The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same

THE SEASON OF PROMISES, ON THE CUSP OF GOING SILENT - DEMOCRACY IS THE STARTER, BUT NOT THE FINISHER!

CANDIDATES ARE ALL FOR TRANSPARENCY BEFORE THE ELECTION, BUT IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING, NOT SO MUCH!

    I THINK WE ALL HAVE TO RECOGNIZE, IF WE'RE WILLING TO BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES, (ALL THE ARMCHAIR CRITICS OUT THERE), ESPECIALLY WITH THE DULL, PREDICTABLE, SAME-OLD, SAME-OLD COMING ELECTION, THAT APATHY IS RUNNING AMUCK IN OUR MUNICIPALITY. WHILE IT MIGHT BE SEEN THAT WE ARE HAPPY ENOUGH, (NO POINT GOING OVERBOARD WITH EXCITEMENT) AS A COMMUNITY, WITH STATUS QUO, THERE IS A DEEP RUNNING NEGATIVE HERE, THAT CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES, FAR TOO MANY PEOPLE JUST DON'T GIVE A DAMN EITHER WAY. THEY AREN'T INTERESTED IN COUNCIL, AND WORK AROUND IT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, DECLINING TO GIVE IT ANY CREDIBILITY, OTHER THAN WHAT THE TOWN EMPLOYEES PROVIDE AS A CONSTITUENT SERVICE. WE SHOULD HAVE HAD AT LEAST THREE TO EVEN SIX CANDIDATES FOR MAYOR. THAT WOULD HAVE MADE IT EXCITING, AND AN ACTUAL COMPETITION, WHICH ISN'T GOING TO TRANSPIRE INTO ANYTHING LARGER THAN A FLICKER OF FLAME, IN LATER OCTOBER. THE ONLY ADDED SPARK IS THAT TWO FORMER MAYORAL CANDIDATES ARE RUNNING FOR DISTRICT, AND SEEING AS THERE WAS NO LOVE LOST IN THE PAST ELECTION, IT COULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW FORMER ADVERSARIES CAN WORK TOGETHER, WITH THE PRESENT MAYOR, OR NOT. IF SHE IS ELECTED, OF COURSE.
    WELL FOLKS, THE LAST DAY FOR REGISTRATION, TO RUN IN OCTOBER'S MUNICIPAL ELECTION, WASN'T EXACTLY THE BARN-BURNER MANY CONSTITUENTS WERE HOPING FOR! THE DOORS AT TOWN HALL WEREN'T TUMBLED-DOWN BY EAGER CONSTITUENTS, HOPING TO BECOME THE NEW VOICE OF GRAVENHURST, DURING THE NEXT TERM OF OFFICE. IT WAS PRETTY SLEEPY AS FAR AS REGISTRATIONS GO, AND SO FAR, THERE WAS ONLY ONE ADDITIONAL COUNCILLOR ADDED TO THE MIX; WHICH IN MY OPINION, THE TOTAL REGISTRATIONS ATTAINED, WAS NO BETTER THAN TWO THIRDS OF WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN REGISTERED. I SUPPOSE THERE ARE A LOT OF ARM-CHAIR CANDIDATES LIKE ME, WHO DECIDED AT THE LAST MINUTE, TO REMAIN A COMMONPLACE CIVILIAN, AND LET OTHERS LEAD US TO OUR DESTINY AS A MUNICIPALITY. SO AS FAR AS AN EXCITING ELECTION, WITH A LOT OF NEW FACES, WELL, I'M AFRAID STATUS QUO IS ABOUT THE BEST WAY TO DESCRIBE THE COMING RACE. I WON'T COME OUT AND SUPPORT ANY CANDIDATE OVER ANOTHER, BUT IT'S TRUE I HAVE SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO SPREAD MY HERITAGE MANTRA TO A FEW HOPEFULS, SEEKING MY ADVICE. I'D LIKE IT TO BE MORE, BUT A FEW CONVERTS CAN INFLUENCE OTHERS.
    I AM DISAPPOINTED IN THE TURN-OUT OF COUNCIL HOPEFULS. IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH SLEUTHING, TO READ INTO THIS, THAT MOST OF US HAVE GIVEN UP TRYING TO ACHIEVE RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT, ON ANY LEVEL, AND HAVE TAKEN THE APPROACH, UNFORTUNATELY, THAT "ONE IS GOOD AS THE OTHER." IT'S NOT TRUE OF COURSE, AND IT CAN SPELL A LOT OF TROUBLE IN THE LONG RUN. BUT IT IS WHAT MOST BELIEVE TODAY, REGARDLESS THE REALITY IT IS ALSO FAULTY LOGIC. I THINK THESE CANDIDATES THEMSELVES, SHOULD BE DISAPPOINTED, THAT CONSTITUENTS HAVE SHOWN SUCH LITTLE ENTHUSIASM, FOR SHAPING THIS REGION OF MUSKOKA, INTO A LEAN, MEAN FIGHTING MACHINE. I HAVE TRIED TO CONVINCE AT LEAST FOUR CITIZENS I KNOW, TALENTED IN THEIR FEILDS OF EXPERTISE, TO TAKE UP THE CHALLENGE, TO LEAD OUR MUNICIPALITY. THEY HAVE ALL ANSWERED THE SAME WAY. "I CAN'T COMMIT TO FOUR YEARS IN OFFICE." AND "THE PAY ISN'T ENOUGH." THEY'RE RIGHT ON BOTH COUNTS. THE TERM IS TOO LONG, AND THE MONEY SUCKS. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TALENT POOL, AND THINK ABOUT HANDING OVER A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR CORPORATION, WE SHOULD ALL FEEL A LITTLE EMBARRASSED ABOUT THE LOW NUMBER OF CANDIDATES, FOR WHAT SHOULD BE PERCEIVED AS AN IMPORTANT, HISTORY MAKING POSITION, THAT MANY PEOPLE WOULD WANT TO BE A PART. I CONGRATULATE ALL THOSE WHO HAVE REGISTERED, BUT I HAVE TO ADD, THAT IT IS A COMMENTARY FROM THE CITIZENRY, THAT COUNCIL DOESN'T MEAN SQUAT TO US; EXCEPT WHEN THEY PUT UP STOPS SIGNS WHERE THEY'RE NOT NEEDED, AND RAISE OUR TAXES.


     A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, FEELING PRETTY DOWN ABOUT THE COUNCIL WE HAD ELECTED, TO REPRESENT OUR TOWN, I WROTE ABOUT FIFTY SCATHING BLOGS REGARDING THE CLOSING CURTAINS OF TRANSPARENCY. THERE WERE A LOT OF SITUATIONS GOING ON, INVOLVING THE TOWN, AND THEIR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS, THAT GOT THE BUZZ RIPPING ON THE STREET, AS THEY SAY. I'M NOT GOING TO DETAIL ALL THE GRIEVANCES I HAD, OR THAT WERE BEING WAGGED AROUND THE TOWN, IN COFFEE SHOPS AND TAVERNS, ABOUT THE FAILURES OF COUNCIL. FOR WHATEVER GOOD THIS COUNCIL ACHIEVED, THEIR INABILITY TO EXTEND THE MESSAGE BEYOND TOWN HALL, NEGATED MUCH OF WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN SAID OR WRITTEN, OF A POSITIVE OPINION ABOUT THEIR TERM OF GOVERNANCE. I AM THE HISTORIAN AFTERALL, AND I HAVEN'T WRITTEN DOWN MUCH IN THE "ACCOMPLISHED" COLUMN OF MY NOTES. THEY VEILED THEMSELVES IN SECRECY WHETHER THEY ADMIT IT OR NOT. THERE WAS A LID, AND IT WAS TIGHT.
     SENSING THEY WERE BEING PICKED-ON, PRESUMABLY, MY OPINIONS WERE CONSIDERED BLASPHEMOUS. I DIDN'T LIKE SOME OF THEIR ACTIONS AND REACTIONS, AND WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BIT MY TONGUE, I DID THE EXACT OPPOSITE. I APPARENTLY DIDN'T PLAY THE ROLE OF GOOD CONSTITUENT. SEEN BUT NOT HEARD. THE ONE MOST OFTEN REPEATED CRITIQUE OF THIS PRESENT COUNCIL, IS THAT THEY AREN'T ALL THAT RECEPTIVE TO INPUT....UNLESS IT'S THEIR OWN. EVEN IF A CRITIQUE IS CORRECT AND WOULD WORK TO SOLVE A PROBLEM, IF YOU HAPPENED TO BE ON THE "OUT" WITH COUNCIL, THE IDEA WOULD LOSE ALL ITS MERIT. NOT BECAUSE IT WAS FAULTY, ILL CONCEIVED, WOULDN'T WORK TO FIX A MALFUNCTION, OR IMPROVE A DISCONNECT, BUT OWING TO THE PERSON OR GROUP MAKING THE SUBMISSION. YOU BECAME AN ENEMY OF COUNCIL IF YOU DIDN'T BOW TO THEIR AUTHORITY. I HAD A RESPECT ISSUE RIGHT OFF THE BAT, FOR THIS REASON. I BOW TO THOSE WHO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS, AND AREN'T AFRAID TO ENGAGE THE PUBLIC, WHEN THEY FIND THEMSELVES UNSURE OF LOCAL SENTIMENT.      AS I WROTE ABOUT, IN YESTERDAY'S BLOG, I WAS A SOURCE OF IRRITATION TO A PREVIOUS COUNCIL, INVOLVING THEIR PLAN TO SELL OFF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WETLAND, "CAUSE THEY FELT LIKE IT!" THE CITIZENS WON, AND THEY (THE TOWN) LOST. AS FAR AS CRITIQUING THEMSELVES, THEY DIDN'T. THEY JUST DECIDED WE WERE TOO MUCH OF A PAIN IN THE ASS, TO PISS OFF ANY FURTHER. IN ALL FAIRNESS, IT'S EXACTLY WHAT I TOLD THEN MAYOR JOHN KLINCK, WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, AS PART OF OUR "SHOCK AND AWE" STRATEGY, IF THEY DIDN'T BACK AWAY FROM WETLAND SELL-OFF. IN A SHORT TIME, WE HAD MUSTERED SUPPORT ON MANY FRONTS, AND COUNCIL KNEW THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE DRAGGED THROUGH THE MUD FOR A LONG, LONG DISTANCE, IF THE MATTER WASN'T DROPPED. I WILL SAY ONE THING FOR JOHN KLINCK. AFTER A ROCKY START, HE WAS THE ONE WHO BROUGHT ABOUT THE BIGGEST CHANGE, WHEN HE BEGAN LISTENING TO THE ARGUMENTS, INSTEAD OF SHUNNING THEM, LIKE A FEW TOWN COUNCILLORS. HIS CHANGE OF OPINION, WAS THE PIVOTAL MOMENT, THE HONEST RECKONING, ABOUT THE DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY THUS ENTERED, AFTER LESS THAN TWO MONTHS OF ARGUING THE CASE. I'M NOT SAYING HE SURRENDERED, BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. HE VISITED THE PROPERTY. HE CAME TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ALL THE FUSS WAS ABOUT. IT'S OKAY FOR A POLITICIAN TO CHANGE THEIR OPINION, BASED ON NEW INFORMATION. HE DIDN'T HAVE TO LIKE ME, OR EVEN SHAKE MY HAND, TO MAKE ME, AND ALL OF US BOG PROTECTORS, VERY PLEASED BY THE SPREAD OF ENLIGHTENMENT. ALTHOUGH I STILL HAVE MY SUSPICION JOHN AND I COULD LOCK HORNS ON SOME POLITICAL MATTERS, FACING THE DISTRICT TODAY, I HAVE FELT HIS CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE REGION HAS BEEN HIGHLY COMPETENT, AND I HAVE FELT MYSELF, AGREEING WITH HIS POSITION, AND LEADERSHIP, MORE THAN I THOUGHT POSSIBLE, WHEN HE WON THE JOB OVER FORMER DISTRICT CHAIRMAN, GORD ADAMS, FOUR YEARS AGO, ANOTHER CHAP I HAPPENED TO SUPPORT; MOST OF THE TIME.
     AT THE PEAK OF MY FRUSTRATION, WITH THIS MOST RECENT TOWN COUNCIL, THAT SEEMED TO LOSE ITS COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY, ONLY WEEKS AFTER BEING ELECTED, I CHATTED WITH ONE TOWN COUNCILLOR, WHO I HAD A GOOD WORKING RELATIONSHIP, AND SUGGESTED, THAT IF COUNCILLORS DISLIKED MY OPINIONS AND OVERVIEWS, AND THOUGHT OF MY EDITORIALS AS UNFAIR, AND UNTUTORED, I WOULD INTERVIEW EACH COUNCIL MEMBER INDIVIDUALLY, TO ALLOW THEM TO HAVE THEIR SAY IN THE MATTER; OR JUST GIVE ME CRAP FOR A PAGE OR TWO. I SUGGESTED THAT EVEN IF THEY WROTE A RETORT, I WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO PUBLISH IT ON MY BLOG-SITE, WITHOUT ADDING ANY ACCOMPANYING EDITORIAL COMMENT. WELL, I COULD HAVE PROBABLY INTERVIEWED THIS COUNCILLOR, BUT THE OTHERS APPARENTLY WEREN'T INTERESTED. IT CAN'T BE SAID I DIDN'T MAKE AN ATTEMPT TO REPRESENT THEIR OPINIONS ON SUCH THINGS AS SHRINKING TRANSPARENCY, AMONGST OTHER ISSUES GOING ON IN THE TOWN AT THE TIME. I'VE BEEN IN THE NEWS GATHERING BUSINESS FOR A LONG TIME, SO I DO CHERISH FREEDOM OF THE PRESS, AND ALL THAT OTHER JAZZ, ABOUT THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO KNOW, THAT PROVIDES HONEST, TRUTHFUL OVERVIEWS, AND RELATED INSIGHTS, AN INFORMATION BENEFIT TO ALL CONSTITUENTS. I'M SORRY IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. IT WOULD HAVE GIVEN ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET PRIVATELY WITH COUNCILLORS, AND DISCUSS COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, ECONOMICS, SOCIAL WELFARE, AND A LITTLE HISTORY THROWN IN FOR GOOD MEASURE. BUT WHAT I NOTED BEFORE, APPLIES HERE AS WELL. "WE DON'T HAVE TO TALK WITH YOU!" "WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE ANY WAY?" "WE DON'T NEED YOUR HELP! WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING, SO LEAVE US TO RUN TOWN COUNCIL THE WAY WE SEE FIT!" THESE ARE THE CLAIMS BY CONSTITUENTS, NOT JUST ME. THE ONLY TIME THEY BECOME RELEVANT IS IN THE DAYS LEADING UP TO THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION. AFTER THAT, INPUT IS A LOT LESS SIGNIFICANT. ALL THE VOTES HAVE BEEN COUNTED. THERE'S NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO REMOVE AN UNRESPONSIVE COUNCIL. THIS IS THE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO. WE GAVE THEM THE POWER AND THEY KNOW HOW TO USE IT! WHEN YOU CAN NO LONGER FEEL COUNCIL HAS ANY INTEREST IN US LOWLY CONSTITUENTS, WE FIGHT BACK IN THE COFFEE SHOPS OF OUR HOMETOWN, AND SATISFY OURSELVES WITH VENTING FRUSTRATIONS, ON EACH OTHER INSTEAD.
     IN THE COMING WEEKS, REGARDLESS OF THE MUNICIPALITY YOU LIVE IN, IN ONTARIO, CONSTITUENTS WILL BE BOMBARDED BY COUNCILLOR PROMISES. THEY WILL TRY TO IMPRESS YOU, WITH ALL THE RIGHT STATEMENTS, AND THE CORRECT MEASURE OF SENSITIVITY ABOUT ISSUES IN YOUR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD, ON THE MAIN STREET OF TOWN, ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS, URBAN AND RURAL, AND MOST WILL COME ACROSS AS SINCERE AND HONEST ABOUT THEIR AMBITIONS; EXCEPT THE ONE, ABOUT IMMEDIATELY BECOMING STANDOFFISH ONCE ELECTED TO OFFICE. I KNOW THIS ISN'T THE CASE FOR ALL CANDIDATES WHO TURN THEIR CAMPAIGNS INTO SUCCESSFUL OUTCOMES, BUT IT HAS BECOME SOMEWHAT OF A TRADITION, TO TAKE THE POPULARITY CONTEST, AS EVIDENCE OF SUPERIORITY OVER EVERYONE ELSE.
     I REMEMBER POINTING OUT TO A COUNCIL HOPEFUL, WHO WAS SUCCESSFULLY ELECTED, IN THE LAST TERM, THAT HUMBLENESS WAS A VIRTUE JUST AS MUCH FOR A COUNCILLOR AS A CIVILIAN. I POINTED OUT, THAT THE SLATE OF CANDIDATES WAS AN AVERAGE SELECTION OF THE CITIZENRY, BUT BY KNOW MEANS THE MEMBERS OF KING ARTHUR'S ROUND TABLE. THERE WERE NO EXTRAORDINARY TALENTS. NO FUTURE PRIME MINISTERS, GETTING THEIR START-UP ON LOCAL COUNCIL. JUST BECAUSE THEY HELD A COUNCIL SEAT, DIDN'T MEAN THEY HAD ANY MORE LEADERSHIP SKILL THAN THE REST OF US, BUT WHO, FOR PERSONAL REASONS, DON'T WISH TO GOVERN AT THIS TIME. MAYBE SOMEDAY. BUT SOMEONE HAS TO RUN FOR OFFICE? WHAT ELSE WOULD WE DO WITH THOSE COMFORTABLE COUNCIL CHAIRS, THE COUNCIL TABLE, A HONKING BIG TOWN HALL, AND THE CHAIN OF OFFICE, IF NOBODY STEPPED FORWARD TO RUN FOR ELECTION? YET WHAT HAPPENS, TIME AND AGAIN, IS THAT POWER CORRUPTS. AVERAGE FOLKS, YOU KNOW FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS GOOD HEADS, ALL OF A SUDDEN FEEL THEY DESERVE MORE FROM US, AND THAT THEIR GOVERNANCE SHOULDN'T BE CHALLENGED BY MERE MORTALS. IF GRAVENHURST COUNCILLORS, FOR EXAMPLE, REALLY CARED ABOUT CONSTITUENTS, AND THEIR OPINIONS, THEY WOULD HAVE HELD MANY MORE PUBLIC MEETINGS, TO GIVE THE CONSTITUENTS AN OPEN MICROPHONE TO CONGRATULATE THEM, OR RIP THEM TO SHREDS. THE ONLY TIMES THESE WOULD OCCUR, WAS WHEN SOMETHING ELSE WAS ON THE AGENDA, TO BE DISCUSSED; CERTAINLY NOT THE ADDRESS OF THE GENERAL DISSATISFACTION OF CONSTITUENTS. THUS, COUNCIL LOOKED LIKE IT WAS APPROACHABLE, AND OFFERING ITSELF UP FOR PUBLIC SCRUTINY, IN AN OPEN FORUM, IN THESE CASES, BUT WHEN YOU LOOKED A LITTLE CLOSER, IT WAS THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE. THE LONGER THEY COULD AVOID GETTING ROASTED THE BETTER! THEY MADE MISTAKES AND THEY DESERVED TO BE TOLD ABOUT IT! THEY JUST DECLINED TO LISTEN. WHAT GALLED ME, WAS WHEN THEY WOULD THEN MAKE NOTE, THAT WHEN THEY HELD PUBLIC MEETINGS, VERY FEW SHOWED UP AS CONCERNED CITIZENS. IF ON THE OTHER HAND, THEY HAD HELD AN OPEN MICROPHONE NIGHT, TO COME AND AIR YOUR COMPLAINTS, OR WELL WISHES, THEY COULD HAVE FILLED THE OPERA HOUSE TO STANDING ROOM ONLY. THE FACT THEY WEREN'T REQUIRED TO DO THIS, BY MUNICIPAL LAW, MEANT THEY WEREN'T GOING TO DO IT VOLUNTARILY.
     MEETING WITH THE MAYOR IN PRIVATE IS A GOOD THING. I APPLAUD THE MAYOR FOR FACILITATING THIS OPPORTUNITY. BUT IT'S QUITE ANOTHER THING, TO FACE THE MUSIC, FROM AN UNHAPPY GATHERING OF RESIDENTS. IT'S NOT JUST MY OPINION, BUT THIS COUNCIL, KEPT UP ITS INSULATION, PROTECTING ITSELF FROM FACING THE PUBLIC IN SITUATIONS THEY COULDN'T CONTROL. AND IF THEY BELLY-ACHE ABOUT THIS, AS BEING UNFAIR, I WANT TO POSE SOMETHING TO THEM, AND ALL FIRST TIME, OR RETURNING CANDIDATES. IF THEY WANT TO PROVE THEIR WILLINGNESS TO FACE THE PUBLIC, WITHOUT A SHEILD, WITHOUT INSULATION FROM TOUGH QUESTIONS, THEY WILL DO THEIR PART TO INSIST, THAT IF THE GRAVENHURST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE RUNS AN ALL-CANDIDATE MEETING, AS THEY DID FOUR YEARS AGO, THAT AN OPEN MICROPHONE (OR NUMEROUS), BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR. IT'S PERFECTLY ALL RIGHT TO HAVE SUBMITTED QUESTIONS, STANDARD TO CANDIDATES, BUT IT CAN NOT BE THE CONSTITIUTION OF THE FORUM. OR IT'S NOT A FORUM. IT'S NOT A DEBATE. IT'S QUALIFIES AS A LOVE-IN, WHERE EVERYBODY IS COMFORTABLE, AND IN A GOOD NEIGHBOR FRAME OF MIND. THE PRESENT COUNCIL CAN ENCOURAGE THE CHAMBER TO ACCOMMODATE THE RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH, AND ALLOW FOR THE "OPEN MICROPHONE" PORTION OF THE ALL-CANDIDATES MEETING. THAT IS, IF THE PRESENT COUNCIL GIVES A CRAP ABOUT FREE SPEECH, AND DEMOCRATIC PRIVILEGE, TO QUESTION CANDIDATES ABOUT ISSUES THAT DEEPLY CONCERN THEM. THE CHAMBER SHOULD NOT BE DETERMINING WHAT QUESTIONS MAKE THE GRADE, AND WHAT OTHER ONES ARE REFUSED. A CITIZEN PANEL SHOULD BE ASSIGNED THE TASK IF THERE HAS TO BE A CULL OF THIS NATURE, OWING TO THE PUBLIC'S RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FOR QUESTIONS.
     ONE OF MY ONGOING PROBLEMS, WITH GRAVENHURST COUNCILLORS, AND SOME OF THE HOPEFULS I KNOW HAVE REGISTERED FOR THIS COMING VOTE, IS THAT THEY ARE SERIOUSLY LACKING, IN THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL HISTORY. I CAN THINK OF NOTHING MORE OFFENSIVE, FRANKLY, THAN RUNNING FOR ELECTION, TO REPRESENT OUR COMMUNITY, WITHOUT FIRST KNOWING HOW THIS SAME AREA HAS PROGRESSED THROUGH HISTORY SINCE THE LATE 1850'S. IT JUST MAKES ME NUTS, THAT MOST OF THEM COULDN'T CARE LESS. I KNOW A FEW THAT WOULD TELL ME, ALL STERN FACED AND EVERYTHING, TO MIND MY OWN BUSINESS, AND HISTORY IS HISTORY; BEEN THERE, DONE THAT! IN MY OPINION, ONLY A WEINER WOULD THINK THIS WAY, AND I'D LIKE TO EXPOSE EACH AND EVERY ONE, WHO THINKS THEY CAN GOVERN ANY AREA, WITHOUT ANY REAL KNOWLEDGE OF WHERE OUR TOWN ROOTS ARE ANCHORED, AND WHAT SOCIAL / CULTURAL TRADITIONS WE'VE ESTABLISHED HERE, FOR ALL OF THESE PRECIOUS DECADES. GIVE ME A FEW MOMENTS, WITH ANY SMART ASS, WHO THINKS THEY CAN SAVE US FROM OURSELVES, WHO HASN'T FIRST DONE THEIR DUE DILEGENCE, TO FIND OUT FIRST-HAND, HOW WE GOT FROM ONCE UPON A TIME, TO THE PRESENT (WITHOUT THEIR HELP). FOR THIS REASON, BACK IN JANUARY, I OFFERED TO RUN BASIC TUTORIALS FOR ANY COUNCIL HOPEFUL, OR RETURNING COUNCILLOR, IN ORDER TO EDUCATE THEM, AT LEAST IN PART, ABOUT THE UNIQUENESS OF OUR REGION OF SOUTH MUSKOKA. IF THEY DON'T BELIEVE WE ARE UNIQUE, I CAN CHANGE THEIR OPINION IN A COUPLE OF HOURS. IT IS A FREE SERVICE, BECAUSE I WANT OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO KNOW THIS STUFF, AS IT RELATES TO JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING ELSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE FACED WITH, IN THE COMING FOUR YEARS OF REPRESENTING OUR VALUES, HOPES AND ASPIRATIONS. WHILE THESE "LIVE FOR THE-NOW" FOLKS, THINK THEY'RE SPECIAL, AND IN-TUNE, WITH THE WAYS OF THE WORLD, MY EXPERIENCE IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE. THEY MIGHT LIKE DELUSION AS A PARTNER, BUT MOST OF US DON'T. I DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE HEAVEN-SENT TO SAVE US. IF YOU DON'T KNOW HOW WE HAVE GROWN THROUGH HISTORY, AND THE HERITAGE OF MUSKOKA GENERALLY, YOU WILL BE ILL PREPARED AND A CRAPPY COUNCILLOR, WHEN IT COMES TO UNDERSTAND PRECEDENTS AND THE LEGACY YOU MUST STEWARD THROUGH, THE COMING TERM OF OFFICE. IT'S WHY "THE BOG," WAS VERY NEARLY DESTROYED OUT OF IGNORANCE. THERE WAS NO EXCUSE FOR WHAT HAPPENED, EXCEPT MAYBE "OOPS!" THIS MISTAKE NEARLY COST US AN IMPORTANT FILTERING WETLAND, FOR THE WATER IN MUSKOKA BAY, OF LAKE MUSKOKA. IF THEY HAD TRULY CARED ABOUT THE HERITAGE OF THIS AREA, THEY WOULD HAVE TALKED TO SOME OF THE LOCAL EXPERTS, WHO TALKED TO US, KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT THE BOG WAS DOING ENVIRONMENTALLY FOR THE QUALITY OF WATER IN MUSKOKA BAY. THE IDEA WAS, "WE'LL DO IT, AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS." IF THEY WANTED TO TAKE A PAGE OUT OF "THE WEST WING," THEY WOULD HAVE DONE THEIR HOMEWORK, BEFORE GETTING INVOLVED IN SOMETHING, WITH AS MUCH INHERENT ACTIVISM, AS WAS IN OUR BUNCHING OF KEEN CONSTITUENTS; LIKE HANDLING A BEEHIVE AS IF IT WAS A FOOTBALL, THINKING NO HARM CAN RESULT FROM THE INTRUSION. THEY LOOK TO BLAME OTHERS WHEN THEY GET STUNG! GIVE ME AN INTUITIVE COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE, WHO BELIEVES IN THE TRUE VALUE OF CONTINUOUS LEARNING, AND SHOWS RESPECT FOR THE PLANKS OF THE FOUNDATION, BUILT STRONG BY OUR FOREFATHERS AND MOTHERS. IF THIS FUTURE COUNCIL TRULY GIVES A CRAP ABOUT THE WELFARE OF THIS COMMUNITY, IT WILL DROP THE STARCHED OFFICIALDOM, AND INVITE US TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. COUNCILLORS NEED TO WORK WITH THE MAYOR, AND IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS, LET THE MAYOR KNOW THEY ARE IN CLEAR OPPOSITION, AND FIGHT FOR WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN. BEING PART OF A TEAM WORKS WELL IN HOCKEY, BUT TEAM-PLAY CAN DENY DEMOCRACY ITS RIGHTFUL DYNAMIC; AS SEEN WHEN COUNCIL ADOPTS A UNANIMOUS APPROACH TO GETTING THE JOB DONE, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, IGNORING AND DOWNPLAYING THE OBJECTIONS OF CONSTITUENTS, PETITIONING AGAINST AN INITIATIVE OR DEVELOPMENT. COUNCILLORS NEED TO STEP OUT OF LINE OCCASIONALLY, AND STATUS QUO IN THIS NEXT FOUR YEAR TERM IS GOING TO BE DANGEROUS. THERE ARE A LOT OF TOWERING ISSUES, WHERE COUNCIL'S ACTIONS AND REACTIONS ARE GOING TO BE JUDGED HARSHLY, AND NOT JUST BY LOCAL CONSTITUENTS. THERE'S SOME REAL RISK COMING DOWN THE PIKE, AND A LOT OF IT WILL INVOLVE THE FUTURE OF THE MUSKOKA CENTRE PROPERTY. THIS COULD BE OUR PARALLEL TO THE BALA FALLS PROTEST, AND THE FORMER ROSENEATH DEBACLE, BACK IN THE EARLY 1980'S, THAT RIPPED THE TOWNSHIP OF MUSKOKA LAKES APART; DIVIDING SEASONAL RESIDENTS FROM THE PERMANENT POPULATION OVER THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW HOTEL ON LAKE MUSKOKA.
     I'VE WATCHED A LOT OF BIG SHOTS, AND SELF ABSORBED INDIVIDUALS, BITE THE DUST IN THESE COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONFLICTS, AND I'M GENUINELY WORRIED, THE SAME IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN IN GRAVENHURST. WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THIS COMING BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE THIS GELL COATING TO PROTECT COUNCILLORS, FROM THE PENETRATING ACID, TO BE EXPERIENCED, NEGOTIATING A WORKABLE ARRANGEMENT, ON PROPERTY THAT MAY BE THE MOST COVETED OPEN SPACE, ON THE MAJOR MUSKOKA LAKES. MAYBE IT'S WHY A LOT OF CITIZENS, WHO HAVE EXPERIENCE IN SUCH MATTERS, DECIDED TO SIT THIS ONE OUT, BECAUSE THEY KNOW THUNDER WHEN THEY HEAR IT OVER THE HORIZON. THE WAIT AND SEE STRATEGY, IS JUST STUPID, BECAUSE WHEN THE PROVINCE LISTS THE PROPERTY, THE THUNDER IS GOING TO BE HARD TO IGNORE. THERE ARE A LOT OF VESTED INTERESTS OUT THERE, AND THIS WILL BE A NEW CENTURY TEST ON ALL THE BYLAWS AND ALL THE PLANNING DOCUMENTS, THUS FAR, BECAUSE THIS LAKEFRONT JEWELL, IS GOING TO GET A LOT OF INTEREST; AND NOT NECESSARILY FOR WHAT WE MIGHT ALL APPROVE. I'M PRETTY SURE, FROM MY OWN YEARS OF EXPERIENCE COVERING, AND STUDYING SOME OF THESE CONFLICTS OVER DEVELOPMENT, AND PROPERTY USE COMPATIBILITY (WITH NEIGHBORS), THAT IT WILL BE A MOB OF PLANNERS AND LAWYERS JOSTLING WITH OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND TOWN STAFF. I WARNED A YEAR AGO, THAT THE TOWN NEEDS TO UP ITS GAME, IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH WHAT COULD HAPPEN WHEN THE "FOR SALE" SIGN GETS COVERED, WITH A STICKER THAT ANNOUNCES "IT'S SOLD." EVEN IF IT WAS GIVEN TO THE TOWN AS A GIFT, OF PARKLAND, THERE WOULD BE OPPOSITION, ESPECIALLY IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC, OF BOTH BOATS AND MOTOR VEHICLES, ALONG A FEEDER ROAD, THAT ENDS ABRUPTLY ON THIS POINT OF LAND. WOULD I BE WRONG TO SUGGEST, THAT A LARGE DEVELOPER, WOULD HAVE A TEAM OF EXPERTS ON THE PAYROLL, TO WANGLE THE BEST DEAL POSSIBLE FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT, AND TO SMOOTH OUT EVERY WRINKLE ENCOUNTERED IN THE PROCESS? ARE WE UP TO THE CHALLENGE IN TERMS OF GOVERNMENT COUNTERPOINT CAPABILITIES, TO HANDLE SUCH A MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, SMOOTHLY, AND IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF ALL CONCERNS? IT IS THE QUESTION WE HAVE TO ASK?
     BY THE WAY, THE OFFER OF TUTORING IN HERITAGE MATTERS, IS AN OPEN CALL, EVEN DURING THE COMING TERM OF OFFICE.
     IF YOU MEET UP WITH A COUNCIL-HOPEFUL, DON'T BE AFRAID OF ASKING TOUGH QUESTIONS, AND MAKING TOUGH DEMANDS. THIS IS YOUR RIGHT. IF THE CANDIDATES DON'T LIKE IT, TOO BAD. THEY MIGHT AS WELL GET USED TO THE TOUGH-GOING BEFORE THEY ARE SWORN IN, BECAUSE IT'S TOO LATE, AFTER THE FUR STARTS FLYING.
     THANKS FOR JOINING TODAY'S BLOG. THESE ARE MY OPINIONS. SOME ARE SHARED OPINIONS, BUT I'M THE ONE WITH THE BLOG.