When A Resolution Is Not A Resolution But Is A Resolution

ANYONE WONDER WHY THE CITY CLERK HAS NOT DONE HER JOB AND ORGANIZED THIS PUBLIC MEETING?
DO MUNICIPAL COUNCILS HAVE TO KEEP THEIR RESOLUTIONS LEGALLY?
Sometimes I wonder…who leads who here in the City of Woodstock. Is it the horse, or is it the rider?
Our mayor Michael Harding, likes to claim he’s a leader, but in the end, the ones who really control what goes on in this city appear to be the folks at city hall, the bureacrats who were never elected, and are not covered by integrity laws of any sort. Unfortunately for the mayor, having to follow the real leaders must be a terrible tragedy for him, and for us as well. If he had some gonads, he just might attempt to force some accountability on them…but not likely.
Some people in the bureacracy just never do their jobs to the satisfaction of the people who pay them and for me I look at one person, the city clerk and wonder what it is she does, and why she doesn’t do the things she was mandated to do by order of council?
The main point of all of this is the fact that on November 2, 2006, Louise Gartshore was ordered by council in a carried motion to put together a public meeting for the benefit of the citys’ ratepayers in order to clear the air on the Info Energy matter. The meeting never arrived, and Ms. Gartshore has refused to do her job as ordered by council and for that reason alone, she should take her leave…or her early retirement and let someone into the job that may feel some compassion for the poor buggers that have to sit back and watch accountability and transparency turn to ashes.
Perhaps Ms. Gartshore should enlighten us as to why this meeting has never taken place, and what reasons could possibly exist for her refusal to perform her duties as mandated by council? There may possibly never be a satisfactory answer to that question as she is not under any legal obligation to perform to any level of competence or satisfaction. And sadly for us, it’s all just more smoke and mirrors in the ongoing saga of Info Energy, Mayor Michael Harding, Dave Nadalin and the bumbling efforts of some elected people to obscure the facts from public view and investigation.
Here’s that good old motion that our council lied about…from November 2, 2006..seems like an awful long time for a consultant to be unavailable!
Moved by Councillor D. Nadalin Seconded by Councillor D. Tait

Whereas the taxpayer is the sole shareholder of Woodstock Hydro; And Whereas there is public concern of the operations and the cost of its subsidiary Info Energy; And Whereas Council is now in receipt of information pertinent to its operation; Be it resolved that the City Clerk organize a public meeting to be held tentatively on Friday, November 10th 2006 at 2 p.m. to discuss the operations of Woodstock Info Energy; And further that the aforementioned date is established based on the availability of the consultant. Carried.

Advertisements

17 Comments

  1. Anonymous
    Posted June 19, 2008 at 2:29 am | Permalink

    DO MUNICIPAL COUNCILS HAVE TO KEEP THEIR RESOLUTIONS LEGALLY?

    Councils make resolutions. Staff carry them out (or not in this case). It’s the CAOs job to monitor the performance of staff and ensure that Councils’ resolutions are implemented. It’s Council’s job to ensure that the CAO is performing his duties satisfactorily.

    That makes a total of nine people who just “forgot” to implement the resolution.

    It’s understandable. It’s not as though it was a particularly important issue.

    It’s not as though the public had any great interest in whether the Mayor and others performed their duties with integrity regarding large bundles of Info Energy cash.

    It’s not as though there has been an ongoing cover up for two years including the hiring of a so-called Integrity Commissioner to sanitize the scandal.

    Nope. Just a minor oversight. Stop looking for conspiracies Bender.

  2. Anonymous
    Posted June 19, 2008 at 11:25 am | Permalink

    They didn’t lie, they just didn’t do their jobs.

  3. Anonymous
    Posted June 19, 2008 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

    Given the choice between being branded as liars or incompetents they will go for incompetent every time. They know the public will forgive stupid much easier than crooked.

  4. Anonymous
    Posted June 19, 2008 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

    Nice.
    Sounds as if our choices are limited to crooks and liars.

  5. Anonymous
    Posted June 19, 2008 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

    … and idiots

  6. Anonymous
    Posted June 20, 2008 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    #1 anonymous is typical of the stagnant idiots that roam our City. There the first ones to complain for getting screwed by government but have no backbone and idolize the likes of Harding. IE. Hugo and Adam Nyp.Be careful to include Nadalin in the smoke mix. He was the only one with balls to take the clown on. It has rubbed off on Deb Tait too. You get what you deserve.

  7. Hugo and Adam
    Posted June 20, 2008 at 8:31 am | Permalink

    So what if we see our Michael as a superhero.He gives us pop and compliments, opens doors for us, shines our shoes, makes us lunch, waves all the time, picks up the tab for our prostitutes and is an overall great guy.

  8. Anonymous
    Posted June 20, 2008 at 8:34 am | Permalink

    And for that he gets nothing but positive media spin and a box of chocolates…

  9. Michael
    Posted June 20, 2008 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    #1 Anonymous is my hero…

  10. Anonymous
    Posted June 20, 2008 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    The semi-literate posting as Adam, Michael and Hugo should go back to school and take a remedial reading course or get someone who can read to explain this stuff to them.

  11. Anonymous
    Posted June 20, 2008 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    he is a hero. He made out taxes go up, and job losses are mounting across the city.

  12. Hugo
    Posted June 24, 2008 at 2:47 am | Permalink

    Wow. What great comments.

    Just goes to show that tapping at a few keys and hitting ‘post’ anonymously or with a pseudonym takes no brains at all.

    Of course, some of us already knew that.

  13. Anonymous
    Posted June 24, 2008 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    That was pretty lame Hugo.

    Harding’s attack dog has turned into a whiny puppy. Where’s the old Hugo? We could at least count on his antics for a few laughs.

  14. Anonymous
    Posted June 24, 2008 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    C’mon guys. Leave hugo out of the argument. He’s not the problem, the council is.

  15. Anonymous
    Posted June 24, 2008 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    “Leave hugo out of the argument. He’s not the problem, the council is.”

    He is Harding and Council’s most prominent defender and apologist. He is a big part of the problem.

    Maybe I should have said “was part of the problem.” We’ll see what the new managing editor thinks of Hugo’s antics, both on this blog and elsewhere.

  16. Anonymous
    Posted June 28, 2008 at 2:54 am | Permalink

    hardings’ most prominent defender and apologist??????????????????
    I fucking doubt that very much Thank You people!

  17. Anonymous
    Posted June 29, 2008 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

    “I fucking doubt that very much Thank You people!”

    Allow me to allay your doubts.
    Try reading the comments here….

    http://jimbenderoxford.blogspot.com/2008/06/so-whats-with-this-coming-tuesdays.html


Post a Comment

Required fields are marked *
*
*

%d bloggers like this: