Hugh Mackenzie
Huntsville Doppler
It seems that Huntsville Mayor Scott Aitchison is “disgusted” with public reaction, especially on social media, to Council’s decision to virtually ignore much of its own bylaw related to the heritage designation of Hart House. How sad.
For those who may not know, Hart House is a Huntsville treasure. It was built 120 years ago and its unique Queen Anne style, its majesty and its dominance are an important part of our local history. It holds the stories of many families, including a murderer, and it served effectively as Huntsville’s first hospital. Consequently, Hart House has been designated as a heritage site for many years.
In very recent years, a new owner purchased the property and applied to Council for some variations to its heritage designation. After considerable debate, these were granted. As I understand it, however, as these approved changes proceeded, substantive additional renovations occurred which were not approved and which many felt changed the historic nature of Hart House. There was a public outcry and Council was faced with deciding whether they should enforce their bylaw and order the unauthorized renovations removed, or to approve them retroactively. Council decided to allow them to stand. Now I will not take Council to task for this decision, even though I do not agree with it. It was a tough call that had to be made one way or the other and Council made it. That is what we elected them to do.
What I do object to, however, is the rampage the Mayor indulged in when Council approved these unauthorized renovations because he was “disgusted” by public comments from people who disagreed with Council on the Hart House issue. In part, he was defending staff, which I understand. They do not make policy. They follow it. Most municipal staff recognize that splash from decisions and actions by elected officials sometimes lands on them. Indeed, sometimes it makes life difficult. It’s unfortunate, but it happens. What is fortunate is that we have many strong and effective public servants on our municipal staff.
What annoyed me however, was the Mayor’s lack of understanding of the right of taxpayers to vocally disagree with decisions that he and his Council make. Instead of recognizing that the Hart House decision would make a lot of people unhappy, he almost boasted about it. He lashed out at the critics and heaped praise on the owners of Hart House even thanking them for the previously unauthorized renovations to the building. He patronized the public by saying they didn’t understand the Heritage Act but ignored his responsibility to have communicated that to them. He was at his best from his bully seat.
The public has every right to hold the Mayor and Council accountable. The Mayor and Council have no right to criticize them for doing so. It is an important and fundamental democratic right and being held accountable and subject to criticism goes with the territory. So suck it up.
Mayor Scott Aitchison has entered the third year of his four year term of office. In many ways, it is a pivotal year, when people will take a hard look at what he has done and how he has exercised the leadership that has been entrusted to him. I am sure he is very confident. In fact, word on the street is that he plans to run again and is confident that no one would dare to run against him. He may be right and, for the record, certainly it will not be me. I have learned that lesson! But, in my view, he is showing early signs of becoming too comfortable in his own seat.
To many, Scott Aitchison is a hail fellow well met. He is very good on his feet and, when he wants to be, he is an excellent people person. But those who know him well and many of his colleagues know that he can also be arrogant, sarcastic, mean-spirited and unforgiving. It is a brave person who has the courage to stand in his way. He has been pretty good at keeping much of this from public view but the cracks are beginning to show as illustrated at Council last week.
In my view, during the next year, people will begin to hold the Mayor more accountable. When they see the 2017 tax increase, they will ask why the past three annual tax increases have been well above increases in income for most people in Huntsville. They will also want to know where the money went. As well, as the realities of hospital care in Muskoka become more clear, they may challenge him on this flip flop related to a full-service hospital for Huntsville. He could even be asked why he does not reside in the municipality he serves, although he does own rental property here.
How Mayor Aitchison addresses these or other controversial issues as the election cycle winds down will directly affect his ability to successfully seek another term of office. He has the potential to be a good Mayor and, in fact, he and his Council have accomplished some good things. But he is not there yet and arrogance, self-satisfaction and disdain for those who disagree with him or question him can trump any of these accomplishments.
Scott Aitchison knows how to be an effective communicator. To date, in my view, we haven’t seen enough of it. It is time that we did.
Hugh Mackenzie
Don’t miss out on Doppler! Sign up for our free, twice-weekly newsletter here.
Couldn’t agree more, Derek….Staff didn’t even look out the window to see what was going on……
In once sense, I can agree with Jason – it is just a house; yet I think there is a larger issue than that at stake – someone at the municipal level made a mistake – and I haven’t heard anything about that – I heard the Mayor praise the staff – but did the staff really do its job and thus is very noteworthy of praise from all, or was the Mayor and Council only told about the situation after the fact?
Staff deserves praise when they do their job and do it correctly. Tax payers don’t deserve to be called “disgusting” any more than anyone does.
I am sorry that I made a comment that didn’t get a positive response (by positive, I don’t mean that anyone agreed with me) – but I don’t like being called disgusting.
It`s sad you feel this way Jason. Do I detect a little “Trump” streak in you? Why would you think any money saved by gov`t would ever find its way to people who need help. Maybe you haven`t lived long enough to see how the world really works!!!!
That’s one viewpoint, Jason. But there are many people who value the architecture and the history that century homes such as Hart House represent, people who seek out these lovely buildings that have been so carefully preserved over generations. When our Town adopted the logo “Touch the Past, Embrace the Future”, we represented ourselves as a community that is committed to preserving our heritage, and I think that draws visitors to Huntsville. This beautiful Queen Anne-style home was built 120 years ago by a local master builder for a historically important person. It was lovingly restored and maintained for years. Countless people have visited and photographed this iconic building. It’s a house that would be treasured in any other community. And yet, like yourself, our Town leaders don’t seem to see its value.
Sure, it may make more “fiscal sense” to tear these heritage homes down and build modern, energy efficient, “green” houses in their place, just as we could replace our beautiful old Main Street architecture with more modern, streamlined metal and glass shops. But don’t you think that would destroy what’s so unique about our community? The beauty, the charm, the history? Some of the very things that draw visitors to Huntsville and feed our economy? In that respect, I think it makes “fiscal sense” to preserve these heritage homes.
Well said! Was ‘trump these accomplishments’ a Freudian slip?
Who cares, it’s damn house and it doesn’t make anyone’s life easier or better because of its heritage designation! The fact that governments piss money away on these types of buildings when tearing them down and replacing them makes way more fiscal sense is pathetic. Think of the money, time, and energy that could be saved. Now think of who we that saved money, time, and energy can go to helping people get their feet back under them.
Like Hugh, I was disappointed that our mayor failed to acknowledge the many concerned citizens of our town who believe in working hard to preserve our heritage. I spoke to many who were saddened by the inability to protect this one particular designated property from the gradual changes that have been allowed to occur. They, like I, believe that more could have been done to enforce the designation, in a way that would have respected the rights of the property owner, and preserved the key features of this important property. There is nothing “disgusting” about having a passion for heritage protection. On the contrary, I think it speaks well of our town that we have many people that care enough to make an effort to preserve it. I don’t think it serves any of us to pit one side against the other by reducing those who respectfully opposed the changes to the realm of bullies on social media.
Hear, hear! Thank you, Hugh.