Let the debate begin

You might have thought that the debate about Cobourg moving to the OPP was almost over, by the lack of debate and thoughtful letters to the local media. Well it has just been kickstarted by the action of the Cobourg Police Association sending out a flyer explaining what the local police do for the citizens of Cobourg. If you don't get a Northumberland News read the flyer here. All the CPA is asking that one contacts the local councillors and tell them that the local option is the best. As well they are asking that letters of support be emailed to cobourgpoliceassociation@hotmail.com

Bush gets no respect!

Just came across this video this morning, for the early morning chuckle! Bird Poops On President Bush During Presser

Council hears unpleasant news

Tonight the Cobourg Council listened to delegations who wanted to speak about the harebrained scheme to spend 1.3 million dollars on an ice rink [get it right Burd, the estimate is now 1.8 million - ed.] Three speakers expressed three concerns: the process of the decision making and the rush to complete it without adequate public discussion, the questionable estimates and the projected true costs and finally the last speaker spoke about the usefulness of the project but please relocate it.

Of course the other side had two delegations: one from the DBIA who said "it is good for businees" and the other being a member of the disabled community congratulating Council for the wisdom of providing a warm bus shelter. There was also in the meeting a resolution presenting a large memo, that outlined the costs and details of the project, that was accepted as information. However when councillor Mutton asked for details outlining who made what decisions and when she was met with a stony silence. The most telling part of the evening was during Mr MacKenzie's presentation the Mayor was at first acknowledging his various points and prompts to questions as "Michael" when it became apparent at the end of his presentation that Michael had criticised severely all things before him, it became, "Thank you Mr MacKenzie!"

I think, and I hate to defend the rich and famous, that the residents of the harbourfront have a very good and defensible point of law. Nowhere in the documents before them, when they bought into the area was an ice rink mentioned, in fact the documents given by the Town, when asked, were the original plans for the park, minus the rink. So they have had their lifestyle and accepted norm for quality living compromised and should be able to sue, let's see if they go that far. An injunction at least to allow further public input, should put a crimp in the Town's plans and put the axe to a local plank in the upcoming provincial election.

Proportional Representation

Now I smell a conspiracy theory. Proportional Representation (PR) is a form of voting that enables voters to get representatives in a Legislature in numbers that correspond to the number of votes cast. Proponents will tell you that the end result is more diversity and a mixture of political opinion that mirrors voter's wishes. This is not possible in a First Past The Post (FPTP) system where a majority governemst is routinely formed by a party that does not get a majority of votes.

Mr McGuinty set up a commission to investigate PR and randomly picked (there's a laugh the commission suddenly became a model of diversity not necessarily random) and they investigated all forms of PR and held hearings and are now recommending a system called Mixed Member Proportional Voting (MMPV). Under this system there will be 99 regular MPPs and 30 odd Party MPPs, these members will selected by parties off a list drawn up by the party.

Now for the problem and the conspiracy. The conspiracy first. McGuinty was dragged kicking and screaming into this issue. by angry electorates and PR zealots. His answer was the old political gambit - set up a high priced and gold plated commission that recommends unpalatable and unpopular policy and he looks good in trying to fix the issue. His unpopular axis is the recommendation - MMPV. To convert the electorate into supporters he will have to persuade them that a Party MPP is a valuable resource and the price of democracy. It is ingrained into the voters subconsciousness that you vote for a person to represent you not a political party to govern.

Personally I will not be voting for this proposal although PR is absolutely necessary to get proper representation, the idea of two votes - one for the MPP and one for the party is not my favourite and will lead to inequality in the legislature. I would be voting for it if the Single Transferable Vote (STP) had been recommended. Again this is where the conspiracy comes in, all McGuinty has to do the kill PR is to make sure that he adopts an unworkable idea and confuse the voters and he has. In defense of MMPV he and others in power say that the STV system is unworkable because of its complexity. Well is that so? Both the Liberals and Tories have been using the STV in nomination meetings for years - so much for unworkability!

My stinky opinion

Sometimes I hate to go against the tide just to be right but in the case of PC Nelles justice demands that the system be played out to the end. Nobody knew that the game wold go into quintuple overtime. It is not our fault that the Police Services Act (PSA) demands that officers under review get paid, that is patently unfair to all other workers who get suspended and then reinstated - or not. It is the fault of the government that our justice system is underfunded and therefore under resourced so that these cases take so long to process.

The upshot is that Nelles is entitled to his full days in court, we are entitled to swift justice and the governments should be severely chastised for not making this possible.

Cobourg Council is dysfunctional

More evidence that Cobourg Council is a law unto itself and being ruled by four dead white men and presided over by a Mayor more interested in his legacy hit the public domain this past week.

In theory Cobourg is governed by the Council which has divided the workload into little fiefdoms called "portfolios" - planning, safety, public works, parks etc. In practise this means that each councillor can really only look after the kingdom and ignore what the others are doing. This lazy and inefficient practice has been going on for years. But with a recent election and the imposition, by the public, of the top vote getter being given the most important portfolio - planning, the old way has changed slightly. Now the four dead white men in their chauvinistic way have decided not only will they look after their own little fiefdom they will look after the planning portfolio as well.

Two issues bring this practice to light: one is the announcement of a public meeting to discuss the official review of the Official Plan ad the other is the ongoing definition of the harbourfront park and the planned changes to it. The first issue - the review of the OP, a dispute has arisen between the old king of planning and the incumbent. Dean McCaughey, who was the biggest loser in the last election and now sulks in Public Works and doesn't do committee work, says it should be a very brief meeting because it is only a perfunctory formality to have this meeting, Miriam Mutton disagrees and says that members of the public should be free to speak about their thoughts on the new OP. The second issue is more fundamental and shows that the losers (the four dead white guys) really want to put the boots to the new person who is a woman! Ms Mutton takes the broad view that because the location and planning of the harbourfront area is integrated and therefore changes to one component affects the larger area it is a planning matter in the widest sense. Councillor (I used to be the Deputy Mayor and now sit on my arse and collect the money) Spooner believes that because the area is called Rotary waterfront park, totally diminishing the good name of Dr. Bob Scott, after which the area is named, is in the Parks portfolio and therefore Ms Mutton is "grandstanding" by uttering an opinion.

Putting these issues together and adding in the fact that the Coordinator of planning has had her choices of committee personnel routinely savaged and her cogent and reasonable ideas ignored you could say that she really is not the master of the domain and is not getting the respect that is due her portfolio. That is tragic and cannot be tolerated. That is why the practises of the dead white men majority are continually under scrutiny and often exposed.

The conclusion is that the Council is dysfunctional because the majority of the team have decided that it can run the Town with one member on the bench!

And who says there is no Provincial election?

Click here for a peek Grants-R-Us: Home

Cobourg versus OPP another slant

In the ongoing debate about the efficiency of the OPP and the wastefulness of the Cobourg police let's look at the proposed workload and the actual (1996) and see if we will get value for the Cobourg dollar.

Cobourg has 18 frontline officers (23 total) and 5 Sgts. The OPP proposes to have 23 constables and 6 Sgts (one more than now) so be fair and say that the three OPP constables will become program officers and therefore the number of constables will be the same - 18.

Now look at the workload, it is substantially different. Cobourg responds to each complaint And the OPP will only respond to complaints of a dollar value of more than $4800, source of this the OPP Municipal Policing Framework: buried in the back under "differential response".

The upshot is that of the 4771 cases responded to last year by the Cobourg Police, 1001 of them would not be followed up by the OPP under the differential response.

So we now have the same number of officers, and an extra Sgt. doing 20% less work - who is overcharging now?

So what about the waterfront park?

What about it? Will it add or detract from the area, will it bring people to the area thereby furnishing the downtown with a critical mass of customers, will it produce parking complaints and a whole lot of other questions. Since the whole harbourfront has been turned into a residential wasteland (what's the opposite of slums) that pleases no one, especially the people who live there and expect bucolic conditions tailored to their taste. I have no desire to visit the place and therefore what goes there is of no interest to me. But if it pleases others it will be of use but how much do I want to pay for their pleasure?

What is of interest is that whatever does go there must have the lowest maintenance costs possible - grass in the summer and plowed paths in the winter would be good. This proposal of a fountain (shades of prancing waters at the Bellagio casino in Las Vegas - take a look here for a look at real fountains), is really really expensive to maintain, and proper questions have been raised about it. $86,138 is the estimate to run it for a year. Just how tasteful will the area be when it is budgeted to sell advertising $20,000) , where and how much? The idea of a bus shelter is taking some flak but if you remove it the $21,000 grant that goes with it disappears too.

So much for so little I notice that some other commentator in Cobourg on another site notes that the Park does not have a name,well it might have soon - Delanty's folly

Hey I'll do it!

Always on the lookout for some 'ready' this item crossed the screen Blogging for dollars. So form the line at the right and I'll flog anything you want to sell, especially if the far away places have to be visited and verified, at your expense of course.