Letter to the Editor
Dear Sir,
This has been a really bad winter weather-wise and it is obvious that the usually perceptive brains in MOM (Municipality of Meaford) are not fully awake. The KISS (keep it simple stupid) principle appears to be no longer used especially when discussing our local library and high school.
Firstly, the library and the high school are and should be two distinct and separate discussions. We have an ancient crumbling non-functional library building providing a service required by law, to an average of 330 visitors of all ages a day. Meaford library provides far more activities than mere book lending but because of its physical limitations, it cannot truly become a 21st century place of learning for residents of all ages. So, the question should be, do we really want a modern library in line with the provincial government’s just-announced ‘hub’ concept or not?
After full open debates with arguments by both sides, a decision can be made but whatever choice is made, pro or con for the library, it must be a stand alone decision based on what is best for MOM’s residents and not because it may or may not keep the high school open.
The high school is possibly in danger of closing due to falling enrolment and if it does, over 300 high school students will be educated in Collingwood or Owen Sound. The decision to close or remain open will be made soon but it will not be made by MOM, it will be made outside our municipality by a school board concerned primarily with cost and the number of students attending the school. The concept of dual-purpose occupants sharing the present school building for financial reasons is perfectly valid and has been used successfully in other jurisdictions. However, whether a dual-occupancy building would save our high school from closing is debatable, and given the present state of uncertainty re the closing, at this time it would be irresponsible to make a commitment of any kind.
These are two important and distinct questions to be asked, which require careful and considered thought before reaching a final answer. Prior to the election, there was a strong movement to utilize the vast amount of residential knowledge and brainpower available in our municipality by forming advisory groups to assist council in decision-making.
Our new mayor must be credited with instigating and establishing some of these advisory boards, and the council decision made on March 2 to accept the motion from Councillor Calvert re due diligence and risk analysis, based upon an idea presented by MACA, is admirable.
These volunteer advisory groups consist of involved, intelligent, educated, informed taxpayers concerned with the total well-being of MOM, who take the time and make the effort to investigate all aspects of a problem. Citizen advisory boards, after they have performed the required amount of risk analysis and due diligence, are there to advise and assist council. They are not there to rubber stamp staff proposals and ideas but rather to independently investigate and ensure that proposals from any source are fully evaluated. This largely new council needs to start listening to the people who elected them, because the voters, some in the form of advisory boards, are intelligent and informed with valuable insight and knowledge to share.
Some senior staff tried to convince us all that the Owen Sound Police proposal offered exactly the same services for a cheaper price. This was done before all the facts were known and it was only through taxpayer concern that a decision was made to wait until a true comparison could be made. Staff even issued a press release which was not a press release in order to hide this mistake which eventually cost the taxpayer a further $25,000 in consultant’s fees.
There are far too many other examples where staff have made decisions without applying due diligence or consulting with residents. Some obvious examples were maps of MOM which in reality were only maps of the town and ‘Meaford’ signs which appear all over the municipality and offend many rural residents. The much applauded Citizens’ Charter stressing openness and co-operation has long been forgotten and was the $40,000 spent on a consultant for Recreation and Culture really necessary?
Adding further insult to injury was the way in which the newly appointed Economic Development Advisory group, which consists of talented successful business entrepreneurs, was told by staff what they were going to do, how they were going to do it, and that it was already done. No consultation needed, just a rubber stamp and another $10,000 of taxpayers’ money gone. Even worse than this has to be the insult to the Library board and staff who have worked hard and long to produce the best library option possible. To be informed via a newspaper reporter that a deal was being formulated by staff without any prior consultation with the board shows a standard of professional conduct which is simply not acceptable and should not be tolerated.
If our staff wish to be treated with dignity and respect, they should extend the same dignity and respect to all taxpayers, which includes volunteer advisory boards. This issue is not about the closing of a school or establishing a new library, it is about who controls our Municipality – councillors elected by the taxpayers or senior staff members?
Now is the time for an independent consultant to be hired to examine MOM’s staffing needs, and evaluate proficiency and report on what services MOM should provide. The advantage of employing a part-time investigative aide to the mayor to ensure that due diligence and risk analysis is performed adequately should also seriously be considered.
David Long, Meaford
