The Blue Agave Forum: The Blue Agave Forum -> The Mumpsimus Blog

Six thirty. That's when last night's council meeting ended. Shortest meeting I can recall this term - 90 minutes. Almost a breeze.

Ninety per cent of the meeting was simply a continuation of Thursday's six-hour planning/zoning bylaw marathon. That means the main topic under discussion - letters of consideration, comment and concern about provisions in the new zoning bylaw - took roughly seven hours in total to hear and discuss. There was really only that one topic of discussion on the agenda, last night - no public planning meeting, no delegations, no correspondence, no motions.

Each letter was presented individually in a bound document, complete with the planning department's comments and suggested resolution. Thursday we barely got through half the letters in the inch-thick document. Last night we did the remaining half in an hour.

Maybe we weren't collectively in as cantankerous - or as voluble - a mood as we seem to have been, Thursday. Whatever the reason, last night we raced through the letters and were out of the chamber in record time. Maybe the tough issues were at the front of the binder. Very little controversy over the content last night (Thursday was far more interesting from that perspective).

Perhaps the only serious...

Quietly nestled inside last week's consent agenda was a letter that may prove a ticking time-bomb for Collingwood's election process. The letter, from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, informed - warned? - council about upcoming changes to Ontario's Municipal Elections Act.

Changes that could seriously affect the way we hold elections. One of the things that may be on the chopping block is our mail-in ballot. Is it our electoral ball-and-chain? I'll address that further below.

The letter listed several proposed amendments to the Act, suggesting they would "strengthen the integrity of local elections." They'll certain upset the apple cart, since they will come into effect in early 2010, before the next municipal election. These changes included:

Quote

I was surprised there was any debate let alone opposition, over the request to provide free parking downtown during the reconstruction of the main street, last Monday. After all, as nice as the revitalization will be when it's finished, the construction is having a massive impact on downtown businesses. No one can drive through the centre block, nor park on it. For the first two weeks, the fencing separated east and west sides of the street, which further dampened sales.

Council should be doing everything it can to relieve the pain we caused. The vote, while not close, was 7-2, with Deputy Mayor Cooper and Councillor McNabb voting against.

People have been staying away from the downtown, unsure if businesses are open or where to park. I've personally spoken to at least a dozen customers in my store who admitted that, since construction began, they'd stopped going downtown. So where are they shopping? Elsewhere - the malls, big box stores, or even going to Wasaga Beach and Barrie. The downtown is hurting.

And of course there's the recession. Despite governmental claims that it's over, it can still be felt here. I haven't found a single Collingwood business person who says sales have recovered to previous years' levels.

There is a...

I probably wasted my money, but I just ordered a copy of Fritz 12, the latest version of the best chess-playing software available for a personal computer.

Frankly given my lack of practice these days, I could probably be beaten by my dog or by a talking smoke alarm. Still, I persist in wanting to play.

Certainly all of the existing chess programs I already have - including Fritz 10, Chessmaster 10 and several free chess programs - can beat me at a rather embarrassing level. So F12 is easily overkill if I'm looking for an e-opponent.

But I live in hope. I was once a much stronger player and I sometimes fool myself into thinking that, with a little practice against my digital opponent, I could revive those skills. Probably true if I was in my mid-20s. In my late 50s, my brain is probably so ossified that any hope of significant improvement is self-delusion. In the 70s and 80s, I played chess daily, often staying up all night playing chess with friends. Nowadays I'm happy when I can play monthly. And more often as not, that's against the computer, which beats me without gusto or verve, merely mechanical skill.

I don't have a lot of opportunity to play chess these days, outside the computer. My best opponent is an old friend who lives...

My, oh, my. Was I surprised when I read Councillor McNabb's vituperative column in today's Enterprise-Bulletin.

Titled, "Now is the time for mayor to roll up his sleeves," McNabb takes a double shot, one at his fellow councillors, the other at the mayor. The latter certainly takes the brunt of it.

What surprised me was not the criticism of the mayor, but criticism from someone who for the past three years has been described as "the mayor's man" - not merely an ardent supporter, but an apologist for and defender of the mayor at almost every turn.

These columns are a new feature cooked up by editor Ian Adams (aka Scoop) to give every member of council an opportunity to publicly and individually address issues, or simply outline his or her ideas and goals. I'm sure that annoys the mayor, because he sees himself as the sole voice of council and the town and has been very critical to date of my blog.

So far, council has responded with fairly mild content: none of the articles have been even vaguely controversial until now (well, I haven't had my turn yet, but I have this blog to vent my spleen, so I don't need the paper to do so). This changes the texture of the spot. It's now not merely a space for civilized...

It will be interesting to see how some members of Collingwood Council handle the inevitable requests for funding that arrive outside the town's budget process, next year. In the past, most councillors have stuck to the line that, if a request is made outside the budget process, no matter how worthy of consideration, it will be refused.*

Rules! they say; we have to stick to The Rules. We have to follow The Process!

But apparently it's okay with them that Simcoe County Council doesn't. Nor did it seem to concern several of my colleagues that $250,000 of your taxes for PR cosmetics was merely handed out, not tendered. The county ALREADY spends $1.1 million annually on a communications department, but the county's politicians deemed it necessary to go to an outside firm at added cost to the taxpayer for their election-year makeover.

Monday night we received a letter from Tiny Township council objecting to this expenditure. I asked to have the letter pulled and made a recommendation to endorse that resolution.

I wrote about the county's decision in a previous entry. Last month, when I posted that piece, I commented that, "...if we're going to spend taxpayers' money polishing someone's image after a...

It seemed such a simple thing. Cranberry Resort wanted to extend its liquor licence so guests at the Bear Estate could go outside with a drink. Not to roam everywhere; the space was limited to a small area adjacent to the back of the building. Seems logical enough: on a nice summer afternoon, why would people at, say, a wedding, want to be indoors when beautiful Collingwood beckons just outside?

It wasn't an expansion of the activity space - the site plan agreement demands all events have to take place indoors, with the doors shut. That constraint was written in response to neighbour complaints about noise. This would just be a place for guests to get some fresh air, maybe smoke if they wanted, mingle, and converse. The doors would still be closed.

It wasn't a space to serve alcohol, either. Just a place outdoors for guests to get away from the crowd and enjoy a drink in the open air. Maybe watch the sunset, or gaze across the bay to the elevators. The motion called for it to be available only from noon* until 8 p.m., too, so it wouldn't mean a large group of people outdoors, late at night.

And it wouldn't mean an increase in the number of guests, either. This is an ancillary use to the existing conditions, not an added use, so the fire...

2009 marks a landmark year for the legacy of Charles Darwin, with dual celebrations.

First it is the 200th year since his birth - February 12, 1809. Second, it is the 150th year since he first published his seminal work, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life," first released on Nov. 24, 1859*.

It is probably the most important, and most controversial, yet least-read book of the past 150 years.** I think more has been said about it and regarding it by people who have never actually read it than any other book in history.

We know that work more commonly as "The Origin of Species," and regardless of whether you have read it, it is one of the most important and influential works of science, putting Darwin on par with Newton and Einstein, at least in the field of biology. Origins marks a significant turning point in Western culture.

I was thinking about Darwin this week for many reasons. First was an interview I heard on the CBC with evolutionary biologist, Richard Dawkins, discussing his new book - The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. The description of Dawkins' newest book includes this:

Quote

Drive-through* businesses have been around in North America since the 1930s. According to Wikipedia, the concept began with a single bank in 1928, and extended to restaurants only in 1948.

They joined drive-in operations - restaurants and movies - as part of the popular car culture of the 1950s and the 1960s. One might even say it has been a car-worship culture, as many trends in planning and development catered to the car, rather than to people.

Although McDonald's didn't get their first drive-through until 1975, today, almost every fast food restaurant and chain coffee shop has one. For some of these businesses, the drive-through trade represents as much as 60% of their business. They are often touted as convenient, fast and efficient.

But are they good for the community? Should we restrict or even ban them from future developments? Those are questions council has to wrestle with in our new 'comprehensive zoning bylaw.'

First, let me note that no one is saying we will tell anyone with an existing drive-through that it has to be closed. Not only do we lack the legal authority to do so, that's not the subject of the debate. The debate is about future drive-through operations, not current ones.

Collingwood already has numerous...