Board vote to NOT rescind first, second and third readings of 911 bylaws

A Message From: David Ham <jdavid [dot] ham [at] gmail [dot] com>

Hi
  If you were confused about my posting, #4 of Vol. 48, issue 36, you're not the only one. It is confusing why the Board passed this negative do nothing motion.
Here is the way I understand it from minutes of COW and Board meetings:

• Oct. 15 at the Committee of the whole meeting our director made a motion, with Board Chair Brabazon seconding it, That the Committee  recommend the Board NOT rescind the 911 bylaws.
  • Only one Director voted against the motion and it was not our director. This negative motion should have been" out of order " in my opinion.
     
• Oct. 22 at the Regional Board meeting Director Brewer and Alt. Director Rebane made a motion THAT the Board concur with the recommendation of the COW to NOT rescind the 911 bylaws.
  • A motion to amend the original motion to add after rescind " first, second and third readings " was made and passed, with one against.
  • Then the amended motion was passed with three Directors voting against it and our director was not one of them.
  • It is interesting that Director Brewer voted against his motion.

  Seeing that our director initiated the motion and voted for it the people who signed a petition, wrote letters, made phone calls and expressed at meetings that they wanted the first, second and third readings of the 911 bylaws RESCINDED now know for sure that our director is not listening to them. In fact he has done the exact opposite to what so many of the Lasqueti community want. It is hard to fathom why he would do this.
Is he trying to get people more upset with him? If he is trying to he is succeeding.

  The Oct. 15 motion is nonsense because it is trying to rescind bylaws that have not been passed. So here we have our director making a motion to not make a move to rescind a bylaw that does not exist. Added to this is that our director, in his Regional Notes posted Oct. 29, did not write the correct motion that was passed. He left out the amended part that added first, second and third reading. Did he do this on purpose if so why?
 I have some questions for our director in regards to this motion:

1.  Why did he make this motion?
2.  Why did he make this motion at this time?
3.  What is the purpose of this negative motion?.
4.  What motivated him to make this motion?
5.  What outcome does he hope to achieve with this motion?
6.  Who advised him to make this motion?
7.  Can he explain why he made a motion that actually does nothing? ( as far as I can see the state of these bylaws stayed the same whether this motion passed or failed ).
8.  When is he going to start working with the many in the community instead of against?

 These are serious questions. They need to/ must be answered.

  In closing I want to say that I see this motion by our director and others on the the Board to be a backward, negative expression that does nothing but create mistrust especially after they came to Lasqueti saying they wanted us to trust them and that they were willing to work cooperatively to find an appropriate solution for dispatch. To me our director with this motion wasted the Board's time and their energy and made a negative move that creates dissension. If our director is trying to build trust i see him as failing. I mean what good did this motion achieve? It certainly does not add good to the process. In fact in my opinion this motion is an insult to and disrespect for the people of Lasqueti Island. This motion only clarifies one thing for me and that is that our director  does not represent the interest of the majority of residents on Lasqueti in this matter.
 Thank you
 David