Tuesday, December 7, 2010


Thumbs up to the majority of Council for last night's performance. I didn't listen to all the presenters but caught the Councillor comments prior to the vote.

Although I didn't agree with Clark's position he gets credit for being consistent and speaking for those in the minority. Lorje on the other hand continued to master the position of playing both sides of the fence. I'm not sure what Hill was saying nor am I sure that he knew what he was saying. As for the rest of Council they seemed to be voicing the opinion of the majority of their constituents and it seemed to run 75% in favour of a replica and 25% against. I suspect that was pretty accurate. I hope they re-do the bridge prior to applying for heritage status. It would be a shame to get the designation and then find out as a result of the designation they can't do what they intend to do.

Many comments were made yesterday about community associations. I personally think those groups play a valuable roll in that the majority of the organizations serve their communities in providing recreational and activities of interest to their particular communities. I applaud the majority of people involved for their interest, activism and volunteerism. These groups are established and receive some funding from the city. Every association has a difficult time filling the roster of volunteer positions. They should be appreciated for what they do and they are few and far between.

Problems result when, every now and then, an individual(s) gets involved for the wrong reasons and attempts to use the association for their own personal best interest. At this point they usually over step the boundaries. When it comes to a major decision, like the Traffic Bridge, I would think that if the association wanted to speak for the community it should require community input in the form of a special meeting that is well advertised within the neighbourhood. In this particular case, although the association published its regular meeting dates, it published no agenda listing this item as a topic for discussion.

Enough said.


  1. "As for the rest of Council they seemed to be voicing the opinion of the majority of their constituents and it seemed to run 75% in favour of a replica and 25% against"

    I sat through the whole debate on the bridge and your statement above is not accurate and this was just reinforced by the Mayor on Gormley show. They are not building a “replica” bridge. They are building a new steel truss bridge that is sympathetic to the original heritage. Sympathetic is not the same as replica.

    I agree with your comments on community associations.

  2. Anon 9:10
    At first I thought you might be splitting hairs, but now think your accessment is right on. The Heritage proponants showed great enthusiasim and did their job of drawing everyones attention to the history/heritage aspects of the debate which should be their job. Ultimately council came to the decision the majority of citizens preferred. Moving forward I think I will become more involved with my own Community Association because of yesterdays blog.

  3. I stand corrected. Thanks for your comment 9:10.

    Anon 9:47 - I applaud you for considering service to your community association. It will give you a real sense of your own neighbours and area.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.