At the October 8th Oxford County Council meeting (timestamp 2:28:40), councillors had a simple choice: support transparency or keep the public in the dark.
The Township of Norwich had sent a letter asking Oxford County to answer a list of straightforward questions about its green initiatives and spending — the kind of accountability any resident would expect when tax dollars are involved.
Rather than ignore the issue, Tillsonburg Mayor Deb Gilvesy proposed an amendment to the motion. Her request was clear: for the sake of transparency and clarification, she asked that County staff prepare a report answering Norwich’s questions publicly.
Woodstock Councillor Tait seconded the amendment, saying,
“I think we should be completely transparent on these questions. It’s extremely important to the public.”
You’d think that would be a no-brainer.
But instead of supporting open answers, most county councillors voted against it.
How Each Councillor Voted on the Transparency Amendment
✅ Voted FOR transparency:
- Mayor Deb Gilvesy (Tillsonburg)
- Councillor Tait (Woodstock)
- Mayor Jerry Acchione (Woodstock)
- Mayor Phil Schaefer (East Zorra–Tavistock)
❌ Voted AGAINST transparency:
- Warden Marcus Ryan (Zorra)
- Mayor Peterson (Blandford–Blenheim)
- Mayor Mayberry (South-West Oxford)
- Councillor Martin (Woodstock)
- Mayor Palmer (Norwich)
- Alternate Wilson (for Ingersoll’s Mayor Petrie)
The amendment failed — 6 to 4.
What Warden Ryan Said
Warden Marcus Ryan opposed the amendment, giving two reasons.
First, he said approving Norwich’s request would “send the wrong message” because council had previously denied a similar request from residents.
He continued:
“This potentially sets a dangerous precedent for councils to call on each other—demand that each other do things.”
Ryan warned against what he called “tit for tatting each other,” and questioned whether councils should be “oversighting” one another. He argued that councils must “respect each other’s jurisdiction” and “stay out of each other’s way.”
He concluded that Oxford County has worked well by keeping those boundaries clear — and for that reason, he would not support the transparency amendment.
Councillor and Mayor Responses
Councillor Tait pushed back, saying:
“That was a little extreme, your comments. And I’d just like to point out quite often that the Upper hasn’t always respected the Lower… This is information and there’s dollar amounts attached. And if it’s already public, we’re not asking something extreme.”
Mayor Acchione added:
“I am going to respectfully disagree with you. I think this is the chance that each of us lower tier municipalities do have… bring it here to the table and ask for any kind of discussions.”
Both emphasized that this was about openness, not interference.
But despite those calls for clarity, transparency lost the vote.
What Happened Next
After the amendment failed 6–4, Council moved to vote on the original motion — simply to receive Norwich’s letter as information.
The sound cut out before the full tally could be heard, but the takeaway was unmistakable: The council voted to merely receive the request from Norwich as information, essentially filing it away. Clearly Oxford County Council is still not ready to open the books or answer basic questions from the public or from its member municipalities.
Why It Matters
This wasn’t about climate politics or jurisdictional turf wars. It was about accountability — the right of residents and local councils to know how public money is being spent in the name of climate initiatives.
If County leaders are confident in their decisions, then producing a transparent report should be simple. The refusal to do so only fuels doubt and frustration.
Take Action: Demand Transparency
We’ve said it before — Oxford residents are paying more than ever and being told less than ever.
If you believe in open government and honest answers, now’s the time to speak up. Call or email your mayor and councillor — ask them where they stand on transparency. Sign the petition calling for 0% tax increase until Oxford council proves to taxpayers that they can exercise real fiscal responsibility.
Transparency isn’t a luxury — it is a duty. And Oxford deserves better.
8 responses to “Who Stands for Transparency? Oxford County Votes on the Norwich Motion”
-
I am stunned at the outcome of this vote for transparency! First residents’ request was denied, then one from a member township!! How can ANYONE be OK with this?? Pay attention Oxford County residents as to HOW YOUR MAYOR voted! Elections are coming up next year.
-
We couldn’t agree more! The vote on transparency is indeed shocking, and dismissing resident and township requests is a major red flag. Oxford County residents need to pay attention to how their mayor or councillor voted. Let’s hold our leaders accountable! With elections coming up, it’s time to demand the transparency we deserve. Stand4Oxford stands with you in advocating for meaningful change!
-
-
I find it interesting that the issue of disclosure was denied.
What is there to be hidden?
Is there something they “nay” voters are afraid to disclose?
Norwich Township Mayor Palmer..shame on you! Thought you were voted in to represent our township!-
We share your concerns. The denial of disclosure raises serious questions about what might be hidden from our community. Transparency is vital for good governance, and without it, trust erodes. Mayor Palmer’s decision is particularly disappointing, especially since the request for disclosure came from his own council. While the vote’s outcome is disheartening, we must not give up. Let’s stand together and continue advocating for a transparent and accountable local government!
-
-
As a property tax payer in Woodstock I am concerned that some of the current members on county and city council are out of touch with the current economic situation both local and country. I’m not sure if all the council members are home owners or renters but it’s time that these individuals understand the financial pressure their decisions have on people. I refer to home owners and renters differently because those who rent may not be feeling the increases to property tax increases because their rent is governed by the Provincial government at approx. 2.5% whereas home owners are feeling the full brunt of the property tax increase of 10% or more. Council members need to be reminded that the money spent is not their money but rather tax payers and they need to be more fiscally responsible.
-
You’ve summed up what a lot of residents are feeling right now. Many homeowners are struggling with steep tax increases, while council seems disconnected from how those costs impact daily life.
It’s a reminder that taxpayer money isn’t council’s to spend freely — it comes from hard-working residents who expect responsible decisions and clear priorities. At Stand4Oxford, we’ll keep pushing for transparency, accountability, and a stronger focus on affordability in every budget discussion.
-
-
Transparency, honesty, accountability , responsibility equal intergrity…none of these things should require a vote…it’s ridiculous and underhanded and makes one wonder nefarious and corrupt things.
-
Agreed. If council has to vote on whether to be transparent, something’s gone wrong. Stand4Oxford will keep pushing for open, responsible leadership our community can trust.
-
Leave a Reply