Jim Turner E-Mail Shows He’s Unfit To Represent Constituents
Readers might be interested in a November 11 e-mail exchange between Councillor Jim Turner and a constituent regarding the controversial Genivar septic inspection contract.
The e-mail just below was sent by a constituent to all council members. It is the exact original e-mail except I (Craig) have replaced the constituent’s name with xxxxxxxxx:
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2012 11:14 AM
It was my understanding that Genivar was “fired” by the Town of SBP for lack of a better word “incompetence” during the Sauble Sewer Fiasco. Can you please enlighten me then why on earth you would award them a contract for septic inspection? This company has cost the taxpayers of this municipality dearly and should not be given another blank cheque.
I would like an answer to the above!
Councillor Turner’s reply to the constituent is just below. It is exactly as sent by Mr. Turner to the “constituent”, except I (Craig) have replaced the constituent’s name with xxxxxxxxx):
From: Jim Turner <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 1:50:55 PM
Subject: Re: Genivar
So nice to see you’ve put me back on your list of people to provide you with answers. I would have been unable to comment on a previous question you asked as to why a staff member was in attendance with me at court. Had I been able to comment I would probably have told you that how she spends her personal time is none of your damned business so thanks for not putting me in a position to appear rude.
I have never before found you to be lacking any words but please allow me to help!
“for lack of a better word “incompetence” ???”
A better word might have been “for completing a plan they were commissioned by previous council to prepare”
I know that phrase isn’t as catchy as incompetence but then truth seldom is!
Surely you meant Proposed Project!
“why on earth you would award them a contract for septic inspection?”
Maybe becausePryde Shropp McComb(division of Genivar) submitted the best bid based on a “blind” evaluation of the criteria in our RFP and council was looking after the best interests of the whole town.
Not wanting to lack a better word I chose carefully:Blind: noun – unable to see (the name of the bidder before choosing)
“should not be given another blank cheque”
You should choose your words more carefully since a contract to do work for a specific price is not a blank cheque and a statement like that illustrates a lack of knowledge on your part that would lead some to believe that attempting to “enlighten” you would be fruitless!
I hope this fulfills your request to “enlighten me then.” and please feel free to include me in your next round of questions as I am more than willing to help you come to an understanding of the process and procedures at council.
Please make sure your questions have nothing to do with my court case as I am still diligently following the advice of the excellent lawyer you and the rest of the taxpayers have provided to defend me and offering only – for want of a better word – No Comment.
That “No Comment” was the end of the Turner e-mail. From here on is my commentary (Craig), and is not part of the constituent and Turner e-mails.
Democracy is participation, by the people governed, in the policy process. The only reason why we don’t put the whole assembly of the people in an arena to make TSBP policy is because it would be too unwieldy. So we elect “representatives” to go to the assembly on our behalf, and to “represent” us.
We didn’t elect “representatives” to judge us, to harass us, to hurl snide, sarcastic, vitriolic remarks at us, to denigrate us, to libel us, to slander us, or to do anything else except “represent” us in accordance with their oath of office (“I will truly, faithfully and impartially exercise this office to the best of my knowledge and ability”).
So could someone please tell me (Craig) how Councillor Turner got elected?
And note Councillor Turner’s brag that he got staff to pay his legal bills – with our money! (Maybe it’s also a subtle Jim Turner threat, namely:“if you come after me I’ll get my Chief Financial Officer to hire expensive lawyers to fight you – and we’ll do it with your money” ?)