Sunday, August 2, 2009

Two More Laneway Views


It is amusing to hear residents of the west side complain about a city
council being indifferent to neighbourhood concerns. It was the west
side that defeated the opportunity to adopt a ward system. They fell
for Sam Sullivan's idiotic contention that wards would make for more
expensive government. This economic ignorance is particularly galling
when manifested by the upwardly mobile.

If we had councillors elected by neighbourhoods they would be
accountable to neighbourhoods. There are dingbats who say that such
accountability would result in nimby-driven governments. Nimbyism is
a fact of life. We make a reservation at Bishops because we don't want
to sit beside a smelly homeless guy. We ask for upgrades when we fly
to get away from the steerage conditions of economy. We buy in Point
Grey because we wouldn't keep our dog on the east side, let alone live

The greatest failing of the current era is that we have allowed the
nattering class (media) to convince us that preference equals
prejudice. If I deny shelter, employment or due process to somebody
on the basis of race, religion or orientation, that's prejudice and
it's against the law. If I do that, I deserve to be punished.

If I change seats on a bus because I don't like the appearance, garb,
girth or aroma of the person beside me, that's preference. If he/she
suspects my action is based on preference, tough luck.


In all honesty and sheer frustration (at the fact that I know so many of you good people dealing with this and I have simply been unable to find the time myself this year)...

I believe this 'shoving' a by-law, which effectively causes massive restructuring of our total City, with back door / behind the scenes changes that are not made available to the public, under conditions quite contrary to the expectations of why this council was elected:

I think we should bloody well call for an impeachment! Robertson, et al, be damned! ... Is there some way that citizens can bring into question (mid term) the dealings of a council??... This one is acting (in my pea brained mind) almost to the point of illegality!?!

Further to that, calling into question Mr. Gellar's (flagrant or near??) conflict of interest in advising council both before and now after the election, I would like to have some process taken his way.

And finally, I would like someone to suggest that Mr. Brent Toderian get the royal 'boot'... There is no question that he is driving much of this agenda with absolutely no consideration to the citizens of the City. Somebody fire him and tell him to go back to where he came from (Calgary / Ottawa?), and go ahead and ruin that City instead.

Not that I dislike Kitsilano as a community, but having the whole City look like a carbon copy (and then with even more densification potential) of that area is not what this City should look like. The citizens need to be informed on what this is all coming to. The only real 'print' on the subject that has made it to the mainstream media has been Gellar's inputs on how wonderful it would all be (total conflict of interest, and WHY the media doesn't take that into consideration is just gobsmacking???).

Again, I bring up the freeway model of yesteryear. I think a lot of citizens back then initially didn't really give much thought as to whether it was a good idea or not... For the most part, all other Cities were doing it, so why not us? It took some very visionary opposition to raise the alarm. Unfortunately, this one issue came fast and furious; but, I can't understand why this has to be a done deal and never be able to undone.

There, I've vented. Thank you for your time.

1 comment:

ronnie said...

But suppose if you change seats on a bus because you don't like the race, religion or orientation (which may or may not be inferred by appearance, garb, girth, etc.) of the person beside you, would that be preference or prejudice?

Although I agree with you that one does not equal the other, they are also not mutually exclusive.