Comment 58351

By MattM (registered) | Posted January 27, 2011 at 14:29:39

As others have said, council should have stuck with WH all along. I'm sure BY would have ended up saying okely dokely. Now sure, I'll say BY didn't bargain or negotiate in good faith and it's a bad deal for the city etc. However, by saying this it seems to me like we're saying council are, as a group, weak to have been railroaded by some rich guy. And that's not a very complimentary thing to say about council, even if it might actually be the truth.

It's not a complimentary thing, but it IS the truth. Mayor Fred and council stood firmly behind the West Harbor, even in the face of stiff opposition from East Mountain supporters. It wasn't until BY said "We're not playing at WH, you didn't give us EM. We're done here." that council immediately flip flopped, voting to "explore other alternatives". This of course lead us on the expensive, incredibly pointless journey that took us through the summer, fall and half of the winter.

Fred stuck behind his principles even when council abandoned him, and he paid the price by losing his position. That showed incredible leadership and a love for this city that some people will never understand. Now we are left with a man who is prone to flipping off the handle, making decisions based on emotion and using pencils in a way they weren't intended to. What's worse is that he can't even rally council behind him, less than 6 months into his term.

Over the last year there has been an immense amounts of monumental mistakes, and it all comes back to the Tiger-Cats, as far as I'm concerned. Given where we have ended up now, they had no good reason to simply shoot the West Harbour down like they did. We are now paying the consequences, one of which may be losing the games altogether.

Comment edited by MattM on 2011-01-27 14:31:34

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools