Loading...

SBP Council Puzzle missing Pieces

Posted by CL1368 on February 27, 2007 - 9:58am

Well, anyone at the SBP Council Meeting last night must have been as confused as I was.

Here’s the pieces to the puzzle, from where I sit and have observed:

At the last Council meeting, the meter program motion to defer to a time when all councilors were present was defeated and the ensuing tie vote meant that the meter program was not approved. This vote was tension filled, and the sides were very evident.

The next item for vote, regarding the school development, was rescheduled to the March 12th meeting by the Mayor after confirming with only Councilor King that he would be with her on February 26th and therefore not be at last nights meeting. Those paying close attention to the whisperings of the Mayor deduct there would not be a full Council present last night.

Mayor Gilbert, Councilor King, and Councilor Wunderlich are attending the Good Roads conference in Toronto yesterday, and today.

Councilor Hall is prepped by staff all day on how to chair the Council Meeting in the Mayor’s absence, and showed up well prepared BUT…

In walks Mayor Gilbert and Councilor King (who does not drive by the way) from Toronto to the Council meeting, minus Mark (who they obviously left behind in Toronto). Councilor Hall seemed to be taken by surprise.

So they left the Conference early to drive back. (didn’t we pay for their registration and hotel?)

Comments are made such as “why are the Mayor and Councilor King finally dressed up in more than a hoodie and sweatpants?”

Then, Councilor King pulls the EA motion and requests a recorded vote, in reverse order. (Why reverse order? – to have Mayor Gilbert’s vote the last?)

When Council adjourned to informal session, Councilors Lamont, Kerr, Hoath, and Herron got up and walked out, The Councilors who left the meeting short sensed that the Mayor and her co-horts were planning something again by Mayor Gilbert’s constant discussions with Councilor King regarding the proper procedure for the vote on the EA Motion he tabled and hastily sent a note amongst themselves organizing the departure.

In the eerie silence that filled the room, all that the Mayor could be heard saying to Councilors King and Vukovic was “Did you get a copy of the email? Did you get a copy of the email?” When she asked Councilor Hall, Hall even went as far as to get out her PDA and check her emails at the council table.

So, what really is going on?
Why wasn’t the Mayor above board and informed at least Councilor Hall that she would be back, after all, it’s a 3 hour drive from Toronto so they had to have left by at least 4pm, early enough to have called. Councilor Hall was used.
Are there separate delegations representing SBP at conferences?
Why is the Mayor hell bent on stacking the vote?
Why did they leave Councilor Wunderlich behind?
Why is an email message from the Mayor passed around to select Councilors so important?

Did the Mayor really say on public radio “I don’t understand what it’s all about”

I think she knows fully what it’s all about. After all, didn’t she campaign on “No Secrets”

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Pieces don't fit.

Submitted by CL1368 on February 27, 2007 - 7:26pm.

From the Owen Sound Sun Times:

After a few minutes to gather her thoughts, Gilbert said she had spoken to the Minister of Environment's Parliamentary secretary in Toronto and had been advised to encourage the municipality to work on a smaller sewage project for Sauble. As for Sauble's water needs, the province's view is that problem has already been solved by a $9 million provincially assisted project to upgrade communal water systems in a number of subdivisions, Gilbert said.

"So because there was a vote coming down tonight to continue the EA for the $80 million pipeline, a project that has torn our community apart for six years, I thought it was important to relay this information to our council," she said. "But I never had the opportunity."

What's wrong with these statements?
There is no $80 million pipeline.
The problem is not solved as the upgrades were mandatory.
"I never had the opportunity" - Gilbert and King both had the opportunity during the informal session (item 12.4 for those with agendas), before the walkout at the Open Forum, but chose to say nothing. I do expect to hear a full report of the questions she asked at a later date.

Please tell the truth Mayor Gilbert.

Who was right?

Submitted by Dan O. on February 27, 2007 - 10:07pm.

CL1368; you've asked a few questions but you may be asking the wrong ones. Gilbert and King returned from Toronto to represent their constituents. Why didn't Wonderlich feel that it was his duty to do the same?

If the Mayor received information that was critical to the vote on the addendum didn't she fulfill her responsibility?

I'd be asking why elected councillors walked out? Do they still get paid? Does that indicate how they're going to act for the next 4 years?

I managed to obtain my answer on the addendum. It relates to the pipeline EA. It may not be applicable if local water systems are installed. With that information and the information that the mayor received you can start to piece together why she felt it was her obligation to be present.

As to the actions of the councillors passing information amongst select groups, it sets up potential pitfalls so soon into the term. I guess I'd have to be there like you to see what was going on.

PS; it was good of you to concede 2 points to Dodge. He worked hard for them and it helps to bring to light the facts that everyone can agree on.

Dan O.

CL1368 Spin

Submitted by hockey17 on February 28, 2007 - 10:48am.

CL1368, you obviously didn't vote for Gwen and so you see
your duty as spin doctor against her. It appears assumptions and few facts embody most of your thoughts. Here are some facts to consider--Gwen Gilbert campaigned against the pipeline so she made sure she was there for the vote while bringing new info from her meetings that day. The fact Art King was there indicates it was important to him also.What about Mark?? Was it not important to him??? Why couldn't he get back?? He's a big boy. He keeps saying how big his shoulders are and the "Buck stops here" but doesn't come back.As for Monday night, Yvonne and friends started the note passing and whispering. Don't tell me this wasn't a set up. As they left, Gwen questioned why as she was not privy to the note. Why wasn't she??What was in this note and why were only a few involved. This kind of crap(note passing and whispering)is not allowed in schools so why did the "4" see this as acceptable in council??? Someone was behind this walkout and I don't believe they( the walker outers) could have planned it on their own. Stan was ill so why was he there in the first place and when he left why didn't he state it for the record for all to hear? Wray left for a meeting in Hamilton. Did he inform the CAO or mayor beforehand and why would one leave so suddenly and late for a 4 hour trip to Hamilton?? Yvonne said little but was the instigator of the note. Dan has usually let council know early that he has had to leave,why not this time?? He is sharing his reasons today because he has NOW had time to figure them out and still look good. My assumption is the 4 pro-pipeliners saw that the motion to continue the EA process would be defeated so ,just like children,they took their ball and ran home. Betty had to be prepared in case weather stopped anyone from getting back whether she knew they were coming or not. If Gwen was to pay for this whole project herself , I believe CL1368 would find something wrong with that. Finally, no matter how you spin what the magnificent 4 did, it reflects badly on the Town and has voters questioning why the 4 were elected to represent the entire town.

I dream of Transparent Government

Submitted by garym on February 28, 2007 - 11:46am.

Passing notes?? How ... um ... quaint. You mean to say none of them have Blackberry Phones? Egad, you can buy a Barbie® message passer at Wal-Mart for about $10!

I don't know why who was or wasn't there or did or didn't walk out but what I do know is how precisely none of our speculations would be necessary if people would just get with the idea that Government Secrecy is self-defeating. It is not 'strategizing', it is just plain foolish. Childish even. Machiavelli is dead, folks. Get used to it.

People are going to find out. Here's a relevation: People talk!

And if they are going to talk about you, they might as well have your side of the story in their mix. They may not listen, of course, no more than, say, how the councillors reading this thread have any obligation to really listen to anything beyond what they've already decided this thread should say, and there's no blame in that. But to skulk about in silence playing cloak and dagger games? That's just, well, it's just sad.

we have the technology

Imagine if you will, a landscape of sights and sounds ...

  1. they are running late, they won't make the meeting. they whip out their smartphone Nokia e31 (on special at Rogers.ca btw) and hammer in a fast message addressed to blog@southbrucepeninsula.com. "We're running late," they begin, "but here's why, and here's what we wanted to say ..."

  2. The hundredsdozens of ordinary citizens who care about what council does immediately get a ping on their phones telling them the RSS feed for the Council Blog has seen an update. The headline appears here on the SBP and other with-it websites who care. Everyone knows why, everyone knows the missing pieces.

  3. A scant few people get another ping on their phone. What's this? Yes, it's another post on another blog via another RSS feed. This one is from the YvonneBlog.southbrucepeninsula.com and it is very interesting indeed.

  4. At the council meeting, they have already read the Council Blog so they already know who's going to be missing and why. They already have the latest updates from each other piped to their cellphone RSS reader. Someone who'd read the MarkBlog also speaks up to say exactly what's happened there, relayed straight from the source, straight no chaser. Everyone is on the same page.

  5. During the meeting asides flow freely over ad-hoc jabber conference chats. Did you hear that? and Did you bring that paper? and When was that? Let me check the Council Blog archives...

    All technology is, says McLuhan, a tool, an externalization of our body, an extension of our natural selves. The car extends the foot, the knife extends the tooth, the digitally networked smartphone extends the brain ...

  6. After the meeting, minutes are posted to the Council Blog, followed by "... only there is more to that ..." clarities on various councillor blogs, each telling their audience (and each other) what they thought, what they did, filling in what the meeting secretary's fingers could not move fast enough to type, speaking outside of the pressure-cooker of the intimidating meeting hall, filling in their thoughts of what I should have said and the hopes and regrets ... and inviting the interested to comment. They don't have to listen of course, but it is nice if they engage a conversation.

    and there are good solid spam filters on it too, of course.

  7. Over on the old e-rag Peninsular all the second-guessers are in a harumph because they got nothing to second-guess and speculate about. They may not agree with what got did, but that is just the nature of people living together; the point is, they know what's what and why and who and how.

Aye, talk about Star-Trek! But it would be so nice, wouldn't it? To have a real conversation with our 'leaders', to have real rapport with those whom we place as our proxy in stewardship of the community commons...

What do we have instead? Juvenile PR dripping in obtuse inhuman pseudo-academic language presented in opaque PDFs tucked to the back of a jet-cockpit document vend-o-mat ... leaving us reg'lar folk to suss out the real news by tin-can and string.

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

Use Your Phone

Submitted by Dodge on February 28, 2007 - 10:48pm.

No Blackberrys, no table talk at Timmies. Next Council meeting will be another vote for continuing the addendum and the pipeline needs to be stopped now. Councillor Harron is the vote to change and the preferred method is to phone and say "Don't you dare let this continue". I hear she is getting calls.

I can't figure out if she has lost all sense of reason completely or if she has come under the influence of the anti Mayor faction that started with Dan Kerr's transparent attempts to run a smear campaign against Mayor Gilbert during the election campaign. Stan Hoath and Wray Lamont have joined and Mark Wunderlich has a history of only listening to himself on pipeline issues.

Anyway they have walked out of a meeting and showed their colours. Their cards are all on the table.

Mayor Gilbert Gets Community Support

Submitted by Dodge on March 15, 2007 - 12:23pm.

There were three letters in yesterday's Sun Times, all supporting Mayor Gilbert's effort to bring fiscal and moral responsibility to Council. One of the letters is particularly hard on Councillor Dan Kerr. From what I am hearing he has criticized our Mayor on a local radio station and some people who voted for him are mightily unimpressed with his behavior.

Hockey wrote this 2 weeks ago and it seems he has predictive powers: no matter how you spin what the magnificent 4 did, it reflects badly on the Town and has voters questioning why the 4 were elected to represent the entire town.

It turned out as Hockey said.

The four walkout councillors knew they would face flak but it was the lesser of two evils for them. They risked their reputations to make sure the pipeline project was continued.

Councllor Wunderlich's resolution was to force the Town to continue the addendum process of updating the Water and Sewer EA. This EA is a one trick pony. It can only go down one channel and that chanel is the pipeline. It is of no use for a small project because the EA's preferred solution has been set with the pipeline. The walkout councillors risked their reputations to keep the pipeline going. It is now going badly for them. In spite of all their excuses that particular EA is good for nothing else unless there is a new addendum to change it to a different project in a different direction. This current updating addendum they so badly want will not cover anything else except the pipeline. They know it. They want it anyway.

We are all so damn lucky that the mayor and Councillor King came back that night and bought us a few weeks of time at least until early April. A better option has always existed.

We are about to find out on March 20 that spending any funds on the leftover pipeline baggage from the previous administration is wasted money. We have to make a clean break.

We have another path ahead of us and there is a good chance of receiving funding and bringing almost the whole community on board.

Where does that leave Councillor Dan Kerr? Apparently his role for the next 3 years will be to go on the radio and snipe at the mayor. In between times he could organize walkouts or do whatever he can to impede real progress on the Mayor's agenda.

Can we expect a sea change anyime soon?

My POV - guarded comments

Submitted by CL1368 on March 19, 2007 - 1:37pm.

Mayor Gilbert has gone on record stating the EA vote was not the sole reason she returned from the convention. It was regarding the email that was circulating, that called her character and role as mayor into question. She did state in the paper that when she got wind of the email, she had no doubt that she was returning. The specific email she referred to has been posted in this weblog. This goes back to my very original comment regarding a missing piece of the puzzle. (all FACT)

Since then she has verbally warned all councillors that her legal counsel is addressing this matter, and in addition, others have been contacted and forewarned. (yes this is FACT) Interesting to note how the timing of garym's posting regarding "basic facts about holding discussions online" co-incides with the Mayor's threat and the obvious reduction of postings here. (Yes this is FACT)

So, just like in the election campaign when we questioned the truth about the $60k payout to the former Fire Chief from the Town on Councillor Gilbert's behalf, we are snuffed again or risk the wrath of the now Mayor. Even when confronted with proof of check numbers and amounts it was denied by her. (FACT from Wiarton Public Meeting) Pointing fingers and trhreatening lawsuits. (FACT from Sauble Beach public meeting)This is not the way it should be. Remember freedom of speach? Remember telling the truth?

I am releived to see the Code of Ethics finally allowed to be tabled by Councillor Wunderlich for Council's discussion. (FACT) I was also happy to see the reports presented to Council from the conference that he had promised. (FACT) We did not see any written reports from Mayor Gilbert as she had promised. Another broken promise? Why?

I am sure that the next meeting with HP on March 20th will shed light on all councillors and the public regarding the EA process. Hopefully all the smoke and mirrors will be revealed and we can move on, whichever is the right direction. It will take open minds and listening ears at this meeting. I hope it goes well.

The FACTS are stated for the benefit of those who post here and think I am full of ......hot air! Check for yourself.

....keeping those feet hot.

The Skewer is at it again

Submitted by hockey17 on March 19, 2007 - 5:38pm.

I thought you'd moved CL. Well, actually, floated away.

Why would anyone worry about a lawsuit if they've done nothing wrong BUT a few are running scared(FACT). For your information Councillors Gilbert and Varley brought up the idea of having a code of ethics early in the previous council and Councillor Wunderlich voted against it(Fact), Go figure!!

I take it you're not attending the March 20th meeting. The reason I say this is because you said "it would take open minds and listening ears".

FACT

Submitted by Dan O. on March 19, 2007 - 6:26pm.

CL; Dodge backed his facts up with proof. You've made many accusations with only the word "FACT" to back it up. You now have the opportunity to show proof of what you speak in an open forum.

How can you base fact on a third person verbal statement? Unless someone had a tape recorder or you were present what you've presented is here say. On top of that you end sentences with inuendos. What is so factual about that?

Why you've taken on a personal vendetta against the mayor I don't understand. If you ask for open minds and listening ears you need to look at what you're saying first.

Dan O.

a few missing facts

Submitted by mmockler on March 1, 2007 - 12:58am.

I guess all of you have heard what transpired at last Monday’s council meeting.

Here are a few facts that you may not know.

Our esteemed Mayor ditched a meeting on Monday afternoon with a member of the Cabinet of the Province of Ontario to make her mad dash back to Wiarton with her little cohort.

This is a meeting that our esteemed Mayor requested with the Minister. This is a meeting that could potentially bring much-needed funding to our Town. This is a meeting that was being attended by not only Town staffers, but members of an engineering firm (who are being paid by the Town) and also by our MPP, Bill Murdoch.

How embarrassing for our Town to request this meeting and then our esteemed Mayor not even have the courtesy to show up.

I am asking each and every one of you to do the following:

• request that our Mayor and her cohort refund the taxpayers the cost of one night’s hotel costs ($150 each) and one-third of the cost of the conference ($500 each)

I have attended the Good Roads Conference for more than 10 years now, both as a Provincial Political Staffer and now as the wife of a municipal councillor. I can attest to the value of this conference. Not only is a valuable educational opportunity, it is a chance to network not only with Provincial Ministers, but municipal colleagues.

It was quite obvious on Sunday night that our esteemed Mayor was out of her league when she pestered Mark with questions on how to conduct herself during this conference. It was quite obvious that Mark would have to “hold her hand” throughout each Ministerial meeting.

But was not obvious at the time was how unprofessional her behaviour would be.

Mark will be attending council next Monday with five reports on each of the seminars he attended. He will also be bringing reports from each of his Ministerial meetings. What will our esteemed Mayor be bringing? Traffic reports from her drive?!

On her little tirade on the radio today, she claimed that she would not have missed Monday night’s vote “for the world.” A few minutes later, she claimed she didn’t make up her little mind about attending Monday night’s council meeting until late in the afternoon. Come on – she can’t have it both ways!

She has embarrassed this Town, she embarrassed the staff and she embarrassed herself. And I have e-mailed her to tell her that she has a new low.

Melissa Mockler-Wunderlich

Very few facts-more like a fairy tale

Submitted by hockey17 on March 1, 2007 - 8:57am.

Melissa, let's give credit where credit
is due.Really,who is the champion of the
river mouth?Who set up the this meeting
to flaunt his prowess in dealing with the
Provincial government? None other than your
husband Mark. Was it not he who stated,
during his election campaign, that Queens
Park knows him and quakes at the mention of
his name ? Why would it be necessary for our
inferior Mayor and her cohort to attend,
when SuperMark along with his entourage is
leading the way?

When can we expect the dredging to begin and
the funds to flow in? I would love to have
been there when Mark took the floor to let the powers that be know exactly where they stood and what
they'd better do or else. Those huge
shoulders must have frightened the living
daylights out of the minister.He would have
known he was facing "Buckstopper"!

Also,I can just see our terrorized Mayor
pleading, on bended knee, for Mark's
assistance on proper governmental etiquette
and procedure. What else could she do in
the presence of such greatness but ask for
his assistance.

How could the voters in the TSBP have been
so wrong in electing such an inept Mayor.

Possibly, once the dredging is started
and the funds have arrived , thanks to Mark's
herculean efforts, maybe he could go over
to the Middle East and quell the situation
there. Can you imagine the trepidation that
would be caused within the Taliban and El
Quaida. I'm sure George and Tony would
welcome his assistance.The mind boggles.

I hope I can attend the meeting when Mark presents his 5 seminar reports. Will they be typed,hand
written or printed in crayon??

I hope you realize I'm entitled to my
unbiased opinion, just as you have expressed
yours.

Finally,a couple of thoughts. You mentioned
writing a few facts. Where are they??? Also, maybe you and CL1368 could collaberate on a book. You both appear well versed in fiction.

LOL

Submitted by vinylgirl on March 1, 2007 - 9:37am.

I almost ejected my coffee from my nose Hockey17, that is toooo funny! Thanks, I needed that :)

your funny rant

Submitted by mmockler on March 1, 2007 - 2:52pm.

Hey there, whoever you are . . .

I couldn't help but reply to your too hilarious rant. You must seriously take up a career in satire!

But on a serious note . . . it takes a lot of guts to put your name on a ballot. Having been there as both as political staffer and as a candidate, I can tell you that being a staffer and writing the speeches is much easier than putting your name and reputation on the wall for everyone to either, praise, ridicule or make personal assasinations.

I seriously congratulate each and every person that takes this step and I even more congratualate every person who is elected by their constituents. It is not an easy job.

And whether you agree or disagree with your elected representative, you MUST give them credit for being there. It is courageous.

What is NOT courageous is people like you who hide behind cute little nicknames and throw poisonous little darts. If you have such strong convictions (and I am sure you do after reading your postings), then put your name and your face out there. People like you remind me of the Cowardly Lion from the Wizard of Oz.

Mark and I sign everything we write. Take a lesson from this.

And - by the way on a comedic note - Mark agreed to write his reports in crayon so that it will be comprehensible on YOUR level :) Do you have a favourite colour?

Melissa Mockler-Wunderlich (aka: the wife of SuperMark - the big shouldered guy)

Tisk Tisk. ..

Submitted by vinylgirl on March 1, 2007 - 6:37pm.

I think you are "calling the kettle black" when you are referring to your "esteemed Mayor". This is in regards to your quote "I can tell you that being a staffer and writing the speeches is much easier than putting your name and reputation on the wall for everyone to either, praise, ridicule or make personal assasinations."

It is pretty hard to dismiss the "personal assasinations" that you have made, but I suppose it is okay, because you have used your real name.

(From your previous post) "It was quite obvious on Sunday night that our esteemed Mayor was out of her league when she pestered Mark with questions on how to conduct herself during this conference. It was quite obvious that Mark would have to “hold her hand” throughout each Ministerial meeting.
But was not obvious at the time was how unprofessional her behaviour would be."

Maybe Melissa, you should practice what you preach and stock up on Crayola's.

Just had a thought, maybe the politicians should stock up on sidewalk chalk, because it's easily erasable, and they can change their minds with ease.

Edit~ better yet, buy all the politicians Etch-a-Sketches and they can "shake-shake their silly's out".

My Response

Submitted by hockey17 on March 2, 2007 - 12:06am.

MMockler, Im pleased you appreciated my satire.
But seriously, you have pointed out something with which I wholeheartedly agree. Being a politician is
not an easy job. I also feel politicians do
deserve positive support.

Unfortunately, in your earlier diatribe, I
somehow missed this positive backing you were
displaying towards the Mayor and her deputy.If
what you wrote was meant to build their confidence, I
missed that too. Using sarcasm, skepticism, and
less than factual reporting, I believe, will
not help stroke anyone's confidence. You might
remember this adage"Practice what you preach".

Did you congratulate the Mayor on her victory?
What positiveness , if any, have you directed
her way?

My "assassination" was written as a follow-up
to yours because I find that people understand
more when they are treated as they treat. My
favorite color is blue as in TRUE, LOYAL Blue.

If you follow your own preachings, I will be
looking forward to some blogs from
you which are positive towards any and every
council member including our Mayor and deputy.

Again, and I'm being serious,if I understand
the purpose of "Good Roads", as I have attended
several previously, I will be quite interested in Mark's
reports on the processes and plans he developed
at the conference and will be presenting to
council to be implemented in our Town thus
illustrating that our money was well spent.

CL1368, do you think our council needs positive
support as Melissa has correctly alluded to
as the job is difficult and thankless. If your
answer is no then there is no sense in dialoguing
with you. But,please,from now on,use complete
FACTS when you comment.Here are some you don't seem to be completely aware of :
1) The TSBP did NOT pay Mayor's Good Roads
fees. Check with the Town for proof.
2) The Mayor returned to the conference
immediately following the Monday evening council
meeting.Why the complaining. Why is a payback needed?
3) I missed your complaint when Carl Noble went
to Ottawa, was less than happy with the meetings
and results, and returned here the same day.
Two days were paid for. If that had been Gwen
you'd have been all over her.

Your bias is obvious!!!

As far as the crayon thing, if you color within
the lines, less crayon is wasted.

U. N. Owen
Sauble Beach

SBPC

Submitted by zodiac on March 2, 2007 - 9:36pm.

THANKS for your input to Melissa
Cackler-WunderWoman. I have tried to follow
all the pettiness and sour grapes, and I'm
still looking for maturity....so far I am
only seeing it from you and "Dodge" and
"Garym" and a couple of others. We are more
than a little concerned that our former
Mayor is reaching in from his "Sour Grapes"
past and continuing his contamination with
his sheep.....namely Councillor WunderBar
in particular, but unfortunately, Councillors
Hoath and Harron as well. Amd who in the
world is this CL--- guy (or gal)???
Keep up the good work!! Zodiac.

Refund Owed by Mayor and Cohort - Facts

Submitted by CL1368 on March 1, 2007 - 4:39pm.

Registration Fees for the OGRA/ROMA Conference held at the Royal York this week were:
3 days - $430
I day – Monday - $240
1 day – Tuesday - $240
Half Day – Wednesday - $120
Companion Registration - $120
Lunch Tickets - $55
Banquet Tickets - $85
No Refunds after February 16th.

The TSBP paid OGRA/ROMA $3,083.64 on January 10, 2007 (Cheque #015737)

Registration did not cover travel and accommodation expenses.

Mayor Gilbert and cohort, we want our money back. Fiscal Responsibility – remember?

Besides, I need the money to buy more crayons to colour the photocopies of the increasing number of osteriches.

CL Silliness and John Close Tries To Attack

Submitted by Dodge on March 2, 2007 - 12:55am.

First of all, CL, you cannot win on this insinuation. I don't deal with disinformation and yours is always transparent... Is it you or John Close speaking?

Mayor Gilbert took 3 nights single accomodation and was there for all three. She booked no banquet or lunch tickets or companion packages. Wunderlichs were there should we look at their companion expenses? No, I don't think so. There is nothing unusual going on. On Monday night the Wunderlich's and the Jeff Grahams were out for dinner celebrating no doubt a secure income stream for Henderson Paddon and secure in the knowledge that Mark's resolution to continue the addendum would pass.

Here is the part you don't know:

The Mayor and councillor King returned Monday night travelling at their own expense to fight off a fifth column attack (organized by John Close in an email) and to be carried out at Council meeting. They were all set to diss the Mayor and force the continuation of the pipeline addendum. Jim Turner, an arch Gilbert enemy who said he would close his shop the next day if Gilbert was elected mayor was there to add citizen outrage to the discussion as well. The store is still open by the way.

As it happened Mayor Gilbert and Councillor King bought two weeks of valuable time by being present and forced the bit players to walk out to avoid losing a vote on the pipeline addendum. The public profile is getting hotter every day and Mayor Gilbert is doing what she was elected to do. Close's email was put away once the Mayor was present.

Gwen left arrangements in place for Councillor Wunderlich to represent the Town in a meeting with the MNR on the river mouth project. A typical problem here is that the Owen Sound MNR would not let Hunter Excavation go in with an excavator in the fall with low water. High level discussion required. It does require certain people to be present not the Mayor.

What was in the email? Rampant chauvinism and power envy. Gwen had a quiet cup of coffee with a few friends and bounced a couple of what if scenarios around. John Close tried to make a federal case out of it. Read his email to Councillor Kerr and you will see what they were set to do at last Monday's Council meeting. They were surprised when Gwen walked in.
They ended up walking out of the meeting after their plans fell through.

Here is Close's email to Councillor Kerr:

Councillor Kerr

On Wed. night Feb. 21st I was at the South Bruce Peninsula Chamber meeting along with Mayor Gilbert, councillor Kerr and the CAO. M. McIntosh. Councilor Kerr made a good report and expressed council’s willingness to work with the chamber and would be asking the chamber for input on an item to be brought up later. The meeting went on to new business and it was obvious too most that Mayor Gilbert was dropping an item she was going to raise. Shortly thereafter the meeting was adjourned with neither the mayor nor Councillor Kerr asking the chamber for input on any issue. What was also very obvious to most was the mayor asking a few ladies to stay behind and subsequently it was obvious that a closed meeting was taking place between the mayor and three or four ladies. At this point I will add that none of the four executive male board members were asked to stay behind and join this meeting. During a later phone conversation Paul advised me that the meeting was about a trade show or something and that the mayor should have raised it with all of the chamber members but that she was afraid of the reaction. Dave was advised, after the meeting took place, by the chamber members that attended that the mayor wanted them to put on a Home and Cottage show at their place of business and the council would FAST TRACK any and everything required to make sure that this event takes place. My experience with council and fast tracking any and everything was a financial benefit to the recipient.

Questions:
1. Did council authorize the mayor to hold this closed-door meeting?
2. Did the CAO know about this meeting? The CAO left the meeting early.
3. How was this inner circle of businesses picked?
4. What do I need to do to become an inner circle business and receive financial benefits from council?
5. Why were only the ladies chosen? Is there a gender issue?
6. Why were none of the four male chamber board members not invited?
7. Why were not all the ladies invited?
8. Why was councillor Kerr not invited to the meeting?
9. “Fast Tracking” is a financial benefit to the recipient. There were no funds for this in the 2006 budget so this is a new expenditure for council. When were the public meetings to authorize this new expenditure or was council just going to turn a blind eye and have no paper trail?
10. Why only Wiarton businesses chosen? Was this offer made to Sauble Chamber or to businesses in Allenford or Red Bay or Hope Bay or Berford Lake?
11. When Mayor Gilbert was councillor, closed-meetings by the mayor without minutes being submitted to council was unacceptable, has the mayor submitted minutes of this closed meeting?
12. Can I see a copy of the agreement made with these businesses and are the same terms available (fast track what ever is needed} available to all business?
13. Has a “Non-disclosure Clause” been added to this agreement?
14. Was the “fast track” option given to Mr. Whitcroft in his resent rezoning application or will this only be given to chosen companies?
15. Is this how the new Economic Committee will work by closed door meetings, secret deals and inappropriate usage of tax dollars?
16. Can a councilor make deals with individual businesses?
17. Councilor Kerr in his talk emphasized that council wants to work with the BIA, Chambers and business; does council believe that closed-door meetings and special deals is FAIR to all business and all constituents?
18. A Home Cottage Show is a good idea and works in many towns and cities. So why destroy a good idea with secret agreements and closed meetings?

Finally, are you prepared to ask these questions in an open council meeting and get to the bottom of this closed meeting and unethical behavior or will this be buried with the rest of the dirty laundry?
John Close

The completed puzzle

Submitted by CL1368 on March 2, 2007 - 12:10pm.

I started this discussion asking questions, and they seem to have been now flushed out, and therefore, time to move on. I asked:
“So they left the Conference early to drive back. (didn’t we pay for their registration and hotel?)” Answer -apparently provided by Dodge below.
“Comments are made such as “why are the Mayor and Councilor King finally dressed up in more than a hoodie and sweatpants?” Answer - because they drove directly from the Conference.
Then, Councilor King pulls the EA motion and requests a recorded vote, in reverse order. (Why reverse order? – to have Mayor Gilbert’s vote the last?) Still not answered.
“Did you get a copy of the email? Did you get a copy of the email?” Answered by the posting of Dodge below, apparently with an email not from the Mayor, but from the other side.
So, what really is going on? Answer: I think we can deduct that the Mayor is paranoid and not confident in her position as Mayor, yet.
“Why wasn’t the Mayor above board and informed at least Councilor Hall that she would be back?” Answer, um, well we don’t know yet, but likely a backup in case of bad driving.
“Are there separate delegations representing SBP at conferences?” Answer – Yes, it is evident the Mayor feels she is not competent, there is no teamwork, and no communication between Councilors and Staff.
”Why is the Mayor hell bent on stacking the vote?” Answer – she fully expects the EA to continue but was really worried about the effects of the email.
”Why did they leave Councilor Wunderlich behind?” Answer – lack of respect.
”Why is an email message from the Mayor passed around to select Councilors so important?” Answer provided by Dodge below.
Did the Mayor really say on public radio “I don’t understand what it’s all about” Answer – Yes, which was an outright lie as she was concerned about the EA and the Email.
I think she knows fully what it’s all about. After all, didn’t she campaign on “No Secrets” Answer – yes the Mayor did campaign on “no secret backdoor meetings” and as evident by John Close’s email, has broken that promise already.
Thanks to all for completing this puzzle, although there was some mud-slinging and fighting over the pieces, and it seems that there are some left over.

My last question would be to Dodge, who seems to have had the puzzle picture and most of the pieces from the start. You know so much inside info regarding Gwen, are you leaked info by her? Obviously, by aquiring her itinerary, the email, and other statements, she is leaking confidential information. What else has she told you?

Opinions aren't facts

Submitted by hockey17 on March 2, 2007 - 3:24pm.

After responding to MMockler about being positive towards our elected council and pointing out to CL1368 to use fact not assumption or opinion, he comes up with this opinionated epistle totally void of fact. When he is questioned , he never answers with fact , just opinion and supposition.

Here are some questions with fact included;

1) Why is the Mayor being blamed for Monday
night's Town embarassment. Their plan was all set.
The vote would be taken ( FACT- the Mayor had asked a week before to move the vote to another date when everyone could attend but that was voted down).It appears the results
would be 4-2 in favour of completing the EA. Oh,no
she's back with her deputy. What a dirty trick she pulled, spoiling our ploy. Run!!!

2) Why didn't Mark come back? It was his motion(FACT). The Mayor should have told him. Didn't she realize when she was elected Mayor, she became his mother too, although as reported by Melissa, HE was the Mayors guiding light at the conference. Where was he? Word is ,he was at dinner with his wife, paid for by Henderson Paddon . I don't know if this is fact, since I wasn't there.

3) Why is John Close sending an inflammatory email to a councillor who in turn sent it to all coucillors(FACT). He, too, points out things said, that he wasn't present to hear. That's hearsay and,in law,not permissable as fact.Could this be sour grapes on his part for his election loss. Did he congratulate Gwen on her victory?

4)Instead of walking out Monday night, after whispering and note passing, were there any other options available? Roberts Rules says yes(FACT). They could have a) tabled the motion, as Stan Hoath ask for in informal session(FACT), b) adjourned the meeting or c)voted on the EA motion when they returned to formal session. FACT-they ran out and did't even have the courage of there convictions to TRUTHFULLY say why.

5)In his campaign, John Close said he was tired of the gossip,& rumors and would lead a unified open, transparent, council(FACT).Is that email his idea of an open,honest communication style? Why didn't he go to the Mayor directly, face to face, and ask his questions?

6)On 98,the Beach,on Thursday morning Mark told Gwen and the audience that all these goings on should be put behind them and they should move ahead positively. Did his Friday morning interview on 560 reflect that view??? Which view will we see in council chambers Monday and in the future???

Finally, I think those of you who have a bias towards the Mayor for whatever reason, and are prepared to listen to factless rumors and gossip should take a good look at yourselves. (FACT) Mature, intelligent adults who really want to know the truth and move this Town forward in a positive direction , go with an open mind, question the person(s) who would know the truth, listen, research and evaluate, then make an informed intelligent comment or decision.

Whatever

Submitted by CL1368 on March 2, 2007 - 6:13pm.

hockey17, you will note that I was being provided answers to my initial questions by the likes of Dodge. I would trust that those were facts, like the email, as it has already cost me 2 points elsewhere in this blog site. Your questions are answered with your own "facts" which should be a new topic. I will not address them here. Move on. Your 2 cents worth are 2 late.

a correction sorely needed

Submitted by mmockler on March 2, 2007 - 6:14pm.

Hey Hockey,

I don't know where you get your info, but before you spread gossip around, you should be sure of your facts.

Yes, Mark and I did go out to dinner on Monday night, after Mark attended EVERY scheduled meeting and seminar that the taxpayers paid for (pity the Mayor and Mr. King can't say the same thing). Daytimes are for meetings. Dinner at 9 p.m. I believe is perfectly acceptable.

And yes, a member of Henderson and Paddon was in attendance, along with his wife and Norm Gamble, who is head of the local LIHN. The topic of discussion mainly centered on our kids and how we are all working to get them through college. It was just a congenial evening after a long day.

But, contrary to what you write, MARK paid for that meal - out of his own pocket. Check his expenses - we ate at the Taro Grill on Queen St. The reason Mark paid was that he wanted to show his thanks to Jeff Graham for helping with the meeting with the Minister of Natural Resources after the Mayor ditched said meeting.

If you would care to meet me, I will show you the receipt.

And to correct another of your so-called "facts." Mr. King is NOT the deputy mayor. While Ms. Gilbert has taken to calling him that - that is a decision of council - a decision that has NOT been made.

As to why Mark did not come back from the conference? I guess he had a naive belief that the Mayor - a Mayor he has been trying hard to support since the election - would not pull a sneaky move like this. Believe me, he won't be fooled again.

And again, to correct the record - the vote on Monday night was to continue the EA on future expansion of the Wiarton water system. Council is on record, as passed in their minutes, that the pipeline project will ONLY go ahead if there is 2/3rds funding from the senior levels of government.

Ratepayers have every right to be ashamed of the political manoevering our Mayor tried this week.

As Christine Curtis of 560 CFOS said this morning on "From Where I Sit"

"It was wrong for Gilbert and King to ditch Good Roads and a meeting with the people from Natural Resources. It was a meeting South Bruce Peninsula requested, obviously for an important reason. Meetings with Ministers don't come along every day, and leaving slighted their responsibility. Leaving Councillor Wunderlich behind to make the presention alone without even warning him was at best would I would describe as "questionable.'"

Mark is on the record as saying this behaviour will not be tolerated by ANY member of council. I believe every taxpayer should demand the same thing.

And, just when is the Mayor paying back the County and Mr. King paying back the Town for the money they wasted?

Curious taxpayers want to know.

Remember, watching expense accounts works both ways.

Melissa Mockler-Wunderlich

About your sorrrowful correction

Submitted by hockey17 on March 2, 2007 - 9:28pm.

MMochler, Hockey here. It appears you can read but do you comprehend. I believe you said I should be sure of my facts. If you reread my previous reply, I believe I wrote,"word has it" which would indicate this was not fact. I also qualified that statement by identifying that I wasn't there and thus it wasn't fact.What part of that did you not understand???

Later, in your rebuttal, you state that Mark was all alone to make his presentation. Then you say the reason Mark paid for dinner was to thank Jeff Graham for being with him during his presentation to the Minister of Natural resources. Which was it??? Both you and he claim what big shoulders he has and how he had to lead the Mayor around by the hand. All of a sudden, he can't function on his own?? What's your point??

As yet ,I fail to see any positiveness towards the elected officials, just the defence of Mark.

You insist Mark has been trying to support the Mayor since the election. Could you please enlighten us on what he has done towards that end?

Again I must ask, what was the sneaky move? It would appear that while you were dining, Mark was probably confident his EA motion would pass because obviously there was a plan afoot. It backfired and now you blame the Mayor and Art King. For what???

I've heard of Walter Cronkite, Knowlton Nash, Dan Rather ,and Peter Mansbridge but who,in the scheme of things, is Christine Curtis? She( Christine C.) mentions something was questionable but what is truly questionable is thinking that what she has to say is important.

How was money wasted by the Mayor and Mr King since they returned to the conference directly after the meeting here? I'm sure they felt that the meeting they missed was in good hands with Mark at the controls. I'll also bet that the Mayor will NOT claim gas and or mileage for the trip up and back that day.

I agree with you, curious taxpayers do want to know-- not answers to the questions you've brought up but instead why the 4 walked out and gave no valid explanations to their move thus embarassing the entire Town.

Will watching expense accounts finally result in any positive comments towards the Mayor and council or are you looking for more ways to put people down.

yet again

Submitted by mmockler on March 2, 2007 - 9:46pm.

Hey hockey,
Insteresting to see your lack of knowledge about how presentations are made to Ministers of the Crown. They are not there to listen to staff, nor are they there to listen to engineers (they have staff for that). They are there to listen to the elected officials. And, not to belittle Mark's position, they are there to listen to the Mayor/Warden - not one lone councillor.
Jeff Graham provided excellent back-up for Mark (as he has done for the Town on many occasions and hence the reason for the thank-you dinner). But first and foremost, a Cabinet Minister does not want to hear from staff or engineers.
And I will pass your comments on to Christine Curtis. You are obviously not tuned in to the local media. FYI, she is the anchor of the CFOS 560 morning show.
And I too will be watching the expense accounts and just how many reports our Mayor and Mr. King will present to council to justify the cost incurred by the taxpayers to send them to this conference.
Melissa Mockler-Wunderlich

Me Too

Submitted by hockey17 on March 3, 2007 - 12:03am.

Hey Mockler,

Again, your logic astounds me. According to you,I have a lack of knowledge. To help me along, you tell me that ministers don't listen to engineers. Then why are we paying for them to be there. Please don't tell me that Henderson Paddon pays, because if so,obviously,they will then bill us later. Let them simply prepare the paper work and the Town rep can take it along. Certainly will cut costs.

What happens if only 2 Town reps go and they have 2 meetings at the same time? Does the minister say get lost to the one who is not the mayor I'm only speaking to the Mayor. When it comes right down to it why would we send anyone but the Mayor since that is the only person to whom the minister will listen .

Christine is the anchor of the CFOS 560 morning show. WOW!!! Those names I mentioned earlier had better watch their backs as, I'm sure, their networks will be moving her in as the replacement, as soon as they faulter- and as soon as those networks ever hear of CFOS AM 560. I am being facetious here, obviously, and I'm sure Christine works hard but...

Again, you missed another of my thoughts. I didn't say I would be watching expense accounts. I was referring to why you would watch and how you were going to use the info.

I Love A Good Strategy

Submitted by Dodge on March 2, 2007 - 6:57pm.

Even a strategy that does not work is interesting. When you have choices A or B and you choose B because you can predict some of the outcomes even in the unfolding it interests me. That is just the way I am.

Bad information skews the unfolding and makes it difficult to predict the outcome. Good Roads comes every year and it consists of municipal politicians meeting ministerial assistants and sometimes a brief chat with a minister. Always staff prepare the answers ahead of time and it can be a charade. It is a perk and acceptable to have a dinner and a bit of a vacation and I find no problem with that nor do I care who spent what or who had the best time. However when the reports here start to interfere with the outcome of another strategy to put an end to the pipeline disaster I will write something.

When I heard the Mayor had been in Wiarton Monday night I guessed what had happened. When Melissa posted that Mayor Gilbert left before an important meeting I decided to check. I phoned and asked point blank did you leave an important meeting? A long answer but in short "no".

Amabel Property Owners President is present at most Council functions and keeps close tabs on what is said. That email is easily had for the asking since it was distributed as a broadcast. I read about it here first. Sometimes things are overheard or said at a local coffee shop or the Horn that get back to me. Those who know me from past times will know that I gather information and make conclusions and I have made a couple of mistakes in the past it is not a perfect process.

Even the former Mayor learned to stop talking at Lodge because some of it was getting back to me. :)
A council resolution to continue the addendum to update the pipeline EA is what caused the walkout. The EA is pipeline specific and includes HEPWORTH. The preferred solution as selected covers no other alternative.
My main strategy interest is what happens to the addendum in the next few days and unless someone reaches Yvonne the outcome is not the one most of the residents want. It will be continued and the vote to do so controlled by the walkout Councillors. What has changed the possible outcome is that this thing is getting a public profile and attention on what they are doing is bad for Yvonne and probably Stan Hoath.

From my perspective the more posted here the more profile this thing gets. Mayor Gilbert has not lost any support of that I am certain. Profile means people are phoning Councillor Harron. The strategy outcome of that is not clear.

My biggest disappointment is Phil McNichol. If he was half the reporter he used to be he would have picked up on the email and the return trip plan and interviewed Yvonne rather than quoting Mark that Sauble puts out more raw sewage than Halifax a city of a mere 500,000. That is a piece of information that is about as useful as the ditchwater samples. :)

My take on the EA

Submitted by Ron Forbes on March 2, 2007 - 8:54pm.

I was introduced to this site a couple of weeks ago and I find your chat intriguing. I have become bored with my sand-box and I think your sand box is more challenging, even with the sticks and stones. I used screened sand in my sand-box. Even the sand box playing should be respectful and truthful.

My pet peeve is the environment. I do not drink water from the ditch and I do not need Henderson & Paddon to give me a large invoice to remind me. The EA is based on poor science.

your comment

Submitted by mmockler on March 2, 2007 - 9:21pm.

Hey there,
Sorry to hear that Gwen thought the Sauble River mouth project was not that important. As you may know, that was the subject of the meeting with the Honourable David Ramsay, the Minister of Natural Resources - the meeting that our Mayor requested and then ditched.
A lot of other people think this is an important project.
Maybe we should let all the Anglers groups in the area know this as well . . . and to think of it . . . the boating community too.
And, Doug, as a former Queen's Park political staffer, I can tell you that a good presentation will sway a Cabinet Minister - I saw it happen a few times to the Minister I worked for. Good Roads isn't as predictable as you may think.
Melissa Mockler-Wunderlich

SBPC

Submitted by zodiac on March 2, 2007 - 10:10pm.

Thanks so much for your comments. I am new
to this site, but I support what you are
saying, and I shudder to think what we are
in for the next 31/2 yrs with members of a
Council, such as Hoath,Harron,Kerr and Lamont
suddenly departing a duly called meeting
without permission from the Chairman.
I have one comment with respect to your
dialogue with CL1368? He has indicated his
"Take" on fitting the pieces to the puzzle
(from where he sits)...I can assure him that
from where I sit...he is sitting in the wrong
place. I would not expect this from a so-called
pipe line Consultant! Does he,by any chance have a
"Hidden Agenda" ?? or is he being influenced by a
"CLOSE" ENCOUNTER OF THE WORST KIND? Zodiac.

Maintain Course Scottie!!!!!!!!

Submitted by Dan O. on March 1, 2007 - 9:36pm.

It's always been interesting that parties which have agendas will deflect and change the course of arguments by such techniques as name calling and arguments to the absurd. This deflects the thought process from the true items that really matter and they win by default.

We have a major vote coming up next week and people need to focus on that point if they wish the best outcome to proceed.

Important facts and information appeared to be coming to light before the argument was deflected. How can I obtain my counsellors phone # (Yvonne Harron). I'd like to understand her reasoning so I can understand if I'm voting for her again next election.

Dan O.

Yvonne Harrons' Phone Number and the Others

Submitted by Dodge on March 1, 2007 - 10:27pm.

All councillors are listed on the Town site. I wouldn't bother with email I tried one time but never knew if she received it

Yvonne is 519 934-2882. I think she should be willing to listen. Good luck.......

They are all here:

http://www.southbrucepeninsula.com/index.cfm?page=239&r=92877

now now

Submitted by wayne tanner on March 1, 2007 - 10:49pm.

When this is all over and the truth comes out by survey or reply or post whateverhaveyou...
I would like all by a show of hands who is going to say
-I am sorry,
-I was wrong, I apologize to you for saying nasty things
-I didn't mean to go on the offensive and be nasty because I didn't have anything tangible to say.

The benchmark for being honourable fellows of character, such as bub and Gary who put forth ideas and I shot them out of the water and made them realize how poorly structured and thought out their arguments were, I let it be know I was a force to be reckoned with and not to be taken lightly. Both of them came on this forum and with tail between thier legs beg me for forgiveness and raised the white flag.
At least that is how I remember it.....
I f you are wrong and know it please keep it civil, I have had more than one chess board thrown in my face, and like this "game" that is going on 0nly those dignified enough to lose should play.