Jump to content






Photo

No pancake breakfast on Canada Day



I just learned that the traditional pancake breakfast will not be taking place downtown on Canada Day this year. Council wasn't informed of this change, nor was council even asked whether or not we wanted to participate. It was just cancelled.

I only found out because an email meant for Helena Guergis' office was misrouted to my inbox. Our MP had already sent out an information flyer about Canada Day events mentioning the pancake breakfast. She's wrong, but I can understand the confusion. For the past decade or two, it has been held here. And hundreds of residents and visitors have enjoyed a low-cost breakfast courtesy of the town. Helena usually joined us at the grill for an hour or two.

Now it isn't happening and I have no idea why or who made that decision. Or why council wasn't informed.

Last term, almost all of council showed up every Canada Day to flip pancakes, or grill sausages - even the current mayor participated, cheerily flipping pancakes beside me. Usually the police and fire chiefs joined us. It was a way for council to interact with the public, to show that we could rise to the occasion and act as a team to serve the public good (or at least the well done...). It was a way for us to socialize outside the political arena and have a bit of fun together.*

This term, that tradition sputtered and died. I turned up early the first two Canada Day events this term with some of my fellow councillors with apron in hand, eager to pitch in, only to find the breakfast had been turned over to another group, without anyone informing council of the change (let alone asking us if we wanted that). We had no role to perform, so we shuffled around aimlessly, and spoke to people in the crowd lining up for breakfast, before going home (last year, as I recall, I couldn't attend the event, so can't comment on how it turned out).

This year, it isn't being handed over: it's been cancelled entirely. I haven't the foggiest idea why.

Sadly, the pancake breakfast seems to mirror council's performance this term.

~~~~~
* Last term, after our Monday council meetings, Mayor Geddes and most of council - the current mayor being the exception - would meet at Huron House/JD's Lounge for a drink and a chance to unwind. Usually the CAO, clerk and several department heads would join us. We would talk about sports, weather, movies, family, books, world events - everything except local politics. It was a way for us to get to know one another, to learn about the people we worked beside, to help forge ties that continued in our council debates. It helped us learn to respect one another as people, not just seem others as political opponents. It made us a less contentious, more affable group. The current mayor refused to continue that practice (it is difficult to socialize after a five-six hour meeting, of course). At the beginning of this term I met with him and asked if he would continue the social time after council meetings. He said he saw no reason to do so. As a result, councillors never get together in any social event this term, and without any socializing, council this term has been cantankerous, confrontational and divided. I guess that pretty much defines the difference in leadership between the former and current mayors.
I had originally noted this was a 'free' event. It wasn't. It was a minimal cost - $2? Thanks to Scoop for pointing that out.




probably couldn't decide where to set up the tables....next to the building or curbside.
According to an email I got back, this decision was the result of a "community" survey (I never got one, former Mayor Geddes didn't get one, and no one I have yet spoken to remembers receiving one, and certainly didn't respond). I'm still unsure how it was distributed.

In fact, only 26 responses were received. Compared to, say, 300 or 400 people who enjoyed the pancake breakfast every year.

Yet on the basis of those 26 respondents, the pancake breakfast was cancelled. Three of those respondents (11.5%) said they wouldn't be attending the event in 2010, so the decision was really based on the remaining 23 who said they would attend (out of a population of 17,592 or thereabouts, plus visitors).

Only 8 respondents wanted the citizenship reaffirmation ceremony (less than a third), yet it will continue. Only 6 (less than a quarter) wanted it downtown, yet it will be hosted there. So the logic for cancelling the breakfast escapes me.

A reasonably good mail campaign gets a 4% response rate. I don't know if this was mailed to residents, but if one was sent to every household, that represents roughly a 0.2% response rate. Or twenty times smaller than the average mail campaign response rate. I would not want to base any decision that affected an entire community on such a low sample.

Council was informed about the survey by email, on May 28, but there is nothing in the notice that mentions the breakfast was cancelled - it merely indicates the events this small sample wanted to see, or preferred venues.

This would have been better presented to council directly during a meeting, with the changes noted for the public record (and the TV audience), so council would not only be informed, but could also ask questions and make a decision whether we wanted to continue the breakfast in the face of 23 people who didn't care about it.
I participated in that survey. It was on-line;BIA site I think. I wanted the pancake breakfast.
Hmmm, $2? Maybe 20 years ago; I think in recent years it's been about $4 or $5 (a little cheaper for the kids).

ianadmin, on 24 June 2010 - 07:42 AM, said:

According to an email I got back, this decision was the result of a "community" survey (I never got one, former Mayor Geddes didn't get one, and no one I have yet spoken to remembers receiving one, and certainly didn't respond). I'm still unsure how it was distributed.In fact, only 26 responses were received. Compared to, say, 300 or 400 people who enjoyed the pancake breakfast every year.Yet on the basis of those 26 respondents, the pancake breakfast was cancelled. Three of those respondents (11.5%) said they wouldn't be attending the event in 2010, so the decision was really based on the remaining 23 who said they would attend (out of a population of 17,592 or thereabouts, plus visitors). Only 8 respondents wanted the citizenship reaffirmation ceremony (less than a third), yet it will continue. Only 6 (less than a quarter) wanted it downtown, yet it will be hosted there. So the logic for cancelling the breakfast escapes me.A reasonably good mail campaign gets a 4% response rate. I don't know if this was mailed to residents, but if one was sent to every household, that represents roughly a 0.2% response rate. Or twenty times smaller than the average mail campaign response rate. I would not want to base any decision that affected an entire community on such a low sample.Council was informed about the survey by email, on May 28, but there is nothing in the notice that mentions the breakfast was cancelled - it merely indicates the events this small sample wanted to see, or preferred venues. This would have been better presented to council directly during a meeting, with the changes noted for the public record (and the TV audience), so council would not only be informed, but could also ask questions and make a decision whether we wanted to continue the breakfast in the face of 23 people who didn't care about it.

Facebook

Latest Entries

Latest Comments

Daily chess puzzle

Search My Blog

Word of the day

June 2013

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
161718 19 202122
23242526272829
30      

Latest Visitors