Failed spin cycle at the Town of Newmarket/ Newmarket Cares

I hope that everyone had a safe and happy Christmas.  Newmarket Town Hall Watch was ever vigilant during the holidays keeping an eye on our municipal government.

Almost a year ago, the Town of Newmarket released this media release announcing how involved it was in launching "Newmarket Cares":  http://www.newmarket.ca/en/townhall/resourcelibrary/newmarket_takes_a_stand_on_racist_graffiti_jan3_2012_final.pdf

Then on February 9, 2012, on the Town of Newmarket page that is published in the Era on a weekly basis, the Town of Newmarket made this announcement about "Newmarket Cares":  http://www.newmarket.ca/en/services/resourcelibrary/townofnmkt_february09_final2012.pdf

So it seems more than odd that the Town of Newmarket would make the following Twitter statement on December 24, 2012 in response to my most recent blog:  Town of Newmarket‏@TownofNewmarket

@NwktTownHall Please note @newmarketcares is a volunteer-based group and is not administered by #Newmarket staff.

 

It is an odd remark because clearly Newmarket employees are definitely involved in the communications relating to "Newmarket Cares".  The January press release even provides the name of a staff member for the media to contact regarding questions.  If the Town of Newmarket had no involvement, they wouldn't be issuing media releases and making announcements on official Town advertisements. 

 

Even more to the point, the Town of Newmarket could have demanded a retraction when this story was published:  http://www.yorkregion.com/news/article/1549337--newmarket-fire-victims-lean-on-each-other.  The Era makes it very easy to report an error (even providing an on-line link).  Yet no correction was made to "donations to be managed through Newmarket Cares, a Town of Newmarket initiative that was established following a racial graffiti incident earlier this year." 

 

The Town of Newmarket has broken a cardinal rule of public relations, namely when in damage control mode never lie to the media, (especially new media like Newmarket Town Hall Watch).  

There are too many contradictory examples that show Newmarket employees are involved with communications for "Newmarket Cares" for us to buy @townofnewmarket 's Twitter denial.  Press releases and public announcements fly in the face of what can only be called spin by the Town of Newmarket. 

 

Another cardinal rule of public relations requires an immediate correction of the mistake or lapse.  First of all, @newmarketcares follows all of Council except one member.  @newmarketcares is very conspicuous in not following @joesponga.  Secondly, if the Town of Newmarket wants to distance its employees from "Newmarket Cares" then it should get the Era to correct the Timothy St. Fire article and send out a revision to its media release so that The Era, Newmarket Town Hall Watch, the CBC, and other media outlets that have already reported on "Newmarket Cares" won't be fooled into thinking "Newmarket Cares" is a Town of Newmarket initiative.  Otherwise, it appears that the Town of Newmarket is trying to create positive press for itself for something @townofnewmarket says it has no involvement with. 

Merry Christmas Everyone

Twenty twelve was a year of folly
Fa la la la, la la la la
Leaving taxpayers melancholy
Fa la la la, la la la la
Budget passed with tax increases
Fa la la, la la la, la la la
Two percent promise torn in pieces
Fa la la la, la la la la

See Van Bynen and Taylor working
Fa la la la, la la la la
Allied together, plotting, smirking
Fa la la la, la la la la
Breaking promises at their whims
Fa la la, la la la, la la la
Leaving taxpayers as victims
Fa la la la, la la la la

Too much time spent on petty politics
Fa la la la, la la la la
All the while ignoring economics
Fa la la la, la la la la
Shark fins soup and tree permit bylaws
Fa la la, la la la, la la la
Kids playing road hockey are still outlaws
Fa la la la, la la la la

Higher user fees in store for us
Fa la la la, la la la la
Parking charges are now enforces
Fa la la la, la la la la
Our drinking water smells like chlorine
Fa la la, la la la, la la la
While water rates are now obscene
Fa la la la, la la la la

See how the old year passes
Fa la la la, la la la la
With our Council lads and lasses
Fa la la la, la la la la
Two years left in this present reigning
Fa la la, la la la, la la la
In 2013 they'll start campaigning
Fa la la la, la la la la

Newmarket Cares - A Town of Newmarket Initiative

Lately I've been noticing the fine art of "exclusion" being played out by certain political factions within Newmarket as we ramp up to the next municipal election. 

For example, when the Glenway Preservation group launched their twitter account, it should be no surprise that who they chose to "follow" are prominent supporters of Dalton McGuinty's "Places to Grow Act" including former candidates (Taylor and Bisanz) or active members of the very party that passed the legislation that doomed the green space at Glenway to the development.  

Why not follow MPP Frank Klees?  Its not because he hasn't been successful at saving communities before, because he has.  It's because he wears the other team's colours.  Like I said, this is a prime example of politics of exclusion.  Its not about preserving the Glenway community as so much as it is about earning brownie points for the next time voters head to the ballot box. 

Its one thing when a private citizens' group wraps itself in party politics.  Its quite another thing when the actual government does it. 

Newmarket Cares, as reported in the Era newspaper here: http://www.yorkregion.com/news/article/1549337--newmarket-fire-victims-lean-on-each-other , is a Town of Newmarket initiative.  Newmarket Cares recently launched its own twitter account and chose to follow 15 people:

1) Jane Twinney (Ward 3 Councillor)
2) Teresa Latchford (Era Reporter)
3) Debora Kelly (Editor in Chief, York Region Media Group)
4) Newmarket Main St. BIA
5) @kwdubeau (No description but she tweets predominantly about technology)
6) Tom Hempen (Ward 4 Councillor)
7) Wes Playter (Roadhouse & Rose Funeral Home)
8) Tom Vegh (Ward 1 Councillor)
9) Chris Emanuel (Ward 7 Councillor)
10) John Taylor (Regional Councillor)
11) Tony Van Bynen (Mayor)
12) Toddy Kyle (CEO of the Newmarket Public Library)
13) Newmarket Public Library
14) Town of Newmarket
15) Newmarket Chamber of Commerce

Did you notice any conspicuous omissions? 

How about Ward 5 Councillor, Joe Sponga?  I know that he doesn't tweet much (but the @tomhempen account has zero tweets).  If you re-read the Era article I linked to, you'll recognize that it was Joe Sponga's initiative to raise donations for the victims of the Timothy St. fire.  Why was he excluded by the Town of Newmarket's "Newmarket Cares" follow list?

Or how about Ward 6 Councillor, Maddie Di Muccio?  She too tweeted about the Timothy St. fire donations.  She was also the only councillor to speak out against the racist graffiti (the rest of this group kept silent -- like they did during the c-word fiasco, like they did when Councillor Emanuel was arrested and convicted, etc. etc, etc).  She too isn't on the list of "following".  And, as the Era story says, Newmarket Cares was founded in the aftermath of the racist graffiti in Newmarket last winter.

In other words, somehow the only two Councillors who bothered to get off their duffs to actually do something that Newmarket Cares was supposedly going to address, are the victims of the politics of exclusion by the Town of Newmarket? 

This is a scandal in the first rate.  Shame on you, Town of Newmarket. 

The Fossils of Newmarket Town Council

If the Mayans got their calculations right, we have only a few days left on this mortal coil until mass extinction rains down upon us from outer space.  With our own impending disaster in mind, lets give some thought to when the last global catastrophic event occurred almost 65 million years ago.  When scientists find fossils they marvel at the variety of dinosaurs that once dominated the planet.  We make up names and try to explain the uniqueness of the features in the imprints of bones.  We learn as much as we can about these creatures from millions of years long ago. 

What will scientists 65 million years into the future think of the bones they find of those who perish at the end of the Mayan Calendar era?  More specifically, what would the fossils of Newmarket Councillors tell those who inhabit our planet millions of years from now? 

1) The Veghoceras - The Veghoceras is prime example of the types of politicians who seemed to proliferate in this time.  Similar to the Jurassic era Stegoceras, the Veghoceras is most notable for walking on two legs and having a incredibly thick skull.  While scientists have no clear explanation why the Veghoceras' skull was so thick, it is assumed that this species used it for butting heads with other politicians. 

2) The Kerwinacanth - The Coelacanth is also known as the dinosaur fish.  Thought to have been extinct millions of years ago, the coelacanth shocked scientists when it was discovered in Indonesia in 1938.  Similarly the Kerwinacanth is popularly known as a politician living outside its time.  We can only imagine that the scientists from millions of years in the future will be equally surprised to find that the Kewinacanth has survived the Mayan Calendar apocalypse and was still occupying a seat on Newmarket Council. 

3) The Twinneyasaurus - Scientists will remark on the Twinneyasaurus' chameleon like nature.  Changing her colours based on her emotions, or the media spotlight, or the political temperature, this species will go from blue, to red, to orange and then to green.  Undoubtedly, this ability to change her political stripes has confused many of those who once voted for her. 

4)  The Hempenasaur - The fossils of the Hempenasaur are a very rare find in the future.  Scientists have hypothesized that the rarity of the fossils were due to this species ability to avoid contact with other species and a superior ability to hide.  Conjecture that this creature's ability to vote against projects designated for his ward contributed to his ultimate demise. 

5) The Spongaceratops - Very little is known about the Spongaceratops because there is no fossil evidence that this species had ever exisited.  Its existence is based on theoretical evidence only.  Like the prehistoric jelly fish, the Spongaceratops left no fossils because it did not possess a backbone. 

6) The Dimuccioraptor - Although diminutive sized, this species of politician was much feared by other political species of the day due to her ability to take on and defeat much larger prey.  The Dimuccioraptor is a cunning predator that uses strategy to ambush the slower witted species of the political savanna.  Scientists theorize that this species of politician was known for chewing up and spitting out the bones of anyone who dared to cross her. 

7)  The Emanuelosaurus - This species of politician is imagined to have the odd behaviour of crashing into things and causing much damage.  Scientists can only speculate at the nature of such behaviour and they are confused by the criminal record that was found in the vicinity of this species' fossils.  Scientists of the future have no explanation why an Emanuelosaurus would be allowed to share the political savanna with the other political species if it had a criminal record.

8) The Taylorpod - This species is most notable for being incredibly tall.  While being slow moving, scientists believe the Taylorpod was generally a herd animal.  Fossils seem to indicate that the Taylorpod is known to have travelled in mixed herds which included Emanuelosaurus, Hempenasaur, Twinneyasaurus and Veghoceras.  This herd mentality is believed to be a defensive manoeuvre to ward off attacks from the Dimuccioraptor. 

9) The Vanbynendactyl - The Vanbynendactyl is best remembered as a political species that prefers to fly above the fray.  Although scientists believe the Vanbynendactyl was a meat eater, there is no fossil evidence to prove that this species possessed any real teeth.  Scientists believe that the Vanbynendactyl preferred to perch himself above the other political species of the savannah only to swoop in when the opportunity to score a quick photo op presented itself.  The Vanbynendactyl's ability to drop in and then fly off makes scientists believe the characteristics of this species to be more reptilian-like. 

Integrity Commissioner Investigation Demanded

On Monday of this week, Toronto Mayor was ordered removed from his office due to conflict with the Ontario Municipal Act.  According to various talk radio and newspaper sources, the law about this matter is really quite clear.  The judge had no option but to order him out of office.

Where the Mayor went wrong is that he used his letterhead (which ironically he paid for himself) to solicit funds to support his football foundation, a sum of just over $3,000 while he was still a Toronto City Councillor. 

On Monday night, during Community Notes, the Regional Councillor John Taylor was very disrespectful to Rob Ford, referring to him as the "Former Mayor of Toronto."  While I guess it should be no surprise that the left-wing is happy to rid themselves of a formidable political opponent,  Mr. Taylor's remarks were crass and seen as simply "piling-on" the beleaguered Mayor of Toronto.  In my opinion, it was especially bad form to do so during Community Notes.  The political partisanship at Council meetings is really getting out of hand but one would think that if there was one item of the meeting agenda where political gamesmanship should not be welcome it would be during Community Notes.     

Earlier this week, I was having a twitter conversation with a Newmarket resident about expenses.  She got my wheels turning when we discussed Councillor Emanuel's expense reimbursement of 2 family swim passes.  According to her, these passes were donated for a school fundraising raffle. 

Well, hold your horses!

What is so different between a Councillor of Toronto writing a letter to raise funds vs. a Newmarket Councillor donating a raffle prize?  Shouldn't the Ward 7 Councillor be required to re-pay all the money raised by the school raffle or risk being guilty of the same offence as Mayor Rob Ford? 

Let's unpeel the onion some more -

Last night, @ClowncilWatch tweeted

Clowncil Watch‏@ClowncilWatch

Mayor Dawe solicites donations"make cheques payable to:AuroraMayor’sCharityGolfClassic"uses TownHall address In 2012 flyer.Conflict? #Aurora

 

Well, the Mayor of Newmarket also has a charity golf fundraiser and the Mayor sponsors a Prayer Breakfast that raises funds.  On Monday, the Mayor suggested providing funds to the United Way via the Mayor's Charity Golf fund.  I checked the Town of Newmarket web page and none of these events were listed there so it appears that they are not official "Town" events.  How does the community know if the Mayor crossed any lines?  Do we need an Integrity Commissioner investigation?  Does the Mayor need to repay all the funds that were raised by the Mayor's Charity Golf Tournament and the Mayor's Prayer Breakfast? 

 

And remember Mr. Taylor chortling about Rob Ford's woes on Monday?  Well in 2011, Regional Councillor Taylor expended a $100 sponsorship of a Warriors Booster Football Club Fundraiser event.  Please explain the difference between what Mr. Taylor did vs. what Rob Ford did (except that Rob Ford didn't actually use any City of Toronto money in his fund raising activity).  He gave $250 to the fundraiser and he also sponsored the event to the tune of an additional $100 and it is that sponsorship that crosses the line here.  Should the Regional Councillor be required to repay all the monies raised by the Warrior's Fund Raising event? 

 

I don't think the Town of Newmarket has a choice here.  The Municipal Act is quite clear.  We demand an Integrity Commissioner investigation to look over years and years of expense reports and require those members of Council who used their elected office to raise money to repay all the funds raised or risk being ordered from office by a judge. 

Us vs. Them Politics in Newmarket

The battle lines are being drawn for the 2014 election and it's going to be an "Us vs. Them" election.  Or more precisely, "Us vs. Her".  The wagons are being circled around the Van Bynen/ Taylor camp and they are doing everything they can can to show Di Muccio as an outsider.

For months, we've been hearing certain Councillors saying they can't work with the Ward Six Councillor.  Her "behaviour" and her "antics" disqualify her from any cooperation on their part.  Yet it was a gigantic eye-opener at this week's Council meeting to see the Mayor trying to prevent her from putting a motion on the table to be voted on.  Thank goodness the Clerk was there to prevent a travesty against the democratic process. 

Let's review the events of the past 2 months:
- Taylor convinces council to hire an integrity commissioner against her because she exposed his duplicity in her Toronto Sun column
- Van Bynen/ Taylor team up to reject her offer to collaborate on a new expense policy
- Van Bynen/ Taylor embarrass themselves by stridently defending DUI convicted Councillor Emanuel's pride when Di Muccio suggested that Council help out at Operation Red Nose.
- Last night Van Bynen and Twinney take a roll call of Council members attending the Metro Bowl but forget to mention Di Muccio.  It may not seem like a big deal but to me it epitomizes the sentiment at Town Hall. 
- And how many recent Council votes have been tallied at 8-1?

I have to say that it is a very bizarre strategy on the part of Van Bynen/ Taylor.  In a democracy, "insiders" don't usually outnumber the "outsiders".  From the people I talk to, the public sentiment favours a shake up at Town Hall.  This might spell good news for a Di Muccio 2014 bid. 

A new 'Era' (because the old one is losing its readership)

When MP Dean Del Maestro suggested that all users of the Internet should be identified when posting an opinion, almost every newspaper and journalist in Canada mocked him for this viewpoint.  Ironically, Debora Kelly of the Era seems to be espousing Del Maestro's idea but this blog questions her motiviations. How much stock should we put into the Era Editor's column regarding municipal blogs and twitter accounts that are written anonymously?  I don't pretend to read them all but certainly I can't see any reasonable person subscribing to her viewpoint.  Let's place it in context.

1) Hypocritical - Newspapers publish anonymous opinion pieces with almost every edition.  They are called editorials.  Editorials are anonymous because the newspaper feels that the opinion being expressed is paramount to the identity of the writer.  The ideas are important and only the ideas should be discussed.  It forces the debate to be about the issue. 

Locally, the Era wrote an editorial in the summer of 2011 calling on Councillor Emanuel to resign when he was caught drinking and driving.  Councillor Emanuel's supporters went on line demanding to know why the editorial did not have a named writer.  At the time, Debora Kelly rightly defended the practice of anonymity.

2) Political - If the shoe was on the other foot, if my support was wholeheartedly in the Van Bynen/ Taylor camp, I would guarantee you that I would be supported and even lauded by some factions.  Anonymity wouldn't be an issue if the view point of this blog was in their camp.  It's not surprising that Councillor Di Muccio has been defending my blog since the column was published.  She likely sees the popularity of my blog as a boon for her political fortunes so its within her best interests to defend my credibility and reputation. 

If there is any doubt about this, look at how many of these same people who condemn my blog will converse with www.newmarketfreepress.ca via twitter.  Despite being anonymous as well, the Newmarket Free Press is more benign (but certainly holds many similar viewpoints as my own blog - I enjoy reading the editorials posted there).

As I said many times before I wish I didn't have to write this blog.  I wish we had a local media that covered the news stories that people like me feel are important.  The Era is supportive of the current Van Bynen/ Taylor administration (which is their right to have their own opinion), but it causes the paper to avoid issues that make the Mayor and Regional Councillor appear in a bad light.  Examples include: soaring debt loads at the York Regional government, issues with closed door meeting transparency, and racist vandalism.  Newmarket residents had to rely on the Toronto media to report these stories.  Even when these stories break in the Toronto media, the Era refuses to do a more thorough follow up.  In a nutshell, the Era's political bent has harmed it's news reporting credibility.   

3) Economical - Throughout the mainstream media these days, there are scads of stories about how newspapers are struggling to compete with social media.  Large media companies such as Torstar, Bell Globe Media, and QMI are announcing paywall subscriptions for their media websites as more and more people are flocking to the Internet for news and opinions. 

Locally, my blog is getting an audience.  Some of the same people who are advocating that the public should ignore my blog because it is anonymous are amongst my most voracious readers and supporters of the Van Bynen camp.  I appreciate their regular visits even if they don't agree with my opinions. 

Advertisers are certainly aware that printed media is waning because it is disadvantaged by social media competitors.  Therefore it should be no surprise that a newspaper is trying to suppress readership of a social media competitor.

Among the advantages of my blog versus the Era is that I comment on items that aren't being written about elsewhere.  I publish and will not rebut any comments posted by readers (as long as they are written in good taste and on topic).  Juxtapose that with the Era which oftentimes will not publish letters to the editor from the public.  My blog allows people on the twitterverse to argue for/against any of my views in realtime.

4) Agenda - Mayor Van Bynen, Regional Councillor Taylor and the Era are very closely linked.  For example, the publisher is a colleague of the Mayor and Regional Councillor on the Newmarket Economic Development Committee.  The Editor serves on the Belinda's Place board with the Mayor.  The Era is tight with the Van Bynen/ Taylor group.  The Town of Newmarket is a major advertiser of the Era.  Its no surprise that the Era supports the status quo, (even to the extent of ignoring real news to keep these men in good light).

A while back, I wrote a letter to the editor that was published by the Era that was very mildly critical of a certain municipal politician.  After it was published, I was contacted by that politician.  He wanted to argue with me about my letter.  Well if every person with an opposing opinion can expect to be harangued, is it any wonder why some of us would choose to be anonymous?    

In summary, to the main extent, her column was "inside baseball."  As much as the columnist was questioning the credibility of certain bloggers, she never provided instances.  Whereas the columnist holds the position that certain blogs "attack" municipal politicians, she never gave any examples.  My question to Ms. Kelly is if she isn't able to reference any concrete examples to support her views, then who truly has the issue with credibility?              

A Council of Shame

Town of Milton Regional Councillor Tony Lambert pleaded guilty:  http://www.mississauga.com/news/article/1256068--councillor-pleads-guilty-to-drunk-driving  He has made a statement acknowledging the criticism he has received and admits he deserves it.   

City of Toronto Councillor Ana Bailao has been charged and awaiting her day in court: http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1272214--ana-bail-o-toronto-city-councillor-charged-with-impaired-driving  She has announced that she will be entering a "not guilty" plea. 

City of Cambridge Councillor Pam Wolf was charged after a two car collision on Friday night: http://www.therecord.com/news/local/article/835465--cambridge-councillor-pam-wolf-charged-with-impaired-driving  Councillor Wolf is reportedly taking some time to consider her career. 

And then there's our hometown shame, Newmarket Councillor Chris Emanuel who was convicted in August 2011:  http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1040337--councillor-fined-for-driving-drunk  Councillor Emanuel seeks out speaking gigs with school kids and charity galas that promote him as a "star".  He refuses to volunteer with community groups that promote an anti-drinking and driving message.   

Who will repair this broken Council?

Two years ago, Newmarket council was elected with a lot of promise.  Newmarket Council was comprised of a good blend of new blood and experienced incumbency.  The rookie councillors were given a clear mandate from voters to push for change while the incumbent council members, including the Mayor and Regional Councillor, had the numbers of Council votes behind them to make sure these changes would be gradually implemented.

Today, it isn't hard to see that Council is deeply divided.  There are 8 Council members on one side and the Ward Six Councillor on the other.  (The rookie Councillors Hempen and Twinney wasted no time turning their backs on their campaign promises and, to put it politely, sold out.  If there is any doubt just check their web pages www.ourward.ca or www.janetwinney.ca and you'll certainly be questioning what happened to what appeared like a promising start?)

With the numbers heavily in favour of the group of 8, the ability to dominate the Council agenda, and to make every vote go their way, you would have thought that two years in, this would have been a tremendously successful council term for the Van Bynen/ Taylor two-some.  Normally, 8 to 1 wouldn't be a fair fight but Di Muccio has shown that she is a formidable opponent at almost every turn.       

When Regional Councillor Taylor sent around his October 2012 postcard, he highlighted just two accomplishments this term -- the Riverwalk Commons (which was actually a Lois Brown accomplishment), and a property tax increase.  People are wondering.  With everything going right for Van Bynen/ Taylor, why haven't they been able to accomplish more?  What happened?

So there are two years remaining.  With nowhere to go but up but no one in the group of 8 stepping up to lead.  No strategic direction, no political will to change, it seems like this Council will drift along until the voters deal with the impasse in 2014. 

If there is any reason to hope, it lies with Councillor Di Muccio continuing to reach across the table.  Of the group, she seems to be only one who realizes that this current situation doesn't need to be permanent.  In the past two Council meetings, she has made offers to bridge the gap and has been rebuffed both times by Van Bynen/ Taylor.  Hopefully she'll continue to show leadership towards fixing this broken Council and maybe Van Bynen/ Taylor will recognize the vacuum their "leadership" has created.    

Following up with Nwkt Councillors Charitable Giving

I've been writing a fair bit about a perception of insincerity with politicians using community charity events exclusively for photo ops and self promotion. Well, last night between 6:35 and 6:45 pm, Ward 3 Councillor Jane Twinney posted this message on Twitter:

Jane Twinney‏@JaneTwinney

Thank you to all the residents who generously donated tonight to the #poppy campaign. http://yfrog.com/oc9qzahj

 

(Notice that she included a photo of herself with a box of poppies).

 

Then at 7:00 pm, Ward 7 Councillor Chris Emanuel posted this on Twitter:

 

Chris Emanuel‏@_chrisemanuel

With @JaneTwinney & @tomvegh and our town Santa Claus Parade mtg - Santa Claus comes to #Newmarket on November 17th - newmarket.ca for info

 

Draw you own conclusions, Newmarket. 

Big Spenders must accept strings attached to taxpayer funded expense accounts

The blog I wrote on November 4th, 2012 identified two groups of council members.  In the first group, who I will call the "Big Spenders", we have Tony Van Bynen, John Taylor, Tom Vegh, Jane Twinney, and Chris Emanuel.  Each member of the Big Spenders have used his/her taxpayer funded expense account to "donate" $1,000 or more to attend fancy dress galas and events.  In the second group, we have three councillors who, when we combine similar expenses, total only a few hundred dollars. The same three councillors were identified during last night's meeting as being willing to volunteer their time to a local community event.  The three in question - Councillors Hempen, Di Muccio, and Kerwin. 

Speaking during last night's televised Council meeting on behalf of the non-committal/ un-responsive Big Spenders, Regional Councillor John Taylor said that he would not feel any shame about not participating in the community event.  He argued that he and his colleagues have the benefit to choose with whom and when they will do community work. 

He's wrong of course -

When a councillor "donates" taxpayer provided funds directly from his/her expense account, then the councillor must accept there are strings attached.  Regional Councillor Taylor and the others must recognize that using taxpayer money means there are obligations of them to represent the residents of Newmarket. 

Therefore, because they are using taxpayer funds for charity donations, Regional Councillor Taylor and the others don't get to "pick and choose" who they can work with.  Voters have already decided through the last election who the Big Spenders will work with.  If the Big Spenders wanted the luxury of "picking and choosing" then Regional Councillor Taylor and the others shouldn't have dipped into the taxpayer funds from the outset.

I don't believe for a second that Hempen, Kerwin or Di Muccio are less charitable than the others based on their expense account totals.  In fact, I believe there is more than ample evidence to prove otherwise, not the least of which being their willingness to be generous with their free time at this upcoming community event.  I think they approach charitable giving very differently from the first group of Council members. 

In fact, I think there is clearly reason for raised eyebrows concerning the Big Spenders.  I have to wonder, if there wasn't a fancy dress party or a photo opportunity on hand, would any of them show up at a community event?  If you don't believe me, open up any edition of Newmarket SNAP and count the number of appearances by Taylor. Van Bynen and the other "Big Spenders".  They seem to be where SNAP shows up.  Imagine that. 

I've always believed that charitable giving, (whether it involves money or time), should always be made with humility.  The humble giver shows great strength of character.  Too bad that too many Newmarket Council members missed that lesson in Sunday school.  Perhaps they were too busy trying to be noticed instead.  Some may be too cheap to give with their money (it's better to donate taxpayer money instead), or perhaps too lazy to show up (when no photo opportunity exists).
        
Of course, Mr. Taylor and his Big Spenders gang would not be shamed.  They've given up the capacity to feel ashamed a long time ago.  Somewhere along the way, they have come to believe that they are entitled to the money in their expense account -- to buy gala tickets for themselves (and perhaps their spouses as seems to be the case with Councillor Vegh), to purchase photo ops, etc -- because they've lost sight of whose money they are spending.  It isn't theirs.  It belongs to the residents of Newmarket.

In which Regional Councillor John Taylor reveals that he's not running for re-election

Was Councillor Di Muccio being cheeky when she challenged her colleagues to participate in charity work as a team?  I don't think so because earlier tonight the Mayor was commenting about a similar challenge involving Mo'vember fundraising with the Town of Aurora, ("We lost by a hair", he chortled).  We also regularly see similar challenges on the Internet for organ donations etc.  So what's wrong with a likewise challenge for Operation Red Nose?

Could it be that Regional Councillor Taylor just simply lost his temper because he wrongly inferred a slight against a DUI convicted colleague? 

It certainly seems so. 

And it's his temper that just effectively ended his political career tonight. 

Charity - Are Nwkt Council Members Sincere or Frauds?

The 2012 third quarter Councillor expense reports were released with little fanfare or promotion from either the Town or the Newmarket Era.  Thank you to Councillor Di Muccio for making us aware that this report even existed.  Here is the link:  http://www.newmarket.ca/en/townhall/resourcelibrary/2012Q3Councilexpenses-website.pdf

As usual, there are few details to accompany the expense report.  Without these details, residents have no way of knowing if these expenses are legitimate or not.  I believe the Town could do a much better job of reporting expenses, including posting copies of invoices as some other municipalities do. 

Let's look some of the details we do have focusing specifically on money spent on galas, fundraisers, and event dinners. 

Mayor Van Bynen used up over $5,800 of tax payer funds over the first 9 months of the year.  Almost $1,500 of that was spent on galas, dinners, art shows etc. (any excuse for the Mayor to put on his tuxedo, I guess).  Like many residents, I wonder why we all have to pay for his so-called charity?  The Mayor gets two paycheques.  Financially, he's doing very well while so many Newmarket taxpayers are struggling to make ends meet.  Why can't he pay for these events out of the salary we pay him? 

Compare the Newmarket Mayor with the Mayor of Toronto.  Rob Ford is well known for being generous too.  The difference is that Rob Ford is generous with his time (giving many hours of his free time to coach high school football).  The Newmarket Mayor is generous with our money (not his).  That's a sign of a politician who wants to appear to be charitable but really he's faking it. 

Van Bynen's closest ally, Regional Councillor Taylor is equally generous spending other people's money. In the first 9 months of the year, Taylor has wined and dined at local charity and fund raising events to the tune of over $1,800 of your money.  Like the Mayor, Taylor receives a decent salary from taxpayers could easily pay this money out of his own wallet.  Yet, like the Mayor, he thinks its better that you and me pay for his wining and dining instead. 

One question that I don't know the answer to, does the Town of Newmarket purchase these charity gala tickets on behalf of the Mayor, Regional Councillor or other Council members, or does the Mayor/ Regional Councillor/ Councillor purchase the ticket themselves and then submit for reimbursement?  The reason to question this distinction is concerning who gets the tax receipt issued?  I would hate to think that these people are pocketing the tax receipt for a gala that's been paid for by the taxpayers.

Ward 1 Councillor Vegh has an item on his expense report - Southlake Hospital Fundraiser for $300.  This amount is an example of why the Town does itself no service by not providing details of expenses.  Comparing the Mayor's $150 for the Southlake Mardi Gras Gala and Regional Councillor John Taylor's $150 for the Southlake Fundraiser, one can only assume that Ward 1 Councillor Vegh purchased 2 tickets to the same event.  In other words, not only is the taxpayer on the hook for Vegh's so-called "charity", we're also paying for his wife's too?  If that's the case, his abuse of his spending account is truly scandalous.  As a taxpayer, I am outraged if this is indeed true. 

Like the others, Vegh is paid a good salary by the taxpayers.  If he feels inclined to give $1.200 to the hospital, the Alzheimer Society, or Crime Stoppers, why isn't he giving from his own money?  Why is he inflicting his "charity" on us?

Councillor Kerwin's spending on these items is just over $350.  While less than some of his colleagues, its still an outrageous amount to saddle the taxpayer with. 

Back to the big spenders (with your money that is), Ward 3 Councillor Jane Twinney spent over $1,400 to dress up fancy and get photographed by SNAP.  Maybe Councillor Twinney has a special affinity for myriad of causes she appears to "support" (with your money) but why doesn't she support them with her own money?  If the cause is so important to her, certainly Councillor Twinney could donate from her own purse.  Charity begins at home, does it not?

Councillor Hempen isn't shy about using your money for his photo op purposes either.  Item 8 listed as "Fundraising Event August 20 $160" raises concerns for me.  Surely, the Town of Newmarket didn't write a cheque to "Fundraising Event".  It seems more than probable that Councillor Hempen paid for a ticket out of pocket and then asked the Town to reimburse him and perhaps Councillor Hempen didn't provide any details of what the ticket was for.  If this was for a charity, to whom did the the charity tax receipt get issued to?  (Usually tax receipts are sent to the purchaser).  Somebody needs to look into this item with a fine tooth comb.  Again, without providing details of expenses, the Town is only causing a lot doubts and questions.  The Town of Newmarket looks really bad because of its policy not to be transparent with expenses. 

Councillor Sponga's expense report is interesting.  For some reason, he can attend the Federation of Cdn Municipalities 2012 Conference for $300 whilst Mayor Van Bynen charged the taxpayers $2,800 for his expenses to the FCM conference.  I'm assuming its the same event.  Did the Mayor live high off the taxpayer funded hog while Councillor Sponga was more frugal?  Given the money the Mayor spent on gala dinners (to which Sponga spent none), it seems clear that Sponga's expense report shows the Mayor living the "cavier dreams" lifestyle with your money. 

Councillor Di Muccio at $20 is the lowest of all Council.  Yet, reviewing photos on her twitter feed, residents know that she is charitable with her time and money.  She is rarely photographed by SNAP at the fancy galas but we see her helping at the CIBC Run for the Cure, at the Terry Fox Run, and helping out with minor sports, such as football.  I recommend that the other Council members look to Councillor Di Muccio for a good example of what the public expects. 

Lastly, Councillor Chris Emanuel is biggest spender of all.  His total expenses exceed even the Mayor's.  He has spent over $1,500 on his so-called "charity" with taxpayers footing the bill for his dinners, galas, etc.  Of particular concern is item 17 where it appears he has purchased lunch for Councillor Sponga.  Although the dollar amount is small, the taxpayer is wondering why are we paying for two councillors to lunch?  What's next?  High tea?

I don't understand why our Council seems to have so much trouble reigning in their expenses?  It seems they just don't get it.  Taxpayers are more than fed up with funding their "night out on the town".  Our charities do good work.  Newmarket is a charitable community which is why so many galas take place here.  Many of us are generous with our time and money.  These Councillors are insulting us all when they attend the same events we do, lining up for photos and asking the emcees to announce them, while sending the bill to the taxpayer.  These Councillors should be leading by example.   





         

Listen carefully - He's not a star

Some long time readers may roll their eyes when I get after Councillor Emanuel about his drinking and driving escapade.  Honestly, I might be able to forgive an ordinary person for the crime and property damage.  But Councillor Emanuel?  No bloody way.

Let's review:

Councillor Emanuel attended the opening of a new business in Newmarket.  He drank himself into a stupor.  The establishment requested that he take a cab.  He refused saying that he had a designated driver.  The new business could have lost their liquor license and potentially their business because of his very selfish act of drinking and driving. 

Councillor Emanuel, was "at work" when this happened.  He introduced himself as "Councillor" in this video here (acknowledging that he understood that he was on the job:   http://www.snapnewmarket.com/index.php?option=com_sngevents&id%5B%5D=290959  (skip ahead to the 1:05 mark of the video to see Councillor Emanuel at work).

While it's not actually a crime to be intoxicated while working, are there any situations where it could be considered appropriate?  If the Newmarket Code of Conduct doesn't apply to public intoxication, (as Mayor Van Bynen says here:  http://www.yorkregion.com/news/article/1050403--councillor-charged-with-impaired-driving), then the Code of Conduct needs to be updated.  We can't have drunk councillors voting on how to spend money, approving residential and commercial construction projects, and enacting new bylaws.  I'm certain that 100% of Newmarket residents would agree with me on that.

Since his conviction, residents have witnessed a lot of arrogance and very little remorse from Councillor Emanuel.  It is extremely inappropriate for Councillor Emanuel to be speaking to school children about "Civics" (unless the topic is about the evils of drink).  It is super extremely inappropriate for Councillor Emanuel to be involved in anything to do with violence against women (given the statistics between the crime and alcohol use).  It is ridiculous that he continues represent Newmarket on the Fire Department Board (as indicated here:   http://www.newmarket.ca/en/townhall/committeeandboardmembership.asp?_mid_=921) given that our fire fighters are the front line responders coming face to face with the very real consequences of excessive drinking and many must be emotionally scarred by the carnage created by perpetrated by the likes of Councillor Emanuel.

What takes the cake is Councillor Emanuel allowing a charity group to call him a "Star".

- 300,000 people were injured by drinking and driving in 2009 according the MADD.  A "Star" you say?
- Over $20 billion in actual damages caused by drunk drivers like Councillor Emanuel in 2009 says MADD.  Money that should have be used to house the homeless, feed the hungry, and treat the sick is instead paying for needless injuries, deaths, and property damage.  Yet Councillor Emanuel is a "Star"?
- How Star-like is Councillor Emanuel when academic studies show that 45% of domestic violence occurrences were directly related to the abuse of alcohol?

I'm not just angry at Councillor Emanuel.  We all learned that he had no scruples when he refused to resign as the Newmarket Era called him to account:  http://www.yorkregion.com/opinion/editorial/article/1070613--convicted-councillor-should-step-down. 

Why are the Mayor and Regional Councillor allowing him to be called a "Star" by either promoting or attending the Dream Halloween charity event?  I look forward to picking up the next edition Snap to see which other members of Newmarket Council attended.  Their attendence sets a very poor example that drinking and driving isn't a serious offense.

For those who support Councillor Emanuel and who have argued with me that there is nothing seriously wrong with a drunken politician, I challenge you to learn the facts of what criminals like him have done to our community.  Look at crime stats, victim statements, and the real costs of drinking and driving.  Stop rolling your eyes and get informed.  The injuries, pain, and costs are very, very real.    



   

How Invalid Logic is Becoming the Norm in Nwkt Twitter Wars

The fun thing about twitter is that sometimes its like peeling an onion.  You need to uncover a few layers before seeing the truth behind some one's spin. 

Case in point, here is something that Ward 1 Councillor Tom Vegh tweeted seemingly out of the blue:

Tom Vegh‏@tomvegh

Arrest warrant issued in ON for Chris Scullino,Co-Founder York Region Taxpayers Alliance, for theft over $5k#newmarkethttp://www.linkedin.com/pub/christopher-scullino/31/970/137 …

 

On the whole, intriguing but without allusion to context, he left many residents wondering, "what is he talking about?"

 

Shortly afterward, ex-Newmarket Era crime reporter Joe Fantuzzi chimed in:

 

Joe Fantauzzi‏@jjfantauzzi

Scullino, who seems to be in Halifax, apparently worked on @KevinGaudet's Ontario PC bid http://bit.ly/P0MUPz #onpoli #cdnpoli

 

One layer of the onion peeled away.  If that's where the story ended, all would think that Vegh was dog-hunting the star candidate for the Ontario PC party, Kevin Gaudet.  After all, there was a news story that Ontario is going into an election in the spring so its about the time when Liberals start sniping Tories and vice-versa.  Ontario Liberal Vegh is baiting Ontario PC Gaudet about his association with an alleged felon. 

 

However, that's not necessarily the case because here's a tweet from the ratepayer's group, York Region Taxpayers Alliance:

 

York Region Taxpayer‏@yorktxpyr

York Region Taxpayers is NOT affiliated with Christopher Scullino @scully546 We hope he resolves his personal and legal issues.

 

Which was immediately followed by a tweet from Newmarket Ward 3 Councillor Jane Twinney:

 

Jane Twinney‏@JaneTwinney

@yorktxpyr hey Chris, I think there are some people looking for you.

 

Ah, so the onion is down another layer.  It looks as though the two councillors are trying to implicate the YRTA into some nasty business by the Alliance's co-founder.  Again, its not unusual for tax and spend politicians to squabble with ratepayers.  So this seems like "politics as usual". 

 

But here's the revealing tweet, from none other than the Ward 3 Councillor's husband of all people:

 

joe twinney‏@joetwinney

@dsmerek Perhaps our #newmarket ward 6 Councillor Dimuccio could fill you in as he was her "date" for Ford Fest in Sept.

 

Ah ha.  So that's it.  It's yet another clumsy, fumbling shot at the hardworking Ward Six Councillor. 

Despite Counillor Twinney later claiming not to be attacking anyone, her tweets in concert with her spouse's clearly reveal otherwise.

Let's test the logic behind what Vegh/ Twinney are implying:

Allegedly Christopher Sculliano is wanted by the police for theft; and
Christopher Sculliano once attended a picnic with Councillor Di Muccio;
Therefore, Councillor Di Muccio must also be involved in alleged criminal activity.

Obviously that's not true and we seriously question why Vegh and Twinney(s) are implying that there is a connection.  Their implication makes no more sense than:

Members of Scouts Canada have been convicted of sex crimes involving children; and
Councillor Jane Twinney promotes Scouts Canada in her twitter;
Therefore, Councillor Jane Twinney must be promoting pedophilia via twitter.

Both arguments are invalid and not supported by the facts.  I think Vegh and Twinney owe Councillor Di Muccio and the York Region Tax Payers Alliance an apology forthwith.  I doubt we'll see one anytime soon (look at Vegh's past behaviour with the C-Word and W-Word to describe Di Muccio). 

One last note:  as the @yorktxpyr author points out correctly, here are some arguments that are indeed valid:

Councillor Emanuel is a convict; and
Councillors Vegh and Twinney support Councillor Emanuel and don't want him to resign;
Therefore, Councillors Vegh and Twinney support having criminals represent Newmarket

And

Councillor Emanuel is a convict: and
Councillor Di Muccio demanded his resignation because of his conviction;
Therefore, Councillor Di Muccio doesn't want criminals to represent Newmarket.

 

Council gets it wrong on the Farmer's Market

I'll admit that I may not have all the facts on this & welcome comments from anyone who can set the record straight.  What I'm writing about is based on the scant information provided by twitter, www.newmarket.ca, and www.newmarketfarmersmarket.com.  To be truthful, there isn't much information out there and perhaps that too is a problem.  (Like so many other issues, the Newmarket Era doesn't report on this matter.  It just re-confirms why blogs like this are so important to people who want local news coverage). 

Newmarket Council voted yesterday to waive extra fees for vendors.  While this may be "good politics" it really is a "bad government" move.  The Newmarket Farmer's Market has been in existence for more than 10 years.  It is a viable business model that doesn't require government subsidy.  It is no longer in the start-up phase of its existence. 

The vendors who maintain booths at the Farmers Market are private enterprises.  They are there to make a buck.  Very few of these vendors are based locally. By contrast, we have local grocery stores, owned by local residents, and who employ many hundreds of employees.  I was saddened to see a grocery store on Leslie St. north of Davis being shuttered and jobs lost recently.  Who is offering to waive their business related fees? 

Some Councillors have said that the Newmarket Farmers Market is essential to create economic growth for the Town.  I say that is a crock.  If they are referring to jobs, well the Price Chopper on Leslie provided the Town with more employment than the half-day a week, seasonal jobs that may be produced by the Farmers Market.  Yet, there was no special Council action taken to prevent those job losses. 

If the Councillors believe that the Newmarket Farmers Market creates tourism, then I think they are wrong on that account too.  Each of our neighbours, Stouffville, Aurora, East Gwillimbury, have their own weekend farmers market.  There is no evidence that people are bypassing those communities to drive specifically the one in Newmarket.  Let's be honest and admit that the people shopping at the Newmarket Farmers Market are predominantly locals. 

What gets my goat is that this is a government hand out for a group of "for profit" businesses.  Let's contrast this with the Heart of York Soccer Tournament that the Newmarket Soccer Club hosts each year.  The Newmarket Soccer Club is a "not-for-profit" club.  The HOY tournament brought 197 youth soccer teams to Newmarket this past August.  Assuming each team has 15 players, that means a grand total of almost 9,000 visitors for each of the two-day tournament, (assuming each player travels with 2 parents or 45 visitors associated with each team).  Likely, these visitors bought gas, ate lunch, visited the mall and so on in between games.  The economic spin-off for the local economy is in the $100's of thousands.  Keep in mind, these are visitors not local residents.  Despite all of this economic benefit, I didn't find any Council involvement to waive fees for the Newmarket Soccer Club. 

When local residents buy at the Farmers Market from people who have businesses based elsewhere, that hurts our local economy.  You are taking consumer money that would have otherwise been spent in a Newmarket grocery store and giving it to a business that contributes no taxes, no fees, no jobs to our Town.  All these Farmers Market businesses do is take, take, take.

When we use taxpayer dollars to fund non-local farmers, the Council is engaged in depleting our local economy.  Its a dumb move and all residents should be outraged by their "photo-op" motivated decision. 

Finding Folly with Van Bynen's Finnish Flight of Fancy

Last week, the National Post wrote a tongue-in-cheek review of Newmarket Mayor Tony Van Bynen's recent foray into international trade.  See the article below:
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/10/11/forget-chicago-newmarket-mayor-looks-to-finland-for-trade-links/
The trip to Finland and Estonia comes on the heels of recent news about other trade missions by prominent politicians; notably Toronto Mayor Rob Ford travelling to Chicago, and Ontario Premier, Dalton McGuinty announcing a trade mission to China in January. 

The question at the outset of the National Post article was also the one that was on the top of my mind:  Finland?  Estonia?  Why? 

According to the IMF, China's economy is the world's second largest in terms of GDP.  If Chicago were a country it would rival the Swiss economy at around 35th place.  Finland's economy is about half of Chicago's GDP and ranks 54th in the world.  Estonia is in 106th place and just a fraction of Chicago. 

It's important to highlight Newmarket's proximity to major multi-lane highways which connect us to the GTA with a population of more than 6 million people living and doing business in 25 municipalities.  Newmarket can also trade beyond the GTA because we have excellent access to rail, air and waterway transport all within under an hour's drive of Newmarket that connect us with the United States and to the world.  We have a number of major universities, a provincial capital, and the heart of Canada's banking and financial sectors headquartered right at our doorstep.  What this means is we don't have to travel far to find opportunities for our community.   

By comparison, Finland's population is 5.3 million and Estonia 1.3 million or approximately the same population as the GTA but these markets aren't within an hour's drive.  It's a twelve hour flight with a stop over in either London or Paris between Toronto and Helsinki.  That's a long way for the Mayor to travel to find new jobs for Newmarket. 

The point is, if the Mayor is actually interested in economic development, there are a lot of places much closer to home to visit to bring jobs to Newmarket.  Still, if the Mayor feels that it is important to travel abroad, why didn't he arrange to be included in the Toronto Mayor's trip to Chicago or the Premier's trip to China?  If you are looking to bring new opportunities to Newmarket, certainly these destinations would provide greater opportunities for our business sector.   

The Mayor claims this was a economic development trip but he travelled with people from the university, the hospital, York Regional government as well as people representing the Town of Newmarket.  All of these are public sector representatives.  That is not to say that Newmarket couldn't expand it's economy by public sector growth but it seems unusual that the Mayor would be focus on growing more "government jobs" during a time when the governments here are contracting and implementing cost containment measures. 

I just don't see the sense in the Mayor's junket and apparently neither did National Post reporter Graeme McNaughton.  I'm sure the trip was a lovely diversion for the Mayor and maybe he picked up a souvenir or two.  I sincerely hope that it was worth it considering the roughly $5,000 that this "business" trip cost Newmarket taxpayers.  Still I doubt Newmarket taxpayers will ever re-coup the $5,000 cost of the trip via new tax revenue generated by this visit but, hey, Mayor Van Bynen got his passport stamped and his photo in the paper (and the rest of us get a chuckle at his expense).        

Budget Process or Christmas Wish List?

Remember when we were kids?  At Christmas time the teacher would hand out a sheet of paper and all the kids would write a letter to Santa.  All the letters were pretty much the same.  We'd feign interest about Mrs Claus and Rudolph.  We would assure Santa that we've been good over the course of the year and we would show our Christmas spirit by decorating the letter with hand drawn images of Christmas trees, candy canes and wreaths.  However, the real purpose behind the letter was to deliver the news to Santa Claus of our wish list for Christmas morning.

This Santa letter exercise was called to mind when I used the town of Newmarket's new "Budget Tool" (go to www.newmarket.ca).  This tool allows you enter in the assessed value of your home, and then slide targets back and forth to increase or decrease the amount you pay for specific items, such as road work, library services, and garbage pick up.  After you make your decision, the tool warns you that you may have reduced service levels (if you opt to pay less) or increased services (if you opt to pay more).  Perhaps unintentionally, the calculator is biased towards showing that drastically cutting services will only have a small financial reward to residents while increasing services will only cost each of us just a few dollars more each month.   

I would like to propose another way of reviewing the budget; it starts with the question, can we maintain our current level of service and yet, still reduce costs?  I am emphatic in the belief that this is possible.     

Let's refute the school of thought that economic austerity means immediate withdrawal of services.  Evidence shows otherwise, as the Government of Canada has just demonstrated.  Federally, it was possible to make $30 billion in expenditure cuts while experiencing no appreciable difference in the level of government services we receive on a day to day basis.  The federal government did this by finding greater efficiencies in their departments and laying off employees who became redundant.  Where programs had passed their best before expiry date, they were ceased.  Where head count was bloated, they were reduced.  Where spending was out of control, they were curtailed.  All in all, the majority of us felt no ill effects from these cuts. 

If the federal government can accomplish this feat, surely there is fat to be trimmed locally too.  Rather than ask citizens to draft up a Christmas list of services they would like to continue, perhaps a more fruitful exercise would be to ask Town of Newmarket department heads to demonstrate how they can maintain service levels while spending less and give bonuses and/or incentive pay to those managers who actually achieve their goals. 

My philosophy regarding salaries is simple.  I tend to ignore those who whinge about "Sunshine" lists.  If a department head has the ability through his management skills to save taxpayers seven figured sums, why do I care if we pay him/her a six figured salary and a significant bonus?  However, if the department head isn't able to demonstrate savings of tax payer money while retaining service levels, then his/her name should be on the top of the list of those to be laid off.  Just like anyone in the private sector, Sunshine list employees must be ready to show why they get paid the big bucks.       

First things get "personal" and then things get "stupid"

I waited a whole week to see if, and how, they would respond to this published letter:

http://www.yorkregion.com/opinion/letters/article/1503724--reconsider-re-naming-field

The allegation that the letter writer is making is very serious; because she has made her colleagues upset, did the honourable(?) members of Newmarket Council decide to back-track on their promise of support the re-naming in order to 'punish' Maddie Di Muccio and her husband? 

Here are the most salient points (keeping in mind, it doesn't matter whether you feel the sports field naming is warranted (as many do) or not (as the Era Banner doesn't):

1) Have they lost perspective of what they were voting on?  We're talking about naming a sports field, just one of the many sports fields located at the Ray Twinney Centre.  This is a compelling story and the vote should have been obvious (even for this bunch).  I have yet to see any Council member explain why he/she couldn't support this.  It seems like a total bone-head move not to favour this (even for this bunch).  If the letters in the Era and the Toronto Sun are any indication, this item has the public's attention.  (Here is another letter in the Era:  http://www.yorkregion.com/opinion/letters/article/1503725--least-we-can-do-is-honour-youth-with-field )

2) The letter writer claims that Councillors had previously promised him to see this through.  A record of broken promises will indeed break political careers.  Again, why is there a cone of silence around this?  It seems to be political suicide not to explain their about-face to the public.

3) I can't think of a politician alive who would let allegations like these ones made by the letter writer just ferment in the public. It begs the question, is the letter writer on to something here?

Either the Mayor and these Councillors have totally given up all hope for re-election (and yes, issues like these become BIG issues at election time.  Voters want leaders who are compassionate not heartless), or they have become absolutely blinded by their hatred of the Ward 6 Councillor.

So Newmarket, you get to decide.  Are our esteemed(?) Council members "Heartless" or "Hateful".  Either way, I don't think they should be given the benefit of the doubt. 

If you're a cowboy, and you're dragging a guy behind your horse, I bet it would really make you mad if you looked back and the guy was reading a magazine

These wise words are from "Jack Handey Deep Thoughts".  These are the words that came to my mind when I read this news item:

@teresalatchford: #Newmarket council vote unanmiously to direct staff to retain an integrity commish to investigate possible breach of code, confidentiality

 

 

Strengthen Oversight of Mayor and Council

It seems that at every turn, some Councillors are putting up roadblocks against good governance.  Transparency, accountability, openness may seem to be lacking substance in the opinion of some Newmarket politicians, (ahem, Regional Councillor Taylor), but it would be very stupid to overlook what these values mean to Newmarket residents. 

I had an opportunity to look at information from the Ombudsman's Office and/or Auditor General's office for other provinces in Canada as well as our own.  The complaints coming against municipal councils/ councillors seem at first to be varied.  Some complaints dealt with questionable spending.  Other complaints focused on apparent conflicts of interests.  I saw complaints concerning record keeping, tendering for municipal projects, and even how the municipal government sold off it's surplus vehicles.  On the surface, there appears to be little connection but I think the underlying issue is the same in each case - a lack of transparency and accountability. 

What I saw when looking at these cases was clear evidence that the complainants were correct.  Upon investigation, the provincial investigator found instances of poor decision making, questionable accounting, and a disregard for transparency.  Having a case of outright fraud is very rare but don't underestimate the millions of taxpayers money that is wasted through lax or inadequate governance. 

Unfortunately there are very few places for residents to go for help if they have a problem with the governance at Newmarket Town Hall.  For example, when a Richmond Hill Councillor sent in a bill for his new set of golf clubs, the Mayor suggested that it was no business of the Town to address his poor judgment.  Instead, the Mayor referred the matter to voters (with years to go until the next election).  To be forced to wait four years until election time before getting a chance to give him the boot seems to be a weakness in our system.  Unlike in the old days when people expected common decency from those in public office, today we can't rely on a politician to have the integrity to resign when he finds himself in the hoosegow.  (Ahem, Councillor Emanuel). 

I would like to see a mandate coming from the Province requiring the Regional Government to set up a municipal audit unit.  The auditing unit would be tasked with showing up unannounced to conduct an audit of each municipality and make sure that the local government is operating to the best governance standards. 

Here are a few items that the Regional audit unit could investigate:

1) Complaints from residents about the professional conduct of any municipal politician
2) Confirming the results of the year end audits of the municipality.  The year end audits rarely find any issues with the town because the town employees know when the audit is going to happen.  If the audit is a surprise visit, it's harder to sweep certain things under the rug.
3) Reviewing and commenting on the adequacy of certain reserving practices
4) Overseeing complaints concerning the tendering policies of the municipality to ensure transparency
5) Auditing in camera meetings (by actually attending the session) to ensure conformity to the municipality's policies
6) Auditing the police department, fire department, municipally owned electrical utilities, public libraries, public transit and other quasi-autonomous municipal entities to ensure good governance and transparency.

Here are just a few benefits of having a Regional audit unit:

1) Greater public transparency because municipal audit reports would be published and available to the public.  This gives the public improved information when voting.  For example, when a Mayor says he is a good manager, the public will have an unbiased assessment of the Mayor's management ability to be able to judge his opinion.
2) Identify weaknesses and best practices from around the region.  With audits, municipalities will have an opportunity to see where they are lagging or how they can learn from their neighbours.
3) Avoid a lackadaisical attitude towards good governance.  A surprise audit is a great way to motivate town employees to do their best every day. 
4) An opportunity to fix problems right away.  Asking residents to wait four years to improve the governance of their municipality through an election just doesn't make sense.  Let's give residents a much quicker response mechanism allow us to address a problem early on. 
5) Avoid fraud and other misconducts.  This should be the responsibility of every municipal leader but very few are able to police themselves.  A Regional audit unit can detect and report misdeeds and protect the residents from misappropriation of taxpayer money.  The greatest opportunity of fraud occurs during in camera sessions  when the public and media are barred from attending which is why monitoring the goings-ons of these meetings is so important. 

A specialized, York Regional auditing unit makes a lot of sense.  Obviously, an audit alone is not enough.  The mandate should also require the municipality to respond to the auditing unit's report allowing residents to gauge the performance of the Mayor and Council before an election which can only improve our democracy.  As we have seen in Newmarket, when too many items are being discussed in camera, the public perception is one of distrust and suspicion.  Pull back the curtain and let a well respected auditing team review and report back to the public to re-establish faith in the municipal government. 

This churns my stomach. Are there no decent politicians out there?

This is going to be my last blog about the despicable events of earlier this week.  To those who still don't get it -- calling a woman a C-word is just like a punch in the stomach.  There is nothing worse.  It compares with using a racial slur. 

The bare minimum any of the elected Newmarket politicians had to do was to condemn the use of the word.  None of them would do it.  Do they not have one scintilla of common decency amongst them? 

Instead, Councillor Jane Twinney takes to Twitter saying that she is thinking of quitting social media.  Here's a newsflash for the councillor - This isn't about her.  Her colleague got viciously attacked and Councillor Twinney stands silently.  Words cannot express my disgust.

Instead, Councillor Tom Vegh is retweeting his allies - Regional Councillor Taylor, Councillors Emanuel and Twinney - desperate for some type of re-affirmation from them.  My advice to Vegh's chums:  Councillor Vegh is toxic.  Women won't forgive this.  He is radioactive. Its best to keep far away.  It was stupid of him not to have apologized profusely when he had the opportunity. 

Frankly, I don't understand the silence.  It reminds me of when the racial epithets were being spray painted on garage doors on Sandiford.  Even then, it was only Councillor Di Muccio who spoke most vehemently against the perpetrator giving a voice to what we were all thinking. 

Basic human respect is all that I'm asking for.  None of you shown it.  You don't measure up to what the community of Newmarket represents.  Shame on you all. 

These are your community leaders, Newmarket

In yesterday's blog, I promised to contact various female politicians and give them a chance to sound off on the appropriateness of the C-word, the B-word, that W-word in describing a female politician in this day and age. 

I have no doubt that if I took this survey to the corner of Riverwalk Commons and asked random strangers, that the responses would be automatic.  The question isn't that difficult.

However, politicians are not like ordinary people.  Politicians stumble sometimes on even the most simple, common sense type of issues - such as whether Councillor Chris Emanuel was wrong re: drinking and driving. (A year has passed and still only one Newmarket politician has condemned him for that.  Thank goodness that the public is not that stupid). 

Condemn and condone.  Those are the two words before us and they have very different meanings.  To condemn something means to express an unfavourable judgment.  To condone something means to disregard or overlook something that is objectionable.  (Look it up in the dictionary if you don't believe me).  Ergo, politicians who say nothing about drinking and driving, or remain silent while people are using the C-word, B-word, and W-word around females, are indeed condoning that behaviour. 

So yesterday I gave certain people an opportunity to condemn or condone the objectionable behaviour on Twitter and defend Councillor Di Muccio who was being called some very nasty names. 

Here are their responses:

Minister of Municipal Affairs, Kathleen Wynne - she remained silent therefore she condones the use of the C-word, B-word, and W-word to describe female politicians.  Minister Wynne is a big advocate for Equal Voice.  I don't know how she justifies advocating for women in politics and yet says nothing on this issue?

Mayor Tony Van Bynen - Well of course he said nothing (did you expect otherwise)?  In reality, there are two main culprits in this whole council misbehaviour imbroglio.  The first culprit is the Mayor because he has been condoning a lot of bad behaviour.  He portrays himslelf as the 'steady hand at the wheel' but in reality, he is very weak.  He is too meek to stand up to council colleagues Taylor, Emanuel and Di Muccio and therefore he is the wrong person to be the Chair for this group of Councillors. 

Regional Councillor John Taylor - Crickets.  Chalk him up as condoning women being called the C-word, B-word and W-word.  (Though I know his mother didn't raise him to be that way.  She must be aghast.  Maybe Regional Councillor Taylor is going through some type of rebellion phase).

MP Lois Brown - I expected her to say something to condemn drinking and driving.  She didn't.  I expected her to condemn the abuse that Councillor Di Muccio has been facing.  She didn't.  I think a lot of people are really disappointed in Lois.  She doesn't seem to have the guts to act like a community leader.  A community leader isn't afraid to ruffle some feathers when it comes to right and wrong.  I can only imagine that Lois is waiting for a memo from the PMO to arrive before we'll know what she thinks. 

MPP Frank Klees - I'll let MPP Klees off the hook a bit.  He was working on the Ornge file yesterday.  I will be disappointed if he ultimately says nothing. 

The other Newmarket Councillors - Well, most of the block me on Twitter so they didn't respond either.  Let's give them the benefit of the doubt and pretend they are not aware of the issue.  Although I admit that Tom Vegh came very close to close to saying that the use of the C-word, B-word, W-word was bad, when he said his son requested @dunkie69er apologize. So by proxy of his son, lets say Councillor Vegh knows that calling females the C-word, B-word, W-word is a no-no.  He missed a golden opportunity to apologize to Maddie Di Muccio, or even admit that the use of such language was regrettable. 

What about some other female politicians in Newmarket?

OLP Candidate Christina Bisanz - she said nothing so she condones this objectionable behaviour

Green Party of Canada Candidate Vanessa Long - she too condones when females are called nasty names. 

Municipal Candidate Lucille Abate - There can be no denying that Lucille Abate and Maddie Di Muccio are staunch rivals ever since they faced off in 2010.  Therefore, it is with great admiration that Ms Abate is the only local politician to have the intestinal fortitude to actually condemn the abuse.  Lucille has demonstrated more integrity for standing up for what is right than all the others combined.  She doesn't like Councillor Di Muccio, but she did the right thing and supported her against the abusers.  The MP, Mayor, and the rest could learn something here.  Its called doing the right thing.

Media folk -

I contacted two members of the media, both of whom I expected to find the topic of female politicians being called the C-word, B-word, W-word very objectionable. 

AM 640 Arelene Bynon - Interviewed Councillor Di Muccio and Councillor Vegh and presented a well balanced view point.  The callers after the show seemed to overwhelmingly favour Maddie Di Muccio.  This blogger even blushed a little when the blog was mentioned (although not by name.  Next time please give your listeners the web address Arelene).  Arelene proved again that she is one of the best in the business. 

The Era Banner Editor Debora Kelly - Ms Kelly surprised me by being so much more focussed on my identity rather than the issue.  Not only is Ms. Kelly a noted female business leader, but she is also a mother with a daughter.  Yet there can be no doubt that she absolutely condones the use of such disgusting language.  There is also the matter of arrogance from her (mainstream media) to denigrate bloggers like me.  Remember the influence bloggers had on Aurora Mayor Phyllis Morris' career?  We are new media and we have an opinion.  And guess what?  People are reading what we write too.  Chris Watts, an Aurora blogger, refers to Debora Kelly's paper as the "Error Banner" and I am beginning to agree with his perspective. 

The second culprit in these shenaningans is the Era Banner.  Rarely (if ever) does the Era Banner provide balanced reporting of the issues.  The fact that the Era Banner uncritically promotes the Van Bynen/Taylor platform is the sole reason why blogs like this one exist.  Bloggers wouldn't be writing about municipal issues if the Era did its job of providing a critical analysis through columns and editorials.  If you don't like people like me writing blogs, then you need to do a better job with your own paper.  If the Era Banner was doing a better job (and not giving Van Bynen/Taylor a free ride), there would be less twitter fights, fewer bloggers, and more accountability for mis-behaving politicos.  Advice to ponder, Ms. Kelly.  Think about it.           

 

Tom Vegh, You Must Be So Damn Proud

Last night on the commute home, I listened to the Arelene Bynon show talk about the attacks on Rob Ford.  Arelene Bynon makes the point that many of these recent attacks, (such as making a butter statue of the Toronto Mayor), really are crass and hit well below the belt.  Rob Ford got elected on a well defined mandate and he has stuck to his platform by implementing policies that back up his campaign promises.  The Rob Ford detractors who make "fat" jokes should really just grow up.  His detrators should debate the man on his policies if they disagree with him (provided that you have the IQ to do so) but don't belittle him because of his weight. 

Late last night, Newmarket Councillor Maddie Di Muccio surprised many by posting some of the twitter comments she was receiving.  This blogger can tell you that these abusive comments are not unique - some of my readers believe that she writes this blog and have hurled insults my way that were intended for her.  I've never spoken about them before and I've noticed that neither has the Councillor.  I can certainly see why she's finally saying, "Enough is enough". 

Here's one darling example of what she has tolerated:

@dunkie69er:  @vegha0535 Fuck @MaddieDiMuccio. #hackjobpolitician #illiteratecunt  Hope your dad stomps all over that #whore

Or this charming gentleman:

@dtellthetruth:  @nwkttownhall Have you noticed the googly eyed ward 6 clr with the big bald spot on top her head. Now thats a costume!!!

Now, for those who aren't aware, the "dad" being referenced by @dunkie69er is Tom Vegh.  @vegha0535 is apparently Alex Vegh, the young whelp of the Newmarket Ward 1 Councillor.  How proud his daddy must be Alex.  He has raised his son to become one of the finest, Grade A bullies this town has ever seen.  What a happy, happy day it must be at the Vegh homestead.  Good for you son.  You're a bona fide asshole now.  One day, all of this could be yours. 

We might moan and complain about how there are so few strong women in politics.  Well, if a woman, (who is also a mother by the way), can be called a a cunt/ whore/ dike (sic)/ and many other crass and disgusting names on the Internet, and nobody in the community speaks out against it, then why should she seek public office? 

That's why I am writing this blog.  I will also be using my twitter to call out certain female politicians asking them to condemn these comments and support Councillor Di Muccio.  Ideology doesn't matter in these circumstances.  Women of all political stripes must band together and join Maddie in saying, "Enough is enough"

PS - Councillor Vegh has been contacted and he has not condemned the comments above.  His silence qualifies him as a dispicable, disgusting human being.  Some might even refer to him as a "cunt". 

Something stinks with my drinking water

The Town of Newmarket announced today that we are switching water treatment disinfectant from chloramine to free chlorine (here:  http://www.yorkregion.com/news/article/1489399--newmarket-changing-water-disinfection-system).

As many residents are about to discover, free chlorine disinfectant can turn your water a different colour and give it more of a chemical-smell.  When you shower, your bathroom will reek of chlorine.  If you drink water from the tap, you will have to learn to tolerate its new taste, (although free chlorine is reportedly safe to drink).   

I expect that many residents will have no choice but to purchase non-refillable plastic containers of water in order to enjoy a glass of water.   It begs the question, when considering this change, did anyone at the Town of Newmarket think about the potential harm to the environment beforehand? 

The Town of Newmarket is telling us that free chlorine is safe, referring to it as approved by the Ministry of the Environment.  However, studies show that chlorine strips a person's skin of protective hair and natural oils which can make some people susceptible to rashes and other skin irritations.  Breathing in chlorine during a hot shower can cause breathing problems for some individuals too. 

Like everyone else, I am concerned about having safe drinking water from our taps and using chloramine disinfectant is a more expensive process.  Free chlorine is the cheaper disinfectant.  Yet, I contend that there is a marked difference in quality of taste and smell between the two systems and most residents have come to expect high quality drinking water.  This year our water bill increased exponentially and now we learn that the quality of water is being decreased. 

Readers should keep in mind this news (from July), http://www.yorkregion.com/news/article/1394117--conservation-methods-drive-up-water-costs-expert when the town announced it was increasing the amount of chlorine it uses, plus adding ammonia to make the chlorine last longer.  Factor in the fluoride that is also being added and you have to ask yourself, is this a glass of H2O or some kind of chemical soup that we are being forced to ingest?  Is this what we get in return for our higher water bills?

12 months later, Does it still matter?

It’s been a year since this:

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1040337--councillor-fined-for-driving-drunk

Since this time, Councillor Emanual has under gone a superficial "make over" to try and make people forget. His strategy is apparently three pronged: he has surrounded himself with supporters to write letters to the editors of the local papers to tout his good works in the community; he has arranged to speak to grade school students, scouts, and graduates to heighten his profile among Newmarket youth; and he has ingratiated himself with local charity events advertising Councillor Emanuel as a ‘community hero’ and as a ‘star’.

Apparently Councillor Emanuel thinks the average Newmarket resident is really, really stupid.

FACT – He pleaded guilty. That means he does not dispute any of the allegations that were made against him. He admitted to all of them.

FACT – He caused tens of thousands in dollars of property damage. He could have been killed. He could have killed others. The only reason that didn’t happen was due to dumb luck.

FACT – He was drunk on the job. A lawyer cannot show up to court drunk. A doctor can not attend surgery drunk. A teacher cannot be drunk in the front of the classroom. All of them would lose their careers (and face disciplinary hearings and likely hefty fines). Why does Councillor Emanuel think he is so much better than a doctor, lawyer, or teacher and we must overlook this behaviour?

FACT - Councillor Emanuel has friends in high places and they are committed to protecting him. The Mayor, his fellow councillors (except for Councillor Di Muccio who publicly called for his resignation), and even Ontario Liberal Party big wigs like Warren Kinsella have refused to condemn his crime. They don’t have an ounce of credibility on this issue but they still refuse to do the right thing.

FACT – Back in August 2011, Regional Councillor John Taylor said that Councillor Emanuel was very important to the Glenway fight. Regional Councillor Taylor should read these recent letters to the editor:

http://www.yorkregion.com/opinion/letters/article/1486127--staff-still-upset-about-glenway-s-closure and http://www.yorkregion.com/opinion/letters/article/1486125--glenway-more-than-bricks-mortar

The truth is that Councillor Emanuel has been entirely ineffective with the Glenway file. The Town’s strategy of not negotiating with the Glenway developers has been a complete and total dud. Glenway is lost and people like me point a j’accuse finger squarely at Councillor Emanuel, Regional Councillor Taylor and the Mayor. Enjoy your new neighbours Glenway residents. Maybe we should name an Emanuel Street, John Taylor Way, and Van Bynen Avenue in that new neighbourhood too because they were instrumental in seeing this development proceed.

FACT – Councillor Emanuel hasn’t spoken out against drinking and driving. I am not saying that he condones the crime but why isn’t he using his experience to raise awareness?  If he is sincerely interested with raising money for charity or speaking with young people, then I believe he should be lending his name to MADD Canada and SADD Canada. His silence on his criminal behaviour is deafening.

FACT – Newmarket residents are not stupid and we don’t forget. There is still time for Councillor Emanuel to do the right thing (resign) but that window is closing fast. Fortunately, as time goes by, we get closer to that date when we get to vote him out of office.

FACT – That day can’t come soon enough.