By Pam Wright
Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
South Kent Coun. Trevor Thompson was a busy man at the June 8 council meeting.
That’s because the veteran councillor pulled every single item on the agenda for discussion – meaning nothing was passed in bulk in what’s called the consent agenda.
Thompson, who is not seeking re-election this fall, said he did it to prove a point in response to a motion put forward by Coun. Ryan Doyle, who also represents South Kent.
Simply put, Doyle’s motion sought to document the number of times councillors and the mayor pulled an item from the consent agenda for discussion; how many motions they made and how many were successful, as well as how many motions made during budget and how many of those were successful.
It also called for administration to prepare a detailed public report for council documenting the details in a report at the end of every council term, including one for the Sept. 26 meeting.
But the motion, which failed 3 to 14, elicited strong words around the horseshoe, including the initial statement from Doyle.
“I would like to thank councillor Thompson for coming out for the first time in two years,” Doyle said after reading the motion. “It’s nice to have ya.”
Immediately West Kent Coun. Melissa Harrigan raised a point of privilege, stating “that’s a very disrespectful comment.”
“I would very much agree,” Mayor Darrin Canniff added.
“I’ll withdraw it,” Doyle noted. But he added that Thompson was “very obviously making a mockery of my motion tonight. So, it’s OK for him to do something like that, but it’s not OK for me to make that comment.”
Doyle said he brought the motion forward because many constituents don’t watch council meetings and a report on engagement would be a tool for them to gauge how councillors are doing. He said he was tired of watching the same “six or seven councillors” pull items for discussion.
However, Doyle, who isn’t sure he’ll run again, said he recognized that making motions and pulling items for discussion aren’t the only way a councillor’s performance can be measured.
In speaking to the issue, Thompson stressed that governing to a metric “is no way to govern.
“I can’t understand how someone could possibly say it’s administration’s, or it’s council’s job to grade other councillors. That is concerning to me. The number of motions, successful or otherwise, does not impact your ability or your quality of governance.
“And ultimately, if I am doing a bad job, or another councillor is, that is up for the constituents to decide,” Thompson added, stating he’s watched councillors make motions just to play to the television cameras.
“We are not performing here; we are governing.”
He also referenced “beloved” former Dresden councillor Joe Faas, who said he enjoyed being a councillor but hated attending the meetings and didn’t speak up all that much.
“What he said carried weight,” Thompson said.
In her comments, Chatham Coun. Amy Finn got right to the point.
“When this came forward, it was like a slap in the face, Ryan,” Finn said, adding she’s out in the public, involved with the public and part of the discussion around the council table.
“According to your motion, none of that shows,” Finn stated. “I’m not an accountant, so budget is difficult for me and I’m always the first to admit it. Again, it doesn’t make me a bad councillor.”
Councillors Lauren Anderson, Carmen McGregor and Brock McGregor also spoke against the motion, each stressing councillors serve their community in many different ways.
“I think everyone on this council works very hard in all directions in this community,” Carmen McGregor said, adding the motion feels like “pointing fingers at each other at election time. I know they call it ‘the silly season’ and that’s exactly what this feels like to me.”
Brock McGregor also referenced Faas, quoting the retired councillor as saying he “loved everything about being a councillor aside from Monday nights.”
Doyle, Michael Bondy and Rhonda Jubenville were the councillors voting in favour of the motion.
