Raise the Hammer

Sorry, but I do not believe this is something that an Ombudsman should be looking at. What on earth would this person base any sort of investigation on?

For example, with all the good arguments showcased here (and last night, at the event at Mills Hardware), it's pretty clear that pro-LRTers in Hamilton are passionately supportive of the cause. And you may feel that Councillors 'are clearly not representing them/majority'.

But how do you know that this viewpoint is the 'majority'? (And please don't simply point to the 1,600 or so residents who were consulted when the plan at the beginning of this decade was being worked on. Because frankly, that's a specious argument when you consider what percentage of Hamiltonians that number represented.)

What if you took a vote, if you were -magically- able to get everyone eligible to cast their ballot, and it turned out that the 'majority' were against LRT? What then?

Or, for the sake of argument, let's suppose that despite this referendum result, Council nevertheless decided to go ahead with LRT. And, assuming that the Ombudsman was empowered to 'do something about' it and the 'majority' went to him saying 'the elected civic officials were clearly not representing them'? What then?

I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this.

One of the takeaways for me last night...even putting aside some of the glaring-yet-unspoken differences between Waterloo and Hamilton...was that Waterloo had constructed and maintained across several administrations the conviction of a pro-LRT vision. And the primary way they did this? (Beyond having the right people voted in)

They did a great job of selling LRT to residents. Something that in a Spec op-ed last summer, I pointed out that Hamilton had not seen. (No matter that Ryan took the time to deconstruct my piece here.)

So, to repeat: LRT has never been sold well to Hamiltonians. And by 'sold' I mean provided information, promoted discussion, had passionate advocates, and by 'Hamiltonians' I mean all Hamiltonians. Not just people who get involved in civic engagement in the lower city, most notably by downtowners and environs west.

This point was actually conceded last night: "What have you heard about LRT in the last four years?" UKS Hamilton co-founder Maureen Wilson asked the 120 or so people packed into the Mills Hardware space on King Street. "What have we been doing about LRT in the last four years? Let's start putting it back on the agenda."

For me, here's the basic truth, one I have always gotten derision for, because it connotes the notion that I am trying to dictate how people should be going about promoting and producing civic engagement: Don't look to Council to 'sell' LRT. They won't. It's too contentious, no matter what their voting on it has been in the past. Don't look for the City to do it, no matter what faith Mayor Eisenberger has in a public consult. If you want to change Councillors' minds on this subject, if you want them to act with the kind of conviction and certitude their counterparts in Waterloo have done, you need to get out into the communities and do the selling yourselves. And this applies to any issue. You want another example? Ward boundary reform. It was badly handled by proponents, convincing and widespread support was not illustrated by the petitioners, and therefore, 'defeated'. (Yeah; it was kicked down the road to the current Council to deal with. Which, even with an optimist's spin, equates to 'defeated'.)

Because unless the implications of what today's Spec's article today notes ('Waterloo chair preaches LRT to Hamilton converted') is fully acknowledged and conceded by pro-LRTers, unless there is a concerted effort to generate support at the neighbourhood level, you're going to be faced with unnecessary heartbreak.

To quote one of Canada's best observers-by-way-of-music:

'Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.'