Council votes to waste $20 G’s and other tidbits

“There may be better ways of doing that and I’d love people to tell me that.”

April 11, 2009, Windsor Star, Dr. Robert Williams

_____________________________

I know I said there would be no more blogs until I returned from vacation,  but tonight’s council discussion regarding the Ward Boundary Review has prompted me to respond. 

Unfortunately, I caught only the tail end of the meeting – and it was enough, trust me, but I will be posting the entire video upon my return (technology permitting).

There were so many motions flying around, with motions being voted twice I lost count after 5 minutes.

But for city besieged with nearly 15% unemployment and looming financial Armageddon, what’s $20,000 here and $20,000 there? 

What’s $1.7 million in legal fees for a tunnel deal that went no-where?  Or the millions spent on the border file, or the hundreds of thousands of dollars for the “non-negotiable” Greenlink proposal, which is now only a name?

And that’s just in the last couple of years.

What was really interesting is despite the prolonged 3 hour debate to do nothing, was the Mayor’s refusal to break any ties - despite voting consistently with respect to motions related to the ongoing CUPE strike.

Back on November 20th, 2008 the Windsor Star reported:

City council is poised to review the ward system and its current municipal election boundaries because of a shift of population across Windsor in recent years.

The current system of five wards and their locations has remained untouched since 1978, but it may be time for a change before the next municipal election in November 2010, some councillors have said.

A little over 7 months ago, on December 8th, 2008, councillor’s passed the following:

That the City Clerk BE DIRECTED that a full comprehensive Ward Boundary Review BE UNDERTAKEN which could result either in the creation of new ward boundaries or the dissolution of the existing ward boundaries for the 2010 election, and a possible change in the representation of council members. Such a review would be undertaken with the assistance of a Consultant and the project would have an allocated budget of $50,000.00 to be funded from the unallocated 2009 balance as a pre-commitment to the 2009 Budget. In this option, the City Clerk would be directed to engage a Consultant pursuant to the provisions of the Purchasing By-law, and, the Chief Administrative Officer and General Manager would be directed to execute a contract for such consulting services satisfactory in technical content to the City Clerk, in financial content to the City Treasurer and in legal form to the City Solicitor.

City administrators chose Dr. Williams.

Dr. Robert Williams is a retired faculty member from the Department of Political Science at the University of Waterloo. During his 35-year career, Dr. Williams’ research and teaching included municipal government and electoral systems. He served as an expert witness in eight OMB hearings on ward applications including hearings involving the cities of Guelph, Belleville and Vaughan and the towns of Aurora, and Newmarket. He has also been engaged in Ward Boundary Reviews in the City of Kitchener, the Township of Wilmot, the Town of Milton, the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville and the City of Windsor.

Naw – what does the good doctor know anyway?

Tonight we also heard some councillors whining they didn’t have enough time to review the 31 page document – despite asking the matter be deferred nearly 1 month ago.

Funny – councillors could approve the hundreds of pages in the Sandwich Towne Community Improvement Plan and Heritage study but not a 31 page report .

Despite the fact that back on February 2, 2009:

On February 2, 2009 Dr. Williams communicated to City Council a preliminary report that outlined his objectives to completing the task of a ward boundary review and to present a proposed timetable.

And then on April 6, 2009:

On April 6, 2009 Dr. Williams communicated to City Council his “Options Paper” that presented his findings up to that point and to further describe his next steps. His options included four scenarios, a four-ward and a five-ward model where two councillors represent each ward, and an eight-ward and ten-ward model where one councillor represents each ward.

Over 90 days have passed since that date, and some councillors didn’t have time? 

What part of “There may be better ways of doing that and I’d love people to tell me that,” did some councillors not understand?

Please, cry me a river.

Community’s of Interest was the discussion from a couple of councillors, but I sense voters of interest would be a more apt description.

Despite outlining the short-comings of the present system in voting to note and file, they accepted the short-comings of the status quo.

But moreover, every single councillor had the opportunity – since at least February – to contact Dr. Williams and discuss their concerns – but failed to do so.

A valid point made raised by Mayor Francis.

But they voted against the status quo.

They voted against a modified 2 councillor 5 ward system.

They voted against a one councillor eight ward system.

They voted against a one councillor ten ward system.

And in the end they voted to do nothing and waste $20,000.

Geesh – CUPE should have made a presentation in favour of noting and filing, then we probably would have seen a decision made.

In-Camera meeting called mid-council

Tonight, during the ward review debate, Mayor Francis hastily called an in-camera meeting – without a vote or without disclosing the general nature of the meeting as required by the Municipal Act as well as Council’s Procedural Bylaw:

Section 3.4.viii.b of the Procedural Bylaw states:

b) Prior to moving “In Camera” for one of the reasons listed in Section 3.4 a), Committee/Council shall pass a motion in public session stating: i. the fact that the Committee/Council is convening into closed session, and ii. the general nature of the matter to be considered.

The Windsor Star reported:

Minutes later, Francis returned to the council chambers and, interrupting debate on a study of new ward boundaries, suspended the debate and ushered councillors back behind closed doors. The surprised politicians returned minutes later to resume the public meeting.

Can the Mayor unilaterally suspend a meeting of council without a vote?

Yes – but only to regain order to the proceedings. 

Section 10.17 reads:

The Mayor or Chair may request that a member or members of the public vacate the Council Chambers if their behaviour is deemed to be disruptive to the business at hand. The Mayor or Chair may unilaterally suspend the meeting until order is restored in the Council Chambers.

I sure hope councillors did not pass any resolutions in that brief in-camera meeting because  according to the Council Procedural Bylaw:

All resolutions, directions and general actions resulting from “In Camera” discussions shall be confirmed/adopted in open or public session.

One may accuse me of being “particular,” but why bother having bylaws if we are not going to follow them?

Media Blackout – where?

In tonight’s Windsor Star:

The mayor wouldn’t provide details Monday night but said council’s unanimous position was “a signal that it’s time to move forward.” Referring to the latest positions of both sides in the bitter dispute, Francis said he’d be “happy, more than pleased, to contrast the two tomorrow.”

Recall, on July 13, 2009 the Star reported:

A media blackout has been imposed on the substance of the negotiations.

CUPE respected the media blackout by not divulging their proposal – but the Mayor?

Then again, Toronto Mayor David Miller released details of the city’s position which forced CUPE Toronto to submit another proposal.

The July 11, 2009 Globe and Mail reports:

In a rare, high-stakes bid to end the strike, Mayor David Miller has gone over the heads of union leaders to give Torontonians and city workers details of a new offer that includes a 7.2-per-cent pay raise over four years.

The mayor’s gambit was denounced by the presidents of Locals 79 and 416 of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, who said they were “disgusted” and rejected the slightly sweeter proposal.

For residents weary of a 20-day dispute that has cancelled garbage collection, daycare, pools and other services, the drama sets the stage for a weekend of intense talks that could either lead to a deal in the next few days, or see the opposing camps dig in for a long haul.