By Pepper Parr
October 6, 2016
BURLINGTON, ON
Just who did leak the information?
Ward 4 Councillor Jack Dennison was miffed when name Liz Benneian made mention of the date December 12th – as a deadline for an extensive review of the details, data and background by the City Manager of the proposed water break the LaSalle Park Marina Association says is needed to keep the boats safe from damage.
Where did you get that information asked Dennison – Liz Benneian smiled and said she saw it in an email.
Ward 4 Councillor Jack Dennison.
Dennison wanted to know who the email came from – Benneain smiled again but demurred – Jack was going to have to dig a little deeper to find out just how information he saw as confidential got into the hands of the Save the Trumpeter Swan coalition.
Later in the council meeting that took place on Monday Dennison asked the Clerk what was done with the memo he had sent to all the members of council saying he was going to bring an amendment to a motion.
Meed Ward, who has chosen to be paperless, didn’t get a printed copy. All the other members of council got printed copies – several members of council apparently didn’t see or read their copies before the meeting.
Councillor Marianne Meed Ward
It “appears” that Meed Ward may have shared the information she was given electronically with the Trumpeter Swan people.
This isn’t the first time this Council has suspected Meed Ward of leaking information to people. She has never leaked anything to the Gazette, for which we will never forgive her.
Expect the Councillor for Ward 1 to be reading up on the city’s procedural bylaw to see if Meed Ward committed an infraction.
Well said Liz, if only more people would involve themselves even one quarter, no even one tenth as much as you do perhaps more citizens would become aware of how some old time councillors work the system. Constant vigilance, that is what is needed.
John, why would you think I was the only person to read about the amendment? I have no idea how many people the Councillor sent the information about the amendment to. And, once again, because it’s nobody’s business, I have never said whether the email I received came from the Councillor or someone else. And, in any case, I was a registered delegate at the public Council meeting, speaking to the very decision that the CCSC Committee (which I also delegated to) had voted on and were now sending to Council for approval. I have spoken to the Marina issue every time it has come before one of Burlington’s Committees or Council for the past four years. Are you saying that delegates should be kept in the dark about amendments to issues they are registered to speak to? And to AsTheWorldTurns, if you think someone who has been as politically active as I have been is naive about the way politics works you are greatly mistaken, but I want things to be done differently. People want transparency. They want decisions to be made on the basis of what’s best for the majority. That’s why I keep trying to open those closed doors and shine a light into the smokey rooms.
Liz – “People want transparency.”
I will agree with you on that, exactly why I suggested that the Gazette post councilor Meed Ward’s email, if not perhaps the councilor will.
In the interest of transparency you may even consider posting the email informing you of the proposed amendment.
I don’t know how many people the councilor sent the information to and I certainly don’t know what the amendment contained or if it was or should have been confidential. Other than the recipients of councilor Dennison’s email, you are the only other one I am aware of that could enlighten us.
What I do know is councilor Meed Ward said she circulated the email to inform the public. That’s public information, and no delegates should not be kept in the dark, either should the public.
Editor’s note: The Gazette does not have a copy of the now infamous email – and we don’t expect to actually see a copy of it. Our view is that the sender of the email is the person to release the document.
Absolutely agree with the editor on the Gazette’s position.
How unfortunate that a document we were told was for public information doesn’t appear to be available to the press or the public.
We will have to work on that transparency thing !
Perhaps what is needed to clarify the issue is to have the Gazette print the email sent by councilor Meed Ward.
That should end any confusion or speculation.
As she said it is to inform the public, doesn’t that make it public information ?
The best thing I read… Ward 1 Councillor = Trump. How so very true!!! Two very self-serving individuals who couldn’t find compassion if they tripped over it.
John,
EXACTLY!!!!! Thank you for clarifying that for Liz!
I checked twitter, face book and the ward 2 newsletter, these are the usual ways the councilors informs the public.
There doesn’t seem to be any mention or attempt to inform the public as councilor Meed Ward has said.
Simply checking the councilors email records will indicate who was informed and who was copied, there is a date and time stamp on emails.
Oh my goodness people! There is no mystery about what happened. Councillor Dennision put forward an amendment to the resolution the CCSC had voted on, putting a timeline on City Manager’s Ridge’s report on the Lasalle Park Marina saying that it had to be completed on or before December 12. He circulated it to the Council and to staff. When Councillor Meed-Ward received it, she circulated it. And what was wrong with that? Nothing. Citizens deserve to know what’s coming before Council, especially when they have registered to delegate on the issue. That’s called transparency. When Dennison asked me how I knew about the amendment, which he ultimately did not bring forward, I replied that I read about it in an email. When he asked me who sent me the email I declined to answer. Why? Because it’s none of his business who I send emails to or receive emails from. However, when Marianne Meed-Ward had the floor she told Council that she had circulated the amendment, she told them why and she said that in future amendments to items on the Council agenda should be circulated and if there is not enough time to do that before the Council meeting, they should be printed and placed in Council so anyone attending can see what’s being proposed. People should be more concerned about the complete lack of due diligence over the past 8(!) years that Council has paid to the proposed expansion of the Lasalle Park Marina than this nonsense on Dennison’s part.
Liz
Your are correct it’s none of our business who you get emails from or send them to however, this is not about you.
When a councilor sends emails to inform the public, as councilor Meed Ward said she did, it is public information. Unfortunately, you seem to be the only member of the public to receive it.
Is that what you call transparency?
A councilor providing public information is not only councilor Dennison’s business, it’s the business of every resident of the city.
J.T.
Was the information about the deadline date “confidential” and, if so, why? With all due respect, I believe that that’s the issue around transparency. To share information that is not or should not be privileged is not a transgression – no matter how narrow the audience.
Mike
I will let J.T. respond however, without seeing the email suggesting the deadline date, it would inappropriate and simply speculation to comment on your questions.
OK, let me get this straight. If a councillor decides to share information of declared council coming amendments, then he/she must share it with everyone in Burlington? Does council have every citizen’s email on a list so this can be done? I somehow doubt that.
Possible motions declared in council become public information the second they are pronounced. Anyone can share any part of them with anyone they wish. Show me otherwise and I’ll be better educated.
J.T.
But if it’s “speculation and simply speculation to comment” why are you doing so? Have to admit, you have me confused.
Liz, How naïve? not enough is made public…it most often is (made public)…after the fact…as councilors male and female…smokers or non…DO hind behind closed doors..that is a fact at Burlington City Hall. Please do your fact checking first!!
I think that the fundamental question is why Councillor Dennison believes that a review deadline date is confidential. Should it be? Does disclosure provide any undue advantage to any party or interest group? Seems to smack of a lack of transparency that has become a modus operandi of this Council.
Let the light in Jack.
Pepper why are you trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill? If you watched the video then you know that Marianne Meed-Ward sent an email out about the proposed amendment because she told Council that she did, during the Council meeting. And there is not a reason in the world why she shouldn’t have. The amendment should have been made public because how the heck could the public speak to it if they didn’t know about it? Good grief. We are long past the era where politics is conducted by men, behind closed doors in smoke-filled rooms, aren’t we?
I stated at Mondays meeting that I am glad the CAO is reviewing this project. I hope this time, the process will include a full public airing.
If Council ultimately approves a marina expansion and break wall plan, it must be able to explain to the public why this project supersedes other strategic infrastructure projects that have already been fully vetted and placed on the City’s priority list. Council will have to justify to the public why projects, already deemed essential priorities, have to be removed from the list.
This means that Council must be willing to explain to the public how a marina, that caters to under a hundred Burlington residences and even under the expansion may have more outside members than Burlington residents, how is this a more important public infrastructure than, for instance, flood abatement and road repairs. It will also have to explain exactly how an expanded marina and break wall would benefit the Burlington community at large. How is it a good amenity that contributes to the quality of life for the whole community, how does the marina maximize participation of the community in general. Is this the kind of public airing council wants to avoid?
All this in my opinion would NOT be discussed if Dennison’s motion to shortcut the process and move the marina’s agenda to the December 12th meeting was put forward.
Our Mayor also told the marina that the city would pay compensation to LPMA for money they have put into the marina plans over the last EIGHT years. I think it sets a dangerous precedent. City also carries a lot of dept on this project.
In my opinion there is the appearance of a strong connect between the executive of the marina and a few current members of council. It is evident by the action of Dennison who wanted to put forth an amendment to jump start a procedure and Craven who is a strong proponent of the marina project. In my opinion the amendment would have gone through easily if it was not brought to light prior to the reading of the amendment and recorded for all to see.
Why should an amendment be kept secret from the public.
is that one of Hillary’s 33,000 missing emails?…lol Will Trump…ooops I mean Craven pounce on Meed Ward…stay tuned!!
When members of council wants to put forth an amendment that shortcuts procedure to bump up an agenda that may remove or move down an infrastructure programme that benefits all, for something that benefits only a few hundred members of a marina and wants to do it in a manner that would have it passed without notice to all those involved in the matter is underhanded in itself.