Grp of 5 can now revisit & overturn any previous decisionS

RLGG Response to Councillor Paula Banks:

On November 18, 2023, Councillor Paula Banks posted (shown on the right) on her political FB  page saying there was more to talk about with regard to adopting proxy voting.  She referenced an editorial piece in the Westport Review Mirror and I agree that there is more to talk about.  After having read the editorial it contains the facts of what is and/or would have been possible for a Rideau Lakes Township Councillor.  

It is a fact that there are no limits on attending council meetings virtually.  In the case of Rideau Lakes, I will add that most of the time those attending virtually cannot be seen but only heard.  It is a fact that Councillors Paula and Jeff Banks were vacationing overseas and attended meetings virtually for 7 weeks.  It is also a fact that the motion to adopt proxy voting was moved by Councillor Jeff Banks and seconded by Councillor Paula Banks on October 23rd and that motion was carried in a 5-4 vote.  It is also a fact that the resolution was given 1st and 2nd reading with the 3rd reading deferred until November 6th.  There are no factual errors in the editorial….it would have been possible then to never physically be present at Council meetings should proxy voting be adopted.

It is also true that residents’ expectations are that their elected representatives will be present at Council and in the community.  Mr. Fenik was not “off base” but he was “on point”.  Also Councillor Banks’ felt they should have been asked questions as to why they proposed proxy voting.  That matters not at all as municipal policy is not, and should not, be about any individual’s personal agenda .  In terms of a news story or editorial, being the first and only of 444 Ontario municipalities to enact proxy voting would definitely be worthy of a story from any journalist’s point of view.

From her perspective she does not think that current Council is dysfunctional.  Consider that each ward has 2 representatives.  The two Councillors from South Elmsley are at odds on several important critical issues.  Two Councillors from North Crosby-Newboro are also on opposite sides of the same issues as are the two South Crosby representatives.  Only Bastard and Burgess Representatives are on the same page.  Consider that one of the South Elmsley representatives supports all the issues brought forward by one the B&B representatives who are also their spouse.  This current Council is a near perfect example as to why there should only be one representative per ward (which would be a less expensive option) if indeed there should be a ward system at all.

Councillor Paula Banks is extremely misleading and disingenuous when she says the proxy was voted down unanimously at the November 6th meeting “because the entire council worked together and resolved their concerns using other options”.  Several letters, communications and conversations prior to the meeting on November 6th made it obvious that many residents were questioning allowing a Councillor to vote by proxy.  Both of the Banks began the discussion Nov 6th by saying they would not move forward with proxy voting if two sections of the procedural by-law were changed.  They were indeed prepared to trade the proxy for changes to the Motion to Reconsider in the procedural by-law.

Rules of Order are the foundation on which most municipal procedural by-laws are built and the by-laws acknowledge that fact.  The Motion to Reconsider requires that there be new information and a vote by

2/3’s of Council to reconsider any by-law already passed by Council.  The Banks would agree to abandon the option of proxy voting if the Motion to Reconsider was changed to a majority of Council and that no new information was required.  There was an attempt by one councilor to further delay 3rd reading and give councilors and staff time to consider the ramifications of the proposal but that was not given consideration. The main motion was to remove the clause that proxy voting would be adopted and that was unanimously carried. There were two more motions following that vote, the first to was to remove the “no new information” from the Motion to Reconsider and the second was to decrease the needed vote from 2/3’s to a simple majority.

Neither of those was unanimous and was carried in a 5-4 following the usual trend of this Council on important issues.  It would appear that Councillor Paula Banks perceived that as being collaborative, I fail to see that being the case when you watch the meeting.  The consequences of making that change to the Motion to Reconsider could be as bad or worse than allowing proxy voting…..time will tell what else will be “revisited” from the past or the impact on future already debated decisions by Council.

I wonder if a Motion to Reconsider was needed after the Township had passed a resolution on virtual attendance at meetings being limited to 5 meetings annually.  Councillor Jeff Banks speaks of that briefly when he offered that it had been changed after the Banks’ extended vacation in Italy because they weren’t allowed to exceed the limit then. Many of the changes could be perceived as part of an agenda to be self-serving.

In response to Councillor Banks’ contention that Rideau Lakes Grassroots Group (RLGG) constantly brings up the Portland Hub project.  In point of fact, since seeing the Treasurer’s Long Term Financial Stability Report and the budget deliberations, RLGG has not raised the subject as it would appear that neither the Hub Project or the Portland Hall/Library project should proceed.  The only individuals raising the subject of the Hub are Councillors Paula and Jeff Banks and their supporters.

With regard to mentions of Councillors Banks’ tribulations and the added expenses inflicted upon them to attend Council meetings from those exotic locales I think it is highly likely that there are very few people interested in anything but their positions and conduct as representatives of our Township.  On a related note I’m sure that Mr. Banks can speak for himself and it is unprofessional to for partners to plead each other’s cases continually, especially when they are tasked with serving different wards although that has not really been in evidence of but is evident in statements such as “keeping our word to Portland”. 

RLGG will continue to respond, comment and have opinions on the Rideau Lakes Township Council and its members.  Councillor Banks can continue to characterize RLGG’s positions and responses as “attacks” all the while inviting people to ask questions while blocking the spokespeople for the RLGG from doing so on her political page.  This is the job you aspired to….this is democracy.

Wendy Alford, RLGG Spokesperson