posting
05-19-2010, 02:05 PM
Kingston City Council
May 18 2010
Jason here. Oh they did it again! Ran out of time before discussing the Barriefield option of land swap and voting on the 2nd phase of the third crossing environmental assessment. How long this can go on? Has the mayor given up? Something has to be done about this. How can matters of this import be discussed fully without draining the public patience? Maybe that is the answer. Wear them down!
This Council session was dominated – again – by questions of the engineering firm who completed the phase 1 assessment. They were called questions, but they were really policy statements. Councillor Garrison was correct when he protested that everyone knew how they were going to vote on the issue, so lets cut to the chase and vote on it. He had successfully moved the third crossing and the Barriefield discussion to the end of the agenda. I’ll bet he won’t do that again! In the meantime we heard about urban chickens. This was interesting. Councillor Hutchison submitted a mangled report to Council on the issue. He should have paid more attention. While the intent was clear, the wording of the report left much to be desired, saying as it did, that the report would come before the public meetings.
We also heard an interesting discussion on whether the ‘parallel service’ – the Access bus, the bus service for the disabled – was an ‘essential service’. This, I assume, means that in the case of a strike, the service would continue. Councillor Schmolka spoke passionately about the ‘right to strike’ and how hard won it had been, but most of the councillors were moved by the difficulties no service would cause in the lives of the disabled. Someone was heard to mutter that some of the Councillors who had been supported by the labour unions had voted in favour of the motion. I assume the implication here is that votes can be ‘bought’. This I really doubt. In the most recent municipal election the major contributors were the Councillors themselves. There just is not enough money at stake to buy anyone’s vote. If I saw a LOT of money being contributed – and this is no longer possible- I’d worry. I guess The GTA has this problem. We don’t – yet anyway.
By the way- are roosters an ‘essential service’?
May 18 2010
Jason here. Oh they did it again! Ran out of time before discussing the Barriefield option of land swap and voting on the 2nd phase of the third crossing environmental assessment. How long this can go on? Has the mayor given up? Something has to be done about this. How can matters of this import be discussed fully without draining the public patience? Maybe that is the answer. Wear them down!
This Council session was dominated – again – by questions of the engineering firm who completed the phase 1 assessment. They were called questions, but they were really policy statements. Councillor Garrison was correct when he protested that everyone knew how they were going to vote on the issue, so lets cut to the chase and vote on it. He had successfully moved the third crossing and the Barriefield discussion to the end of the agenda. I’ll bet he won’t do that again! In the meantime we heard about urban chickens. This was interesting. Councillor Hutchison submitted a mangled report to Council on the issue. He should have paid more attention. While the intent was clear, the wording of the report left much to be desired, saying as it did, that the report would come before the public meetings.
We also heard an interesting discussion on whether the ‘parallel service’ – the Access bus, the bus service for the disabled – was an ‘essential service’. This, I assume, means that in the case of a strike, the service would continue. Councillor Schmolka spoke passionately about the ‘right to strike’ and how hard won it had been, but most of the councillors were moved by the difficulties no service would cause in the lives of the disabled. Someone was heard to mutter that some of the Councillors who had been supported by the labour unions had voted in favour of the motion. I assume the implication here is that votes can be ‘bought’. This I really doubt. In the most recent municipal election the major contributors were the Councillors themselves. There just is not enough money at stake to buy anyone’s vote. If I saw a LOT of money being contributed – and this is no longer possible- I’d worry. I guess The GTA has this problem. We don’t – yet anyway.
By the way- are roosters an ‘essential service’?