You are here

Setting the record straight

Letter to the Editor,
I want to clear up what I think are a few misconceptions about the L.o.W. council. In the last few weeks I have seen a few things printed in your paper which are not entirely true. Some may say that I am biased, as I am the daughter of a council member, but I would like to take this opportunity to present some information in its entirety. I am not saying that the people who contributed the past information were being dishonest, I merely suggest that they were not informed of all the facts themselves.
I am the type of person who does not assume unethical things to be true until I go to the source, so when I heard gossip and rumors about the integrity of council members, I went to my father, a council member, to acquire some facts.
At first, I was concerned about the councilors giving themselves a raise, as was headlined in the paper. I was advised that there was a backlog of issues from the previous council, which required the current council to have one extra meeting each month to conclude. These meetings were extensive, and council felt that they should be paid appropriately. I understand that the need for extra meetings has been met, and at present, there is no necessity for more.
The councilors looked at every applicant for each tender and considered various factors before coming to any final decisions. As for the implication of nepotism, I would like to submit, that in a small community such as L.o.W., many residents are somehow related to one another in some fashion. I do not know who submitted tenders for the jobs, but is quite possible that many of the applicants were somehow related to a councilor. While it is true that three of the four councilors spouses were hired, those councillors whose spouses were involved declared a conflict of interest, and did not participate in voting for that tender. There were not enough positions for all the applicants, and regardless of who was hired, someone would be left disappointed with the outcome.
My father even received a phone call after council made their selections, from someone who suggested that council should have discriminated against one of the applicants because of his age and weight. This caller wouldn’t even consider the long list of qualifications that the person held. Did anyone take the time to find out who else submitted tenders? Should the spouses be disallowed the opportunity to receive the positions they are qualified for, merely because they are married to a councilor who does not even vote on their tender?
It is true that I did not attend the council meetings, nor did I preside at any discussion of the tenders, but I know three of the four councilors rather well, and would like to suggest that if people questioned their integrity, they would not have been voted into town council.
While it is easy to accept things that others mention in passing, or even in a lengthy discussion, I suggest that people take more time to find the facts before forming opinions on the character of others.
I do not presume to have all the answers, nor all the facts. I do know, that when I have questions, I ask questions. I suggest that people with questions or misgivings about the decisions contact a council member and do the same. Questions are far more civilized than accusations or implications, and they are far more likely to be answered.
–Sherri McCormack