Winter Walking and Cycling

[danbrotherston]

...

Sadly, I think you'll probably end up finding the status quo works. In 10 years, we'll probably have pushed solving the problem off long enough that it won't be a problem any more thanks to climate change.

Unfortunately things are probably going to get worse and harder to fix.  The city (or region, I can’t remember) commissioned a study from UW to see the local effects of climate change. More freezing rain was the general consensus, which leads to less safe sidewalks, which is more difficult to clear.

[jeffster]

Not as expensive as having everybody shovel their own. Unless the city is full of unemployed people, their time is worth something; several hours worth of time every year is worth more than any estimate I’ve ever heard of the cost of City clearing. If people had a choice between clearing their own sidewalks and paying $40 a year or something, how many people do you think would keep shovelling their own? Note, that just not shovelling it and taking an infinitesimal chance of being ticketed isn’t what I’m talking about — I’m talking about actually shovelling it.

Also it is obviously way cheaper to clear sidewalks than roads; but nobody raises the idea of only clearing some lanes of the road in order to leave room in the budget for sidewalks.

What is so hard about understanding this basic logic? Until you explain, in detail and with specificity, what is wrong with the above line of thinking, you’ll have to pardon me for doubting your sincerity in claiming you have actually considered this issue.

Let me put the logic another way... or better yet, put you in the decision-making place where council lives.

Simplifying capital/operating expenditures for the moment to make them applicable to this situation-- the budget we just approved had somewhere around 1.5 million in funds we could use to be progressive.  We invested largely in affordable housing, climate change, cycling and improving city-tree-maintenance.  Citywide snow clearing (at the Ottawa level) would be in the range of 6 million every year (plus inflation)... my napkin-math est.  This means if we started allocating ALL disposable funds now, and did nothing else... we could roll out the service sometime in 2024. 

Four years would go by with no further advancement on climate change, no advancement on a minimum grid for cycling, no advancement in affordable housing or anything else people care about.  You doubt my sincerity of thought and consideration on this issue?  I've researched, asked questions, written articles, and I'm spending my time detailing thoughts here late on a Saturday night, months before the actual vote.  And I'm spending it with people I know are unlikely to agree, rather than most who prefer an echo-chamber of the like-minded.  I'm not sure your expectations of consideration are entirely fair.

I think what you're trying to say is, 'at the end of the day, the costs would be more than what the majority of taxpayers would agree to pay and the standards are going to be significantly less than what the actual users would like'.

I think too that someone mentioned that we can clear roads fairly quickly (though driving around today, there are still some side streets that are snow packed) so why not sidewalks? That answer is profound: the speed of a road snowplough is much greater than a vehicles that would be on the sidewalks.

Other factors NOT included: health and wellbeing of the actual workers. Driving the smaller machines on sidewalks are a major health risk and should be very limited. These guys that do this have other jobs that need to be done in the city, and they can't be doing 8 hours a day on the beat, not without hurting themselves and going to leave.

I do agree with the city that the best option is limited snow removal on sidewalks and enforcement on most sidewalks. An alternative though might be though is to have those involved in neighbourhood committees to use city own snowblowers to clean blocks of sidewalks. Volunteer work, or something along those lines. Even work with the school boards to see if this sort of work could contribute towards the students needed volunteer work for graduation.

[danbrotherston]

Let me put the logic another way... or better yet, put you in the decision-making place where council lives.

Simplifying capital/operating expenditures for the moment to make them applicable to this situation-- the budget we just approved had somewhere around 1.5 million in funds we could use to be progressive.  We invested largely in affordable housing, climate change, cycling and improving city-tree-maintenance.  Citywide snow clearing (at the Ottawa level) would be in the range of 6 million every year (plus inflation)... my napkin-math est.  This means if we started allocating ALL disposable funds now, and did nothing else... we could roll out the service sometime in 2024. 

Four years would go by with no further advancement on climate change, no advancement on a minimum grid for cycling, no advancement in affordable housing or anything else people care about.  You doubt my sincerity of thought and consideration on this issue?  I've researched, asked questions, written articles, and I'm spending my time detailing thoughts here late on a Saturday night, months before the actual vote.  And I'm spending it with people I know are unlikely to agree, rather than most who prefer an echo-chamber of the like-minded.  I'm not sure your expectations of consideration are entirely fair.

I think what you're trying to say is, 'at the end of the day, the costs would be more than what the majority of taxpayers would agree to pay and the standards are going to be significantly less than what the actual users would like'.

I think too that someone mentioned that we can clear roads fairly quickly (though driving around today, there are still some side streets that are snow packed) so why not sidewalks? That answer is profound: the speed of a road snowplough is much greater than a vehicles that would be on the sidewalks.

Other factors NOT included: health and wellbeing of the actual workers. Driving the smaller machines on sidewalks are a major health risk and should be very limited. These guys that do this have other jobs that need to be done in the city, and they can't be doing 8 hours a day on the beat, not without hurting themselves and going to leave.

I do agree with the city that the best option is limited snow removal on sidewalks and enforcement on most sidewalks. An alternative though might be though is to have those involved in neighbourhood committees to use city own snowblowers to clean blocks of sidewalks. Volunteer work, or something along those lines. Even work with the school boards to see if this sort of work could contribute towards the students needed volunteer work for graduation.

Why do you believe that driving a sidewalk plow is more dangerous to the worker than a road plow? I think the data says the opposite, for the very reason you give above, road plows go faster...speed kills.

What really bugs me though is this small town folksy belief that volunteers and child labor is the solution to a problem in a large city.  This is a delusion based upon the belief we're the same as town of 500...because, towns of 5000 pay for city sidewalk clearing.

[MidTowner]

Walking this morning, it's pretty obvious that the City of Kitchener's tweaking to its enforcement of clear sidewalks has not worked. Not because most sidewalks are impassable- most are clear, as of Sunday, even after a significant snowfall. But the few that are not are the same ones that were not earlier this season (and never were, but rather left to the weather to address), and the same ones as last winter and the winter before.

To be clear... the move to proactive enforcement was applied to a small area in 2018 and did work according to staff's report.  Council decided to go with sidewalk snow-clearing pilot before making any final decisions.

Thanks for that clarification; I was under the impression that proactive enforcement was city-wide last winter.

I recognize that Bylaw's report after last winter showed that it did work, but they measured success based on how many sidewalks had to be sent to contractors, didn't they? Staff changed the criteria they used mid-season, from "clear" to "passable," and that's a subjective one.

To my mind, the same basic bylaw regime that has existed, still does, and is not working. I say that as someone who walks around, often pushing a stroller, and still encounters sidewalks that force me on to the street, even many days after a snowfall.

I'm not entirely sure what is preventing the City from issuing orders to clear and following up on them, but my experience (again, as a mere citizen just trying to get around) is that they are generally not doing that, whether proactively or reactively to resident complaints.

[danbrotherston]

To be clear... the move to proactive enforcement was applied to a small area in 2018 and did work according to staff's report.  Council decided to go with sidewalk snow-clearing pilot before making any final decisions.

Thanks for that clarification; I was under the impression that proactive enforcement was city-wide last winter.

I recognize that Bylaw's report after last winter showed that it did work, but they measured success based on how many sidewalks had to be sent to contractors, didn't they? Staff changed the criteria they used mid-season, from "clear" to "passable," and that's a subjective one.

To my mind, the same basic bylaw regime that has existed, still does, and is not working. I say that as someone who walks around, often pushing a stroller, and still encounters sidewalks that force me on to the street, even many days after a snowfall.

I'm not entirely sure what is preventing the City from issuing orders to clear and following up on them, but my experience (again, as a mere citizen just trying to get around) is that they are generally not doing that, whether proactively or reactively to resident complaints.

I don't think that clarification is correct. Council explicitly passed a motion requiring pro-active bylaw enforcement to be rolled out city wide at a higher cost, and that's exactly what staff did. I believe the_councillor is incorrect about this, but if anyone want's to dig up the report and verify that staff actually followed council's direction that'd be good.

As for what is preventing the city from sending a clear order, nothing, but they don't know about it, enforcement is incomplete to a laughable degree, 99.9999% of the sidewalks in the city are never visited by an enforcement officer, unless someone calls them in, the city will never visit them. This is true under both reactive and pro-active enforcement.

Real proactive enforcement, where officers visit every sidewalk a few times per storm (like those of us who ride the LRT experience with fare enforcement) would be prohibitively expensive.

[MidTowner]

Thanks for that clarification; I was under the impression that proactive enforcement was city-wide last winter.

I recognize that Bylaw's report after last winter showed that it did work, but they measured success based on how many sidewalks had to be sent to contractors, didn't they? Staff changed the criteria they used mid-season, from "clear" to "passable," and that's a subjective one.

To my mind, the same basic bylaw regime that has existed, still does, and is not working. I say that as someone who walks around, often pushing a stroller, and still encounters sidewalks that force me on to the street, even many days after a snowfall.

I'm not entirely sure what is preventing the City from issuing orders to clear and following up on them, but my experience (again, as a mere citizen just trying to get around) is that they are generally not doing that, whether proactively or reactively to resident complaints.

I don't think that clarification is correct. Council explicitly passed a motion requiring pro-active bylaw enforcement to be rolled out city wide at a higher cost, and that's exactly what staff did. I believe the_councillor is incorrect about this, but if anyone want's to dig up the report and verify that staff actually followed council's direction that'd be good.

As for what is preventing the city from sending a clear order, nothing, but they don't know about it, enforcement is incomplete to a laughable degree, 99.9999% of the sidewalks in the city are never visited by an enforcement officer, unless someone calls them in, the city will never visit them. This is true under both reactive and pro-active enforcement.

Real proactive enforcement, where officers visit every sidewalk a few times per storm (like those of us who ride the LRT experience with fare enforcement) would be prohibitively expensive.

You're right, the clarification was wrong. Here's the report: INS-19-009

From the report, on the pilot: "bylaw officers proactively inspected sidewalks citywide."

So I stand by my initial assessment that the enforcement as it has been practiced doesn't seem to be achieving much, given that the sidewalks that I routinely encounter uncleared are the same ones as earlier this season, and the same ones in years past. This in spite of the fact that the City has had reports about these properties (from me and from others), and has been conducting proactive inspections.

I personally believe that clear sidewalks could be achieved with a regime requiring property owners to clear them. But it would require actual punitive measures for failure to do so. Property owners obviously feel they have nothing to fear from the City if they just don't bother clearing their sidewalks, and I would say that that's a rational belief on their parts.

[tomh009]

Let me put the logic another way... or better yet, put you in the decision-making place where council lives.

Simplifying capital/operating expenditures for the moment to make them applicable to this situation-- the budget we just approved had somewhere around 1.5 million in funds we could use to be progressive.  We invested largely in affordable housing, climate change, cycling and improving city-tree-maintenance.  Citywide snow clearing (at the Ottawa level) would be in the range of 6 million every year (plus inflation)... my napkin-math est.  This means if we started allocating ALL disposable funds now, and did nothing else... we could roll out the service sometime in 2024. 

Excuse me for taking this off track ... but based on what I heard, the affordable housing "investment" was something like $150K. Which achieves something fairly close to nothing. If we are going to be serious about solving the affordable housing issue, just like the snow removal issue, we will need to spend some real money.

[jeffster]

I think what you're trying to say is, 'at the end of the day, the costs would be more than what the majority of taxpayers would agree to pay and the standards are going to be significantly less than what the actual users would like'.

I think too that someone mentioned that we can clear roads fairly quickly (though driving around today, there are still some side streets that are snow packed) so why not sidewalks? That answer is profound: the speed of a road snowplough is much greater than a vehicles that would be on the sidewalks.

Other factors NOT included: health and wellbeing of the actual workers. Driving the smaller machines on sidewalks are a major health risk and should be very limited. These guys that do this have other jobs that need to be done in the city, and they can't be doing 8 hours a day on the beat, not without hurting themselves and going to leave.

I do agree with the city that the best option is limited snow removal on sidewalks and enforcement on most sidewalks. An alternative though might be though is to have those involved in neighbourhood committees to use city own snowblowers to clean blocks of sidewalks. Volunteer work, or something along those lines. Even work with the school boards to see if this sort of work could contribute towards the students needed volunteer work for graduation.

Why do you believe that driving a sidewalk plow is more dangerous to the worker than a road plow? I think the data says the opposite, for the very reason you give above, road plows go faster...speed kills.

What really bugs me though is this small town folksy belief that volunteers and child labor is the solution to a problem in a large city.  This is a delusion based upon the belief we're the same as town of 500...because, towns of 5000 pay for city sidewalk clearing.

1) Did I mention danger anywhere in my post? Re-read it and let it sink it. Workers driving the trucks won't have the same health issues (hearing, vibrations) as those in the little vehicles. Go and actually talk to some workers and get a real viewpoint. As for plow operators, I don't know of any dying locally. It's not like their driving a breakneck speeds, they do not. But the drivers in these small vehicles suffer serious health consequences.

2) What delusion are you talking about? The Liberal government mandated that ALL CHILDREN, if they wish to graduate from school with their OSSD, MUST COMPLETE VOLUNTEER HOURS! This is the law of this province. Child labour or whatever you would like to call it, this is the reality.

Perhaps Kitchener should ban all volunteers then, and indeed, all cities, from Timmins to Toronto and Wiarton to Waterloo. As it is small folksy belief, as you said. We'll see how awesome the cities are after that.

Quickly: Name a city that clears its sidewalks to bare cement within 24 hours....

[danbrotherston]

Why do you believe that driving a sidewalk plow is more dangerous to the worker than a road plow? I think the data says the opposite, for the very reason you give above, road plows go faster...speed kills.

What really bugs me though is this small town folksy belief that volunteers and child labor is the solution to a problem in a large city.  This is a delusion based upon the belief we're the same as town of 500...because, towns of 5000 pay for city sidewalk clearing.

1) Did I mention danger anywhere in my post? Re-read it and let it sink it.  Workers driving the trucks won't have the same health issues (hearing, vibrations) as those in the little vehicles. Go and actually talk to some workers and get a real viewpoint. As for plow operators, I don't know of any dying locally. It's not like their driving a breakneck speeds, they do not. But the drivers in these small vehicles suffer serious health consequences.

2) What delusion are you talking about? The Liberal government mandated that ALL CHILDREN, if they wish to graduate from school with their OSSD, MUST COMPLETE VOLUNTEER HOURS! This is the law of this province. Child labour or whatever you would like to call it, this is the reality.

Perhaps Kitchener should ban all volunteers then, and indeed, all cities, from Timmins to Toronto and Wiarton to Waterloo. As it is small folksy belief, as you said. We'll see how awesome the cities are after that.

Quickly: Name a city that clears its sidewalks to bare cement within 24 hours....

1) Your snark is not justified by the dictionary, the word "danger" means "possibility of suffering harm or injury"...if you are are suggesting there are health and welbeing issues with sidewalk plows, the word for that is in fact "danger".  

Now I haven't spoken with any operators, have you? Regardless, this is completely out of the blue, nobody anywhere else has suggested that operating small sidewalk plows has a possibility of harm or injury above and beyond that of road plows.  If they suffered serious health consequences, this would be a real health and safety issue in the workplace affecting thousands of plow operators in this province alone, including dozens in our city, but frankly, I just don't believe you.

2) Yes, I'm aware of the volunteer requirements, well aware, as I was requried to complete them. Volunteers should not be counted upon to provide essential city services.  Do you also think that we should get highschool students to maintain our water supply system?  The delusion is that using child labor and volunteers is a real solution to anything.

Quickly: Name a false argument that isn't valid.

I could name a dozen cities which use city sidewalk clearing, none of them achieve the false standard you suggest for no reason, and every single one of them achieves better results than we do.

[danbrotherston]

I don't think that clarification is correct. Council explicitly passed a motion requiring pro-active bylaw enforcement to be rolled out city wide at a higher cost, and that's exactly what staff did. I believe the_councillor is incorrect about this, but if anyone want's to dig up the report and verify that staff actually followed council's direction that'd be good.

As for what is preventing the city from sending a clear order, nothing, but they don't know about it, enforcement is incomplete to a laughable degree, 99.9999% of the sidewalks in the city are never visited by an enforcement officer, unless someone calls them in, the city will never visit them. This is true under both reactive and pro-active enforcement.

Real proactive enforcement, where officers visit every sidewalk a few times per storm (like those of us who ride the LRT experience with fare enforcement) would be prohibitively expensive.

You're right, the clarification was wrong. Here's the report: INS-19-009

From the report, on the pilot: "bylaw officers proactively inspected sidewalks citywide."

So I stand by my initial assessment that the enforcement as it has been practiced doesn't seem to be achieving much, given that the sidewalks that I routinely encounter uncleared are the same ones as earlier this season, and the same ones in years past. This in spite of the fact that the City has had reports about these properties (from me and from others), and has been conducting proactive inspections.

I personally believe that clear sidewalks could be achieved with a regime requiring property owners to clear them. But it would require actual punitive measures for failure to do so. Property owners obviously feel they have nothing to fear from the City if they just don't bother clearing their sidewalks, and I would say that that's a rational belief on their parts.

It is concerning, to put it very politely, that a city councillor, who believes he has heavily researched an issue, who VOTED on this issue, and presumably read the staff report which he presents as evidence of the projects success, is unaware of this fact.

@the_councillor would you care to revise your position in light of this?

[the_councillor]

You're right, the clarification was wrong. Here's the report: INS-19-009

From the report, on the pilot: "bylaw officers proactively inspected sidewalks citywide."

So I stand by my initial assessment that the enforcement as it has been practiced doesn't seem to be achieving much, given that the sidewalks that I routinely encounter uncleared are the same ones as earlier this season, and the same ones in years past. This in spite of the fact that the City has had reports about these properties (from me and from others), and has been conducting proactive inspections.

I personally believe that clear sidewalks could be achieved with a regime requiring property owners to clear them. But it would require actual punitive measures for failure to do so. Property owners obviously feel they have nothing to fear from the City if they just don't bother clearing their sidewalks, and I would say that that's a rational belief on their parts.

It is concerning, to put it very politely, that a city councillor, who believes he has heavily researched an issue, who VOTED on this issue, and presumably read the staff report which he presents as evidence of the projects success, is unaware of this fact.

@the_councillor would you care to revise your position in light of this?

Nope.  Good try though.
From the same report...

[jeffster]

1) Did I mention danger anywhere in my post? Re-read it and let it sink it.  Workers driving the trucks won't have the same health issues (hearing, vibrations) as those in the little vehicles. Go and actually talk to some workers and get a real viewpoint. As for plow operators, I don't know of any dying locally. It's not like their driving a breakneck speeds, they do not. But the drivers in these small vehicles suffer serious health consequences.

2) What delusion are you talking about? The Liberal government mandated that ALL CHILDREN, if they wish to graduate from school with their OSSD, MUST COMPLETE VOLUNTEER HOURS! This is the law of this province. Child labour or whatever you would like to call it, this is the reality.

Perhaps Kitchener should ban all volunteers then, and indeed, all cities, from Timmins to Toronto and Wiarton to Waterloo. As it is small folksy belief, as you said. We'll see how awesome the cities are after that.

Quickly: Name a city that clears its sidewalks to bare cement within 24 hours....

1) Your snark is not justified by the dictionary, the word "danger" means "possibility of suffering harm or injury"...if you are are suggesting there are health and welbeing issues with sidewalk plows, the word for that is in fact "danger".  

Now I haven't spoken with any operators, have you? Regardless, this is completely out of the blue, nobody anywhere else has suggested that operating small sidewalk plows has a possibility of harm or injury above and beyond that of road plows.  If they suffered serious health consequences, this would be a real health and safety issue in the workplace affecting thousands of plow operators in this province alone, including dozens in our city, but frankly, I just don't believe you.

2) Yes, I'm aware of the volunteer requirements, well aware, as I was requried to complete them. Volunteers should not be counted upon to provide essential city services.  Do you also think that we should get highschool students to maintain our water supply system?  The delusion is that using child labor and volunteers is a real solution to anything.

Quickly: Name a false argument that isn't valid.

I could name a dozen cities which use city sidewalk clearing, none of them achieve the false standard you suggest for no reason, and every single one of them achieves better results than we do.

1) Yes -- I have spoken to just about everyone at the KOF (Kitchener Operations Facility) regarding snow operations. Very limited time on these small machines because they are very, very loud, and cause hearing damage, and they're very, very rough driving them. Many have had to step back from driving these machines because of what they do to the body. Not a single individual said that they were comparable to a snowplow. Not one. I am still trying to figure, by your definition, how a snowplow is more dangerous. You have data to back this up, obviously?

2) That's an ignorant analogy, and you should know better. Not even remotely the same. Like operating a snowblower requires any sort of education -- it does not. This is why you can buy one from Canadian Tire even if you're 11 years old. Operating a water supply? Good grief, do you understand the education one needs for this line of work? Based of your answer, definitely you have zero clue.

And, by the way: what should volunteers be counted on doing? Nothing? People DO volunteer, for many different reasons. I volunteer. Many of my friends do to. You obviously don't like that sort of set-up, which is fine, you don't have to help for free any cause. But everyone benefits from volunteers. And without those types of folks, the city wouldn't be the same. At that applies equally to Kitchener as it does to Toronto, London UK, New York City. Everywhere. Sometimes it is about being a good neighbour.  Sometimes it is about learning to do good.

Quick answer! You didn't answer the simple question. Where's the data?

[the_councillor]

You're right, the clarification was wrong. Here's the report: INS-19-009

From the report, on the pilot: "bylaw officers proactively inspected sidewalks citywide."

So I stand by my initial assessment that the enforcement as it has been practiced doesn't seem to be achieving much, given that the sidewalks that I routinely encounter uncleared are the same ones as earlier this season, and the same ones in years past. This in spite of the fact that the City has had reports about these properties (from me and from others), and has been conducting proactive inspections.

I personally believe that clear sidewalks could be achieved with a regime requiring property owners to clear them. But it would require actual punitive measures for failure to do so. Property owners obviously feel they have nothing to fear from the City if they just don't bother clearing their sidewalks, and I would say that that's a rational belief on their parts.

It is concerning, to put it very politely, that a city councillor, who believes he has heavily researched an issue, who VOTED on this issue, and presumably read the staff report which he presents as evidence of the projects success, is unaware of this fact.

@the_councillor would you care to revise your position in light of this?

------

So, you keep attacking my research, my understanding of the issue, and even question whether I've read our reports... and now you've been proven wrong.  Is it possible maybe you haven't researched?  Maybe you don't understand the issue?  Clearly you haven't read the report... or in the very least missed the part I pasted above.  Only someone that read the whole report would have recalled that.  Some politicians make up 'facts'... I do not.

[danbrotherston]

It is concerning, to put it very politely, that a city councillor, who believes he has heavily researched an issue, who VOTED on this issue, and presumably read the staff report which he presents as evidence of the projects success, is unaware of this fact.

@the_councillor would you care to revise your position in light of this?

Nope.  Good try though.
From the same report...

Yes, that refers to the fact that they did not hire the hundreds of bylaw officers it would require to patrol every sidewalk after every storm.

Are you suggesting this immense investment in enforcement is your solution?

Because that doesn't refer to the fact that the program wasn't covering the whole city, and if that's what you're suggesting, I'll be generous and say you're being dishonest.

[danbrotherston]

1) Your snark is not justified by the dictionary, the word "danger" means "possibility of suffering harm or injury"...if you are are suggesting there are health and welbeing issues with sidewalk plows, the word for that is in fact "danger".  

Now I haven't spoken with any operators, have you? Regardless, this is completely out of the blue, nobody anywhere else has suggested that operating small sidewalk plows has a possibility of harm or injury above and beyond that of road plows.  If they suffered serious health consequences, this would be a real health and safety issue in the workplace affecting thousands of plow operators in this province alone, including dozens in our city, but frankly, I just don't believe you.

2) Yes, I'm aware of the volunteer requirements, well aware, as I was requried to complete them. Volunteers should not be counted upon to provide essential city services.  Do you also think that we should get highschool students to maintain our water supply system?  The delusion is that using child labor and volunteers is a real solution to anything.

Quickly: Name a false argument that isn't valid.

I could name a dozen cities which use city sidewalk clearing, none of them achieve the false standard you suggest for no reason, and every single one of them achieves better results than we do.

1) Yes -- I have spoken to just about everyone at the KOF (Kitchener Operations Facility) regarding snow operations. Very limited time on these small machines because they are very, very loud, and cause hearing damage, and they're very, very rough driving them. Many have had to step back from driving these machines because of what they do to the body. Not a single individual said that they were comparable to a snowplow. Not one. I am still trying to figure, by your definition, how a snowplow is more dangerous. You have data to back this up, obviously?

2) That's an ignorant analogy, and you should know better. Not even remotely the same. Like operating a snowblower requires any sort of education -- it does not. This is why you can buy one from Canadian Tire even if you're 11 years old. Operating a water supply? Good grief, do you understand the education one needs for this line of work? Based of your answer, definitely you have zero clue.

And, by the way: what should volunteers be counted on doing? Nothing? People DO volunteer, for many different reasons. I volunteer. Many of my friends do to. You obviously don't like that sort of set-up, which is fine, you don't have to help for free any cause. But everyone benefits from volunteers. And without those types of folks, the city wouldn't be the same. At that applies equally to Kitchener as it does to Toronto, London UK, New York City. Everywhere. Sometimes it is about being a good neighbour.  Sometimes it is about learning to do good.

Quick answer! You didn't answer the simple question. Where's the data?

1) I was very clear, snowplows drive fast and are occasionally involved in fatal collisions, I know of no such case where a sidewalk plow involved in plowing operations was involved in a fatal collision.

Now maybe you've raised other concerns, but I'll point out for seemingly the trillionth time, other cities manage to do this, we aren't some special incompetent flower, where we are the only city which can't plow our sidewalks.

2) So then why don't we have volunteers clear the roads, and let the professionals handle the sidewalks?  Or do the grass cutting in summer.  Why is it that the ONLY public service you bellieve should be handled by free child labor is sidewalk clearing?

Your accusation that I don't volunteer is ignorant, I don't have to answer to you, but making assumptions makes an ass out of you.

No, I didn't fall for your bullshit "trap" argument, I called it out...like all false arguments should be, you want to try a third time?