After these many years when Council could not get its face out of Bruce Telecom’s money trough, business necessity is now doing what council would never do, i.e. remove Council as the Board of Directors. Though legally, this new Board does not have to be elected, in the spirit of open government it would be ethically correct to do so.

There will be four directors to be appointed by a selection committee and one member of the new Council to be selected by that Council. These five will have voting rights. There will be three ex-officio members with no voting rights: Hans Neilson CEO, Bill Sipprell CFA of Bruce Telecom, and John deRosenroll municipal CAO who will function as Secretary to the Board. Lorne Lazenby whose background is in Human Resources is acting in a neutral role to review all applications and create a short list which will go to the Selection Committee. As of September 29, the Selection Committee consists of: Glenn Sutton, Sandy Donald, Ron Hewitt, Hans Neilson, and John deRosenroll.

Of the four citizens appointed, two will serve for two years and two for four years and that will be the on-going term of office for all new appointees allowing for continuity on the Board. This is acceptable as far as it goes but there is more that has to be considered.

The Municipality of Kincardine is the owner of Bruce Telecom. It is the responsibility of the Board to use best practices for the well-being of the company so that its owner receives the best possible benefits. The Municipality of Kincardine and through Council is accountable to the citizens of Kincardine as are all functions of Council. During the time when Council sat as the Board not once was an annual, let alone a quarterly, statement made available to the citizens. Council acting as the Board not only ignored the citizens of Kincardine, but imposed an unconscionable large fee for citizens to obtain information through the Freedom of Information Act. This was wrong and should be corrected once the new Board sits. Transparency cannot be served when access to information is restricted.

Furthermore, the directors have voted to increase the salary of the incoming directors by $2,000, a 25% increase, with no explanation to justify the increase. How does this benefit the municipality and where is the concept of service? There are volunteers in this municipality with valuable skills who give as much time, if not more, then called for on the Board. Having argued for years that the Board overpaid itself, the Board should be lowering the remuneration not increasing it. This would attract those who see honour in service foremost and pay second.

Since members of the current Board have not followed best practices as a Board, since they have unilaterally given the incoming Board a substantial raise, and since the selection committee will include three members of the current Council / Board, no member of the current Board / Council should be eligible to apply for a directorship on the new Board.

Let there be a truly fresh start for the new Board of Directors. Let there be a new sense of service, transparency and accountability.

October 11, 2006

All hats are in the ring now and signs spring up everywhere. Larry Kraemer, once again candidate for mayor and Sandy Donald, candidate for councillor-at-large, have the largest signs. True to their performance, the size is in inverse relation to their abilities. I am reminded of an old church adage, “Point weak; pound pulpit.”

Unless there is an awakening by the citizenry to elect candidates such as Kevin Klerks, Laura Haight, and Guy Anderson of whom I wrote earlier, we are in for more of the same ‘keep the peasants in the dark’ government.

When Larry Kraemer was mayor he openly demonstrated his disrespect of for ignorance for fair processes and rules of council. He had three years to open municipal business to transparency but took no steps to improve this essential aspect of democratic government. Ordinary people have rights but by his treatment of Sam Heisz, Mr. Kraemer displayed his disregard for those rights. Larry Kraemer is supported by the Tiverton and District Ratepayers Association. Whether he received the $10,000.00 previously offered to Glen Sutton to support the ward system I do not know; voters should be careful of voting for a mayor who is beholden to a divisive, parochial group. We need a mayor who works for all the people.

Ron Hewitt, though running as a candidate-at-large, thinks only of his own cabbage patch and gives parochialism as the sole reason for his candidacy. He is incapable of thinking of the municipality as a whole. When, sitting on the present council, he spoke of war among the wards, I thought of Afghanistan with its warlords’ interminable feuding preventing good government for all the people. We do not need those values on council.

In Ward Three there is no choice since both candidates represent a feudal mentality. One can only hope that the winner will take the Damascus Road on his way to the Fifth Concession.

Gord Campbell for Ward Two reminds me of the words on a plaque Sylvia gave me years ago that still guides me, “Well done is better than well said.” Gord returns calls, comes to see you when you ask and speaks up at council on issues that may not be popular with the in-group. He may not be a great speaker but he has knowledge and an inborn sense of fairness. We need those values on council. Andrew Hope is new to me but while I like what I read, I am sorry he is not running as councillor-at-large. We would not want to lose Gord Campbell’s voice.

I say, in closing, that Sandy Donald should not be elected. Not because of his stand to eradicate the ward system but because of his overall performance as deputy mayor and the hidden agendas he brought to that office. He thinks of office as a source of power not as a position of trust and service.

Do not fall for large signs: support integrity and thoughtfulness.

October 18, 2006

The ballots are being mailed to the constituents, the candidates have met the public twice and little of consequence has been said. There are large signs, medium signs, small signs and, for one candidate worth our vote, no signs.

Citizens again need to be warned that this election is for a four-year term. If citizens are not careful they could end up electing councillors with hoary ideas of territory, carrying bitter resentment of decisions made by an ill-willed Conservative government. It is imperative for eligible voters to think about the candidates then vote for the future not for the past.

We will never have a healthy government when, whether from cynicism, ignorance or having too much money to care about their municipality, half the eligible voters sit on their hands. This year with the mail-in-ballot there is no excuse for not voting unless one cannot read or write.

It was Marshall McLuhan, Canada’s great communicator, who said that politicians too often offer yesterday’s solutions to today’s problems. We should elect candidates who have the wit to be open to new ideas. Only then will our community prosper.

Many candidates spoke of their support for Bruce Power. That is silly. Is any candidate going to say we should dismantle the plant? Many candidates talked of supporting the farmer. Not one said how. If they do not have a concrete plan then they should shut up. It illustrates their lack of any serious thought on the subject. Farmers need real solutions not hot air or windmills spinning in the dark. They get enough of that from the provincial and federal governments.

At least one candidate spoke of the need for a person with business experience on council. Having had the opportunity of observing, for two years, senior executives make decisions, I question what candidates mean when they claim “business experience”. Their claim does not compare. Furthermore, government is not a business. At its core, government is a service, a stewardship on behalf of citizens. Council does not build soccer fields because members like sports or believe there is a profit to be made; they are built for our youth for healthy growth and recreation in its true sense – renewal. Council does not restore and maintain heritage buildings because some cherish the past; it does so for the future of all citizens by adding quality and history to our present and to those who come later. Council assures the water is clean to protect citizens not to sell bottled water, and when Council repeatedly allows sewage to overflow, it fails that stewardship through neglect.

There is no room for personal agendas, egos and ideology in stewardship; there is room only for service to the community.

“Things are seldom as they seem, skim milk masquerades as cream;” Gilbert and Sullivan had it right when it comes to elections and certainly with Larry Kraemer, a candidate for mayor, who once more displays his inability to develop consensus, respect procedure and to understand process.

It may be acceptable for Larry to change his mind with regard to the location of the tourist booth but citizens deserve to know his reasons. He failed to state them so I conclude his reason for change has more to do with his personal agenda. The Tiverton and Area Ratepayers’ Association has shown poor judgment in their choice of candidate for mayor.

As one letter writer to this paper said, Larry Kraemer does have some interesting ideas about the Annex and the downtown façade project but, in my opinion, Mr. Kraemer is not the person who could bring these about. He is too much of ‘my way or the highway’.

On June 16, 2005 Mr. Kraemer appeared before the CHATS committee. At that time he suggested the Chamber of Commerce and the BIA be dissolved and one united organization be created. The main objective for doing this was to use tourism to attract new businesses and trades people to the area and to increase the membership. Mr. Kraemer proposed, “…to have the Chamber of Commerce included in the Municipality’s strategic plan when building the new Tourism and Information Centre”. As an example he pointed out that the Municipality of Saugeen Shores has an agreement with their Chamber of Commerce for their Chamber to be involved with the running of their two Visitor Information Centres. He did not point out the neighbouring towns that did not involve the Chamber of Commerce or that highway #21 is the main street of Port Elgin (Saugeen Shores) which is not the case with Kincardine.

Mr. Kraemer was asked by the committee to provide a proposal to show how all parties would work together, i.e. the business development aspect, BIA, tourism, Chamber of Commerce, current events providers, the community-at-large, and the Municipality, and then return to the committee.

In August 2005 the committee wrote Mr. Kraemer stating that it planned to continue with the current plans and that it had no plans to provide space for other groups but would re-evaluate the situation after a year of operation of the Centre. The committee also commented it looked forward, “…to learning the outcome of the discussions between the Business Improvement Area and your organization”.

Mr. Kraemer never presented a more detailed proposal nor did he keep them informed of the discussions with the BIA regarding their possible amalgamation.

Two weeks ago, Larry Kraemer presented a proposal to Council but this time he wanted the Tourist Centre downtown in the Annex and, over a year later, was still proposing to unite the Chamber of Commerce and the BIA. He did not explain why he did not first bring his new proposal to the CHAT committee but only managed an expletive when discussing this with the committee chair.

Mr. Kraemer does not have the qualities necessary to bring this municipality together under an open and respected council. “No shit,” eh Larry?