By Pepper Parr
December 11th, 2024
BURLINGTON, ON
During the December 10th Council meeting Mayor Meed Ward raised two Points of Privilege.
In Robert’s Rules of Order questions of privilege affecting the assembly may include matters of comfort, amplification, or safety. For example, it may be difficult to hear the speaker. In this case, a question of privilege could be raised to close the doors and windows.
Without naming the people she was referring to the Mayor appears to have decided that her personal preferences come first, so she did the following:
Mayor Meed Ward: “We want everyone to feel heard and safe to speak their views, however unpopular, this is critical to a healthy democracy.”
“I will take this opportunity in relation to the special meeting of council to speak to a point of privilege. And I’ll do that now before calling the vote as part of our respect commitment to a respectful workplace.
“I would like to address comments made at the Special Council meeting on the budget. This is the soonest opportunity, as I was not at that meeting due to attending a funding announcement at the hospital, one of the delegates mused that perhaps our CAO knowingly misrepresented the budget increase percentage. Now normally I don’t repeat personal attacks or defamatory statements, but it’s critically important to clarify what is in bounds and out of bounds when we are aiming for respectful dialog and respect in the workplace.
“Comments opposing the tax increase, suggesting cuts, offering suggestions around communications or an improved process, these and more are not only appropriate but welcome, however, attacking the personal integrity, honesty and character of anyone, whether a council member, staff or another member of the community, is not welcome our procedure by law, Section 44 two states that no person will speak disrespectfully to or about anyone in council chambers, and that’s what happened here.
“I do want to acknowledge Councillor Nissan for also speaking to this on a recent online post. This has exposed him to unwarranted criticism and misinterpretation of what he was calling out, which is specifically the personal attack on our CAO. Being exposed to such criticism discourages anyone from speaking out and calling us to a higher standard of engagement.
“We have guidelines for conduct in our meetings that are aimed at promoting respectful debate and dialog on the issues we face. This is especially important when there are different viewpoints and opinions among staff council and our community. We want everyone to feel heard and safe to speak their views, however unpopular, this is critical to a healthy democracy.
Mayor Meed Ward
“People won’t run if they’re exposed to personal attacks and a toxic workplace. People won’t apply to work in municipal government and residents won’t come forward to speak. We all lose when these voices are silenced. We need to be vigilant in upholding a respectful workplace and modeling it. We all have a role to play to foster a respectful workplace in service of a healthy democracy. We need to model respect in our own comments and encourage others to do so. My comments are to that end, and my commitment is to do my part alongside all of you. Thank you.”
When introducing a delegation that took place on Tuesday Mayor Meed Ward said:
“Delegates must be respectful of staff, council members and other members of the public who may have a different perspective on the item, personal attacks, innuendo, slander will not be tolerated, and I’ll stop you if that occurs, we do have a respectful workplace, which includes council chambers. So please focus on the issue you’ve registered to delegate to, and if you did speak at committee, try to bring new information forward and not repeat what you said at committee.”
Then twenty-six minutes later the Mayor called for a second Point of Privilege.
“There were some things said that the audit committee is failing in their duties and that staff are failing. There is simply zero truth or evidence to that, and it’s not going to be tolerated if staff, if members of the community, have any concerns about the behavior of staff, there are appropriate independent avenues to follow. We don’t just simply allow allegations that are unfounded to be set in council chambers.”
What I believe we are seeing is a Mayor who has wandered again from serving the public that elected her and pressing her own interests and preferences.
Back in July 2022, people watching a Council meeting webcast heard the MAyor attempt to bully a member of Council into apologizing publicly for something she did not do. It was the most outrageous bit of grandstanding I have ever seen take place in the Council Chamber.
The Gazette recorded that event – remind yourself as to just how bad that performance was – Click HERE
For those who want to decide for themselves if either Eric Stern or Anne Marsden were out of line, their delegations are set out below.
The Eric Stern delegation:
Delegation Monday, November 25, 2025
Good morning and thank you for your time today.
The “Stop the 7.5% Burlington Property Tax Increase” petition has been presented to council. Twelve hundred and forty-seven people signed the petition asking for a zero percent tax increase. The multi-year forecast called for 8.9%, by asking for zero we were hoping to meet somewhere in the middle, at 4.4%, oh well.
Eric Stern: “What residents need is information, not marketing spin.”
I have to say I was surprised to see Burlington get out early again this year with the fictional “4.97%” overall tax increase.
It was interesting to watch Mr. Basit present a 4.97% on November 4th when the Halton Police budget had been made public on October 30th. Did Mr. Basit knowingly misrepresent the truth?
On November 18th I listened to Leah Bortolotti talk about 6.7 million people visiting the website annually. I did another double-take. For a dose of reality, only 200,000 people live in Burlington. Are we expected to believe that every person in Burlington visits the website an average of 33 times a year? How many of these visits are to book the kids into a swim class? More confusing is that the budget document states on page 48 “our website—with its 1.5 million annual users”.
You have approved $148,000 for an SEO Marketing position. What is the payback?
Will there be a staff reduction in Service Burlington because people can find information themselves? Will there be KPIs to monitor this or is this just another overhead cost?
What residents need is information, not marketing spin, Google can make that information searchable. Adding a web marketing SEO position will slow down the posting of information making that information less accessible to taxpayers. Do you remember the taxpayers? The people who pay for this.
The mayor talks about training bus drivers and then those drivers take jobs in other cities as a justification for higher pay. This statement is not supported by the 5.3% turnover number presented on November 4th. A rate of 5.3% is lower than any private sector group except for heads of organizations and executives at 3.8%. This indicates the city has the right mix of salary, benefits and working conditions. An average, across-the-board, salary increase of 4.58% when inflation is 2.5% sounds high.
Residents deserve factual information, clearly presented on the city’s website, by staff and the council, without the deft hand of a communications department spinning that information for the benefit of our elected representatives and city staff. I resent being taxed to pay for information to be marketed to me.
My theme today is clarity. Residents deserve factual information, clearly presented on the city’s website, by staff and the council, without the deft hand of a communications department spinning that information for the benefit of our elected representatives and city staff. I resent being taxed to pay for information to be marketed to me.
Looking ahead to 2026, what considerations are being made for a conservative Federal government and severe cuts to the housing accelerator fund? Much of the expected $21,000,000 may evaporate.
In terms of provincial funding, what happens if the city does not meet its housing targets and no provincial funds are available?
Burlington is building out community centres, transit, etc. for people who may or may not move into the community. What happens if the builders don’t build and the people don’t materialize? Is it time for more prudent cost controls?
The Burlington Residents’ Action Group submitted to this council, in writing, 14 pages of possible cost savings and economies of scale that the city could consider.
I’ve watched many council meetings, people who ask for money often receive money, and people who ask for cuts often receive nothing.
Why are lower tax increases important?
Lower increases leave people with more money for heat pumps and EVs.
Lower increases reduce renovictions by landlords who, through rent control, can only increase rents by 2.5%. This will reduce homelessness and help to “solve the crisis”.
Lower increases leave more money in people’s pockets, reducing food bank visits and crime, and lower the overall cost of policing.
I’ll conclude with, Your Worship, you win, for now, you hold all the cards, residents are not given enough time to review the budget, the budget does not include explanations for the programs, or what the return on the “investment” will be, and requests for details go unanswered.
Congratulations on passing another huge budget increase without the community understanding what the percentage is or what the dollars are for!
The Marsden delegation:
That document will be included when Ms Marsden has made it available.
To Blair and Bob and all the commenters on the Gazette, How do you know you live in a democracy if it is never tested, and should we expect that testing to be from non-evasive to destructive?
Which citizens are democracies for? All of them or only those considered to have acceptable views. I want to hear all the comments whether they offend or not, whether they are in line with my thinking or not, having owned a business I never wanted to be the last one to know that we were crap at what we had advertised to be good at.
David:
You know, it seems that my comments that are far too long and far too involved really miss the point for most people. My communications skills seem to have seriously diminished with age.
In short, I believe that the essence of democracy is engaged and active debate in which all views are respectfully heard and considered. I believe that the notion of “acceptable views” is anathema to a truly democratic society – and perhaps one of the greatest threats to Western society. If my comments suggest otherwise, then I have erred in my communications.
No, I understood your comment completely, it’s me that’s at fault, I was just trying to encourage you to continue to engage, I’m a social media combatant and am used to getting a point across and understanding an argument within 250 characters. The question for people like Bob is, how high will property taxes have to climb before you become concerned and what will you do about it?
The way i see things is that there is a very small group of citizens who are anti Burlington council and oppose every single thing this council does. The majority of the citizens who voted selected this council and the referendum on their term will be at the next election. What is the
Is Brag? ECOB 2.0? It is certainly a lot of the same players with just a different team name. Certain people who ran against the mayor and did not succeed. I voted for the current council and I’ll take my lumps for my decision. Come election time I would reflect my local ward 2 councillor whether it be for council or mayor and support her if the constant attacks are too much for her and she abandons political life. I know a certain few drive me up the wall just reading their constant complaints, I couldn’t fathom what our council goes through.
~ posters addendum ~ we will see if Pepper posts this as he has not posted my last two and has added comments to the ones i do post. Apperently saying likening a certain group od agitators to the name of a Quentin Tarantino movie is out of line but supporting calling the CAO a (…. language deleted…) is OK.
Actually Bob – none of the current members of BRAG ran against the Mayor and, strangely, at least three were part of MMW’s core campaign team in 2018. One was actually her Campaign Manager. So, your facts are abit out of line. Of the nine (9) core members of her inner circle in 2018, the attendees to her one and only unofficial Policy Strategy meeting in November 2018, only 3 remain as supporters (one of those is her husband and two are close friends) – 6 are active and often vocal opponents. Those are facts. And what changed in those 6 years? Well, I believe that she did. She most certainly did not deliver on most of her 2018 campaign promises. Again facts and I have the material to back up that statement. But that is not really the point that I want to make here Bob (what is your last name anyways?).
You will be most thankful, I’m sure, that this will be my last comment in the Gazette because, with people like you and with MMW/COB controlling the local media airwaves, commenting is absolutely pointless. I give you as evidence her “opinion piece” published and prominently displayed in today’s Hamilton Spectator:
https://www.thespec.com/opinion/contributors/democracy-is-not-dead-but-we-can-never-take-it-for-granted/article_b2b037db-787d-553e-8095-351921c85ef5.html
How anyone can believe this spin given the fact that she accepted and has used the totally undemocratic Strong Mayor powers is puzzling. It speaks to the type of blind, unthinking, cult-like commitment recently demonstrated south of the border. Facts don’t matter, logical conclusions and demonstrated outcomes don’t matter; what matters is the devotion of the ‘true believer’ and the inviolate persona of the one he or she follows.
So, I leave the current arena to you. But come election time, as you “… reflect [your] local ward 2 councillor”, I will also try to hold a mirror to what this Council and this Mayor has been, the damage that I believe they have caused and the door through which they all should exit.
I hope by this time that you will have a last name.
Bob. You must be able to afford the ever-increasing property taxes, to pay for a future of wonderfulness in our amazing city, and with the increasing number of wealthy newcomers fleeing from other jurisdictions you are not alone, but you have to accept some pushback from those who don’t share your vision.
I didn’t say I could or couldn’t afford a property tax increase but that is irrelevant to the point you’re trying to make. It isn’t my, nor your assumption that newcomers are wealthy who’s vision we are talking anbout. Under the current electoral system we have, the majority of votes governs for the term elected. Municipally that was MMW and the current council. Whether I supported the current council or not, they are the ones the majority of the citizens who voted chose to govern. Those who didn’t vote can only blame themselves if they disagree with the way our city is being governed. Those who voted against this council and moan about it constantly on here are sore losers. If you really want to BRAG, run for council and if you win brag all you wish, if you lose then you need to look in the mirror and realize you’re not talking for the majority.
Bob mate. I voted for and contributed to MMWs initial run for Mayor, I also voted for Lisa Kearns for her initial run, I thought they were both taxpayer-friendly which in my opinion they are not, should I just stand by till 2026 and keep my gob shut? I and others on here can probably afford any amount of tax increases, doesn’t mean we don’t care about anyone else including you.
The Mayor and Councillor Nisan talk about “respect”. In their rarefied and genteel environment respect is characterized by universal agreement, nuanced communications, tacit agreement and blind acquiescence. What they can’t comprehend is that respect cuts two ways.
“Respect” also means acknowledging and recognizing that not everyone will agree with you 100% of the time. It means actually listening to what is being said during delegations, and not paying “lip service”. It means hearing not just the words but the intent of what is being said by those delegating. It means Councillors who actually look at those delegating rather than texting on their phones. It means city officials who actually check information to ensure it is accurate before releasing it to the public. It is being transparent enough, and open enough, to acknowledge that there is a clear and distinct difference between a blended property tax rate and the rate of increase that the city is directly responsible for. It means responding in a timely manner to citizen questions, and not having to be constantly reminded repeatedly of the need to do so (remember Jim Barnett’s delegation? I do. Of course, I and others were actually listening).
Lost in this maelstrom is the fact that Eric presented 14 pages of costs savings and possible reductions that the city could initiate. Who at city hall is investigating that, and who is following up to see if any of these ideas are researched and investigated? Answer: probably no one. Silence. Crickets. Something else falling through the cracks.
If MMW and this Council want “respect” they might actually try practicing it first and setting an example before preaching about it so sanctimoniously and upbraiding those with the courage to disagree.
Nisan said nothing while sitting listening to the delegation. Mayor wasn’t there. Are we supposed to believe that it wasn’t the mayor who “suggested” Nisan later post on LinkedIn his supposed offence at the delegation after the fact and upon further reflection ?
This victimhood nonsense is out of control. Certain personality types must always blame others for everything, must always portray themselves as either heroes or victims. When one remembers the mayor’s treatment of Stolte and sees her interactions with those she either considers “on side” versus those “not”, the hypocrisy of her accusing everyone of disrespect and bla bla bla is mind boggling.
Bottom line is the delegation was factual and we all have every right to stand there in our small allotted time during the limited hours council decides they’ll pretend to listen to us and say what we think. Don’t like hearing tough words from the public? Then quit and do something else. And as always, critical comments are deleted from social media, she uses her own website to spread her one-sided self-serving messages and then blocks a citizen group for stating facts she doesn’t like aired. Control, deflect, blame, play the victim. Rinse and repeat. Go on media tours with the “poor me” mantra. I’m quite sure t-shirts are being made as we speak. We need council members who won’t enable this crap.
Let’s vote this nonsense out in 2026.
What I have observed since the Meed Ward administration took office is that communications are very cunningly and adroitly handled. Only news that is beneficial to Council gets reported and even the worst missteps are couched in campaign rhetoric. One cannot leave critical comments, even when respectfully made, on the Mayor’s social media and any attempt to repeatedly challenge the “official message” gets blocked eventually. As a result, there is no ‘positive tension’ in the system; Council is a group of willing, self-interested enablers who bolster a Ford-anointed Strong Mayor Queen. There is no official opposition or chamber of sober second thought, no recall protocol or even term limits to confine the tremendous damage that can be done.
The formal avenues of public complaint and redress are a total farce – the City Integrity Commissioner, the City Auditor and the City Ombudsman. Hired guns all who serve on contract ‘at the pleasure’ of Council. Repeatedly their findings have found the City harmless and often their reviews have seemed to defy common sense and perhaps common law. When it suits, the field of inquiry is as narrow as the fine line between due diligence and complicity. Everything becomes the exact letter of the law or knife edge interpretation while the spirit, the intent, is trampled and lost. Obversely, when it benefits their ‘employer’, colloquial norms and standards are adopted to excuse inappropriate behaviour – “the Mayor didn’t really mean to say that Council was only occasionally trustworthy, it was just a figure of speech”.
In this shielded environment, that has become progressively worse and more insular since 2018, the Mayor’s pronouncements of points of privilege are not only hollow and self-serving, they reflect her observed need to control and shape the narrative. A large part of that narrative is the absolute fiction that delegations to Council have evidenced threatening and disrespectful bahaviour requiring public censure, ejections from the chamber or public protections (verbal and otherwise) of Council and staff. This is a manufactured storyline that shields City Hall from effective, energetic debate and useful confrontation. It is also a practiced, co-ordinated and very deliberate ‘slight of hand’ misdirection that masks the lack of Council’s true engagement with citizens and advocacy groups like BRAG. Appropriate and useful criticism is deflected back on those who criticize; critics become perpetrators of disrespect and politicians become victims.
This tactic has served Meed Ward well in the past – as the lone, beleaguered populist voice saving the downtown from rapacious developer interest, as the Jean d’Arc-like saviour of the waterfront, as the vulnerable subject of harassing false-news stories during the 2018 campaign – to name a prominent few examples. It is her political personna and it has served her exceedingly well. But it poses a fundamental threat to the open, constructive and honest interaction between governors and governed that is necessary to a democratic form of government.
In my opinion and with years of observation behind it, there was nothing disrespectful or factually untrue in Eric Stern’s delegation. He simply challenged in a direct way the City Hall narrative. Similarly, there is nothing offensive in the Marsdens’ repeated attempts to uncover the lack of statutory observance or political gamesmanship that often attends the deliberations of Council. What is unusual, given the higher political aspirations of both Mayor and Councillor Nisan (amongst others), is their sensitivity to direct challenge of the policies and performance of both Council and staff. After over 30 years as witness to the truly magnificent theatrics of one political theatre, I openly wonder how either might react as participants in the proceedings of the Ontario Legislature or the House of Commons. Would they stand on points of privilege when called “Chicken Littles” (thank you Jane) or would they exit the chambers in a huff when told by the Opposition that their economic stewardship was destroying the province? There are no ‘delicate little flowers’ in those venues. I thank God and good fortune for that.
I’m just checking Amazon for pricing on pitchforks and flaming torches; I’m with Elon Musk’s ‘Insufferable’ remark about out-of-control weak and woke governance.
In our professional opinion the criteria used in the Audit before council was deficient in terms of meeting the audit’s purpose. Thank you for your immediate response to further efforts to demonize delegations, including Eric Stern et al who are using their locally recognized skill sets in the best interests of the residents and businesses of our city. We use a certified transcript to support what the Mayor and we put on the record as that is all we can really depend on as we are all human and can misread and misspeak.
Sadly 2024 community governance recognized champions John Boich and Walter Mulkewich must be turning in their graves.
I believe citizens groups or individuals have the right to stand up and question the process and budget information that at times is either wrong or positioned to maybe confusing the majority of citizens of the city. It appears that anyone who speaks at committee will now be chastised by our Mayor who was conveniently absent from the important original meeting. As citizens groups led by taxpayers grows in Burlington due to continued criticisms by the Mayor, the next election will be very interesting to say the least. Budgeting and planning are sensitive but large taxation increases need to be questioned and addressed by all.