Hats off to the Chronicle for voicing NDG residents’ concerns over democracy and transparency in our local government. Many despair, many have given up, still many of us are hoping to bring change to the process and play some small role in restoring democracy and services in NDG.

I attended our monthly NDG/CDN Council meeting this month. It was held in CDN as it usually is, not a small trek for NDG residents, especially for those using public transport. Despite repeated calls for meetings to be held in NDG, only two out of 10 council meetings are scheduled to be held in NDG.This makes participation by NDG residents difficult.Indeed, many are suggesting that Mayor Applebaum has good reason for holding the monthly meetings far from the contentious issues in NDG such as the closure of the Fraser Hickson Library, lack of transparency in the relocation of the proposed Sports and Recreation centre and of course the long and frustrating citizen driven efforts to safe the Empress.

Last night he once again dismissed citizens’ requests to have 50% of the meetings held in their borough. Is this really so outrageous a request? One would think that citizen interest is a positive thing and should be encouraged; not so in NDG.

Those who did come out registered their questions prior to the meeting and lots were drawn for a chance to speak.Thirty minutes are allocated for citizens to raise questions of interest to the council members.The thirty minute period was extended as councilors recognized that often their responses took a significant amount of the time allocated for public questions. One woman, the first to arrive, was more than disappointed that her name was not drawn.She did not have the “privilege” of addressing the councilors despite coming out on a winter night to raise her voice.Seems a bit odd – there certainly was time for an admirer to praise the Mayor. So, one taxpayer’s question on public safety was denied, leaving most of questioning the purpose these “open public sessions” serve, other than providing a weak semblance of democracy.

As if the choice of meeting location and the limited question time are not enough to deflect any interest in public participation, as usual the poorly written, vague agenda did little to provide information to the taxpayer on issues of concern to all.The agenda is available online prior to the meeting but as is often the case, two items involving expenditure of public funds were added verbally; there was no written explanation of these items prior to the meeting – no chance for public scrutiny. Likewise, two items authorizing exemptions to the Urban Planning By-Law did not even provide the address of the sites in question making it impossible for the public to have any knowledge of what was involved.

Similarly, a notice of a motion for a by-law discussing an expenditure of over $1.3 million for demolition did not even clearly specify what buildings were to be demolished.This is not the first time the issue of the agenda has been brought to the attention of the Mayor. This month he once more ignored the constructive suggestions from his own fellow councilor Warren Allmand who suggested that the agenda provide the essential information for each item – a reasonable request. Following the meeting, Allmand noted that the councilors themselves are sometimes not given the correct background documentation by the mayor’s office to allow them to have adequate information. Is this how democracy is supposed to work? It is an insult to concerned and interested taxpayers.

What can ordinary citizens make of all this when even their democratically elected officials do not receive information from the mayor – information required to make informed decisions and to fulfill their mandate.

This brings us to the renewal of Mayor Applebaum as Chair of the Urban Planning Advisory Committee.

Currently these meetings are held behind closed doors. Numerous citizens have requested that they be made public. In a vote to re-instate our Mayor as the president, two councilors voted against his re-instatement. Warren Allmand stated he would be pleased to re-instate Mayor Applebaum as president if the meetings were open to the public; he could not in good conscience and in the interest of democracy and transparency support his presidency if the meetings continued to be held in secret. Allmand stated that federal government meetings, dealing with far more complex issues, are held in public - why not in NDG? Councilor Francine Senegal noted that given the political sensitivity around Applebaum’s potential conflict of interest, real or perceived, she also could not support the extension of Applebaum’s mandate. She noted her experience in politics and the old adage that “perception is reality” in politics.

Earlier in the evening, one citizen had raised the issue of conflict of interest with Mayor Applebaum as he continues to be an active real estate agent while at the same time chairs a closed door committee responsible for zoning changes.

Citizen concern over potential conflict of interest is a legitimate concern; Mayor Applebaum stated it was “legal” and that guidelines were followed. Those attending noted that there are many things in life that are “legal” but are not always “ethical”. Perhaps in a well-run borough, where elected officials had more respect for transparency and democracy the issue of conflict of interest would not arise but in NDG at this time, with borough meetings held in CDN, away from contentious taxpayers, with vague and uninformative agendas, with forum for real public concerns, NDG residents have lost the faith in their elected officials.

This does not bode well for the Mayor who has failed to save our Fraser Hickson Library and who has failed to support citizens in their long and determined fight to restore the Empress. It does not bode well for the Mayor who has not respected the community consensus obtained through the 2003 consultation undertaken by the Office de Consultation publique de Montreal to place our badly needed Sports and Recreation Centre on the Benny Farm site.

Citizens in NDG are beginning to wonder where they can find vision, commitment and stewardship of our valuable community assets – a leader who respects democracy and is committed to transparency and true public engagement.

Arlyle Waring