Crowsnest Pass misconceptions, and the picture the authors paint

Today my fellow blogger and candidate for Mayor talks about one of the local papers in the Crowsnest Pass and the picture they paint.
http://blog.johnprince.ca/

Well this raises a great opportunity to talk once more about the great bogeyman of the last three years the 4-3 vote.
If I was a complete stranger coming in to this town I would assume based on what I have read that every decision made by council over the last three years was by a vote of 4-3.

I will try to clear the picture for those that have been brain washed, we had four councilors that stood for "change" in the Crowsnest Pass, three that stood for Status Quo. And that's fine everybody gets to stand for whatever they like (its called democracy).
But yes those four councilors voted the same way on issues that involved "change", (Crowsnest Centre, Arena's, Cleanup's, Eliminating new positions at the town, building our reserves back up, stopping members of council from promoting private business) the other three members that didn't want change for the most part voted against "change".

Does that come as a big surprise that people that wanted change voted for it? of course not, no more than people that opposed change voted against it.

But the local paper with the support of those that did not want change, knowing that neither of them could come up with sound facts or arguments to oppose change did the only thing they could, they created a smoke screen the 4-3, the issues were no longer the issue the vote was.

For the information of the taxpayers, councils here and most other places have been spilt for one reason or another forever. The issue here, was and is "change". It will be the same on the next council, , look at the list of candidates, we all know some will fight for "change" and some will oppose it, I do not expect seven to be elected all in favour of change or against.

I challenge anybody to look at the local newspaper from 2004-2007 and find one mention of the 4-3 as a big issue, guess what we had a 4-3 council three councilors believed in change four believed in Status Quo, and believe or not when the issue of change came up it got voted down 3-4.

A while back I reviewed all motions of council, well in excess of 90% were decided by something other than 4-3. Why because they dealt with something other than change.

Its no different than the corporate reviews on council, all three of them gave council a less than impressive reviews, three different councils, which all had only one thing in common the leader Mayor Irwin, as that ever been spoke about in the local paper?

Yes in my six years on council I have seen the Mayor as the Chair of council allow certain people the opportunity to rant and rave in the council chambers, with not a word said by him or the local paper.
I approached several members of the media when I first got on council about reporting these types of performances, they told me that they did not want to take sides, I told them I didn't want them to, I only asked them if somebody ranted and raved like a lunatic report it.

Anyway lets decide this election on real issues, do we want change or not?