Wednesday 7 November 2012

And so this ongoing saga painfully continues...:(




----- Original Message -----
From: Jim
 
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 10:41 AM
Subject: My 3rd Reply to Mr. John Hannam: My deputations quantity of 2 that were scheduled for this evening.....there was a massive mix-up and assumptions made without my being consulted in any way....message.


Good morning John,

I hope this message finds you well.
Thank you once again for your message, if in fact you have my initial requests before you John I would hope that you will clearly see in the subject line of both these separate letters that I have made it quite clear that these are two (2) separate issues/deputation requests. No where have I indicated that I would be willing and or able to compress both issues into one (1) single 10 minute deputation, that would be impossible to present my concerns on these separate subjects in an effective manner, I would only be wasting the time of all concerned in doing so. Please re-evaluate your position for everyone's sake.
Your office plain and simple made an assumption and did not properly advise me of the so called terms and conditions of which I was going to be allowed/expected to present my deputations,others in my circle including my solicitor equally feel the very same way, can you not get past that fact.?
The issue of the city in not having any "Protocol" in addressing residents concerns through the use of e-mail messaging is all part and parcel of what I was going to be addressing in my 2nd deputation as well as the status of the "splashpad" at county park, the fact that mayor Hobbs did not answer the question posed...is a prime example of elected officials ignoring the concerned public, which  I believe they have no right to actually do. After all they do work for the taxpayers and residents do they not.??? Therefore they must answer to their employer's...that being individuals such as myself in this case.
It appears that the city of Thunder Bay needs a mandate to be put into place/effect in order for the mayor and city council members to be reminded that they have what I and many as well do, that being a duty to provide an answer to any question posed by what ever means their requests for information is used to contact their elected representative's (citing your examples of e-mail, letter, phone call..etc.).
I must say, in my opinion with all that I have personally seen that takes place within any given city council meeting, you did in fact have the ability through your authority as the city clerk of record to call for/or request a very brief moment in time to address this mix-up from the get go as it relates to my full expectations of making 2 not 1 deputation on November 5th, 2012. For some reason you did not act as you could have in this case, if you had all of this back and forth banter that is now taking place would have all been avoided.
I take issue with it as is my right to do so, in what I consider to be un-professional treatment in the way in which you are attempting to not even respond to all of the information that has been included in our previous correspondence, especially to "will you assure myself that at  my next scheduled appearance before city council to do this deputation in question will the mayor be in attendance as I want him to be".?
Please do not dance around this question/request any longer, who really has the time for this anyway....simply provide me with an answer, it really cannot be all that difficult to ensure that the mayor will be there....all one has to do is to check his day planner with his support staff, and then schedule my deputation on a date in which he is not going to be engaged with any other city business, travel or vacation time.
In closing, to keep up with  this type of verbal battle per say is fruitless, I therefore ask for you too address the mayors availability first and foremost, then if you kindly would please provide myself with absolute proof positive that is in fact outside of our City Council's authority to actually put in place a protocol that would mandate that the mayor and sitting council members to respond to correspondence that they would receive from the public that they are elected to represent, therefore allowing you too deny their request to discuss this issue in an open forum with the city's governing body. I do not believe they can pick and choose at randomas to whom they  will provide a reply to any question asked of them, when it all comes down to this issue which I have raised.?
"I believe this city of ours needs more accountability of our elected officials and those in the administartion of same" ( do you like the way I spelled that.???)
Once I have received the requested information from your office, I will then at that tome re-file with your office the required documentation once again for you to set another date in order for myself to finally present my deputation materials. You see I do know how to play nice, if everyone plays nice with me.
Sincerely,
Jim Gamble
Thunder Bay


***End of this my reply Message to what was sent my way this morning as noted below***


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 8:57 AM
Subject: Re: My 2nd Reply: My deputations quantity of 2 that were scheduled for this evening.....there was a massive mix-up and assumptions made without my being consulted in any way....message.


Mr. Gamble; I have reviewed again your correspondence requesting a
deputation(s), I have it here before me as I write, and in it you clearly
asked to speak to the repairs at Hillcrest Park and the Splash Pad at
County Fair Park area.  You were afforded time to make a deputation to both
matters on the 5th; it was your choice to address only Hillcrest Park.
Your correspondence makes a note of questioning whether or not there is a
protocol for members of Council to follow in responding to
calls/emails/letters from residents.  I can advise you that there is no
protocol, it is for each member of Council to manage such correspondence as
they choose.  Council has no authority to direct individual members in this
regard.

As I have previously advised you if you wish to request a future deputation
before Committee of the Whole there is a process to be followed.  I can
tell you now that if you request a deputation on a matter that is outside
of Council's authority I am required, under the procedural rules of City
Council, to deny such a request.

Unless and until you request a deputation in accordance with Council's
procedures I will not correspond further with you on this matter.

Cheers,

"I believe the world needs more Canada" (Bono)
                                                        
  John S. Hannam         (Embedded image moved to file: 
  City Clerk, CMO MPA    pic19954.jpg)wpe597.jpg (5107  
  City of Thunder Bay    bytes)                         
  ph.807-625-2238                                       
  fx. 807-623-5468                                      
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)