The Latest on the Bilingual Sign By-law Debacle...

Read the Recent Press Release
 Read the Media Coverage

What if...

"Township is looking to implement new by-law that would require residents who wish to put 'Welcome Mats' in front of their houses, for the mats to be bilingual. Non-compliance would be punishable through fines."

As bizarre as it sounds, this statement, though false, invokes a reaction similar to that of businesses in our area. "Who do they think they are... they can't tell me how to express myself". The sad truth is that our municipal council has no trouble telling you how to express yourself and that if you don't express yourself the way they have decreed, they will fine you.
How would you react if your municipal government told you that the welcome mat in front of your house must be bilingual otherwise you will be given a fine?  What if they told you that it's for your own good that they have this law?  Would you buy the argument that in order to show respect to all French and English residents of your community, they must have that law and that you should simply comply without questioning what they are removing... your freedom and right to express yourself.

 Would it matter if Township Council told you that "they know what's better for you than you do", that they know how you should "express" yourself better than you do?
Would it matter if they Mayor told you that your freedom of expression wasn't actually being removed because you could still express yourself, but it has to be in 2 languages?
Would it matter if the Mayor told you that, in essence, you needed to be "forced" to show respect to both linguistic communities of the Township because he didn't think you respected them already?
The Russell Chamber of Commerce wants to ensure that people understand what we are fighting for.  We are not against promoting bilingualism. To say that because we oppose the bilingual sign by-law, that we oppose bilingualism would be totally false. The fact is that the representatives from the Chamber who sat on the municipal committee (that was charged with studying the validity of the by-law, along with many of the other participants) provided several suggestions on how the Township could promote bilingualism and bilingual signs by providing incentives for businesses to change their signs from being unilingual to bilingual.
Incentives such as providing the translation service of the Township to businesses so as to lower their costs of making changes.  Another incentive that was advanced was to offer discounts on sign permits to businesses who put up bilingual signs.
Not only do these options follow the "honey attracts bees better than vinegar" way of thinking but also allows the choice to still reside with the business owner which is what we've been trying to reinforce during this entire debate.
Were these (and the other) options that came out of that committee seriously looked at instead of forcing this onto businesses?  The answer is no. To ignore real ways of promoting bilingual signage (as these incentives could have encouraged businesses who have existing signs to change them) in favour of a by-law that intends to punish non-compliance only creates animosity. Offering a hand as opposed to cracking a whip would have served the cause put forward by the Mayor far better than the route he chose.

 Restricting freedom speech!
 Anytime someone is forced to say or write something against their will (or negating their will), their freedom to express themselves has been eliminated.  This isn't a matter of degrees.  Once you can't express yourself in the language of your choice, "free speech" is no longer there. Removing the right (as it is currently a business' right) to how the content of your sign appears and forcing you to make it suit someone else undermines how free-market economies work.
Opposing the Bilingual Sign By-law doesn't mean we oppose bilingualism
 The sad reality is that this by-law would not make our community more "bilingual".  Not only would this by-law create the "illusion" of bilingualism but it would only affect new businesses and new signs.  With all of the existing businesses retaining their signs (either unilingual English or French), what does it really accomplish? Not a whole lot but create divisiveness when it wasn't there before.
 

Click here to listen to our Mayor defend the By-law on the Prof. Gerry Cammy Show
Originally aired on Sunday June 22, 2008
His guests were Russell Mayor Ken Hill and Ottawa Sun Columnist and former Russell Councillor Tom Van Dusen.
The Chamber's request to be part of the panel was flatly refused.  We were also told "not to bother calling in" as we would not be given any airtime (despite it being a call-in show).
 

 

 

What's the difference between a 3-2 vote and a 2-2 vote with the Mayor breaking the tie?

Most people who've ever been in a committee or on a board of directors (or even Mayors in municipal government) know that when your committee/council is split down the middle on an issue, it's a big sign that the issue in question is a serious one.

Most leaders err on the side of caution and vote against the proposed motion with the aim of looking at what needs to be done to achieve consensus. To simply say the 3-2 vote represents the majority, though statistically valid, is misleading.  When there's a tie among Councillors, it signifies that the issue if far from "agreed upon" and one should ask themselves why that is.
 

Did you know...
The "swing vote" on municipal council's 3-2 vote that will take away the rights of Russell businesses to advertise in the language of their choice, was placed by a Councillor that doesn't even call Russell Township his home!
Councillor Donald St-Pierre actually lives in another municipality.
Though he owns a piece of land in Russell Township (all that is required to run for municipal council), he's a resident of The Nation Township (located just East of Russell Township, La Nation's municipal council enacted a similar sign by-law).
 
 

Your business' sign is your identity!
 Outside of your business card, your sign is the greatest outward expression of who you are.  You don't put things on your sign that don't apply to you (that would be fraudulent). Businesses take great care on how they appear to potential customers and to mislead anyone isn't the practice of legitimate business owners.  Forcing you to put a language on your sign that isn't your own (or one you can't communicate in at all) falsely expresses to any potential customer (who expects you to speak that language) a misleading scenario. You know who you are more than anyone else.  Don't let others dictate your branding/message to you.
  
 Existing businesses to be exempt is FALSE!
 Proponents of this by-law are quick to say that "existing businesses" will be automatically 'Grandfathered' and that the by-law only applies to new businesses.  As recently as last week, Councillor Dicaire was quoted saying she didn't understand why existing businesses opposed the amendment professing that it only applied to new businesses (Journal La Nouvelle - 9th paragraph).
  
This is simply not true.  What is exempt is the "existing sign" and not the "existing business". Here is the actual proposed amendment:

"The message or the content of any new commercial sign shall be bilingual . The lettering of a commercial sign (dimension and style) must be identical in French and in English . However, the name of a business can be unilingual for a commercial sign."
 (click here to view the actual clause signed by council)

The by-law clearly applies to all "new signs" and not exclusively to "new businesses".  This means that if you are an existing business and plan on erecting a sign or replacing your old sign, this by-law will apply to you! Why mislead existing businesses in this fashion?  So they have less opposition from both existing French and English business owners. 

Here is some of the media coverage related to this issue:
  (the opinions expressed in the linked articles do not necessarily represent those of the Russell Chamber of Commerce)

Site maintained by The Bourque Group