The views and opinions expressed in these articles and letters to the editor are those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect those of JustSayinCaledon.com, its owner or other authors.
Do I Miss Being Mayor? Yes. And No.
People often ask me if I miss “it.”
And by “it,” they mean being Mayor.
The answer isn’t a simple yes or no.
Because there is much I do miss.
I miss the opportunity to serve a community I love.
I miss working alongside people who genuinely care about making Caledon a better place.
I miss the conversations, the challenges, the opportunities to make a difference and, perhaps most of all, the privilege of helping shape the future of a community that means so much to my family and me.
And, like anything else, there are things I don’t miss.
Public service is not always easy.
Nor should it be.
There are difficult decisions, competing priorities, heated debates and, inevitably, people who disagree with the decisions you make.
I experienced all of that during my five terms on Caledon Council.
But I also learned something important: Good governance isn’t measured by whether everyone agrees with you. It’s measured by how responsibly you make decisions, how respectfully you treat those who disagree and how faithfully you honour the trust residents have placed in you.
And that brings me to the past four years.
Like many Caledon residents, I have watched developments at Town Hall with growing concern.
At times, disappointment.
And, frankly, disbelief.
There are several issues that trouble me deeply. But perhaps none more so than what has happened to Caledon’s capital reserves.
Building a legacy. Or spending one?
Municipal reserves are not particularly exciting.
They don’t make for catchy campaign slogans or colourful election brochures.
But they matter. Enormously.
They are an essential part of responsible financial stewardship. They help municipalities prepare for major infrastructure investments, maintain public assets, respond to unexpected demands and avoid placing unnecessary financial burdens on future taxpayers.
Building those reserves takes discipline. It takes patience. And it sometimes requires elected officials to make difficult, unpopular decisions today to protect the municipality tomorrow.
I remember well the focused attention given to Caledon’s reserves under the leadership of former Mayor Marolyn Morrison.
For four of my five terms on Council, strengthening those reserves was an important priority. It was a commitment shared across successive councils, reflecting an understanding that we were not simply managing the municipality for the present, but preparing it for the future.
It took years to build that financial foundation.
And it has been deeply troubling to watch the decisions made during this past term that have drawn so heavily upon it.
Interestingly, municipal reserves have been raised as an issue in previous election campaigns, sometimes with suggestions that earlier councils had depleted them.
That was never the case, yet today, however, there are legitimate questions about the extent to which our capital reserves have been reduced, what those funds have been used for and how they will be replenished.
I was particularly surprised to learn a mayoral candidate at a Ward 1 debate characterized the current Council’s approach as sound financial planning.
I would respectfully disagree.
There is a fundamental difference between having the financial capacity to spend money and exercising the financial judgment to spend it wisely.
Reserves are not simply money waiting to be spent. They represent years of careful planning and a responsibility to future generations.
And when they are drawn down, residents deserve a clear accounting of why, what has been accomplished and what the long-term consequences will be.
Because what takes years to build can be diminished remarkably quickly.
The importance of respect around the Council table
Financial stewardship is only part of the picture.
Equally troubling has been the apparent deterioration in the working relationships and culture of Caledon Council.
I served through my share of contentious issues. There were difficult meetings, passionate disagreements and decisions that left some residents deeply unhappy.
That is part of municipal government.
But there is an important distinction between disagreement and dysfunction.
A healthy Council does not require nine people to think alike. Quite the opposite. It requires nine independently-elected representatives who are willing to listen, question, debate and exercise their judgment in the best interests of the municipality.
The introduction of Strong Mayor Powers has fundamentally changed aspects of municipal governance. Combined with the recurring 5–4 voting divisions we have witnessed, it has raised questions about the balance of power, the independence of elected representatives and the willingness to consider differing perspectives.
Councillor Lynn Kiernan recently shared her reflections on the past term, describing what she characterized as a deterioration in the respect and collegiality essential to good local government.
Her account deserves thoughtful consideration.
So, too, do the concerns of residents who have attended Council meetings, made delegations, written letters and questioned decisions affecting their neighbourhoods and their community.
During my years on Council, I certainly encountered residents who disagreed with decisions we made. Sometimes vehemently.
But I struggle to recall another period when residents have so publicly expressed regret about the choices they made at the ballot box at public meetings.
That should give every elected official, and every voter, reason to reflect.
When campaigning becomes a distraction
Which brings us to the current municipal election.
Election campaigns have never been pretty affairs. I know that from personal experience.
There will always be competing visions, sharp criticisms, ambitious promises and candidates eager to persuade voters that they offer the best path forward.
That’s democracy.
But I am increasingly concerned about the amount of political messaging that seems designed less to inform voters than to distract, provoke or manipulate them.
Sound bites. Sensationalism. Selective information. Personal attacks.
And then there is the increasingly prominent role of registered third-party advertisers.
Third-party advertising is a legitimate and regulated part of Ontario’s municipal election process. Individuals and organizations are entitled to participate, express opinions and advocate for particular outcomes, provided they comply with the rules.
But that doesn’t mean voters should accept their messaging without scrutiny.
Just this week we have received a glossy, eight-page publication that appears to be devoted primarily to discouraging support for one particular mayoral candidate.
Its production represents a considerable investment. Yet how much do voters know about the individual behind it, the reasons for the campaign or the interests being advanced?
These are reasonable questions.
When an organization actively participates in election advertising and also hosts candidate debates, I believe voters are entitled to ask how impartiality is being maintained.
And when another debate is organized so close to Election Day, following an earlier opportunity by that organization for candidates to present their positions, it is reasonable to ask what additional purpose it serves, how the format was determined and whether every candidate is being treated fairly.
None of these questions, on their own, establishes improper conduct.
But asking questions about transparency, independence and motivation is not unreasonable.
It is part of being an informed voter.
Who is delivering the message?
Who is paying for it?
What interests are being represented?
And, perhaps most importantly, what information is being left out?
Those questions matter every bit as much as the message itself.
A little wisdom from Bill Rea
In campaigns past, we were fortunate to have people like the late Bill Rea, the longtime and well-respected editor of the Caledon Citizen.
Bill was a straight-shooter. An old-school newspaperman who understood his community, knew the players and had little patience for political nonsense.
He had a remarkable ability to cut through the rhetoric and get to the heart of an issue.
During times like this I often think back to an editorial he wrote during the 2014 municipal election.
His advice was simple: be particularly cautious about questionable or slanted information circulated in the final days of a campaign.
And when extraordinary accusations suddenly emerge against a candidate, don’t simply accept them at face value.
Twelve years later, his words remain remarkably relevant.
Sadly, we no longer have Bill to help us navigate the political noise.
But we can certainly heed his advice.
If something seems exaggerated, ask why.
If a message seems deliberately inflammatory, question its purpose.
If an accusation appears out of nowhere in the final days of a campaign, consider the timing.
And if something makes you stop and say, “Hmmm,” then give yourself permission to take that sober second thought.
Do your homework.
Look beyond the headlines and the glossy brochures.
Read different perspectives. Consider the records of those seeking office. Ask difficult questions. And don’t allow someone else’s political agenda to substitute for your own judgment.
What do you want your Caledon to look like?
Ultimately, this election isn’t about the personalities, the campaign signs, the advertising or the political theatre.
It is about Caledon.
It is about the financial health of our municipality, the integrity of its decision-making, the character of its leadership and the kind of community we want to leave for those who come after us.
My family’s roots in this community reach back generations. Like so many Caledon families, we have lived, worked, volunteered and invested ourselves in the place we call home.
That connection doesn’t end when you leave elected office.
Nor does the responsibility to care about what happens next.
So, do I miss being Mayor?
Yes. There are parts of public service I will always miss.
But what matters far more to me today is whether the people entrusted with leading our municipality understand the weight of that responsibility.
Whether they respect the residents they serve.
Whether they recognize that sound financial stewardship is an obligation, not an option.
And whether they appreciate that the decisions they make today will shape Caledon long after their own time in office has ended.
On October 26 and at the Advance Polls, the choice belongs to the voters.
And that is as it should be.
But before you cast your ballot, I would ask you to consider one question.
What do you want your Caledon to look like four years from now?
Think carefully about the answer.
Because the future of this community is too important to be decided by sound bites, sensationalism or the loudest voices in an election campaign.
It deserves our thoughtful attention.
It deserves our participation.
And, above all, it deserves our vote.
