I understand the council voting to strike down the merger give public sentament. But I agree that the public was not well informed in this case. It is sad that fear can rule our choices rather than logic.

Thank you for your efforts. As a Ward 4 voter I intend on casting my vote for people like Mike who look past the fear and look to what is best for Guelph even if others don’t see it.

Guelph Mercury Editorial

Simon says . . . Sometimes it’s tough being Simon, and by that, I mean the leader or at least a leader.

I often think some, if not most, people have a skewed perception as to what a leader is supposed to do. I think a leader’s job is to do what’s best for his or her followers, even if the followers don’t know it’s best.

Guelph’s city council has a long list of major issues for which real leadership has been required, the latest being the failed hydro merger between Guelph Hydro Inc. and Horizon Utilities Corp. out of Hamilton.

The city voted the proposal down Monday night by an 8-5 margin.

Most councillors had well-thought-out rationale for their decisions, either for or against.

However, there’s one argument that doesn’t fly with me, if it’s the only reason, and this is where I think many will disagree: Because your constituents spoke out in opposition to the deal.

I know politicians are told they must listen to their constituents. And it’s true. But what’s more important is to represent your constituents.

Often, people don’t know what they want or what’s best. That’s why leaders are chosen or elected. Leaders have to make difficult decisions, sometimes unpopular decisions.

Many councillors at Monday’s meeting said they were concerned they weren’t going to get re-elected for making the decision they made. But good for them for sticking to their guns if they thought their decision was truly best for Guelph. That’s leadership.

There were others who said the public outcry was a big reason they were making their choice. That’s not leadership, unless it’s backed up with facts and research.

The Wal-Mart case was a great example of this. For more than a decade, the city’s leaders fought hard to prevent the store from opening in Guelph because of vocal constituents.

When the store finally opened, it had a hugely successful grand opening — I’ve heard the best in Canada. Fighting it for a decade was a waste of time, money and was more a case of pandering to a few vocal opponents rather than thinking about what was best for the city’s residents.

Leadership is about making decisions.

The hydro case was filled with good and bad decisions. Not showing the public the business case, even a heavily redacted version, was a poor choice. It’s like being a major employer and saying “we laid off less than 1,000 people,” which leaves most people thinking the worst.

The public likely lashed out largely because the deal was shrouded in secrecy.

Locking the city into a two-year negotiation in which there was no way to talk to anyone else about mergers was also a bad idea. We let the other leaders manhandle us, which is too bad.

I’m hoping the hydro decision was a good one — I think it was — but only time will tell in this case.

Hopefully, this won’t be Guelph’s next blown opportunity, like becoming a 20 per cent partner in the Region of Waterloo International Airport or part of Canada’s Technology Triangle. The city pulled out of both deals, both likely bad decisions in hindsight (the airport was a bad decision at the time, too).

Perhaps Ontario’s energy providers will be gulped up by three big powerhouses — as we were led to believe by proponents of the merger — and we’ll be left as a little fish in a big pond with other, much bigger carnivorous fish.

Or maybe we’ll merge with Waterloo and we’ll enjoy life in our own mid-sized pond with other friendly fish.

In a situation like the hydro decision you should ask yourself: what would Simon do?

While other members of Council found reasons to put up a wall between Council and the Board – dismissing the Board as elitist and/or creating conspiracy theories – you had the courage to sit down with them and engage in an open dialogue. That meant you had to be prepared to have your own assumptions, biases and worldview challenged. As a consequence, you caught the exciting opportunity for our community.

I congratulate those councilors who put their initial biases aside to do a proper analysis and come to an unpopular conclusion, and then to stand behind what was best for the community. That is what leadership is all about. Public office is not easy, so thanks to all for your efforts.

I wish to extend to you all heartfelt thanks for all of the work that you and the staff have obviously put into the decision last evening. The decision was very close so it could have gone either way. Regardless, I respect the diligent pursuit of the best decision each of you could make for this city. This kind of debate is a hallmark of democracy and you have pursued it vigourously and I am sure it was painful at times.

None of what you have said has fallen on deaf ears. I am convinced that this debate also marks the beginning of our awareness that we must be more attentive to our civic responsibilities as citizens. You are all exemplary role models and I admire this in your leadership.