Comment 114585

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted November 03, 2015 at 10:37:39 in reply to Comment 114582

In related debates, Council once again refused to base water rates partly on the amount of storm run-off generated for the sewers to handle rather than simply in terms of tap water consumed. This would have meant businesses with large surface parking lots would have had to pay for all the rainwater they channel into the sewers (and would presumably eventually lead to a reduction in surface parking because it actually costs something).

And members of Council refused to accept a climate change plan until they were assured that it wouldn't require them to spend any money at all!

http://www.hamiltoncatch.org/index.php

Conley's motion is not only fiscally irresponsible it also advocates spending $100 million to actually make our rainwater and climate change problems worse by adding paved area and encouraging more people to drive and more auto-centric developments on the mountain.

So, it's apparently wrong to spend money or adjust taxes to mitigate problems (e.g. tax storm runoff, build bicycle lanes, or increase transit service), but okay to spend $100 million (and millions more annually in maintenance) to make those problems worse?

And, as far as supporting city policies go, as far as I know Hamilton does not have an official policy of encouraging more driving (but it does have official policies to encourage walking, cycling, transit use and mitigate climate change)!

Comment edited by kevlahan on 2015-11-03 11:51:07

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds