Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John L on March 3, 2010 at 6:38pm

Paula "divided the community over the Walmart issue"? Huh? Please explain.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ggood on March 3, 2010 at 6:57pm

the entire issue set neighbour against neighbour, friends divided on the issue. Her approach was combative, at public meetings, where people disagreed with her. She called a ward resident a "traitor" because he disagreed with her. The issue still is often at the centre of many a discussion. Tempers still flair, and its a non issue at this point. And to my mind that's not what a local politician should be about. And as we have clearly seen demonstrated over the last couple of days, it is not what was demonstrated.

John L said:

Paula "divided the community over the Walmart issue"? Huh? Please explain.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pat on March 3, 2010 at 7:45pm

Naw, I think she called him a traitor because he was handing out SmartCentre flyers he had been paid to print at the meeting :-)

Anyways, that episode is over and done with, and I do think it is unfair to blame the schism in the neighbourhood on Paula. We have to learn to agreeably disagree -- I see that I am in a minority by not condemning her for her behavior, and I am willing to accept that others feel more strongly and more negatively on the subject.

In the long run, regardless of how we feel on an issue, we still need to be able to greet each other and wish each other well. We're going to be neighbours longer than any short-term issue will last.

ggood said:

the entire issue set neighbour against neighbour, friends divided on the issue. Her approach was combative, at public meetings, where people disagreed with her. She called a ward resident a "traitor" because he disagreed with her. The issue still is often at the centre of many a discussion. Tempers still flair, and its a non issue at this point. And to my mind that's not what a local politician should be about. And as we have clearly seen demonstrated over the last couple of days, it is not what was demonstrated.

John L said:

Paula "divided the community over the Walmart issue"? Huh? Please explain.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ggood on March 3, 2010 at 8:00pm

Pat, as you know I am always willing to greet you and welcome you warmly . I, like you and only want what I believe is best for my friends and nieghbours. ( and yes I consider you both). And actually he didn't pay to print the flyers, it was because he had been the owner, of a local paper, which he was no longer involved with, and had nothing to do with at the time. But Paula was not awareof the fact that he was not responsible for the advertisement, but went on what she thought, rather than actual facts. And again I reiterate, it is not about the reason, but the response that is the issue. I think it points to a pattern of behaviour which is unfitting a publicly elected official.

Pat said:

Naw, I think she called him a traitor because he was handing out SmartCentre flyers he had been paid to print at the meeting :-)
Anyways, that episode is over and done with, and I do think it is unfair to blame the schism in the neighbourhood on Paula. We have to learn to agreeably disagree -- I see that I am in a minority by not condemning her for her behavior, and I am willing to accept that others feel more strongly and more negatively on the subject.
In the long run, regardless of how we feel on an issue, we still need to be able to greet each other and wish each other well. We're going to be neighbours longer than any short-term issue will last.

ggood said:

the entire issue set neighbour against neighbour, friends divided on the issue. Her approach was combative, at public meetings, where people disagreed with her. She called a ward resident a "traitor" because he disagreed with her. The issue still is often at the centre of many a discussion. Tempers still flair, and its a non issue at this point. And to my mind that's not what a local politician should be about. And as we have clearly seen demonstrated over the last couple of days, it is not what was demonstrated.

John L said:

Paula "divided the community over the Walmart issue"? Huh? Please explain.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nolin (Admin) on March 8, 2010 at 9:10am

for those that requested it, this thread is open again.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy Buck on March 8, 2010 at 11:17am

I Was at the meeting where the "resident" passed out the ETC paper. He stood by the door smiling like a Cheshire cat knowing full well what he was about to do. I also know the man and I know his previous comments to me concerning Paula Fletcher are not printable on this forum.

Paula said what she thought and she was right from my standpoint, where I watched it all happen. As for saying he had no knowledge, that's not true. The family had sold the paper and he was acting as the sales rep. He knew full well what was in that paper when he handed it out. His family was behind/backing the Smart Centres appeal to build a "supercentre" type of mall on the former Film studios location.

Pat said:

Naw, I think she called him a traitor because he was handing out SmartCentre flyers he had been paid to print at the meeting :-)
Anyways, that episode is over and done with, and I do think it is unfair to blame the schism in the neighbourhood on Paula. We have to learn to agreeably disagree -- I see that I am in a minority by not condemning her for her behavior, and I am willing to accept that others feel more strongly and more negatively on the subject.
In the long run, regardless of how we feel on an issue, we still need to be able to greet each other and wish each other well. We're going to be neighbours longer than any short-term issue will last.

ggood said:

the entire issue set neighbour against neighbour, friends divided on the issue. Her approach was combative, at public meetings, where people disagreed with her. She called a ward resident a "traitor" because he disagreed with her. The issue still is often at the centre of many a discussion. Tempers still flair, and its a non issue at this point. And to my mind that's not what a local politician should be about. And as we have clearly seen demonstrated over the last couple of days, it is not what was demonstrated.

John L said:

Paula "divided the community over the Walmart issue"? Huh? Please explain.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ggood on March 8, 2010 at 6:56pm

I also was there Randy, and watched the incident, and my perspective is different. So we will have to differ on that point. But what this thread is about and will continue to be is about a code of conduct which is specific, and agreed upon when a person becomes an elected official, and how that was violated. And there is always a reason for a behaviour, but it is never an excuse. And so now to try and excuse a behaviour which would get most people removed from their jobs is just as unaccepltable. Just my opinion, but then again I'm not an elected official, and I'm not yelling at a member of the public for having an opposite POV.

Randy Buck said:

I Was at the meeting where the "resident" passed out the ETC paper. He stood by the door smiling like a Cheshire cat knowing full well what he was about to do. I also know the man and I know his previous comments to me concerning Paula Fletcher are not printable on this forum.

Paula said what she thought and she was right from my standpoint, where I watched it all happen. As for saying he had no knowledge, that's not true. The family had sold the paper and he was acting as the sales rep. He knew full well what was in that paper when he handed it out. His family was behind/backing the Smart Centres appeal to build a "supercentre" type of mall on the former Film studios location.

Pat said:

Naw, I think she called him a traitor because he was handing out SmartCentre flyers he had been paid to print at the meeting :-)
Anyways, that episode is over and done with, and I do think it is unfair to blame the schism in the neighbourhood on Paula. We have to learn to agreeably disagree -- I see that I am in a minority by not condemning her for her behavior, and I am willing to accept that others feel more strongly and more negatively on the subject.
In the long run, regardless of how we feel on an issue, we still need to be able to greet each other and wish each other well. We're going to be neighbours longer than any short-term issue will last.

ggood said:

the entire issue set neighbour against neighbour, friends divided on the issue. Her approach was combative, at public meetings, where people disagreed with her. She called a ward resident a "traitor" because he disagreed with her. The issue still is often at the centre of many a discussion. Tempers still flair, and its a non issue at this point. And to my mind that's not what a local politician should be about. And as we have clearly seen demonstrated over the last couple of days, it is not what was demonstrated.

John L said:

Paula "divided the community over the Walmart issue"? Huh? Please explain.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ggood on March 8, 2010 at 9:31pm

Judith I'm speaking up for any resident that feels that integrity in our elected officials is and should be first and foremost. And that it is neither appropriate or excusable for the behaviour of any elected official to be dismissed because of a less than sincere apology. I think that all residents, and most particularly in this case the residents of Leslieville deserve better. And I think that we should all take a good close look at whether or not, in this case that is what we are getting. And really that's my only point, naive probably,but eternally optimistic that we will.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page