I had just calmed down from Cranbrook mayor Scott Manjak`s totally unacceptable offer to remove submitted response forms from citizens who may change their minds during an alternative approval process, and accepted the reality that this council has no intention of releasing a $500,000 taxpayer paid for growth management plan before a November 14 referendum on boundary expansion, and I receive an anonymously produced yellow flyer in a local newspaper.
The yellow flyer, obviously distributed by supporters of boundary expansion contains the broad sweeping generalizations with no supporting facts about the future of Cranbrook if boundary expansion is defeated which characterizes most of the material produced by the self proclaimed official Yes side, but it is a nameless, faceless piece of yellow paper. The choice of colour is appropriate.
However, it is point number nine in the anonymously produced yellow flyer that deeply disturbs me. It says: ``It`s fun to criticize democracy when it doesn`t go your way and it`s a much better idea to waste taxpayer dollars on a ridiculous and costly referendum.``
From the outset of this sad, sorry tale in the political life of this small city in the southeastern corner of British Columbia, which has now received national attention, the supporters of boundary expansion, including a majority of the council, have attempted to marginalize those who would dare to oppose them as being less than democratic. On the contrary, the Citizens for a Livable Cranbrook Society, a non-profit society, with the names of its directors available, has been totally democratic in its actions since council tried to use the alternative approval process to expand the boundaries.
The government of the province of British Columbia enacted legislation to permit a municipality under certain conditions to use an alternative approval process rather than go directly to a referendum. Cranbrook council exercised its right under the provincial legislation to go this route in the first instance, and the citizens of the city were able to exercise their democratic right under the same legislation to oppose the council action by submitting a response form indicating they did not approve.
The council received a lesson in the power of grassroots democracy when over 3000 eligible voters submitted response forms basically telling the mayor and his council supporters that if they wanted to expand the boundaries, they must call a referendum as prescribed again by provincial legislation when ten percent of the eligible voters submit forms under the alternative approval process. (1475 were needed.)
The citizens of Cranbrook, close to 4000 of them strong, although not all were counted, were not criticizing democracy by openly signing their names to the form, as the anonymous yellow flyer supporters of boundary expansion would like us to believe, they were exercising their democratic right as provided under provincial law to be heard. It is insulting to them to be criticized by council members and others for exercising their democratic right to be heard.
If taxpayer dollars have been wasted on a ``ridiculous and costly referendum`` as the anonymous yellow flyer producers suggest, then theitr argument is with the government of the province of British Columbia who put the process in place.
The citizens of Cranbrook who moved the process to the referendum stage have clearly demonstrated that famous axiom in countries based on the English common law system ``audi alterem partem.`` (Hear the other side.) They have not been criticizing democracy; they have been practising it!!!
NOTE: YOU CAN EMAIL THIS POST TO A FRIEND! CLICK ON THE ENVELOPE BELOW!
Showing posts with label boundary expansion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label boundary expansion. Show all posts
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Cranbrook growth management plan essential to citizen decision making
Let's assume for a moment that you are a shareholder in a publicly traded company that has been experiencing significant growth over the past few years. The former CEO went to the board of directors in early 2008 and recommended that it approve a growth management plan study to assist the company in making wise decisions for its long term future.
The board thought this was a good idea, and approved a $500,000 study in early 2008. The previous CEO told them that by starting the study early in 2008, the plan should be completed by the end of the year, or early 2009. His successor told the board it should be available by the summer of 2009.
Meanwhile, the company was presented with a huge opportunity to expand, and before it received the $500,000 plan it proceeded with plans to expand the company's operations under the new CEO.
Shareholders were irate when they heard the news that the company was planning a huge expansion before it received a plan for which they, in effect, had paid $500,000. They launched a campaign, and succeeded in obtaining enough proxy votes to call a special shareholders' meeting.
At the meeting the new CEO said the company planned to proceed with the expansion, and the growth management plan was not available.
The shareholders called for a vote, and the story ends with the ouster of the CEO and the board of directors.
Sound familiar?
Well, here in Cranbrook, British Columbia, first term Mayor Scott Manjak and a majority of the city council have approved a referendum set for November 14, 2009, which if approved will more than double the size of this small city in the southeast corner of the province. And it is proceeding with the referendum before a growth management plan has been made available to the citizens to assist them with their decision.
Doesn't make sense to me! Why would anyone approve a $500,000 expenditure to create a plan, which was done by the last council, and then proceed with a referendum without taking the plan's recommendations into consideration. An incredible waste of taxpayer dollars.
Manjak, who took office less than a year ago, and promised an open and transparent administration, told the Cranbrook Daily Townsman on January 22, 2009: "A growth management plan focusing on the East Hill boundary expansion should be ready by summer (of 2009)." Most recently he has said it will not be available before the referendum. Apparently it is undergoing some kind of "technical review" by city staff.
Nonsense! If it is undergoing some kind of review, that's a lame excuse not to make it available to the citizens of Cranbrook now. Tell the staff to make it a priority and get it done and make it available before the referendum. To do so would be in keeping with Manjak's promise to the people who elected him that he would run an open and transparent administration.
The minutes of the mayor's brown bag lunch session of August 18, 2009 quote him as saying the plan was being "vetted" by city staff. As I write it is September 25. The next regular council meeting is scheduled for October 5, 2009.
Manjak admits that the plan is focusing on the East Hill, the very area that voters are being asked to bring into the city limits.
Former mayor Ross Priest, commenting on the study while he was still in office, told the Townsman on January 23, 2008, that by starting in early February last year "the growth management study should be completed by the end of 2008, or very early in 2009."
The referendum is being held because a grassroots group here gave the mayor and majority of council a huge setback when it tried to use an alternative approval process to get the boundaries expanded. The group got over 3000 signatures on elector response forms to stop that move, getting more than double the 1475 signatures required.
Notwithstanding the referendum, and the campaign currently being waged pro and con, the whereabouts of the $500,000 growth management plan, and the real reasons for the stalling in releasing it to the citizens who paid for it, should be of great concern to all. I hope all of you will contact the mayor and councillors and insist it be released now.
The board thought this was a good idea, and approved a $500,000 study in early 2008. The previous CEO told them that by starting the study early in 2008, the plan should be completed by the end of the year, or early 2009. His successor told the board it should be available by the summer of 2009.
Meanwhile, the company was presented with a huge opportunity to expand, and before it received the $500,000 plan it proceeded with plans to expand the company's operations under the new CEO.
Shareholders were irate when they heard the news that the company was planning a huge expansion before it received a plan for which they, in effect, had paid $500,000. They launched a campaign, and succeeded in obtaining enough proxy votes to call a special shareholders' meeting.
At the meeting the new CEO said the company planned to proceed with the expansion, and the growth management plan was not available.
The shareholders called for a vote, and the story ends with the ouster of the CEO and the board of directors.
Sound familiar?
Well, here in Cranbrook, British Columbia, first term Mayor Scott Manjak and a majority of the city council have approved a referendum set for November 14, 2009, which if approved will more than double the size of this small city in the southeast corner of the province. And it is proceeding with the referendum before a growth management plan has been made available to the citizens to assist them with their decision.
Doesn't make sense to me! Why would anyone approve a $500,000 expenditure to create a plan, which was done by the last council, and then proceed with a referendum without taking the plan's recommendations into consideration. An incredible waste of taxpayer dollars.
Manjak, who took office less than a year ago, and promised an open and transparent administration, told the Cranbrook Daily Townsman on January 22, 2009: "A growth management plan focusing on the East Hill boundary expansion should be ready by summer (of 2009)." Most recently he has said it will not be available before the referendum. Apparently it is undergoing some kind of "technical review" by city staff.
Nonsense! If it is undergoing some kind of review, that's a lame excuse not to make it available to the citizens of Cranbrook now. Tell the staff to make it a priority and get it done and make it available before the referendum. To do so would be in keeping with Manjak's promise to the people who elected him that he would run an open and transparent administration.
The minutes of the mayor's brown bag lunch session of August 18, 2009 quote him as saying the plan was being "vetted" by city staff. As I write it is September 25. The next regular council meeting is scheduled for October 5, 2009.
Manjak admits that the plan is focusing on the East Hill, the very area that voters are being asked to bring into the city limits.
Former mayor Ross Priest, commenting on the study while he was still in office, told the Townsman on January 23, 2008, that by starting in early February last year "the growth management study should be completed by the end of 2008, or very early in 2009."
The referendum is being held because a grassroots group here gave the mayor and majority of council a huge setback when it tried to use an alternative approval process to get the boundaries expanded. The group got over 3000 signatures on elector response forms to stop that move, getting more than double the 1475 signatures required.
Notwithstanding the referendum, and the campaign currently being waged pro and con, the whereabouts of the $500,000 growth management plan, and the real reasons for the stalling in releasing it to the citizens who paid for it, should be of great concern to all. I hope all of you will contact the mayor and councillors and insist it be released now.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Citizens for Livable Cranbrook Society create defining moment for city
The Citizens for a Livable Cranbrook Society has created a defining moment in the history of this small city in the southeastern corner of British Columbia as citizens now prepare to vote in a referendum on a boundary expansion proposal supported by Mayor Scott Manjak and the majority of the council.
City council decided on September 14 to hold a referendum after its effort to gain approval for the boundary expansion using an alternative approval process, supported by first term Mayor Scott Manjak and the majority of council went down to a resounding defeat when the grassroots group obtained more than 3000 signatures opposing the council's action. The group received more than twice as many as the 1475 required to halt the council decision. The referendum is scheduled for November 14, 2009.
Manjak and Councillors Denise Pallesen, Liz Schatschneider, Angus Davis, Jim Wavrecan and Diana J. Scott, who voted for the AAP totally misread the citizens they represent, but upon reflection, it may have been a good thing for Cranbrook in the long term as citizens pro and con the boundary expansion are now energized and involved in the local political scene. This mayor and council were elected almost a year ago by about 30% of the eligible voters who turned out on election day. Councillor Bob Whetham opposed the AAP.
There can be little doubt that no matter the referendum result, the next municipal election campaign, although just over two years from now, will be already underway, and a major issue will be the type of community the citizens want, and the people they want to lead it. The defining moment for Cranbrook will continue for some time, and that's good.
The lines are now being drawn as the boundary expansion campaigns get underway with a "yes vote" group of "concerned citizens" setting up a campaign office, hiring a campaign manager, launching a web site, running a full page ad in local newspapers, handing out yes buttons and holding a "catered lunch" to launch its campaign. That's in the first week. A co-chair of the group is Brian Sims, who announced that he has taken a leave of absence from his duties as president of the Cranbrook Chamber of Commerce to be involved.
If I owned the land in question, I would be absolutely delighted to have a group of "concerned" citizens launching such an aggressive campaign really on my behalf. And I am sure everyone would love to have a city council that spends taxpayer dollars on advertisements urging the people it represents, even those opposed to its decision, to vote yes in the referendum, do the same for their pet projects. After all, the whole boundary expansion issue has arisen as result of an application from companies that own the land.
Had the Citizens for a Livable Cranbrook Society not opposed the AAP, the mayor in one of his advertisements would not have offered to remove submitted forms from those who changed their minds, I would never have become interested in the issue. Obviously British Columbia law is not clear on this one, and it should be and that is matter for the legislature.
At the council meeting of September 14, speaking in favour of a motion to proceed to a referendum, Manjak referred to the local chamber of commerce as "our community partner", which represented the community's "business leaders." I have nothing against a chamber of commerce, but I am concerned about a mayor referring to it as a "partner" in effect giving it special status. As a result I visited the local chamber's web site and discovered that the city's chief administrative officer is a member of an "advisory" group to the board of directors and attends its meetings. Councillors Schatschneider and Pallesen are also listed there although the latter is noted as representing "DBA" which is the Downtown Business Association.
Apparently the chamber is supporting the council's boundary expansion decision, but according to a recent letter in the Cranbrook Daily Townsman, all members are not happy with that decision.
I would respectfully suggest to the mayor and council that it move to strictly an arm's length relationship with the chamber of commerce, as they really only have one partner. It is the citizens of Cranbrook that elected them to office, not any organization within the city that may or may not always have the same interests as a council must have in serving all the people.
Had the grassroots group not taken action, I would not have been looking around. I received an email from a reporter this past week who had been reading my blog, and it said in part that my "journalistic juices" must be flowing. Indeed they are.
Most importantly though, I hope the citizens of Cranbrook will stay energized at this defining moment in the life of their community.
City council decided on September 14 to hold a referendum after its effort to gain approval for the boundary expansion using an alternative approval process, supported by first term Mayor Scott Manjak and the majority of council went down to a resounding defeat when the grassroots group obtained more than 3000 signatures opposing the council's action. The group received more than twice as many as the 1475 required to halt the council decision. The referendum is scheduled for November 14, 2009.
Manjak and Councillors Denise Pallesen, Liz Schatschneider, Angus Davis, Jim Wavrecan and Diana J. Scott, who voted for the AAP totally misread the citizens they represent, but upon reflection, it may have been a good thing for Cranbrook in the long term as citizens pro and con the boundary expansion are now energized and involved in the local political scene. This mayor and council were elected almost a year ago by about 30% of the eligible voters who turned out on election day. Councillor Bob Whetham opposed the AAP.
There can be little doubt that no matter the referendum result, the next municipal election campaign, although just over two years from now, will be already underway, and a major issue will be the type of community the citizens want, and the people they want to lead it. The defining moment for Cranbrook will continue for some time, and that's good.
The lines are now being drawn as the boundary expansion campaigns get underway with a "yes vote" group of "concerned citizens" setting up a campaign office, hiring a campaign manager, launching a web site, running a full page ad in local newspapers, handing out yes buttons and holding a "catered lunch" to launch its campaign. That's in the first week. A co-chair of the group is Brian Sims, who announced that he has taken a leave of absence from his duties as president of the Cranbrook Chamber of Commerce to be involved.
If I owned the land in question, I would be absolutely delighted to have a group of "concerned" citizens launching such an aggressive campaign really on my behalf. And I am sure everyone would love to have a city council that spends taxpayer dollars on advertisements urging the people it represents, even those opposed to its decision, to vote yes in the referendum, do the same for their pet projects. After all, the whole boundary expansion issue has arisen as result of an application from companies that own the land.
Had the Citizens for a Livable Cranbrook Society not opposed the AAP, the mayor in one of his advertisements would not have offered to remove submitted forms from those who changed their minds, I would never have become interested in the issue. Obviously British Columbia law is not clear on this one, and it should be and that is matter for the legislature.
At the council meeting of September 14, speaking in favour of a motion to proceed to a referendum, Manjak referred to the local chamber of commerce as "our community partner", which represented the community's "business leaders." I have nothing against a chamber of commerce, but I am concerned about a mayor referring to it as a "partner" in effect giving it special status. As a result I visited the local chamber's web site and discovered that the city's chief administrative officer is a member of an "advisory" group to the board of directors and attends its meetings. Councillors Schatschneider and Pallesen are also listed there although the latter is noted as representing "DBA" which is the Downtown Business Association.
Apparently the chamber is supporting the council's boundary expansion decision, but according to a recent letter in the Cranbrook Daily Townsman, all members are not happy with that decision.
I would respectfully suggest to the mayor and council that it move to strictly an arm's length relationship with the chamber of commerce, as they really only have one partner. It is the citizens of Cranbrook that elected them to office, not any organization within the city that may or may not always have the same interests as a council must have in serving all the people.
Had the grassroots group not taken action, I would not have been looking around. I received an email from a reporter this past week who had been reading my blog, and it said in part that my "journalistic juices" must be flowing. Indeed they are.
Most importantly though, I hope the citizens of Cranbrook will stay energized at this defining moment in the life of their community.
Friday, September 11, 2009
"Why the rush?," Mayor Manjak and supporters
It appears that Cranbrook city council will consider a motion at its Monday September 14 meeting calling for a referendum by the city's voters on a proposal to expand the city's boundaries which if passed would more than double the geographic size of this community in the southeastern interior of British Columbia.
Mayor Scott Manjak and five of his councillors suffered a humiliating defeat when they tried to avoid a referendum by using an Alternative Approval Process this summer when a grassroots group got more than 3000 taxpayers to sign forms rejecting the council's AAP decision. They required 1475 signatures which is 10% of the eligible city voters.
If a motion calling for a referendum is presented and if it is passed by the same members who voted for the AAP process -namely Manjak and Councillors Denise Pallesen, Angus Davis, Liz Schatschneider, Jim Wavrecan and Diana J. Scott, it begs the question, "Why the rush?" Councillor Bob Whetham opposed the motion on the AAP proposal. I use the word ``if`` for a reason. I went to the city of Cranbrook web site looking for the council agenda for its meeting at 4:30 pm Friday. It appears that council posts the agenda with the minutes of the meeting -- after the meeting is held. Therefore, I can not be absolutely sure that the matter is on the agenda. So much for being open and transparent before the fact!!!
During the AAP time period, Manjak issued a glossy brochure delivered in the mail to every household and ran a two page ad in the local paper urging support for the boundary expansion proposal. I have it on good authority that this campaign cost the local taxpayers an estimated $7,000, and I don't know if that includes a letter prepared by the city solicitor defending Manjak's offer to remove any AAP form submitted if people changed their minds.
Despite the mayor`s best efforts, the AAP was quite frankly shot down convincingly. Of course I am not suggesting in the slightest that all those who supported the grassroots group are opposed to boundary expansion. But it is sure a shot across the bow to the council that it may be well advised to move cautiously on this proposal and be sure it is the right move at this time in Cranbrook`s history. It is perhaps time for sober second thoughts.
As I noted previously I am a latecomer to having any interest in the proposal and started writing about it after Manjak made his offer to remove forms submitted in the AAP. Generally speaking I tend to favour boundary expansions and even amalgamation of communities where it made sense. I was a young reporter in Timmins, Ontario, when amalgamation of a number of small municipalities was first being considered and later happened. I was a student at Lakehead University shortly after Fort William and Port Arthur were amalgamated to create Thunder Bay,
But to this point, where the city is proposing to take in two huge parcels of private land for future development that may or may not occur in the future, it bothers me for some reason. So again, I pose the question, `Why the rush?`and I hope each member of council will take the time to clearly articulate reasons for their support or lack thereof for the proposal.
Mayor Scott Manjak and five of his councillors suffered a humiliating defeat when they tried to avoid a referendum by using an Alternative Approval Process this summer when a grassroots group got more than 3000 taxpayers to sign forms rejecting the council's AAP decision. They required 1475 signatures which is 10% of the eligible city voters.
If a motion calling for a referendum is presented and if it is passed by the same members who voted for the AAP process -namely Manjak and Councillors Denise Pallesen, Angus Davis, Liz Schatschneider, Jim Wavrecan and Diana J. Scott, it begs the question, "Why the rush?" Councillor Bob Whetham opposed the motion on the AAP proposal. I use the word ``if`` for a reason. I went to the city of Cranbrook web site looking for the council agenda for its meeting at 4:30 pm Friday. It appears that council posts the agenda with the minutes of the meeting -- after the meeting is held. Therefore, I can not be absolutely sure that the matter is on the agenda. So much for being open and transparent before the fact!!!
During the AAP time period, Manjak issued a glossy brochure delivered in the mail to every household and ran a two page ad in the local paper urging support for the boundary expansion proposal. I have it on good authority that this campaign cost the local taxpayers an estimated $7,000, and I don't know if that includes a letter prepared by the city solicitor defending Manjak's offer to remove any AAP form submitted if people changed their minds.
Despite the mayor`s best efforts, the AAP was quite frankly shot down convincingly. Of course I am not suggesting in the slightest that all those who supported the grassroots group are opposed to boundary expansion. But it is sure a shot across the bow to the council that it may be well advised to move cautiously on this proposal and be sure it is the right move at this time in Cranbrook`s history. It is perhaps time for sober second thoughts.
As I noted previously I am a latecomer to having any interest in the proposal and started writing about it after Manjak made his offer to remove forms submitted in the AAP. Generally speaking I tend to favour boundary expansions and even amalgamation of communities where it made sense. I was a young reporter in Timmins, Ontario, when amalgamation of a number of small municipalities was first being considered and later happened. I was a student at Lakehead University shortly after Fort William and Port Arthur were amalgamated to create Thunder Bay,
But to this point, where the city is proposing to take in two huge parcels of private land for future development that may or may not occur in the future, it bothers me for some reason. So again, I pose the question, `Why the rush?`and I hope each member of council will take the time to clearly articulate reasons for their support or lack thereof for the proposal.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Cranbrook mayor Scott Manjak and council majority made huge political miscalculation
Cranbrook mayor Scott Manjak and five of his six councillors made a huge political miscalculation when they opted for an Alternative Approval Process instead of a referendum on a proposal to more than double the geographical size of this small city in the southeastern interior of British Columbia.
Over the past 45 years, I have been an observer of politics at all levels as a reporter from Bruce Hutchison's "far side of the street" and for eight years I was a municipal politician, so I have seen it all from both sides of the street! Quite frankly, after I learned that a grassroots movement here had secured more than 3000 signatures to stop the council's action, I shook my head in disbelief..They needed 1475 signatures. I really didn't think they could do it.
How could a council, in office less than a year, but with mayor and several councillors on it with elected experience, so completely misread the tune and temper of the citizens it represents? Although it is the mayor's first term, he sat on council for nine years here. Councillor Jim Wavrecan seems to have been on council at least for the 20 years I have lived here: Councillor Liz Schatschneider has been there for nine years; Councillor Angus Davis has years of municipal experience here and elsewhere, while Councillors Diana J. Scott and Denise Pallesen are in their first term.
Councillor Bob Whetham is also in his first term and is the only member who voted against the council motion to go to the AAP to expand the city's boundaries. He has his own views on the entire matter of growth in Cranbrook but most importantly he read the public mood correctly.
Perhaps the council members who voted for the AAP believed that because it had the support of the local chamber of commerce it could proceed without a referendum. Perhaps they believed that despite rumblings from a grassroots group within the community who opposed the AAP, it knew best.
Personally I have never seen a mayor and majority of the councillors suffer a rejection of this nature unless it has been in a regular election and they were all defeated. In a sense they made history.
The mayor promised an open and transparent regime during his time in office. He has "brown bag lunch" sessions and writes a column in the local paper periodically. But, it is pretty obvious that Manjak was not listening to the people of Cranbrook. He sent out a glossy brochure and ran a two page ad in the paper extolling the boundary expansion so he must have sensed there was significant opposition to his council's decision.
Although I have great respect for Bob Whetham, until Manjak said in his ads that if anyone who had signed an AAP, wanted to change their mind, just call him and he would have it removed, I really wasn't too interested in the matter. Suddenly, the reporter's bell went off in my head, and I said to myself "I don't like this", and went to city hall and signed an AAP form. Manjak's comment disturbed me greatly.
Something that Lord Acton once said about power corrupting and absolute power corrupting absolutely came to mind. Obviously, this mayor and council do not enjoy absolute power in Cranbrook, and if any of them thought so, the grassroots rose up and showed them they are the servants of the people. They also need to be reminded that they are in office as the result of an election that saw only about 30% of the eligible voters cast a ballot -- and the more than 3000 AAP forms is only slightly less than the estimated 4300 who voted. Hopefully the 70% of the voters of Cranbrook who did not vote will become vigilant and involved in the affairs of the city for the balance of this council's three-year term.
The council meets next on September 14. We shall then see if the mayor and councillors who supported the AAP have learned anything.
NOTE
SEE EARLIER POST: Cranbrook mayor Scott Manjak and his council followers get lesson in grassroots democracy on Thursday August 27, 2009 BELOW
Over the past 45 years, I have been an observer of politics at all levels as a reporter from Bruce Hutchison's "far side of the street" and for eight years I was a municipal politician, so I have seen it all from both sides of the street! Quite frankly, after I learned that a grassroots movement here had secured more than 3000 signatures to stop the council's action, I shook my head in disbelief..They needed 1475 signatures. I really didn't think they could do it.
How could a council, in office less than a year, but with mayor and several councillors on it with elected experience, so completely misread the tune and temper of the citizens it represents? Although it is the mayor's first term, he sat on council for nine years here. Councillor Jim Wavrecan seems to have been on council at least for the 20 years I have lived here: Councillor Liz Schatschneider has been there for nine years; Councillor Angus Davis has years of municipal experience here and elsewhere, while Councillors Diana J. Scott and Denise Pallesen are in their first term.
Councillor Bob Whetham is also in his first term and is the only member who voted against the council motion to go to the AAP to expand the city's boundaries. He has his own views on the entire matter of growth in Cranbrook but most importantly he read the public mood correctly.
Perhaps the council members who voted for the AAP believed that because it had the support of the local chamber of commerce it could proceed without a referendum. Perhaps they believed that despite rumblings from a grassroots group within the community who opposed the AAP, it knew best.
Personally I have never seen a mayor and majority of the councillors suffer a rejection of this nature unless it has been in a regular election and they were all defeated. In a sense they made history.
The mayor promised an open and transparent regime during his time in office. He has "brown bag lunch" sessions and writes a column in the local paper periodically. But, it is pretty obvious that Manjak was not listening to the people of Cranbrook. He sent out a glossy brochure and ran a two page ad in the paper extolling the boundary expansion so he must have sensed there was significant opposition to his council's decision.
Although I have great respect for Bob Whetham, until Manjak said in his ads that if anyone who had signed an AAP, wanted to change their mind, just call him and he would have it removed, I really wasn't too interested in the matter. Suddenly, the reporter's bell went off in my head, and I said to myself "I don't like this", and went to city hall and signed an AAP form. Manjak's comment disturbed me greatly.
Something that Lord Acton once said about power corrupting and absolute power corrupting absolutely came to mind. Obviously, this mayor and council do not enjoy absolute power in Cranbrook, and if any of them thought so, the grassroots rose up and showed them they are the servants of the people. They also need to be reminded that they are in office as the result of an election that saw only about 30% of the eligible voters cast a ballot -- and the more than 3000 AAP forms is only slightly less than the estimated 4300 who voted. Hopefully the 70% of the voters of Cranbrook who did not vote will become vigilant and involved in the affairs of the city for the balance of this council's three-year term.
The council meets next on September 14. We shall then see if the mayor and councillors who supported the AAP have learned anything.
NOTE
SEE EARLIER POST: Cranbrook mayor Scott Manjak and his council followers get lesson in grassroots democracy on Thursday August 27, 2009 BELOW
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Cranbrook Mayor Scott Manjak and his council followers get lesson in grassroots democracy
Cranbrook mayor Scott Manjak, who took office less than a year ago, and five of his six councillors, have just received a lesson in grassroots democracy which they would do well to heed for the remainder of their three-year term, after more than 3,000 citizens came forward to reject council's plan to use an Alternative Approval Process (AAP)to expand the city's boundaries. Only Councillor Bob Whetham opposed the motion to approve the AAP.
After council approved the Alternative Approval Process approach to a proposed huge expansion of the city's boundaries at its July meeting, rather than send the matter to a referendum by the city's voters, the Citizens for a Livable Cranbrook Society, headed by president Sharon Cross, launched a grassroots campaign to force council to hold a referendum. Ten percent of the eligible voters (1,475) were needed to sign Elector Response forms, and on Wednesday, the society delivered 3,024 forms to city hall, more than twice the required number.
Manjak actively campaigned in favour of the Alternative Approval Process by sending a glossy brochure to each household, and running a two-page advertisement in the local paper. The mayor went so far as to tell voters that if they had signed an Elector Response Form, and wished to change their mind, just call him, and he would arrange to have the form withdrawn. His offer provoked an angry response among some citizens and undoubtedly led to an increased number opposing the council decision.
It seems that the law surrounding the handling of the response forms is somewhat cloudy in British Columbia, but for a mayor to offer to become directly involved in having a form withdrawn in any sort of voting process is totally unacceptable. At the very least Manjak should apologize to the citizens he represents.
Sharon Cross told the Cranbrook Daily Townsman in an article by Bonnie Ryan on August 27, 2009, that the mobilization of the community had been an incredibly inspiring event, referring to it as `truly a grassroots movement.`
The matter will be placed before council again at its September 14, 2009 meeting. Let us hope that Manjak and Councillors Jim Wavrecan, Liz Schatschneider, Angus Davis, Diana J. Scott and Denise Pallesen who supported the Alternative Approval Process fully realize that they have been badly damaged by their presumptuous action, and they must now work to bring the community together again. They are totally responsible for dividing it.
.
After council approved the Alternative Approval Process approach to a proposed huge expansion of the city's boundaries at its July meeting, rather than send the matter to a referendum by the city's voters, the Citizens for a Livable Cranbrook Society, headed by president Sharon Cross, launched a grassroots campaign to force council to hold a referendum. Ten percent of the eligible voters (1,475) were needed to sign Elector Response forms, and on Wednesday, the society delivered 3,024 forms to city hall, more than twice the required number.
Manjak actively campaigned in favour of the Alternative Approval Process by sending a glossy brochure to each household, and running a two-page advertisement in the local paper. The mayor went so far as to tell voters that if they had signed an Elector Response Form, and wished to change their mind, just call him, and he would arrange to have the form withdrawn. His offer provoked an angry response among some citizens and undoubtedly led to an increased number opposing the council decision.
It seems that the law surrounding the handling of the response forms is somewhat cloudy in British Columbia, but for a mayor to offer to become directly involved in having a form withdrawn in any sort of voting process is totally unacceptable. At the very least Manjak should apologize to the citizens he represents.
Sharon Cross told the Cranbrook Daily Townsman in an article by Bonnie Ryan on August 27, 2009, that the mobilization of the community had been an incredibly inspiring event, referring to it as `truly a grassroots movement.`
The matter will be placed before council again at its September 14, 2009 meeting. Let us hope that Manjak and Councillors Jim Wavrecan, Liz Schatschneider, Angus Davis, Diana J. Scott and Denise Pallesen who supported the Alternative Approval Process fully realize that they have been badly damaged by their presumptuous action, and they must now work to bring the community together again. They are totally responsible for dividing it.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Michael J Morris
MJ with Buckwheat (1989-2009) Photo by Leo Ouimet
UNEEK LUXURY TOURS, ORLANDO FL
click on image
MEMORIES FROM CHILDHOOD
Following the American Dream from Chapleau. CLICK ON IMAGE
