Last night was the Rothesay All-Candidates meeting organised by Rotary with some 150 residents in attendance.

All-candidates meetings are generally more risky events for incumbent politicians than they are for challengers. That’s because the record of councillors seeking re-election is under the microscope and true to form, it certainly posed a risk last night.

The challengers, on the other hand, simply needed to demonstrate they would do things differently and they all did, in spades.

In the race for mayor, Pat Gallagher Jette Had the best night. She was relaxed, but at the top of her game when she made convincing points on the issue of open government and transparency.  In answer to a question from the audience, she outlined her frustration at trying to get basic information in town spending despite a motion of Council requiring staff to cooperate.

Three of the incumbents who sat together (Alexander, McGuire, and Grant), looked isolated at the far end of the Candidates’ table, telegraphing, in my opinion, a defensive posture that carried through into their statements and answers to questions. Alexander and McGuire made their remarks seated with elbows on the table, the only Candidates that didn’t bother to stand to address the audience.

Throughout the campaign Alexander, Wells (who didn’t attend last night), McGuire and Mayoral candidate Grant have not fundamentally changed their messaging that was heavy on lists of spending and light on accountability. Despite what must have been a rough round of conversations on the doorstep, that strategy didn’t seem to have changed last night.

Three issues that were raised require some further comment here; the Rothesay audit controversy; the arena debate; and growing concern about parking around the Common.

The Audit issue was raised by Dr. Grant’s intended correction of the record. She pointed out that contrary to what was being said, she and the entire council voted for the independant Rothesay audit.

Well, as an old colleague of mine would frequently say of politicians’ pronouncements, “There is the truth and then there is the whole truth.” In other words, selected facts without adequate context can leave the public with an incomplete picture of events. Without adequate context there can be no transparency.

Deputy Mayor Grant was correct to say that she didn’t vote against the audit motion. In fact she and the entire Council voted for the motion when the issue was returned to Council in April. What was not said last night, however, was that Dr. Grant had been unsuccessful the month previous, in March, in having the question of the audit tabled until after the May 9th election.

From my observation of that March Council session, it was clear that the head of the Finance Committee was frustrated then by the Deputy Mayor’s change of heart on the audit. That is, from her support for it previously in Finance Committee to her motion to table it, which she lost when no one would second her motion that March evening.

Transparency is about getting all the facts available especially those that provide context. I invite readers to read the council minutes of the March meeting by following the link here and going to the bottom of page 6 and judge for yourself.  The TJ article  from March is also here if you subscribe to the TJ online. Again, for the record, Council did finally vote for the audit one month later in April after a raging debate in the newspaper and public push back that saw most councillors and one of the Mayoral candidates, Dr. Grant, on the wrong side of the issue at the beginning of an election campaign.

The second issue last night was the question of a new Arena. It was clear that among the challengers last night, there was no discernible support for building a $15 million new Arena. Most who spoke on the issue, reflected Michael Butler’s position that a renovation of the existing building was the most prudent option.

The incumbents on the other hand, including Dr. Nancy Grant maintained their support for building new. To justify his support for a new build, Councillor McGuire stated that federal cost sharing was not available for renovation, only for new construction. To correct the record on that point I have provided a relevant  quote from the 2016 Budget document in the dialogue box below.

From Budget 2016, Chapter 2 – Investing in Cultural and Recreational Infrastructure

Budget 2016 proposes to provide $150 million to the Regional Development Agencies over two years, starting in 2016–17. This funding, which is cost-shared with municipalities, community organizations and non-profit entities, will support projects to renovate, expand and improve existing community and cultural infrastructure in all regions of the country… Emphasis added.

It appears McGuire didn’t do his homework on funding and has dismissed what appears to be a perfectly viable option in error.

Looking at the federal budget numbers, it’s clear there isn’t a lot of cash to go around and Rothesay would be wise to scale back its ask in any event.

Councillor McGuire also raised eyebrows when he argued that the arena renovation would cost $7 million not the $3.5m estimate provided in the recreation Master Plan by a consulting engineering firm in 2009. Where McGuire gets his new number is unclear as the town has not released any new engineering report to back up McGuire’s claim. McGuire also said, last night, that a renovation would mean two seasons lost without hockey.

To see how a renovation can be done efficiently and effectively all McGuire had to do was observe the RNS new arena dressing rooms project. It was completed for a fraction of what McGuire suggested taxpayers would have to fork out for a renovation of the Rothesay Arena and with little or no loss of ice time.  Perhaps Rothesay council should hire the project planner who did the RNS job and move McGuire to a committee other than recreation if he’s lucky enough to be re-elected.

The third issue raised was the parking issue and traffic congestion created by the siting of the new skating oval and rink on Rothesay Common. The incumbents like McGuire spoke of this as a good problem reflecting success of the project, while most of the new challengers like Tiffany Mackay French raised concerns over safety. Peter Lewis also saw this as a problem that could end in tragedy, an accident involving children. He favours making Church Avenue one way with diagonal parking. Where have we heard this before?

Michael Butler pointed out that the Common rink should never have been put in a place without parking, a point that would have been addressed if the town had done the proper planning and taken the project to its Planning Advisory Committee for the required review. This issue is still awaiting a decision from the New Brunswick Provincial Appeals Board.

We will have to wait until May 9th to see what the future direction will be on these issues.

Thanks to Rotary for putting on a great event.