There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?
Recent Articles
- Justice for Indigenous Peoples is Long Overdueby Ryan McGreal, published June 30, 2021 in Commentary
(0 comments)
- Third-Party Election Advertising Ban About Silencing Workersby Chantal Mancini, published June 29, 2021 in Politics
(0 comments)
- Did Doug Ford Test the 'Great Barrington Declaration' on Ontarians?by Ryan McGreal, published June 29, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- An Update on Raise the Hammerby Ryan McGreal, published June 28, 2021 in Site Notes
(0 comments)
- Nestlé Selling North American Water Bottling to an Private Equity Firmby Doreen Nicoll, published February 23, 2021 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Jolley Old Sam Lawrenceby Sean Burak, published February 19, 2021 in Special Report: Cycling
(0 comments)
- Right-Wing Extremism is a Driving Force in Modern Conservatismby Ryan McGreal, published February 18, 2021 in Special Report: Extremism
(0 comments)
- Municipalities Need to Unite against Ford's Firehose of Land Use Changesby Michelle Silverton, published February 16, 2021 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Challenging Doug Ford's Pandemic Narrativeby Ryan McGreal, published January 25, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- The Year 2020 Has Been a Wakeup Callby Michael Nabert, published December 31, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- The COVID-19 Marshmallow Experimentby Ryan McGreal, published December 22, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- All I Want for Christmas, 2020by Kevin Somers, published December 21, 2020 in Entertainment and Sports
(1 comment)
- Hamilton Shelters Remarkably COVID-19 Free Thanks to Innovative Testing Programby Jason Allen, published December 21, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- Province Rams Through Glass Factory in Stratfordby Doreen Nicoll, published December 21, 2020 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- We Can Prevent Traffic Deaths if We Make Safety a Real Priorityby Ryan McGreal, published December 08, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(5 comments)
- These Aren't 'Accidents', These Are Resultsby Tom Flood, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(1 comment)
- Conservation Conundrumby Paul Weinberg, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Defund Police Protest Threatens Fragile Ruling Classby Cameron Kroetsch, published December 03, 2020 in Special Report: Anti-Racism
(2 comments)
- Measuring the Potential of Biogas to Reduce GHG Emissionsby John Loukidelis and Thomas Cassidy, published November 23, 2020 in Special Report: Climate Change
(0 comments)
- Ontario Squanders Early Pandemic Sacrificeby Ryan McGreal, published November 18, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
Article Archives
Blog Archives
Site Tools
Feeds
By adrian (registered) | Posted November 18, 2010 at 20:45:32
I'm not entirely certain where I stand on the entire issue myself, but I do feel that if city staff - like Anna Bradford - were able to entirely avoid negative consequences for everyone, while achieving their goal of a better Farmer's Market, they would have done so - but in the real world, easy decisions like that don't exist.
Realitycheck asked, "Does anyone else find it strange that the market was redesigned in a way that tenants would be forced out?" To me, this is the most vital question. At some point, early in the process, the decision to have fewer stalls was made. By whom is not clear to me (although perhaps it's on record). In any case, once this decision was made, this situation was inevitable.
What this shows is that decisions that have a substantial public interest need to be framed as such right from the beginning. When plans for the market were being developed, did anyone, at any point, stand up and inform the public that the direction they were heading in was one where there would be fewer stalls, and that would mean, inevitably, that certain popular stallholders would be removed from the market?
Now that we're in this situation, we likely really are left with rule-based criteria. Some are subjective (e.g. "Degree of innovative expression ") and some are not (e.g. "Local Hamilton Farmer "). In a situation like this, decisions that are made on the basis of emotion are incredibly subject to accusations of bias, unfairness, influence, and so on. To avoid that, and in the interests of fairness, we're left with the rules. To me, that means if we wish to help people like Julia Serna, we need to revise the rules. For instance, perhaps there should be some additional criteria (and these could be subjective, objective, or both):
On the other hand, the first criterion is to have completed the application, which is worth a whopping 25 points. Hopefully all of the worthy stallholders who are not in the current group did so.
Edit: Ryan, for the life of me I can't remember the Markdown syntax for links. It drives me crazy - I always mix up the parantheses. Can regular HTML anchor tags get added to a whitelist?
Comment edited by administrator adrian on 2010-11-18 19:53:20
Permalink | Context