Recount Results
Posted by auroracitizen on November 16, 2010
For those waiting with bated breath, the results are in and Paul Pirri was “announced” as the eighth Councillor elect. The previous 7 were unchanged as well.
Of interest — the separation between Perri and Granger increased by 6 votes, and Councillor Wilson came within 2 votes of knocking off Granger for 9th place
| Candidate | Original | Recount | +/- |
| Abel | 5803 | 5810 | +7 |
| Thompson | 5335 | 5341 | +6 |
| Buck | 5317 | 5322 | +5 |
| Humfryes | 5308 | 5304 | -4 |
| Gallo | 4601 | 4601 | 0 |
| Gaertner | 4343 | 4344 | +1 |
| Ballard | 4276 | 4279 | +3 |
| Pirri | 4144 | 4150 | +6 |
| Granger | 4123 | 4122 | -1 |
| Wilson | 4116 | 4121 | +5 |
| MacEachern | 4000 | 3998 | -2 |
There were also no disputed votes.
So what does this mean?
We understand there is a 15 day period where candidates have the opportunity to challenge any disputed votes. However since there were none, the waiting period is a moot point — but the Clerk cannot “declare” the winner until that time has elapsed. In any case it would require a judicial review and would be outside the power of Council to affect this matter any further.
The only other potential wrinkle would be for someone to challenge the entire electoral vote — but again this would require a judicial review.
So it would appear the election results are effectively final.
Congratulations to Paul and all elected Councillors.
Aurora Citizen 
Robert the Bruce said
We should all take a minute and catch our collective breaths. We have been saying on this blog and others that the MorMac regime has been trying to circumvent the political process with back-room deals and running roughshod over the process. Then, when a defeated councillor tries to use the process that we all agreed is all that is holy, we get upset that he is spending tax dollars – whatever that amount happens to be.
You can’t have it both ways. Democracy costs. Be it money in this case or lives in the cases of revolution, but it costs something.
Granger had his opportunity to get a recount. I applaude the fact that he was able to get it. You all know that I am not a fan of his, but he used the process. A process we all agree is what we want.
Forget the cost, that is “the cost of doing business” and let’s move on.
Fuimus
Luckywife said
RTB:
You are absolutely right. Any candidate has the right to ask for a recount and if the law allows for it, it should always be granted. Period. I take no issue with that. Maybe the law needs to be changed to make it automatic within a specific margin. That’s fine to. I also think it might be a good idea for the Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing to establish an across the board process, either all municipalities use electronic machines for voting and recounts or it’s all done by hand. I really don’t care, as long as I get to vote and it gets counted.
What I do care about is any decision regarding an election being left up to the candidates running in it or a council like ours. What went on at the last meeting was shameful and disgusting. Evelyn called it right when she said the whole thing was orchestrated. No elections officer should have to sit there and take the abuse that John Leach was treated to that night. And voters sure as hell don’t have to account to politicians for how they voted. Questioning the entire process after the fact, putting the clerk in the hot seat, then trying to insult, browbeat and itimidate him into doing it their way. Respect? There was none; not for him, not for us, and not for democracy.
I am supposed to accept with grace that Cllr. Granger suddenly cares for democracy and process? Please forgive me if I find that pill a little to bitter to swallow. Rising above the urge to poke some fun at one of the people that voted to deny ME and US, our democratic right to vote for our council representation and in favour of appointment, has proven to difficult for me to resist. I have not shown myself in the best light, I’ll admit that. My friend, there is much that I can forgive, plenty more I’d like to forget. But this ain’t it. Definately not.
Best regards,
Luckywife
Stephanie Allen said
I have cringed a bit at people going on and on about the cost of the recount. It was certainly within his rights, and the margin was small enough that it made sense. I don’t begrudge him the recount, nor the dollars of mine that it cost.
I do agree that it was a bitter pill, seeing all the frustrating behaviour I have observed from Granger over the years. And I admit, he has definitely shown to me to be someone I would prefer not to have on council. But I have held my tongue (or my fingers off the keyboard), because indeed this recount was a reasonable response. So RTB does have a point here. The recount is done. And to hear Granger say that he is satisfied, feels closure, and felt the process was important – – well, that actually sounds like an appropriate response. If this is indeed the end of it, then I think we should indeed move on. There are much, MUCH more ridiculous and worrisome places our tax dollars have gone recently. IF this is the end of the recount business, I would consider it a blessing. I’d prefer to save our tongue lashes for the truly worthy issues, so we don’t begin to sound irrelevant.
Robert the Bruce said
Luckywife (why are you lucky?),
In no way have I approved of the treatment of staff during the recount debate. However, I am not naive enough to think that this behaviour is strictly a GOS trait. Given the same circumstances, I would think (and hope) anyone in a similar situation would fight for their political lives, rather than roll over.
In order for someone to run for elected office in the first place requires a certain ego and arrogance. You will not find many successfully elected people that are wall-flowers. Having said that, when faced with a situation that they are losing an election, their ego will force them to use whatever tools that are at their disposal. Should we forgive the behaviour? No. Should we understand it? I think so.
How did the voters have to account to politicians in this process? I don’t understand that comment.
Questioning the proces is SOP anytime someone is in a situation like this. For example, if you are fighting a speeding ticket, the first thing that happens is questioning the equipment and the operator(s) of the equipment. I am not surprised nor am I shocked with the direction that this went. For you to be insulted is not a rational response.
I assume that you are referring to the Marsh/Gallo situation in the last paragraph. Again, everyone played by the rules then. If you don’t like the rules, that is a different argument. I did not approve of the outcome, but they did nothing legally wrong – morally was a different issue.
I think that while most people are outraged with the events, to be shocked or surprised escapes me. Desparate measures for desparate people.
Fuimus
Matt Maddocks said
After reading this story from Sean Pearce at yorkregion.com,
http://www.yorkregion.com/news/article/904602–revisit-recounts-professor
I’m sensing that this issue is not over. Robert MacDermid and Phyllis Morris share some past history. Is the stage being set? Interesting to note that the lone comment posted in response to this article comes from “AuroraGuy”, the Wikipedia nom de plume of new councilor, Chris Ballard. Relatively quiet until now, Ballard has now shown what side of the recount issue he’s supporting, and where his political allegiance seems to remain.
We’ll see what takes place at the Nov 23rd meeting. We’ll see what type of legacy our current mayor and council want to leave with the people of Aurora. Should be interesting, given that I sense the general political mood of folks these days is still very raw. After the circus that was the recount meeting, everybody’s staying well on guard for any signs that this issue will continue to fester.
George Gonsalves said
Does Fuimus mean “desperate” or “disparate”?
Robert the Bruce said
Mr. Gonsalves, the spelling police. Sorry, my spellcheck did not work. Of course the word I was looking for was desperate but, you knew that.
For more great spelling mistakes… visit http://christopherwatts.posterous.com/
Fuimus
Luckywife said
RTB:
You are right again. I am not arguing with any of your points. What I am saying is that if a candidate requests a recount, for any reason, the yes or no of it should be legislated within the Municipal Elections Act. The decision to decide yes or no should not be left up to a sitting council, themselves being winning/losing candidates. The ego and arrogance you mention being a valid reason why not.
My comment about voters accounting to politicians stems from what happened at that meeting. By seeking to challenge the entire process and how the votes are counted, wanting to scrutinize the ballots before they are recounted, seems to me to be challenging the outcome, pretty much saying that either the Elections Officer screwed up, the machines screwed up and I can’t accept that I didn’t get enough votes to keep my seat. Now, if the outcome had been different and all the incumbants had kept their seats, and Mr. Pirri, losing by 21 votes makes a request for recount, do you think that Cllr. MacEachern would still make a motion for open forum so that her friends could argue for a hand recount? Do you think it would have taken 2 hours of arguing, debating, finger pointing and accusations by all the participants, to get the motion on the floor and give him his answer?
Finally, if our council does not like the electronic voting machines, doesn’t trust them, and wants to go back to hand counting, that’s fine. Then why wasn’t a motion brought forward before the election? They have known for four years when it was going to be. Do you doubt that this council would have had the majority votes to make it a reality?
Best regards,
Luckywife
P.S. I have been a Luckywife for 21 years. All that I cherish and value most from a life partner and father for my childrem, my husband possesses in abundance, and I am both honored and flattered that after all our ups and downs, he still considers himself a Luckyhusband.
George Gonsalves said
No, Fuimus, either word could have fit the circumstances with very different meanings! I just sought clarification, not to police your spelling.
Elizabeth Bishenden said
Well said, George. I think it is important to ensure we say what we mean and mean what we say.
But I hope we all enjoy the good kinds of feelings that are expressed by Melanie of the Luckyfamily!
Robert the Bruce said
Luckywife, I agree with your concerns but the reality is that the rules and the framework for the rules are the jurisdiction of the Province. I can’t fault anyone for working within the rules – I may not like it, but they have that right. Not to sound like a a defender of the GOS – nothing is further away from the truth – but what would have happened if Evelyn Buck was in Granger’s position? I would think – and hope that she would ask for a recount too.
George/Elizabeth,
I hear all sorts of grief about my spelling and grammar from my wife. I usually put a long post through a spell check but I was in a hurry.
Fuimus
Luckywife said
To RTB:
“but what would have happened if Evelyn Buck was in Granger’s position? I would think – and hope that she would ask for a recount too. ”
Now that, my friend, is the $6500 question. She could ask, but would she get? Would Cllr. MacEachern and her friends have argued so earnestly on her behalf? Would the Mayor?
If your answer is yes, then I have a 40 year old, rusted, inoperable vertical milling machine in my garage that I want to sell for $6500. Will you please buy it? Just kidding, I get what you are saying, but the “framework” is not the problem, the personalities are.
Regards,
Luckwyife
Broderick Epps said
While I am no fan of Granger, it was within his rights to ask for a recount. Same if it was Buck/Wilson et al.
What causes the most consternation is the issue of cost. The $6500 cost is not the issue. Underlying everything is Granger’s concern about costs when it came to the by-election issue after Ms. Marsh resigned. He was one of the more vocal opponents of a by-election. So now he chooses to spend taxpayers dollars because its about him? Its this turnabout that has caused the negativity towards Granger and rightly so.
Anonymous said
Seems according to the town’s website that there is a final meeting for the outgoing council on Nov. 23. If so, do you think the GOS will create some new and last second drama or will they finally accept defeat with some class?
The thing I think of that they may try is some kind of tactic to position themselves better against Buck’s lawsuit which each will have to deal with whether they were reelected or not.
Stephanie Allen said
I’m feeling apprehensive about this final meeting. I really hope the outgoing council goes out with some class. I worry that I will see a motion showing an inability to let go of petty issues. But I hope I am wrong, and that this council focuses on the good they were able to do, and shows us that they have integrity.
Paul Sesto said
Stephanie Allen said: “I’m feeling apprehensive about this final meeting. I really hope the outgoing council goes out with some class.”
Perhaps the final decree of the outgoing council will be to remove the “Code of Conduct complaint pertaining to the July 21, 2009 Council Agenda” that is stuck on the Town’s website. In this way it doesn’t have to carry over to the incoming council’s agenda. Perhaps someone can suggest this action be taken by council at “Open Forum”.
Something Fishy in Aurora..... said
As I said before, I expect the last meeting to be a gong show. I’m sure we will see the usual suspects up at the microphone extolling the virtues of some of the members of the outgoing council and how they battled through negativity and hardship and did a great job for the people of Aurora. A nice big pat on the back for four years of service.
Then reality might set in.
I see that the Auroran is planning on streaming the video. Not sure if Rogers will be picking it up too?
December 1st can’t come fast enough.
One who Knows said
Paul do you think for even one millisecond that this bunch of losers would give any consideration to this suggestion of removing the wholly political, trumped up blunder that cost them their jobs, Not a “Snowballs” chance in hell!!!
The ROYAL SEND OFF said
6.Anonymous said
November 8, 2010 at 8:59 pm
“Speaking of Christopher Watts, whose blog I enjoy immensely I might add, does anyone know if he sent PM his “Not the Mayor” jacket that he wore at the hoedown”
This is a meeting not to be missed, it should be a barn burner,If Chris follows through with his parting gift it will bring the house down, Matt thought the last meeting was a circus, This one could be the “Greatest Show on Earth!!!
Paul Sesto said
I’m sorry One Who Knows, I could… not… speak…, my tongue was in my cheek. I have no expectation that this would happen, but sense it will come soon, as December is almost here.
KA-NON said
Item 5 on the Agenda is a revision of the minutes (again) of the September 14th meeting, specifically to recognize that the Mayor left the chair at 1:10 AM and the chair was then occupied by Cllr. McRoberts. THis was immediately after the council had returned from being in camera. I just looked at the September 14th minutes, and there already is a clerk’s note to the effect that …
“Through inadvertence the minutes do not reflect that Mayor Morris left at 1:10 a.m. and Deputy Mayor McRoberts was in the Chair when open session reconvened at 1:11 a.m.”
I am not a procedural expert by any means, but doesn’t that clerk’s note in the minutes mean that the minutes in fact DO reflect that the chair was vacated by the mayor and occupied by the deputy-mayor? Or, maybe the clerk’s note is not supposed to be there at all at this point (until the motion passes at the meeting on Tuesday)? Can’t see why we need the item on the agenda if the clerk’s note is already IN the minutes?
Luckywife said
Just read on Yorkregion.com that Steve-O considers the recount “closure.” He felt that the process was important. Poor Stevie, so glad we could stroke your poor wounded ego with a $6500+ recount. We all know how much you value “process”.
Just in case he comes sniffing around again in 4 years time, let’s all try to remember how much respect Mr. Granger has for process.
Luckywife
Still Nervous said
Am I the only one thinking we haven’t heard the end of this? Two ballot counts, showing different results – are they going to try to question the whole election?
Luckywife said
The only option left available to the candidate is judicial review. Evelina and Phyllis can have all the temper tantrums they want, a judge makes decisions based on the rule of law, not the rule of MorMac.
Luckywife
Robert the Bruce said
How long did the re-count issues for Vaughan in 2006 go? A long time. How deep are Grainger’s pockets to issue challenges?
Fuimus
Anonymous said
I think if this is NOT left alone there will be a full blown revolution in this town and we all know how Marie Antoinette ended up.
Sharon said
Well, I wouldn’t be surprised if this last count doesn’t create more discussion at council level.
After reading John Sargeants letter to the editor in this last Auroran, something is definitely going to hit the fan! Kuudos to John for speaking out, takes courage to do so these days when you see something going on. Who’s going to lead the discussion on accuracy of voting machines at the next meeting? Hmmmmm.
Broderick epps said
Sharon wrote “Who’s going to lead the discussion on accuracy of voting machines at the next meeting? Hmmmmm.”
That would be Evilina Mac and her chief inquisitor friend and annoying one …Walter Mestrinaro.I agree the issue accuracy of the voting machine will not go away. It was once before used by Evilina and it looks like it will be again.
Anonymous said
If Phyllis had not tried to stack the council with some additional cronies (Humfryes and Ballard) Granger and Wilson may have both prevailed. Think about that Lone Granger when you mindlessly defend your false messiah.
Anonymous said
Humfryes, Ballard, Gaertner, and Gallo should be a good check on Dawe, to make sure he doesn’t sell out the town to developers, and gut the new official plan.
I’m looking forward to seeing Dawes financial report to see how much developer backing he has.
David Heard said
Which one of the gang wrote this?
Matt Maddocks said
Right. With Gaertner keeping an eye on Mayor Dawe, we can all sleep better at night.
Luckywife said
Matt, you crack me up! Are you sure you don’t moonlight as a stand up comedian?
Luckywife
Anonymous said
Right. With Gaertner [, Humfryes, Ballard, and Gallo ] keeping an eye on Mayor Dawe, we can all sleep better at night.
There. Fixed that for ya. I know I’ll sleep better
Matt Maddocks said
Melanie – thanks for the comment. I don’t think I could survive the brutal world of stand-up comedy, so I’ll just stick to something safer, like politics…
The Ref said
Meh. Rookies and reserves all. Morris and her first team rec’d well-deserved red cards and were sent off.
Matt Maddocks said
Anonymous – interesting that you’ve gone an lumped Humfryes, Ballard, Gaertner and Gallo together with no prompting from the crowd. It’s long been the cry from the “ex’s” that there was never any “orchestration” or “collusion” amongst the gang of six, that this was all just made up by “very bad people saying very bad things about us”. Have Humfryes, Ballard, Gaertner and Gallo already decided to band together to check on Mayor Dawe? Do you know something we don’t? Inquiring minds want to know…
Luckywife said
To Anonymous 8:29 am
What’s this nonsense? Dawe hasn’t even started the job yet and already he’s being accused of selling the town out to developers? Can we not wait for say, maybe five friggin minutes after he takes the oath before we start with the conspiracy theories?
By the way, before you start assuming that our new council is going to sell your children’s birthright to greedy developers bent on destroying your home, consider this; It is our brain trust at Queen’s Park that has decided on a scorched earth policy, leaving no single hectare of land in the Golden Horseshoe untouched. Their crystal ball seems to be telling them that Southern Ontario is going to undergo rapid unprecedented growth over the next 20 years. Hope whoever these folks are they have bloody deep pockets, because we can build all the houses and highrises they want, but if people can’t afford the hydro bills and property taxes, and corporations don’t find this province competitive, the entire area will end up looking like those pretty architectural renderings with beautiful structures and lots of faux green space; 3 cars in the parking lot and one cute little family playing frisbee in the park with their dog. The most any municipality can do is try to shape the type of the development, delaying tactics will only take them so far, eventually the OMB will just take over and then we have no say in what we get. Please don’t be fooled into thinking they can stop it completely, or that they really have all that much choice. That at least, you can try to do something about. Next opportunity, October 6, 2011. Make the most of it.
Luckywife
In Sheep's Clothing? said
Is this latest Anonymous a Poppe in sheep’s clothing?
Some sturdy investigative work is called for.
Let’s call upon the soon to be registered as a trading name “The Morris Eye” to conduct an inquiry.
Tim the Enchanter said
Good points Luckywife
From what I’ve heard Dawe say I think he understands that Aurora doesn’t have the final word on development but we do have a seat at the table with developers , the Region and the Province and we have to work with them.
Zero development is not an option.
That ship sailed over 40 years ago.
Morris tried impresssing her supporters with the sword-brandishing “we will slay the development dragon” routine and as far as I can tell – all we got was monster legal bills – and more development.
Hopefully we’ll have open and reasoned debate about future development.
I certainly don’t want to see every square foot of Aurora paved over but I’m a little tired of the NIMBYism too, especially when it’s sold under the Save the Moraine brand name.
As you say – give the man a chance.
Anonymously said
Me thinks that Anonymous 8:29 a.m. is throwing it out there because on the horizon will be the results and costs to take those developers to the OMB.
Remember the long sessions at the old library finished just before the election? Big external lawyers fees, and much staff time. All that is still to come out, so they’ll be a hue and cry about the $$$ spent.
Watch and see.
Luckywife said
To Tim The Enchanter:
For sure, there will be plenty of debate, whether it will be reasoned, remains to be seen. As much as I try not to be cynical, I just can’t help myself. It has been so long since I have seen anything even resembling reason, that I have a difficult time believing that folks know what it is anymore. I have high hopes for our new council, not because I think they can do better, but because I don’t believe they could possibly do any worse than MorMac. For now, at least, I am cautiously optimistic.
Saving the Moraine is a worthwhile initiative. Do we really know what we are saving it from? Dear Dalton has given lots of lip service to saving it, but again, the cynic in me can’t help assuming that it is only because the demographic of the surrounding area is middle to upper income. Lip service can buy alot of Liberal votes. A little to the east of us, people are in a huff about their Bluff. To the west, there is alot of chest thumping and digging in of heels to stop anymore development around the Escarpment. Dear Dalton pays lip service to that too. But, does anyone ever wonder where Dear Dalton is planning on erecting the $60 billion worth of wind turbines he’s purchased for us? That’s not dirty development. That’s green energy. We have only to erect them. The wind will come, Dalton says so. At the risk of pissing of David Suzuki and the eco-nuts that will come and bury the eggs of a million stink bugs in my yard, I’d rather have a 100 golf courses than gleaming hulks of twisted metal sparkling in the sunshine. If we can’t leave it alone and untouched, I’d rather see homes and people on it than a steel junkyard. But, again, that’s just me being cynical.
Best regards,
Luckywife
Anonymoose said
Luckywife, cynical is certainly not the word I would use to describe your perspective.
You would really prefer to see farm land and forests paved over with houses and golf courses rather than a portion of the same space being occupied by wind turbines??? Huh??
That is just such a totally bizarre perspective, I can’t even begin to get my head around it.
Saving the Moraine is indeed a worthwhile initiative, but given your perspective, I can’t see how you would ever come to agree with this statement, let alone utter it yourself.
Luckywife said
To Anonymoose:
“You would really prefer to see farm land and forests paved over with houses and golf courses rather than a portion of the same space being occupied by wind turbines??? Huh??”
The answer is no more people, no more houses, no more golf courses, and no wind turbines. If I have to choose one over the other, then yes, I would prefer homes and people.
Question: How many wind turbines would it take to supply the energy needs of 5000 homes?
If you answered 0, because it is not possible, then you would be correct. Ergo, steel junkyard.
Please don’t think that I am a NIMBY. Because if Dalton called me up tomorrow and said “Luckywife, I want you to have a wind turbine! I’m going to give you a grant to help you pay for it, a tax break, and $.80 for every kwh it generates!” You know what my response would be? I’d want to know if I took down my deck, my shed, my pool and my spruce tree, could I fit two?
Best regards,
Luckywife
Anonymoose said
LuckyWife,
“Question: How many wind turbines would it take to supply the energy needs of 5000 homes?
If you answered 0, because it is not possible, then you would be correct. Ergo, steel junkyard.”
I’m afraid I do not understand this statement. Not possible?? Are you serious? Wind turbines can produce many megawatts of electricity. Currently in Ontario we have over 1000 MW of capacity which (assuming 30% efficiency at any instant in time) will easily run over 10000 homes. There is over another 2000MW currently under construction. To get the same power from coal would require burning about 3 million tonnes.
You’re right it’s not NIMBYism. You just don’t understand anything about energy production or use.
Matt Maddocks said
Anonymoose – I don’t concur with your math, and I do understand a few things about energy;
As of the end of 2009, total output of all Ontario active windfarm energy production was rated at approx 2.3 MW.
According to the CEC, the average Canadian home consumes approx 2 kW annually.
This output of wind-sourced energy would therefore heat and light approx 1150 homes.
According to census, the total number of households in Ontario in 2009 was approx 3.9 million.
1150 homes in 3.9 million represents approx. 0.3%.
My point is that wind power, while cool, green, clean, and hip, in reality produces a mouses-fart worth of demanded energy in Ontario. And and I’ve always held the opinion to address the bigger issue of human consumption and demand, rather than the delivery system, I don’t currently place much stock in turbines, at least at this point in their development.
Luckywife, keep the deck, shed, pool, and spuce. Way more fun in the summer than a couple of gawkly ol’ windmills anyway.
How did we get on this anyway? Weren’t we talking about the recount?
Luckywife said
To Anonymoose:
Actually, our current wind capacity is 1152MW, with another 491MW scheduled to come online in the next year. Where are the wind farms of the other 1500MW of the 2000MW you mentioned as being “currently under construction” being built? When will they come online?
To assume “30% efficiency at any instant in time” is very generous and misleading. For instance, in April of 2009 we averaged a wind output of 41%, when we did not need it. In June of the same year, we averaged 14%, when we did need it. Wind power cannot be generated on demand. It cannot be stored for later use. Mother Nature is 100% in control of whether we have output – or not. Having 2000 turbines on a farm as opposed to 200 will certainly increase the MW output, but it won’t change the rate of efficiency. At best, it will only ever provide us with supplemental power. All that we can do is to try and forecast the wind, like we do weather conditions. That is no more of a guarentee than the weather forecast is.
I think that I am quite justified to have reservations about our government preaching wind power as the holy grail of green energy. It is not selfish and shortsighted to worry over sky-rocketing hydro bills. Billions already spent, billions more in the future, all of it on credit. That’s an awful lot of eggs in one basket. I am not arguing that green energy is kind to our enviroment. It is. I am not convinced that in our climate, that wind or even solar is the best solution for us, given its costs and limitations.
Luckywife said
Sorry Matt, I’m the one that brought it up and took us off topic. Too much time on my hands this week, Luckyhusband is away on a business trip. I’m bored and lonesome and of course, kids, being teenagers, want nothing to do with me unless I am cooking them a meal or chauffering them around town.
Note to self: Shut the hell up and go to bed!
Regards,
Luckywife
Anonymoose said
Luckywife, don’t be sorry. This is a perfectly valid discussion for Aurorans to be having. Matt your numbers are the ones that are off kW are a measure of instantanious power. Your A/C uses close to 2KW at any moment in time. Over the course of a month an average household will use anything between 30-60 kWH. That is killowatt-hours.
Luckywife, you’re right. I misread some other OPA documents. When doing some googling just now, I can across this which is a nice summary.
http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/current-electricity-contracts/wind-power
I never claimed that wind power is the holy grail, nor I think did OPA. As you say it is unpredictable and can never be counted on to supply more than about 10% . Especially without some quick responding peaker plants or better storage technology, to mitigate the variance of wind energy. That does not mean that wind energy should not be an integral part of a green solution, just as hydro already is, and solar should be. There is no reason for example that we should not have a grand windfarm 15KM off the shore of lake Ontario.
Why is 30% misleading? 41% one month, 14% another. 30% over a year could be quite reasonable. Especially if you have multiple farms spread across the province.
Paul Sesto said
To add to the info from Luckywife, Matt Maddocks and Anonymoose, one of the problems with wind turbines is that they are either fully on (and variable with the power output) or off depending on the wind speed. If the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine there is no wind or solar (adding that into the discussion) energy. Yes, it adds to the grid but it is not consistent and reliable. So as more wind and solar are added so as to reduce coal burning plants, more peaker plants may also have to be added to provide the power on cloudy or windless days (the wind turbines also apparently freewheel if the wind is too strong). Hydro electric in Ontario may be the most reliable green energy but we have probably tapped “that stream” to the max. The answer to Ontario’s power needs is a whole new debate.
auroracitizen said
We have opened up another post about the wind turbine and power discussion. Please make future comments here.
https://auroracitizen.ca/2010/11/20/discussion-topic-hydro-power/
Disenchanted said
….once again, CONGRATULATIONS Paul Pirri!
….now the manipulator(s) can fade away into oblivion.
Anonymous said
Yahoo! Who was that masked man? …uh not an Aurora councillor, that’s for sure!
Matt Maddocks said
Brian Duff went +3 in the recount – cheers Brian!
Brian Duff said
Darn too bad I left the other 265 votes in my other pants! I was very confident that Paul would prevail and look forward to the new council. It was an interesting day I must say!
Brian
someone who loves this town more than politics said
Brian,
If you’re still looking for that job see me at Tuesday’s council meeting.
Chris
Brian Duff said
See you tonight!
Luckywife said
Wow, a difference of 2 negative votes for Granger. That cost us $3250.00 per vote. I only wish it had been televised. I would have like to witness Mr. Leach confirm to Steve-O that he really is a loser. Now that, might have been worth it.
Luckywife
Luckywife said
Whoops! I was looking at Evelina’s count. Granger only dropped one. I still wish I could have seen his face. Hope we won’t be hearing from him again for at least another four years.
Luckywife
Something Fishy in Aurora..... said
Congrats to those who were elected.
Hopefully The Lone Granger mounts up on Silver and take his Kemo Sabe Tonto Wilson with him and ride off quietly
Oh and don’t forget the villain with the evil stare
All should now be safe in farmers market land for ice cream vendors
james said
Granger as any other councillor was entitled to a recount since the gap was narrow.On the other hand, because the initial vote was confirmed, the public may remember the revote and its cost to the taxpayer in the next election.
Bugs Bunny said
Yeah, instead of getting 8th place, he almost ended up in 10th!
What a maroon.
Tim the Enchanter said
Ya’ mean it’s really over?
None of the top eight have links to Al Qaeda?
No seismic anomolies or increased sun spot activity over Town Hall today?
No chance that any children of Town staff got Halloween candy at Geoff Dawe’s house?
The recount is legit?
Ok.
Just makin’ sure.
I’d hate to think Granger didn’t get a fair shot at blowing my tax dollars.
So that’s it then.
One more meeting so the gang can name streets after themselves and we’ll be good to go for the new council.
Finally!
Uncle! said
Can we send Granger the $6500 bill?
Anonymous said
Show me the $6500 bill – I still think that this cost us next to nothing. I don’t buy the staff costs arguement, they may have to work through a lunch or two to catch up on the work that they would have done but we are paying their salaries anyways.
Kelli said
Anonymous – be a stand up person and stop hiding, you actually confirm all of our points about council and Madame Mayor, as you appear to be too scared or too embarassed to bring yourself to the table!
October Came, Thanks were Given said
Of course Mayor Morris took a day off without pay to act as a scrutineer, or did we the taxpayers get screwed again?
Matt Maddocks said
Anonymous – what an ignorant, arrogant statement to make regarding Town staff.
Work through a few lunches?? We’re paying their salaries anyway?? Hell, why not stay late, work weekends too? As long as we’re paying their salaries, who cares what we get them to do and when we get them to do it – proper town business can always wait!
No wonder there were high-fives and fist-pumps from staff when you ass-hats got the boot.
Anonymous said
For those of you that get a salary, you would understand that you are paid for doing a job – not an hourly wage. You work however long it takes to do the job.
So, the Mayor did not take a day off without pay – based on how many things a Mayor or Councillor does “outside” of their role at town hall, it’s a even trade – whether you like Morris or not.
Matt, how is that ignorant or arrogant? In my job, I work until the job is done. By the way – how is this NOT proper town business?
Kelli said
Matt, once again you make an awesome point! Thanks for standing up for the little guy …. god forbid they are worthy of having uninterrupted breaks!
David Heard said
There is a God.
Simplydebinaurora said
I guess that answer the $6500 question! Now, let’s get on with the towns business.