EDITORIAL
(Correction and clarification.
In my earlier log I described Roberta Clarke and Murray Doehler as Chairperson Roland Deveau's assistants. I thought I had heard him mention their names and then the word assistants.
Deveau clarified this for me yesterday morning. Clarke and Doehler are his colleagues - his equals. The assistants he was referring to are the people who are recording the minutes and assisting generally.
The people at the desk to the right of the spectators make up the Board Council. They include, for example, one who is expert in finance and is qualified to ask questions revering to details accounting matters.
Is this process democratic? Deveau told me the the UARB's review is a policy decision of the province. Its purpose is to provide a rational objective decision.
I believe that the people want a rational objective decision. This would not be possible by a vote or a referendum. As one of the speakers stated yesterday, the town once known for its hospitality is now know for its hostility.)
Tuesday was a full day and evening for the UARB and Hantsport residents. I had to leave during a recess while Grant Thornton was being questioned.
I returned for the evening session with probably 75+ people to hear 12 speakers. They were Joe Foy, Louise Brewster, Richard Gallant, Bill Preston, Jeff Starratt, MLA John Lohr, Rich Fuchs, Nick Zamora, Phil Zamora, Paul Syme, and Jamie Simpson. Joe McGinn was scheduled to speak but was unable to attear. The order they spoke was determined by the dates on which submissions were received and documents filed. Deveau asked representatives of the panels for questions directed to the individual speakers. After each spoke, Deveau thanked him or her for attending. Certainly we all are grateful for their making submissions and being available for questions.
The sessions continue today.
Although I don't live in Hantsport, I am deeply concerned about its future. I support limited village status in Kings County. But time is needed to get all the ducks in a row so that we don't count our chickens before they hatch so the barn doesn't burn while we watch. Just sayin'. Seriously, this is serious business we do need to lighten up a bit occasionally.
With all due respect I appreciate that some folks, including the "Tink Hantsport" activists, seem to support a limited village status for Hantsport within Kings County but I, for one, certainly do not.
ReplyDeleteLiving as I do in Hants Border I am happy that don't live within the current "Haven of Hostility" and can see no possible advantages to being annexed by Hantsport.
Why should anyone currently living in Hants Border,or even Bishopville, want to have anything to do with the currently dysfunctional Town Council where only the minority seem to know what they are doing?
I pay my property taxes to Kings County & am happy that they use that money wisely so why would I want pay more?
I have warned our Counciller Mike Ennis that I am asking the Hants Border militia to be on standby to repel any possible misguided pirates coming our way.