Wednesday, May 11, 2011

If you really want to know . . .

I like the idea of a referendum on recycling. While we're at it, throw in the Mendel Art Gallery and find out whether the local tax base wants to contribute in excess of $40 million capital dollars to construct a new art gallery.

Our newest councillor Loewen says they already have feedback via the consultations hosted by the city. I'll forgive her that one given her limited time on council, but those consultations bring out a small percentage of the public and usually only those with die-hard beliefs on either side of the issue.

Councillor Hill says the city didn't go to referendum on the mandatory flood levy. That is true except for the fact that that levy was to be for a limited time to off set the damage during a horrendous flood circumstance. It wasn't intended to be permanent. And what started out to be a two or three dollar levy is now up to $15.00 on my utility bill.

Councillor Penner says he was elected to make decisions. True again, except for the public expected good decisions and respect for the tax payer.

Lorje states her concern about the proposed zones in the report and how to define basic level of service. I can't believe that the report wouldn't define the service expected and demanded from the successful bidders on the tenders. If the report doesn't define service levels council should be very concerned about the report as a whole and its validity.

The other reason for holding a referendum is that it tends to bring out voters. That may be the best reason for not holding one as the theory is incumbents have the edge on low voter turnout.


  1. Great post Mistress, why is everyone so up in arms about a referendum. We are having an election anyway, throw the issue on the ballot and let the people decide. It will also allow the City to refine some of the questions surrounding the RFP. Sean Shaw has a good summary on his blog, here are a couple of points:

    -Recycling collection and sorting will supposedly be delivered by private sector through a contract for $4.24, however, garbage collection (only) is costing tax payers $5.80 per household. Either the $4.24 is another low ball number to convince people to get on board with the program only to be hit with it's true cost at a later date, whatever that cost may be. Or else it is exposing our waste collection system as horribly inefficient and needing reform. If the second option is true, considering the bankrupt state of our city services and maxed our loans, do we really trust this Administration to keep running programs?

    -How does the City still intend to bind 3rd parties to their contract with Cosmo? Has Cosmo consented to being bound by these 3rd parties?

    Put it to a vote. What is the worst that can happen? .....Ooops we could lose it altogether like we did the downtown casino.

    This Council needs to go, please let their be a decent alternative to the Atch next election.

  2. I can't believe how stupid some people in this city are. THIS IS THE ENVIRONMENT PEOPLE!!!! It should be our number 1 concern at any cost. We are killing mother nature with our harmful living patterns. Any program that is good for the environment should be implemented regardless of cost. Environment comes first, money comes second. We can always save money by cutting from other programs that aren't as necessary.

    If anyone still has doubt about global warming and the environmental damage being done then please enroll and take a class at the university on the topic and EDUCATE YOURSELF.

    It is crazy how much more progressive the younger generation is, like students at our university, when it it comes to recycling and other environmental programs. Why does the rest of society refuse to listen? It makes me so sad.

    We need mandatory recycling in Saskatoon whether it costs $4 or $10 a month.

  3. First to Anon 8:12am
    You're right to question the low ball price on the RFP and it all has to do with legalities. If the prices received come in higher they can automatically refuse the bids and not have to accept. If they put a higher price and someone comes in under they will be bound by it even if it means a monopoly for one company.

    And Anon8:38
    Your pleas for us all to jump on the eco band wagon at any cost is just misguided brainwashed rhetoric. You obviously have drank the Koolaide that humans are to blame for even part of the worlds eco problems. Maybe you should see a bit by George Carlin on his view of the earth and our miniscule part in affecting it. The earthquake and associated tsunami in Japan should be enough evidence that Mother earth can take care of herself and can change the environment millions of times more than humans ever will.

    So is recycling necessary sure as long as it is done the proper way and is enforceable. Setting up a recycling in Saskatoon wont make people recycle. You will need to mold people into the concept. Just like making seat belts mandatory many people still dive without them.. Why.. because that is how they grew up. The younger generation has been inundated with the "Green" attitude and so of coarse they are more involved but charging a grandmother another $5 a month isn't going to make the world a cleaner place.

  4. Grizz

    Global warming is happening and that is a fact acknowledged by the vast majority of scientists. You say I should listen to George Carlin.... did you happen to miss a little film by AL GORE a couple years ago.

    Thanks but I'll trust the university professors over someone calling themself the Grizz.

    We do make a big difference, despite what the Grizz thinks, we need to address our carbon footprint on earth and we need to start with making programs like recycling mandatory so that it sends a message that the environment comes first.

    I'm not sure if people here have kids, but we need to leave the world in a better place for them than it is now, irregardless of what it costs.

    Anon 8:38

  5. So humans played no role in the nuclear disaster in Japan, because it was "Mother earth taking care of herself"?

    Talk about selectively making an argument.

    I, too, will take my chances with the guidance of the world's leading scientists over some anonymous poster named "the Grizz"

  6. go hug a tree for crying out loud. i want to use as much as i can as fast as i can before i die, what the hell do i care after i am dead. as for gores movie two thumbs down based and slanted info.if i hear much more whining my carbon footprint will be the one on your a##

  7. "I can't believe how stupid some people in this city are. THIS IS THE ENVIRONMENT PEOPLE!!!! It should be our number 1 concern at any cost"

    My number one concern is the health and safety for my family. This includes ensuring we have shelter, food, and clean water. Other priorities fall off from there.

    To say that anyone should be concerned about the environment over all other interests is not only ignorant, but dangerously so.

    We make choices every day, compromises that weigh risks versus rewards, costs versus benefits. This includes our choices on the environment.

    I could provide a number of examples of programs more deserving of our scare resources, but to paraphrase Ferris Bueller, a commenter with priorities so far out of whack doesn't deserve to waste any more of my time.

  8. "My number one concern is the health and safety for my family. This includes ensuring we have shelter, food, and clean water."

    Hmm... let's see. There is absolutely no connection between clean water and the environment. And food cannot possibly originate from nature, so no need to worry about the environment there, either.

    Dangerous ignorance indeed.

  9. Anon 8:38
    Do you really think humans can stop global warming?? People like you have a GOD complex. Gobal warming will happen, global cooling will happen, what is important to me and my decedents will be if humans can adapt to those changing conditions. I'm not against recycling but I have to agree with Anon 7:12pm that we have better ways to control waste then just tagging another $8 on everyone's taxes. I recycle could I do more sure. Do I believe we should have a law that makes it mandatory not sure I would go that far. We could take all those that disobey and put them in Jail. Hell Harper promised more jails, get them filled up with all those nasty non-recyclers. Maybe we could even build the jails out of the garbage they didn't recycle.

    AL GORE and his little movie have been debunked. And when did he become and expert on global warming.. probably got his creds from David Sazuki.

  10. Grizz,

    Anon 8:38, you are telling me that Global Warming and the message delivered by Al Gore has been debunked? I highly doubt that global warming has been dismissed by the masses. What the hell is happening in the world then??? The arctic is melting and there are new and unfamiliar storms hitting different parts of the world every year now.

    $8 is a small price to pay to save the world for future generations. You can't go halfway on saving the world, you either make a commitment to be 'Green' or you don't. In Canada we need to lead the charge and show the world what a difference recycling can make.

    It is just so frustrating to see your generation (I will assume you are 40 plus Grizz) not care about the future generations that you are leaving the planet too.

    I don't understand how $4.24 a month (what the city said it would cost) is going to cripple anyone. It's 4 FREAKING DOLLARS to save the environment. Look at cities that have a program and their participation rates. Why is Saskatoon any different????? If there is a program people will use it. It's such a small price to pay for such a worthy cause. Everything we do makes a difference.

    Anon 8:38

  11. Oh and I forgot, what do you now have against David Suzuki???? He is one of Canada's leading environmental minds.

    The mere fact that you have discredited Al Gore and David Suzuki, two people committed to the environment just leads me to think that you really don't care about the environment as you probably drive around in your SUV, drinking starbucks and littering the cups all over the city.

    David Suzuki is one of Canada's more innovative thinkers. Sheeesh knocking down David Suzuki now.

    anon 8:38

  12. There is not one molecule of carbon on earth today than there was when the earth was created, not one! All live on earth is carbon related and mother earth has been successfully been recycling carbon on her own for billions of years. We are just helping her by liberating all of her carbon that has been trapped underground for all those years. Ever bit of the awfull carbon we are liberating was organic at some time. We may very well be helping the developement of the Earth. Saskatoon and Saskatchewan have been a desert, under a kilometer of ice, the bottom of a sea and all of that before the first human ever. Get over yourselves. The earth will continue to be shaped by curcumstances way beyond our control. Who ever said the reactor fail in Japan was a force influenced by human intervention was obviously right, but that argument has nothing to do with recycling in Saskatoon. I am infavor of recycling and do so on my own, my problem is whenever the government at any level tells me they are going to help me I can feel my ass pucker!

  13. Anon 8:38 ever check into my Sazuki's degree. I'll listen to people that actually have studied the environment instead of those that are only lobbyist. I never said global warming isn't happening read my posts what I said is you are blind or even maybe gullible in your thinking that humans are the major or even significant in it happening. I have to agree with Anon 8:32am that this entire "green" at all costs is far more dangerous to our survival as I'm not worried about the world it has been here for many more years than us. Once again it isn't the world your worried about it is how will your descendants live in it.

    And as to your assumption to my age I see way more 50 somethings recycling than I do the younger crowd but hey maybe it's just the circles I run in.

    As to your assumption the the City's price of $4.25/household is nothing.. did you read the fine print of the RFP. This number is only an estimate costs will be determined by the supplier of the service with no guarantees they wont skyrocket once they get their monopoly. Oh and it still doesn't mean people will actually deposit recyclables in that bin.

    Here is a fact I use to get garbage pick up once every 2 weeks. Now I have a garbage truck a compost truck and a recycling truck all going past my house once a week. Bet that doesn't add to the carbon foot print at all. What a farce. I still only need the garbage picked up once a week, I recycle everything I can and take it to the different locations (when I need and while out doing something else) and I compost in my own yard. Why do I need to pay another $4-10. I don't need the service so why should I be forced to pay for it. Sure one could argue that its for the better good but in fact the better good would be to provide the services individuals can't. Like road repair, snow removal, light, water, sewer etc.


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