cmh blog

Stop the Lansdowne mess

Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:26:59 -0400

Sent to City Councillors today:

It is time to put the brakes on this stadium debate for the time being. This process needs a reboot.

At the outset of the Lansdowne process we had a bright vision for a competition and something world-class. Councillors wrote and reassured us that we would not have a sole-source back-room process. Now it looks like the city has decided to take it all to the back room anyway. Councillors are now getting in on the sole-source action, criticising an urban planning document (stadium site list) that shows current proposals are bad planning. Defending the backroom dealers is not your job... standing up for good planning and a well-designed city is.

This whole debacle is a slap in the face to citizens who spent their time and energy putting their imagination to work for the good of the city. The overwhelming result of the public consultation process was that we did not want pro sports to drive the development of Lansdowne. The ink was not dry on those consultations when pro sports derailed the process. That was insulting and dirty. It makes me wonder who you are working for.

In the artificial rush that has been created, you have lost focus on creating a world-class tourist draw to complement the canal's heritage status. I am very scared that I will wake up one morning soon and the whole thing will be a done deal: another South-Keys-Kanata-Centrum-type development built in my backyard, unwanted by local residents who value small local business.

We thought we had a golden opportunity and the right timing to redevelop Lansdowne. In truth there is no hurry. Rather than giving Lansdowne away for development (a likely scenario given the current funding picture) I would prefer to wait for brighter days when we can make Lansdowne something to be proud of. I'll wait for brighter days when a unified strong council has the vision to build something great and the backbone to stand up to its own staff and pandering developers.

add your comment at cmhblog

Bus Strike

Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:37:52 -0400

Dear Councillors,

Your dogmatic position on the transit strike is killing the business and social life of the city.

You are supposed to look at the big picture on behalf of citizens of Ottawa. In this you have failed. By now the economic damage to the city far outweighs any possible benefits you may be holding out for.

The media is on your side only because the drivers have pathetic PR. Some of us realise that a better council would have prevented the bus strike by looking for savings that did not threaten the drivers.

The mayor is trying to increase his popularity on the back of the drivers. In joining with him you have lost track of the fact that these are your hardworking employees to whom you have the responsibility of being a caring and respectful employer. How do you expect to recover from this damage?

You've gone too far. End the strike today, find savings elsewhere and let's get on with it. We will remember your mismanagement at election time.

add your comment at cmhblog

Yes, Mr. Simpson

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 10:31:29 -0400

This article perfectly sums up my views on the current self-immolation behaviour of the conservative party.

add your comment at cmhblog

What is the conservative game?

Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:00:34 -0400

The conservatives have tabled their regular fiscal update this week, but it contains a poison pill for the opposition parties.

When Chrétien left office in 2003 he fundamentally changed politics in Canada by leaving behind a limit on donations that people can make to political parties. Big corporate donations are a thing of the past. Now political parties have two kinds of financing: they can get small (sub-$1k) grassroots donations, and they receive $1.95 per individual voter they get out to the polls.

The conservatives propose to leave the donation cap in place, while cutting the $1.95 per vote.

Many Canadians do not like party politics, but we have to recognize that political parties are the way our political system works. Parties are the way we generate and market ideas. Bankrupting all the parties is not the way forward. The alternative to the party system is electoral reform (not popular) or, frankly, anarchy.

Chrétien's system doesn't cost that much, and it rewards the parties in a free-market one-vote=$1.95 kind of sense. It rewards parties that appeal to Canadians who come out and vote. It is a good strategy. Harper's suggestion is self-serving, short-term thinking that frankly stinks to high heaven.

The question I have, is why the conservatives are doing this. They must know they are putting a gun to the head of the opposition parties, and that the parties have no choice but to vote against the bill (which also contains stupid things like selling government assets when the market is down, incidentially).

It seems likely that the opposition parties, with their big debts, could compromise with one another and could form a coalition government if allowed by the Governor General. Given it's been 6 weeks since the election, this is a highly plausible outcome that would leave the Conservatives in opposition.

The conservatives are smart, why take that chance? Well, if it does come to an election, the conservatives have money in the bank while the other parties are in debt. Perhaps they feel that spending 300 million more dollars to run an election that will only serve themselves is a good thing right now? Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The whole thing sickens me. We should be pulling together with our eye on the ball, but instead the conservatives have their eye on power. What does it say about Canada that we tolerate this and re-elect the party who does it?

My bet is that the conservatives will back down when it looks like they'll have to face a coalition government. Thus showing the kind of dirty politics they believe in.

add your comment at cmhblog

Pumpkin Portraits 08

Fri, 31 Oct 2008 20:55:55 -0400

Quick shot of my pumpkin this year:

Some from down the street:

add your comment at cmhblog

Random links to funny blogs

Tue, 28 Oct 2008 00:10:47 -0400

failblog

passive aggressive notes (the story I'm linking to is funny)

add your comment at cmhblog

Bronson Expressway

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:54:20 -0400

For years car-happy city staff have fostered growth in the south end of town with the promise of the Bronson Expressway. Never quite officially stated, the plan envisages expropriations along Bronson and a high-speed connection to the Queensway. Despite not being an official plan, it is being built stage by stage, consequently with no environmental assessment. Inevitably, all sections will be built except the one requiring expropriation. At that time there will be wringing of hands, and a declaration that we have to do it because we've come this far.

The next-to-last step in the chain is now being considered. The battle is on.

Here's my letter on the topic to the Citizen:

I was shocked to read in today's Citizen that city staff have scheduled the airport parkway for twinning in the next few years. We must be quick, loud and clear in killing this idea before it again takes root.

City staff say we need extra capacity on the parkway, but their proposed expansion does not serve any high-capacity routes. A highway to nowhere makes no sense; this is clearly an attempt to move forward with the Bronson expressway. City employees have taken a piecemeal approach to this mega-project, getting small chunks built in the south to force the final move: expropriation to drive 6 lanes of traffic through the heart of a neighbourhood to the Queensway. With the widening of the Bronson canal bridge this summer, it is no surprise that city staff want to build the next piece of the puzzle.

As council has repeatedly said no to the Bronson expressway, why are city staff allowed to put their fingers in their ears and schedule the work anyway? Why are staff fixated on an idea that makes no planning sense and will destroy a neighbourhood? Why is council powerless to control these city employees? Residents should demand answers to these important questions.

We must organize to stop the twinning of the airport parkway -- the next phase of Bronson expressway construction -- right away. The alternative will be an expensive, distracting and divisive debate: an environmental assessment that rehashes all the same issues that have been explored time and again. In this time of financial uncertainty, we do not need an expensive white elephant that expands road capacity to an existing bottleneck. Make no mistake: a white elephant is what it will be. Downtown residents will not accept the Bronson expressway -- now or ever.

add your comment at cmhblog

Defence Passed

Wed, 10 Sep 2008 17:30:44 -0400

I have passed my defence. I have some very minor revisions to do, but it is essentially over. When Senate meets (a formality) I will officially have my degree.

I have been nominated for a senate medal

add your comment at cmhblog

Defending the Ph.D.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:33:53 -0400

I'm defending the Ph.D. on Wednesday at 1pm. Cross your fingers for me.

add your comment at cmhblog

CurbTalker

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:32:21 -0400

Parliant has released a new product to help realtors provide those call-in numbers that let buyers call to get a description of the house. It makes some nifty reports for brokers and should be useful for buyers and sellers too.

add your comment at cmhblog