A resident’s comments.
Further to the points described below, I note that the many trails in Guelph are presently shared by bikers and pedestrians with little conflict – the conflict would be further minimized if these trails were divided between bikes and pedestrians and this strategy expanded to city streets where it is deemed that bike lanes are required.
It makes much more sense for bikes to share a path with pedestrians than to share a path with 2 ton machines that quite easily convert to death machines. EK
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I understand that the City has started a new group/corp/?? that is responsible for various functions such as central heating initiatives. Etc. etc – this all sounds a bit hush, hush to me and I wonder if it is based on established City business practices and whether business conducted under this group follows normal contracting practices and is fully transparent to Guelph tax payers.
I would sincerely appreciate receiving details of this group/corp/??, its projects, mandate and method of doing business.EK
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I was shocked and dismayed to get an e-mail from administration asking for ideas and participation to fund the core service of storm sewer infrastructure. It is distressing to realize that Guelph’s finances are so badly compromised that they are asking home owners for additional help to fund storm sewer infrastructure, a fundamental and core service.
Rather, I would respectively suggest that the funding come from cost cutting measures by administration and council. Some suggestions:
• Scrap the new library downtown – Libraries are a thing of the past. For those who still use them, the regional libraries are more than sufficient.
• Develop some discipline and expertise in contract management. It is my guess, as an ex construction and project manager, that the city hall court case was a result of an extraordinary large volume of change orders by administration / council and a reluctance to accept the true cost of these change orders. A great tool to use in this regard is that once a contract is let; freeze the design to eliminate changes unless absolutely critical and necessary.
• Scrap Envida Community Energy Inc. This is a sink hole for capital on energy projects that may never show a return. If as stated by the GM, the projects are viable, then let private investors fund these project entirely through public or private enterprises specifically set up for this purpose. Guelph Administration should stay away from such costly initiatives as they can’t even fund core services such as storm infrastructure, let alone fund untried & costly energy initiatives (through Guelph Hydro, 100% owned by Guelph). Additionally they are going to have to find funds to pay for the losses associated with the City Hall Court Case. As an aside, I witnessed central heating on a field trip to Kyrgyzstan and have to say that driving through villages with central heating gave one the impression of driving through a refinery plant – an unsightly mess! I hope that this is not in the stars for Guelph. An immediate benefit to all tax payers will be an immediate reduction in our presently very high hydro costs!A suggestion: List all Guelph’s capital projects along with their costs with a statement of the budget shortfall and allow the public by means of a plebiscite decide which projects to cut in order to balance the budget. I suggest that us tax payers be given the role to make these budget cuts as it would appear that council does not have the political will or desire to do so. EK