No longer

Dear editor:
Like countless others in the area, I pride myself in getting involved in the local political process. Every election, I cast my ballot and then basically don’t think about what happens at council until the next election.
Right or wrong, I simply put my trust in the elected officials and really don’t question their decisions or what motivates those decisions.
No more.
Since the Rainycrest/Riverside/Extendicare fiasco, I have begun to give a lot more thought to local government and to the people elected to fill those positions on council.
When it became evident that the town’s representatives to the Rainycrest board did not reflect the wishes of council (i.e., that Extendicare should not be considered as a management option for Rainycrest), I began to wonder how this came about.
The two motions from council (#409 and #410) made it abundantly clear that Extendicare was out, as far as our town council was concerned. Somehow that message did not get to the Rainycrest board.
At the time, I wondered if that was a one-time breakdown in communication between the wishes of the council and the wishes of our representatives. But after reading last week’s Fort Frances Times, I have come to the conclusion that the wishes and management style of the council and mayor are not exactly in step with each other.
Instead of finding answers in the Times’ articles, I found more questions.
Based upon council’s last meeting, I am led to wonder how the mayor, or anybody else, can stop the voting process of a motion. A motion was tabled, but was interrupted after only one side of the vote.
Perhaps the idea that the motion would fail was the motivation for the vote to be cancelled.
I also wonder how a meeting can be “suspended” by the chairman, in this case the mayor. In normal practice, there had to be a motion to adjourn the meeting. This did not take place.
It is particularly worrisome the mayor needed to seek legal counsel concerning this questionable occurrence.
More questions were raised when I looked back on the reason for the original motion. Historically, the mayor involved the councillors in the decision-making process before bringing those appoints to council for approval. This doesn’t appear to have been the case this time.
I applaud the mayor’s wishes to have council operate as a team. While there are indications that, at present, the council is a team of one, with the expectation that decisions will be rubber-stamped, involving all of council in all of the final decisions can only improve the way in which the council works and the town benefits from those decisions.
The mayor has my support in his efforts to make the committees as strong, and therefore as effective, as possible. With this in mind, I am sure the mayor would agree that change—for the sake of change—is not a constructive managerial direction to follow.
Virtually all of the councillors stated they are just now beginning to get a full understanding and appreciation of how each of the committees works. Collectively, they expressed the feeling that they are now just reaching their greatest effectiveness in directing those various committees.
As the mayor stated, the one exception to this feeling of effectiveness seems to be the Planning and Development committee (“one of our weaker areas”). If this is true, what would motivate the mayor to want to take the members from that committee and move them to the even more important Administration and Finance committee?
Right from their first day in office, the mayor and council all have said that it has been their priority to get the town’s financial affairs in order. The present Administration and Finance committee members have done that quite admirably. Couns. Avis, Drysdale, and Hamilton have done a remarkable job of getting the town’s finances under control.
My question again is, if this committee is able to bring its strong collective background and varied experiences to work, what would motivate the mayor to replace two of the strongest members on that board?
Coun. Avis’ strong business background cannot be doubted. Coun. Drysdale’s equally strong career background, as well, cannot be doubted. Coun. Hamilton, too, brings a wealth of experience to the task.
As a working team, these three should continue their work on this most important committee. This certainly would fall in with the mayor’s wishes for teamwork.
As I said at the beginning, no longer will I be able to follow the direction taken by council without wondering why they are doing what they are doing.
From the reaction I heard about the Rainycrest decisions, I believe there are many more people in the community who no longer limit their political involvement to just casting their vote.
If the mayor and council indeed know they are answerable to each other, they also must know they ultimately are accountable to their constituents, too. That accountability may not just come into question at election time.
Signed,
Mark Kowalchuk
Fort Frances, Ont.