I said it before and I’ll say it again.
Attending a local council meeting can be a marathon of eye-glazing procedural this-and-that, and it can be a real challenge to whatever you drink for coffee, as no level of caffeine can fully protect you from the head-nodding minutiae these affairs can showcase. That said, there is absolutely no substitute for attending in person.
And then being present with your attention.
Tuesday’s meeting, mostly made up of Committee of the Whole items, closed in on the three-hour mark, and that’s not counting however long the closed-door session that followed might have taken. People like me aren’t invited to those in-camera sessions, and part of me is a little grateful for that, as I get to go do other things, like go home, pat the dog if I had one, maybe catch an episode of the latest binge-watch. For the mayor, the four attending councillors, and a couple of administrative staff people (Acting CAO and Clerk) the meeting continued beyond those initial three hours, which would be onerous for any of the participants in its own right, but particularly so for any who had full-time responsibilities to attend to in the hours leading up to the meeting’s 5:30 PM start. So, for any criticism I may direct towards anyone for any reason, I have to respectfully accord respect just for the simple reason that they need to show up for extended periods of time, but also show up prepared by going through the agenda documentation, bolstered by often redundant appendices, just to be ready for whatever the meeting may reveal. And meetings are often the same as war plans, where the whole thing goes out the window after the first shot is fired.
For me, it started somewhat ominously when I was met by a locked door to Town Hall maybe five minutes before the scheduled start. An admin staffer I’d not seen before saw me out there but ignored me — twice — which kind of made me feel a little singled-out, maybe a little hurt, perhaps even a bit ego-bruised. But she apparently let in a town councillor through the back door at the same time as I was at the front, so there appears to be a pecking order. And I can’t complain. It is, after all, more important to get that councillor in chambers so that we could achieve a meeting quorum, something that’s almost laughable, since there are only seven council votes, reduced to five by absences, further reduced to three when two councillors declared conflicts of interest on a specific item. Honestly, according to the rules, all you need for a quorum is a number “not less than two,” which essentially is a really cool way lawyers or staffers have of saying one, but I digress. So in the case of last night’s meeting, on one item, three people voted on something as important as naming rights. That three people alone would be voting on anything in a town like Renfrew is inconceivable, but it didn’t appear to trouble the procedural purists sitting at the head table.
Thank you, by the way, to Director Eric Withers for letting me in. His colleagues will no doubt be pissed at him, but he looks like a solid guy.
Sitting through meetings like this can be taxing, but honestly, it’s in the weeds where you find the biggest nuggets of gold, not that weeds and gold go well together, but it was fun to say. So if you’re going to go, pay attention. If not, just stay at home and read my blog for a week or so following, that is if you want the highlight packages as put together by some third party like me. Not that my blog is superficial, mind you, but at least I try to remove the clutter, cut the weeds, and reveal the gold, if I may reference that extremely imperfect metaphor again.
Especially if you’re one of the actors. Throughout this meeting, administration employees were busily hammering away at stuff on their computers or checking and interacting with their phones. The young today call it multi-tasking, like it’s some sort of skill. What it really means is that you’re attempting to attend to several different things at once, none of them particularly well.
So when a councillor has to repeat a question to a Clerk because the Clerk was on her phone, possibly in communication with other attending staff, then we’ve got a pretty good example of how important it is to be present, not just in body, but in mind. To be fair, the Clerk was on the hot seat seat both procedure-wise and policy-wise the entire evening, so I could understand how easy it would be to be overwhelmed. All the more reason to bear down and leave the phone alone, especially when it seems every question involves you in some capacity. For a self-described eight-year veteran, such a rookie mistake doesn’t look the best. And if that phone had a message on it from somebody else in the room, then whoever sent it did the clerk no favours. And I have a pretty fair theory as to who sent it, because I was there, and I was watching for that sort of thing, this not being my first meeting after falling off the turnip truck.
Full disclosure. I, too, had my phone out, also having my laptop open to the agenda items being discussed, documents I’d been reading, organizing, and prepping on since their release last Friday. But I was ready, I was present, and I was focussed. What I wasn’t was an active participant, not responsible for giving or entertaining or discussing agenda items. I’m not a councillor. And I’m not town administrative staff. So I guess the bar for my phone is a little lower than it was for just about everyone else in the room. After all, nobody was there to hear anything I might have to say.
Going to council is like going to a hockey game, you never see the same thing twice. To begin, we had different players. Councillor Clint McWhirter was back from injury reserve, but Peter Emon remained absent, giving reasons of a medical issue which I truly hope resolves quickly and successfully. Having the reeve around would be a good thing, because that position is a voting position, and this is the second “game” he’s missed in a row, so the fans are starting to ask questions. Councillor Cybulski was also not in the line-up, but I don’t recall the reason for that, if one was offered. So, again, two votes not present on a seven-person council. Not exactly ideal.
Arrayed around the periphery were some players new to me. Gone were Charlene Jackson (Treasurer) and Andrea Bishop, Acting-Director of Quite-A-Bit, to be replaced by Eric Withers (my hero from before), Amanda Springer (my non-hero from before and Manager of Environmental Services), and Janyne Fraser (Community Outreach and Program Supervisor) who chews her gum with a prolific gusto not seen since Whitey Herzog and his chewing tobacco back in the 70’s. Fire Chief Michael Guest, and Shawn Eckford, the Acting-Director of Quite-A-Bit-In-His-Own-Right, filled out the lineup card. Mr. Eckford was the sole senior staff member present that was at the October 22, 2024 meeting. And the poor fellow sat patiently throughout the entire affair not called upon to say a single word on anything, but stayed attentive nonetheless. He, Director Withers, and Chief Guest served as models of being “present” fully at a meeting. If they were doing other things at the same time, they were much better at giving off the appearance that they were entirely there, which is a bit of a skill in it’s own right. Looking up every once and awhile isn’t much of a skill, but at least it’s a respectful step in the right direction.
There were no former mayor/councillors busily scribbling away on the periphery, being good students for taking the note off the board, but by doing so, failing to witness and appreciate the human dynamic right in front of them, and therefore missing a good chunk of the learning opportunity. That’s what the YouTube channel is for. To support the first-person witnessing of the event.
Evidently that bastion of local journalism myFM was there, either in person or via livestream, because they had an article on the secondary plan for Renfrew East on their website this morning, an article that extended into the rarified air of multiple paragraphs, which for them, is a tremendous move in the direction of grown-up journalism. I was planning a story on that same topic sometime in the next week, and mine will be different in that their coverage takes the form of a window display while mine will be more of a what’s actually inside the store and in the back room. I suppose the community needs both, so I can leave the superficial to them and concentrate on the meat and potatoes (the gold in the grass if you will) in mine. They can do the fluff, and I can do the stuff.
If that sounded in any way critical, please understand that it was meant to sound that way.
As a “fan” at my second game, I saw things that surprised me. Some disappointing, some encouraging. I saw some players for the second time, and first impressions, while important to a degree, are definitely not the whole story on a player. So impressions made the last time out were more fully informed by impressions made this time. One should never close the book on anyone else, one way or another. Because I like to be fully informed, not conveniently informed.
It’s sort of like the Brad Marchand thing. If you cheer for any team other than the Bruins, you probably dislike the guy. But if you live in Boston, he’s your favourite player. I don’t have a “dislike” for anyone in this room, but I was seriously impressed with one fellow who I’ve been mildly criticizing ever since I got into this game of self-punishment. He showed up with resolve and he showed up prepared. And they even let him in the building while I languished outside. He asked serious, uncomfortable questions. He was tactically shrewd so as to ensure his concerns were discussed, and when that failed, he requested recorded votes to document his position of opposition to the general flow of the group. I’ve disagreed with this gentleman on issues and/or approaches before and may well again. But he definitely showed up to play “the full 60 minutes,” and often found himself isolated on votes because of it.
In fact, on one issue, he put forward a motion, which was seconded by the mayor, only to have the mayor vote against the motion, which failed 4-1. Perhaps the mayor was just being generous to second the motion so that it would ensure a recorded vote, and therefore an official “hearing.” But to then go the other way seconds later was nothing short of a procedural punch in the gut. So, as I said, perhaps it was for a good intention, but it sure didn’t come off that way, at least to some of the handful of people who were paying attention.
Finally, to the public gallery, this time consisting of three souls, reduced to a single soul when two of them headed out early to get ahead of traffic. I fully respect anyone who wishes to attend a council meeting, and doubly understand if within the agenda is an item directly related to yourself. However, like anyone else, your role is simple: to see and hear, to be seen and not heard. Remember, unless you’re making a presentation before council, you’re just a witness to democracy in action. But if you don’t like what you’re hearing, decorum demands that you take it in, assess and evaluate, then arrive at next steps to be carried out in the proper manner. What you can’t do is mutter to yourselves to the point where everyone present becomes somewhat distracted by your barely concealed anger. Sitting there glaring at staff and councillors, only to leave when your “item” has come and gone, is to a degree, disrespectful in its own right. If you want to go to the meeting, go to the meeting. Then maybe have what it takes to stay there, despite the fact that the discussion centred on you, for better or for worse, has moved on. It’s like going to church, getting there late, then peeling out when it suits you before the service ends. It’s just not a good look, even when others in the room are sympathetic to your issue, and maybe even are experiencing that same issue themselves.
People notice stuff like that, or at least I do, and some of us have the willingness and wherewithal to articulate what we notice.
I’m not perfect, but I don’t have to be. After all, I’m not the show.
NEWSMAGRENFREW 