Transparency

Dear editor:
When I read in this newspaper several weeks ago that our town council was going to call for a byelection to fill the vacant seat on council, I was as shocked as the rest of our citizens were.
I wasn’t disappointed that I didn’t get the position; rather, it was the reason given as to why council chose to need an expensive option to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Ryan was the first person quoted that maybe the seventh-place vote-getter was not actually the seventh choice of the electorate in the last election. Couns. Tibbs, Albanese, and Hallikas were of the same opinion as it was stated in this newspaper.
In other words, the winners of the election are now casting doubt that the intentions of the voters were not as they appeared. What was the real result of the last election? Who did the public intend to elect?
When the last opening on council occurred not many years ago, the council of the day decided to fill the position by appointment. At that time, both Mrs. Tibbs and Mr. Albanese believed so strongly in appointment that they both let their names stand for the position.
I supported Mr. Albanese because he was the runner-up in the previous election. The people on council selected him, as they stated, because he was the runner-up. The right decision was made at that time—at no cost to the town.
Now scarcely two years later, these same two members of council do not believe that appointment would serve the needs of this town. I contend that it doesn’t serve their own personal needs.
Mr. Albanese is now so opposed to appointment that he introduced the resolution to hold the byelection. Three of the present council, and the mayor, participated in the appointment of Mr. Albanese when he was elected. Now in the same situation, only one of them can stand by his convictions.
We can only guess as to the real reason why Fort Frances town council has decided to hold a byelection. They cannot accept the results as they are, except in their own individual cases.
The electoral public must have made a mistake. I agree.
I do believe the current mayor and council have improved our image in the public eye since the last election. We were promised accountability, honesty, integrity, and transparency in the last campaign. Some of these objectives have been met while others are still to be realized.
The health care issues are being worked on or have been settled. The information of the not-for-profit corporation was concluded the same way it started—not in the public eye but rather in obscurity and secrecy.
The public asked for transparency regarding this matter. The people who asked questions and expected answers are still in the dark. I am not saying that the result is unacceptable, but the transparency of the current council is as clouded as the last council was.
When the public sees a deal transacted in secrecy out of the public eye, but involves public tax dollars, suspicions arise, honesty is questioned, and integrity is in doubt.
The same is true for the biomass project at the local paper mill. When the public showed an interest in the decision-making process as it was happening, we were shut out of the whole situation. We had concerns that should have been heard, yet we were again stifled.
If the biomass project means more jobs and a larger tax base, and better infrastructure to support the project, the public is not opposed to that result. But they do deserve input, especially when they ask to be heard.
The current council of the town was elected by people who believe that council represents the people of the town. The mayor, in his most recent column in this newspaper, stated he was disappointed with the attendance at the public meeting for the budget process.
Well, it is the experience of the public in this town that public meetings are a waste of time and energy. The announcement of the meetings give little or no lead time and, worse, the opinions of the attending public are all but ignored.
Petitions presented at public meetings are disregarded on a regular basis.
Public opinion is a great tool for elected officials. The mayor is seeking greater satisfaction from public meetings. Mr. Mayor, you are in tune with the public on this issue. LISTEN!
Signed,
Ken Perry
Fort Frances, Ont.