A Shakespearian Plot at Newmarket Council?

It makes marvelous theatre.

Maddie Di Muccio peeled back the curtain on the gruesome twosome's supposed alliance yesterday in her blog suggesting that there are some big cracks in their relationship. 

It seems that Mayor Van Bynen has been carrying on some serious plotting with the adept use of the magician's sleight of hand. 

If I were Regional Councillor Taylor, I think I would much rather deal with someone who is out in the open about any political disagreements as opposed to have a so-called ally who publicly agrees with me but is secretly scheming behind my back. 

In fact, if I were in his shoes, I would be questioning why I've been doing the man's dirty work - such as taking on the heat for the soccer club bailout - while the mayor has been quietly strategizing against me. 

Lastly, after all the work the Taylors did to get Jane Twinney elected in 2010, if I were John Taylor, I don't think it would go unnoticed how closely the words of the Ward 3 councillor's e-mail resemble those of Jackie Playter (apparently a close ally of the mayor).  In fact, the words are almost verbatim.  Has she been plotting too?  (It would seem so based on who was quoted in the Era defending the mayor).  Et tu, Brute?

It's rather theatric that our antagonistic mayor is complaining that he finds Councillor Di Muccio's behaviour "difficult" all the while he is juggling a set of knives that he is planning to shiv the Regional Councillor with. 

Disappear into the ethernet?

I thought my work was done here. 

I thought I could just disappear into the ethernet. 

The reason for writing this blog was very personal to me.  Before I began writing this blog, the news being reported in the Era was rather milque toast at best.  The Era was a ready resource if you wanted to read about some child getting good marks in school, or who attended the latest event at the Senior Centre, but it wasn't the place to find actual news about our local government. 

In fact, Toronto papers, like the Toronto Star did a much better job of telling people like me what was going on in Newmarket than our own local Era. 

And the Era suffered for it some cases.  In Aurora, after a flurry of blogging activity surfaced, a second newspaper, The Auroran, began publishing and diverted significant advertising dollars

This past month, I noticed a real difference in the Era around the matter of the soccer facility.  The reporter did a very good job at making details known publicly that others were trying to hush up. 

When the facts were known, the public was able to make up their own minds. 

A week later, what was once optimism about the changes at the Era have devolved to pessimism. 

This jaded feeling comes from the reporting of the recent dispute between the Mayor and Ward 6 (although reported as Ward 7) councillor Maddie Di Muccio. 

Is the Mayor a misogynist?  I've watched my share of council meeting videos and the man is certainly a bully.  Not only to the Ward 6 councillor but also to members of the public who come before council to make a statement.  I don't think there are too many who speak in front of council that don't walk away from the experience thinking, "Geez louise, that mayor is an a$$hole". 

But whether he is a misogynist or not will have to be an argument for another day. 

Today's debate is whether the newspaper reported the facts fairly. 

Here are some items that I think were missed in the story:

1) The Era reported to have been in receipt of an e-mail from the councillor and quoted her as demanding an apology.  Fortunately the Councillor made that same e-mail public earlier on her web page.  Here is a quote from Maddie Di Muccio's e-mail that should also have been included in the Era article:

I refer you to the August 28, 2013 Community Services – Recreation and Culture, Closed Session Report #2016-36 (page 6 of 7, item x). This item will verify what I stated in council chambers today concerning the amount of staff time spent on meetings, research and reports with regards to the Newmarket Soccer Club loan.

Without knowing what is in this report, (because it isn't posted on line for some reason), it is extremely relevant because it shows that the councillor was reasonable to reject the mayor's ultimatum. 

2) The word "ultimatum" was removed from the revised copy of the Era's article.  I believe that the earlier version said that the mayor required the councillor to either retract or leave.  Is it reasonable for the mayor to ask the councillor to "retract" something that she knows to be true? 

If she can't retract what she knows to be a fact, then in my eyes, what option did he give her except to leave? 

3) The story was published with such sensationalistic language that leaves the public with the impression that there was a "hissy fit" and "screaming" involved (as per comments posted by -- wait for it -- all male commentators on the Era page).  I've watched a lot of video's like I said.  I have never seen Maddie Di Muccio cry, scream, or act in any way that could be seen as un-parliamentary.  (I would submit that Councillor Di Muccio did not call the mayor a misogynist until after he forced her from her seat.  That name-calling doesn't count as unparliamentary because of timing).   

But if you want to see a councillor have a hissy fit, watch the council meeting from last week.  In it, you will see petulence on display as Tom Hempen has a fit.  That didn't make the papers. 

Via her twitter feed, Maddie Di Muccio has also brought attention to a May 2012 meeting where Councillor Jane Twinney left in tears. 

I can't recall the the date but I'm pretty sure I've seen Councillor Emanuel weeping and then leave his seat when he was speaking to his DUI conviction. 

I also believe that Councillor Sponga has left his seat previously too. 

These occurrences never make it into the Era but Councillor Di Muccio being asked to leave does?

Which brings me to my final point.  The reason the Era gives the old boys club such an easy time is because it is vested in the last few remaining old families in Newmarket.  I grew up here and went to school here and then decided to stay, open a business on Davis, and raise my family here.  I've never been made to feel welcome with these families.  I have never been included. 

I feel more at home with the families that have recently moved to town.  People who want to see Newmarket "mature" and aren't nostalgic for balloon festivals, and dances at the old town hall. 

We are disturbed by decisions like the Soccer Club bail out because we wonder why that same commitment wasn't made to take over the Glenway club house when it was offered to us.  At the time, Councillor Emanuel told us that the town of Newmarket didn't want to assume the cost of running the tennis courts, fitness centre and meeting rooms.  We feel lied to. 

The reason people like me, and others, have gravitated towards Councillor Di Muccio is because she is the only one on Council who won't turn her back to the people who just arrived in Town.  She speaks up for businesses that have been neglected along Davis Drive.  She wants to keep the size and cost of government low. 

It seems that the new Era reporter has been co-opted into the "old ways" of doing things.  Telling only half the story and ignoring the details when it suits the old boys. 

While I thought I could simply go away, I guess my work here isn't done after all. 

Thanks for reading. 

Van Bynen - Misogynist or Wimp?

There are only 9 members of Newmarket council.  With what turned out to be a 8 person voting block backing him, this term on Newmarket council should have been very easy for Mayor Van Bynen. 

He can (and does) get his way on any vote he wants - usually by an 8-1 margin. 

When the mayor wants to raise taxes - the motion passes 8 to 1

When the mayor wants to increase fees for recreational groups - that passes too 8 to 1

Cost over-runs at Old Town Hall?  Not a problem when his voting block has his back.

New parking fees at Hollingsworth Arena?  Done deal. 

I watch a lot of the videos of Council meetings, and I can't recall a single instance where the Mayor actually lost a vote.  If there is such an instance, I would sure like to know what it was. 

That's how easy his job is these days.  He is playing with a stacked hand. 

And the stacked hand gets even more pronounced when considering that he can change the rules of the card game whenever it suits him. 

If you have any understanding of Roberts Rules of Order, you already know that his voting block means that procedurally he can pretty much do anything he wants at a council meeting.  He can make it so any councillor that gets out of line won't get a chance to make even a peep. 

Cut short debate? With his buddies in his back pocket, he can make that happen.

Cut off all debate and go straight to vote?   Easy to do, just need one of his allies to suggest it. 

Want to make a council member appear ineffective?  Just strong arm the other members into not "seconding" that councillor's motions. 

So with all the rules-of-order along with the strength of his 8 of 9 member voting block, how does one explain the difficulties Mayor Van Bynen is having with Councillor Di Muccio? 

Another blogger hit the nail on the head when he pointed out the obvious friction between Councillor Di Muccio and Mayor Van Bynen.  To say that they don't like each other is an understatement.   

Personalities aside, it should be very easy for Mayor Van Bynen to win any political battle regardless. 

In chambers, he has the procedural rules and the votes on his side to completely silence her. 

There are only two possibilities to explain why we are witnessing the battles between the Mayor and the Councillor:

1) he might either be the most ineffective chairperson in the history of Roberts Rules of Order because his is continually being tormented by one single person even though he can count on 8 votes to be on his side; or

2) he might be a bully of the first rate who is trying to "make an example" of Councillor Di Muccio in order to demonstrate just how advantageous his position is.  He can fight with her because he knows that there is very little that she can do to stop him. 

While Mayor Van Bynen might be offended by being labelled a misogynist, he has to recognize that if he isn't, then the only other label that fits is "wimp".  
 

Soccer Club Bail Out and How it Affects the Glenway Battle

When I started this blog, it was in response to what I perceived a  lack of concern by the local media to report the local news.  I made a promise to the editor of the York Regional Media group to cease my blog as soon as I saw an improvement in the amount of information and discourse provided to the public. 

My opinion about the soccer club bail out is the same as many of you.  I have kept my opinion to myself because of the hard work done by many others through social media that have done an excellent job at raising concerns publicly. 

Understandably, the Thursday edition of the Era had very few facts about the soccer club bail out because the news was so recent and the meeting that decided on the bail out was held in secret.  I was looking forward to reading if more details would be published on Sunday's edition.  Unfortunately, this was not the case. 

Seemingly unrelated to the soccer club bail out, the Sunday edition of the Era  included a column entitled "Town can't let cost of fight deter it  from Glenway battle."  I use the words "seemingly unrelated" because I think these two issues are about to intersect in a big way at Newmarket Town Hall. 

In a nutshell, that is the rub for the five members of Newmarket Council who voted in favour of the soccer bail out - because coincidently, their number includes the most hawkish members of the Glenway battle.  Now that these five have committed $2.8 million to appease 2,700 families (and yes, that is the correct number.  The 4,000 number that I've seen elsewhere is a wild exaggeration), so that they can play soccer, how much will they contribute the 700 households who are facing significant financial losses through a reduction in property value if the Marrianeville project proceeds? 

Jeff Brown has long been calling for the Town of Newmarket to provide compensation to homeowners affected by the new development.  Fair is fair but it begs the question:  if these Council members bailed out soccer to the tune of $2.8 million, how much of a bail out will they provide to the Glenway homeowners?   

Councillor Emanuel, who promised on September 5th to blog about the soccer club bail out but hasn't yet done so, would be wise to explain to his constituents what this massive commitment of public resources towards soccer could mean for their battle?  Should they be buoyed by his vote or seriously worried that he spent the money that the town could have used to helped them?

The other question that I would like an answer to comes from Van Bynen's blog on the soccer club bail out.  In his writing, he says the soccer club owed $2.5 million for the Newpark Soccer facility.  Yet, the Town provided a bail out of $2.8 million.  I'm not sure if that is a simple typo or if there is more to the numbers that aren't being made public. 

I'm hearing its the latter.  Important facets of the deal remain secret.  I'm hearing that the Newmakret Soccer Club owed significant amounts of money to multiple parties.  The more than $1,000,000 in registration fees that the club collected this spring did not pay for soccer related expenses.  Those expenses remain unpaid.  Instead, the $1,000,000+ was misspent by the current board.  At very least, the Mayor needs to protect public money by pushing for a complete accounting of the debts of the Newmarket Soccer and how registration fees were spent in 2013.   

As a humorous aside, recently the Mayor (or whomever is tweeting on his behalf) had this to say: 

Tony Van Bynen @rocknrollcroll Please see my Blog: vanbynen.ca. You may wish to ask Councillor Di Muccio who paid for her recent Ad.

Personally, I thought Councillor Di Muccio was very forthright in how she paid for her ad in an interview with the Era.  As far as I can tell, there isn't any controversy. 

I checked on the Newmarket website to find out how much she paid but that figure isn't yet available.  What I did find is that Councillor Sponga paid just over $1,000 for a full page ad in the Era in 2011.  Let's assume that the Era wouldn't charge different rates to different council members and that realistically, a half page ad would be in the range of $600. 

Contrast that estimated $600 amount to the more than $4,000 this Mayor has publicly expensed on "gas and car washes" over the past two-and-a-half years and taxpayers can see the irony in the Mayor's tweet.