After closely checking with another councillor and as someone who regularly attends municipal council meetings, I beleive council has made no such decision. While the Chief Admistrative Officer, Pierre Tessier, has spoken during council meetings about the need to make long term plans encompassing the whole of Clarence-Rockland, his interventions in that regard have largely been met by silence from members of council, and certainly no formal decision has been taken by it declaring 2012 as the Year of Planning (with or without the capital Y and capital P, as writen in the Vision supplement article).
At no time has council even formally recognized the need to make 2012 a year of planning. Why should it? By gosh, planning, short and long term, is and has always been an ongoing activity at city hall. The issue therefore is to decide what the planinng priorities ought to be; council did not make a decision in that regard either.
Assuming he has been accurately quoted, and I have no reason to doubt Chamberlain in that regard, in my view it projects to my eyes Félio attempting to spin and mislead for his own selfish political purpose; that is intelectually dishonest in my view. He attempts to credit the municipal council with an important policy decision and priority, which in fact it did not make.
The credit for taking the initiative to emphasize this year's efforts by city hall staff towards long term planning for the whole of Clarence-Rockland (instead of piecemealing it in a rather confusing and incoherent manner between Rockland and the villages, as is the current pratice), goes entirely to the Chief Administrative Officer, Pierre Tessier.
So far, council's mostly silent response to Tessier's public declarations on this isssue can at best be viewed as going along with him; it did not identify or formally adopt 2012 as the Year of Planning. It did not even make any public pronouncement or decision conveying its support and encouragement for this entirely Tessier initiative towards coherent long term planning for Clarence-Rockland as a whole in 2012.
I say to Félio, give credit where credit is due: in the case of this years' Clarence-Rockland planning priority (which I strongly support) this credit belongs to Tessier in my opinion. At best council can be credited so far with appearing to me to sort of going along with him. A formal decision by council adopting that planning priority and directing Tessier to get on with it with its full support is in order I beleive; that's the leadership I expect from city council. Contrary to what Félio seems to project in his quote, that has simply not hapened.
« Back to index