Dave Kerwin doesn't intend to be at Monday's meeting when Council decides how it will fill the vacant Ward 5 seat:
http://newmarket.siretechnologies.com/sirepub/cache/2/ufqku2a1mk0dmexqud3l2gm0/4312807212016042800256.PDF
Which begs the question: if Mr. Kerwin was taking the time to draft a letter about how he would have voted on July 25th, could he not have included in his letter an explanation to his constituents as to why he was missing this vote?
It would seem common courtesy to his constituents is taking a back seat to Kerwin's need to showboat.
Kerwin wants the people to know he believes in democracy.
All well and good except that the Councillor who voters in Ward 2 have elected over and over again couldn't be bothered to come out and vote himself on July 25th.
No wonder municipal voter turnout is so low. Council member turnout at meetings and committees isn't setting much of an example.
Thursday 21 July 2016
Monday 11 July 2016
Hey Newmarket Era...Leave that man alone.
On its Facebook Page, the Newmarket Era is promising to get to the bottom of the story: "Why did Joe Sponga quit?"
The paper is incensed and aghast that Sponga is refusing to provide any comment. The Era is asking its followers to weigh in on the topic. The paper even started an "Is it just me?" promotion to hype the interest in the so-called Sponga controversy.
But the response rate is negligible. The paper's editor and publisher must be wondering why nobody is responding to their incessant demands for public comment.
The reason why Newmarket residents aren't responding is because for the most part Newmarket residents are generally good people. We are supportive friends and neighbours. We generally don't partake in idle gossip. We are discrete.
The people who know Joe respect his right to privacy. We accept and respect his right to resign and we don't feel we are owed any additional comment or explanation. The moment that Joe Sponga resigned, he stopped being a politician. So people in Newmarket will treat him as one of us.
I don't know what has caused this disconnect of the Newmarket Era from the community, but the paper has misread us terribly.
Maybe it's a generational thing. A Generation Y reporter raised in the era where social media has broken down respect for personal privacy could be the cause. I remember when the Era was a much kinder, gentler publication and much more respectful. That Era has long passed unfortunately.
I also suspect that a John Taylor - through his wife, Michelle Digulla, who is vice president of the publication that writes the Era - connection to this paper may have played a part in the Era's obsession with Sponga's resignation. Whenever the paper has written multiple stories about a single issue in the past (or conversely, ignored issues altogether), John Taylor had political reasons for doing so. Does John Taylor have political reasons to motivate the paper's desire to make Sponga appear 'unhinged' in the public's eye?
My advice is for the public to keep on doing we're doing. Joe Sponga is no longer a politician. As citizens, we wouldn't want someone stirring up innuendo about us. We owe it to Joe to do the same.
It's time for the Newmarket Era to move on and leave Joe alone.
The paper is incensed and aghast that Sponga is refusing to provide any comment. The Era is asking its followers to weigh in on the topic. The paper even started an "Is it just me?" promotion to hype the interest in the so-called Sponga controversy.
But the response rate is negligible. The paper's editor and publisher must be wondering why nobody is responding to their incessant demands for public comment.
The reason why Newmarket residents aren't responding is because for the most part Newmarket residents are generally good people. We are supportive friends and neighbours. We generally don't partake in idle gossip. We are discrete.
The people who know Joe respect his right to privacy. We accept and respect his right to resign and we don't feel we are owed any additional comment or explanation. The moment that Joe Sponga resigned, he stopped being a politician. So people in Newmarket will treat him as one of us.
I don't know what has caused this disconnect of the Newmarket Era from the community, but the paper has misread us terribly.
Maybe it's a generational thing. A Generation Y reporter raised in the era where social media has broken down respect for personal privacy could be the cause. I remember when the Era was a much kinder, gentler publication and much more respectful. That Era has long passed unfortunately.
I also suspect that a John Taylor - through his wife, Michelle Digulla, who is vice president of the publication that writes the Era - connection to this paper may have played a part in the Era's obsession with Sponga's resignation. Whenever the paper has written multiple stories about a single issue in the past (or conversely, ignored issues altogether), John Taylor had political reasons for doing so. Does John Taylor have political reasons to motivate the paper's desire to make Sponga appear 'unhinged' in the public's eye?
My advice is for the public to keep on doing we're doing. Joe Sponga is no longer a politician. As citizens, we wouldn't want someone stirring up innuendo about us. We owe it to Joe to do the same.
It's time for the Newmarket Era to move on and leave Joe alone.
Tuesday 5 July 2016
In Ward 5, one candidate for the vacant council seat rises above all the rest
The July 25th Council meeting will not provide us with any clues about why Joe Sponga controversially resigned amid threats of lawsuits and code of conduct complaints.
The meeting will focus on how Sponga will be replaced followed by who will replace him.
And I would humbly submit that Ward 5 residents and business leaders should make a beeline to former Ward 6 councillor Di Muccio's door step asking her to run.
I don't make this recommendation lightly or without serious consideration. I have surveyed potential Ward 5 councillors and Di Muccio's credentials rises above all others.
There are only two years left in this term, and many significant issues remain that affect this ward. Specifically, Clock Tower, Library, Broad Band Internet, parking issues and so on all need to be debated and voted on.
Di Muccio has been in the closed door meetings between 2010 and 2014 and knows the context of all of these issues. Anyone else will have to rely on other Councillors to "fill them in" on the finer details and are more susceptible to being ill informed when voting. The other councillors won't be able to pull the wool over Di Muccio's eyes because she has first hand knowledge of these issues..
Di Muccio has a consistent track record for standing up to Mayor Van Bynen and John Taylor. Simply put, the gruesome-twosome don't intimidate her. Newmarket has elected "opposition" candidates in the past, only to see them switch sides as soon as they take their oath of office. Jane Twinney and Tom Hempen are two recent examples who ran against incumbents, only to adopt the incumbent's mindset once in office. Di Muccio stayed true to her principles consistently.
The reasons the establishment wanted Di Muccio off council in 2014 don't hold any water in 2016. The establishment said she was too disruptive and pointed to politically motivated integrity commissioner complaints as proof. Well, Newmarket has spent more than double on Integrity Commissioner complaints since October than what we did in four years previous, with more than a dozen investigations against our present council members. So what does that prove about our present council?
And Sponga's resignation shows how dysfunctional this current council is. If Newmarket council was debilitated in 2014, it certainly wasn't the fault of Di Muccio. Newmarket council is more broken in 2016 than ever before. Maybe the fault lies with the gruesome-twosome.
Instead of Newmarket's current "get along gang," the public deserves a council that asks tough questions and holds Town of Newmarket staff accountable for delivering top quality services. I don't see anyone on this present council willing to do that. I do recall that Di Muccio asked tough questions and demanded answers when she served on council, though.
We have a window of opportunity to improve the functioning of our town council, not only for the residents of Ward 5, but for all of Newmarket, as a result of this by-election. I endorse Maddie Di Muccio to fill the vacant seat because she won't flip flop and sell us out. I can't say that wouldn't be the case if others were elected or appointed to replace Sponga.
The meeting will focus on how Sponga will be replaced followed by who will replace him.
And I would humbly submit that Ward 5 residents and business leaders should make a beeline to former Ward 6 councillor Di Muccio's door step asking her to run.
I don't make this recommendation lightly or without serious consideration. I have surveyed potential Ward 5 councillors and Di Muccio's credentials rises above all others.
There are only two years left in this term, and many significant issues remain that affect this ward. Specifically, Clock Tower, Library, Broad Band Internet, parking issues and so on all need to be debated and voted on.
Di Muccio has been in the closed door meetings between 2010 and 2014 and knows the context of all of these issues. Anyone else will have to rely on other Councillors to "fill them in" on the finer details and are more susceptible to being ill informed when voting. The other councillors won't be able to pull the wool over Di Muccio's eyes because she has first hand knowledge of these issues..
Di Muccio has a consistent track record for standing up to Mayor Van Bynen and John Taylor. Simply put, the gruesome-twosome don't intimidate her. Newmarket has elected "opposition" candidates in the past, only to see them switch sides as soon as they take their oath of office. Jane Twinney and Tom Hempen are two recent examples who ran against incumbents, only to adopt the incumbent's mindset once in office. Di Muccio stayed true to her principles consistently.
The reasons the establishment wanted Di Muccio off council in 2014 don't hold any water in 2016. The establishment said she was too disruptive and pointed to politically motivated integrity commissioner complaints as proof. Well, Newmarket has spent more than double on Integrity Commissioner complaints since October than what we did in four years previous, with more than a dozen investigations against our present council members. So what does that prove about our present council?
And Sponga's resignation shows how dysfunctional this current council is. If Newmarket council was debilitated in 2014, it certainly wasn't the fault of Di Muccio. Newmarket council is more broken in 2016 than ever before. Maybe the fault lies with the gruesome-twosome.
Instead of Newmarket's current "get along gang," the public deserves a council that asks tough questions and holds Town of Newmarket staff accountable for delivering top quality services. I don't see anyone on this present council willing to do that. I do recall that Di Muccio asked tough questions and demanded answers when she served on council, though.
We have a window of opportunity to improve the functioning of our town council, not only for the residents of Ward 5, but for all of Newmarket, as a result of this by-election. I endorse Maddie Di Muccio to fill the vacant seat because she won't flip flop and sell us out. I can't say that wouldn't be the case if others were elected or appointed to replace Sponga.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)