09-15-2020, 10:09 AM
(09-15-2020, 08:48 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: ...
In any case, the core of the issue is this. I am a taxpayer, and I am very angry that you are going to waste an excessive amount of money on pro-active enforcement. There is ZERO evidence that it works, I want my government to make evidence based decisions. Yes, I know you believe it will work, but you have no evidence for it.
Even the report explicitly states there is no evidence for it. So why are you wasting my money on it. If you were unwilling to spend on city clearing, whatever, that's a difference of opinion of priorities (yes, priorities, it's not a matter of affording it, we afford lots of expensive programs), but instead you wasted more money on ideas that have no evidence behind them. As a taxpayer, this is insulting.
This is my current perspective on the matter. Proactive enforcement was attempted, and did not work, so it should be given up. What are we as ratepayers paying these people for? So that council can pretend that something is a priority? Forget it.
Councillor Marsh says that there are too many people in Kitchener living on the edge who would evidently lose their homes if handed an $86-a-year tax increase. That sounds pretty dire. So why not lay off the proactive enforcement officers and hand those people back the twenty dollars a piece or however much it would be? They're just play-acting at enforcement, anyway. I have talked to these people, they have told me that they have no clear standard which they apply to sidewalks.
It's all a big joke: we should stop pretending to care, stop spending money buying private households snowblowers and paying people to walk around not issuing tickets, and just do nothing. The result will be the same- poor winter mobility- but at least the price tag will be lower.