If you watch the Weather Network, you may have seen this video clip from the flooding in Medicine Hat, Alberta. I took it myself on Saturday June 19th around 845pm at a creek about 15 mins walk from my house.
The creek is normally over 2 meters below the base of this bridge.
What the weather and news channels seem to keep missing in their reports is that it was not just rain over the past few days or weeks that caused this, it has been rain and snow for MONTHS that soaked the ground so much, it could not handle the recent rain storms. I've been pelted to death from heavy downpours around here for many years and do not recall EVER seeing the creeks like this. It has also been widely mis-reported that this flooding was from the South Saskatchewan River - no it was not. The creeks that burst their banks flow INTO that river, which did go high and did break through into some parks, but the flooding is from normally teeny little creeks, streams, brooks - whatever you want to call them. I grew up walking in one of the coulees that has been hard-hit, walked along the train tracks that have been washed away - and I can tell you that the creek in those areas is usually just a babbling brook that you wade in up to your ankles, maybe mid-calf in some spots, and you can literally jump or step across it in most parts. Now it is a raging torrent and has destroyed homes.
Anyway I will be back when I have time to post some photos that I took.
Showing posts with label MH. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MH. Show all posts
Monday, June 21, 2010
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Trash Talk
A friend of our's had a very interesting conversation with a clerk at the City Utilities Dept last week that I wanted to share with you -- it is in regards to the new trash bins everyone is going to get, along with a new automated truck system. Even if you don't care about garbage cans, the words spoken by the clerk are important to keep in mind for any of these issues, straight through to provincial, state, and federal govts. I believe it shows the mindset a lot (most?) of those people are in and it is WRONG.
Our friend does not want the bin. He has put his trash in the special enclosure he had to build years ago in the back alley. Take your garbage out there whenever it's full and just leave it. Tada - all done. But now we have to wheel these bins out and put them on the road on garbage day, making sure of proper clearance on all sides (so no one can park in front of their own house on garbage day unless they have a wide property frontage), and then hoping our lovely winds don't take them on a merry trip down the road because we only get one and if we lose it, we have to buy another one from the city, etc etc etc.... kinda hard to bring the bin back in while you are at work but apparently we are supposed to figure that out.
Okay fine, but our friend phoned the city about it (he got a letter saying he had to go PICK UP his bin - how are people with small cars or those that don't/can't drive supposed to get their bins I wonder???) and he phoned to say he doesn't want the bin. The usual story was told to him about how this program is starting this fall, he has to use the bin, there is no other way his garbage will be picked up, etc etc etc. He still said he doesn't want it and since he is the one paying for it, he should be able to refuse it. She said "WE bought this bin sir". Oh really? He, admittedly in a very angry tone, said "How do you figure that?"... she responded "WE bought this bin. The City bought all the bins". He was quick to correct her that the City bought the bins with TAX PAYERS money (property taxes, etc) and that no, the city did not buy (pay for) the bins, the people did. The clerk's tone was one of 'we bought these for you, you should be thankful' - and I think that attitude sounds very familiar.
The govt keeps saying 'they' will pay for these programs. The govts don't make money (unless you count interest I suppose, or any money made by investments - but even then the interest is actually accumulating on money that taxpayers were forced to give them so they would not make 5 cents without it). The City says the same thing, the Province says the same thing, the s Feds say the same thing = "We bought it", "We paid for", and they don't mean you and me - they mean themselves. That is categorically untrue. They signed the deal, they scribbled on and typed up the paperwork, but they did NOT pay for it. But they like to take the credit.
I just thought it was a good example of the mentality that seems to spread through each level of govt from municipal up to the top. I thought the govt was supposed to reflect the people's wishes? Be representative of their people? But constantly they are doing things they deem 'in our best interests' without consulting us or even giving us a chance or a say in the matter. Sure, they might host a meeting here and there and then claim that the public did not show up to speak their dissent so they assumed most people were on board - but you know as well as I do that people don't even bother anymore because they know that their voices will be ignored. Things will still go ahead as planned by the officials whether you attend the meeting or not. Look at the Town Hall meetings in the US. From what I have seen, the majority of people at these meetings do not want the Health Care reform to be done in this current manner, but they have been told outright and directly that their own officials are going to pass this no matter what their people say. What? Even if the people are wrong and the funding should move ahead as planned, it's supposed to BE about what the people want. Not what the govt decides they want... isn't it? And as time goes by and people start calling to complain, they will hear the words "We paid for it" coming through the line and it won't just be about a garbage can anymore, it will be about everything. In many cases, it already is. If your representative is supposed to vote on issues based on your thoughts, people in your community, why are we not being asked about things like this? Why when thousands show up at every town hall meeting (usually 50-300+% more people attending than normal) to express concern, why are they told that it IS going to go through. What is that all about? And why does the govt think this is their money? Why do they say "We paid for it" when you say you don't want something? Perhaps they don't want to admit outloud that really YOU paid for it and they took it and did something with it that you did not approve, so they don't want to admit that they stole your hard earned cash? Hmmm... what do you think?
Our friend does not want the bin. He has put his trash in the special enclosure he had to build years ago in the back alley. Take your garbage out there whenever it's full and just leave it. Tada - all done. But now we have to wheel these bins out and put them on the road on garbage day, making sure of proper clearance on all sides (so no one can park in front of their own house on garbage day unless they have a wide property frontage), and then hoping our lovely winds don't take them on a merry trip down the road because we only get one and if we lose it, we have to buy another one from the city, etc etc etc.... kinda hard to bring the bin back in while you are at work but apparently we are supposed to figure that out.
Okay fine, but our friend phoned the city about it (he got a letter saying he had to go PICK UP his bin - how are people with small cars or those that don't/can't drive supposed to get their bins I wonder???) and he phoned to say he doesn't want the bin. The usual story was told to him about how this program is starting this fall, he has to use the bin, there is no other way his garbage will be picked up, etc etc etc. He still said he doesn't want it and since he is the one paying for it, he should be able to refuse it. She said "WE bought this bin sir". Oh really? He, admittedly in a very angry tone, said "How do you figure that?"... she responded "WE bought this bin. The City bought all the bins". He was quick to correct her that the City bought the bins with TAX PAYERS money (property taxes, etc) and that no, the city did not buy (pay for) the bins, the people did. The clerk's tone was one of 'we bought these for you, you should be thankful' - and I think that attitude sounds very familiar.
The govt keeps saying 'they' will pay for these programs. The govts don't make money (unless you count interest I suppose, or any money made by investments - but even then the interest is actually accumulating on money that taxpayers were forced to give them so they would not make 5 cents without it). The City says the same thing, the Province says the same thing, the s Feds say the same thing = "We bought it", "We paid for", and they don't mean you and me - they mean themselves. That is categorically untrue. They signed the deal, they scribbled on and typed up the paperwork, but they did NOT pay for it. But they like to take the credit.
I just thought it was a good example of the mentality that seems to spread through each level of govt from municipal up to the top. I thought the govt was supposed to reflect the people's wishes? Be representative of their people? But constantly they are doing things they deem 'in our best interests' without consulting us or even giving us a chance or a say in the matter. Sure, they might host a meeting here and there and then claim that the public did not show up to speak their dissent so they assumed most people were on board - but you know as well as I do that people don't even bother anymore because they know that their voices will be ignored. Things will still go ahead as planned by the officials whether you attend the meeting or not. Look at the Town Hall meetings in the US. From what I have seen, the majority of people at these meetings do not want the Health Care reform to be done in this current manner, but they have been told outright and directly that their own officials are going to pass this no matter what their people say. What? Even if the people are wrong and the funding should move ahead as planned, it's supposed to BE about what the people want. Not what the govt decides they want... isn't it? And as time goes by and people start calling to complain, they will hear the words "We paid for it" coming through the line and it won't just be about a garbage can anymore, it will be about everything. In many cases, it already is. If your representative is supposed to vote on issues based on your thoughts, people in your community, why are we not being asked about things like this? Why when thousands show up at every town hall meeting (usually 50-300+% more people attending than normal) to express concern, why are they told that it IS going to go through. What is that all about? And why does the govt think this is their money? Why do they say "We paid for it" when you say you don't want something? Perhaps they don't want to admit outloud that really YOU paid for it and they took it and did something with it that you did not approve, so they don't want to admit that they stole your hard earned cash? Hmmm... what do you think?
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Update on Local Health Care issues
I just picked up my local newspaper and our Regional Hospital is not going ahead with previous plans to expand. Excerpts:
""Health Minister Ron Liepert confirmed Wednesday that Medicine Hat Regional Hospital will not be expanding as planned.
...The $280 million previously set aside for the project remains, but it could be closer to 5 years, rather than three, before the government may be in a position to flow the funding forward...
"I've got to tell you that just because something was proposed several years ago, it doesn't necessarily mean that we're bound to that in the future", he [Liepert] said. "I'm not going to be known 20 years down the road as the guy that just simply built hospitals..."
The comments were devastating to former Palliser Health Region board chair Carol Secondiak, who spent years fighting for the project. "It's been planned and planned and planned to death. But when times were good, we got nothing. Now it's bad and we still get nothing..."
Secondiak said a lot of money has been spent planning and reviewing the project, which the government previously listed as a priority. It is unclear how the status changed.
Mayor Norm Boucher says with the decrease in construction costs, now is the time to move forward... And with the growth of our community - not to mention Brooks mothers who now have to come to Medicine Hat to deliver their babies [I recently blogged about the closure of the Brooks Maternity ward], an increase in facility space is becoming more pressing.
Liepert also confirmed Wednesday the Bow Island Hospital remains under review to determine what services should be available in the future....Secondiak called it "the beginning of the end for small hospitals""
___
""Health Minister Ron Liepert confirmed Wednesday that Medicine Hat Regional Hospital will not be expanding as planned.
...The $280 million previously set aside for the project remains, but it could be closer to 5 years, rather than three, before the government may be in a position to flow the funding forward...
"I've got to tell you that just because something was proposed several years ago, it doesn't necessarily mean that we're bound to that in the future", he [Liepert] said. "I'm not going to be known 20 years down the road as the guy that just simply built hospitals..."
The comments were devastating to former Palliser Health Region board chair Carol Secondiak, who spent years fighting for the project. "It's been planned and planned and planned to death. But when times were good, we got nothing. Now it's bad and we still get nothing..."
Secondiak said a lot of money has been spent planning and reviewing the project, which the government previously listed as a priority. It is unclear how the status changed.
Mayor Norm Boucher says with the decrease in construction costs, now is the time to move forward... And with the growth of our community - not to mention Brooks mothers who now have to come to Medicine Hat to deliver their babies [I recently blogged about the closure of the Brooks Maternity ward], an increase in facility space is becoming more pressing.
Liepert also confirmed Wednesday the Bow Island Hospital remains under review to determine what services should be available in the future....Secondiak called it "the beginning of the end for small hospitals""
___
Friday, March 27, 2009
Housing Prices
I know that a lot of people are talking about the drop in real estate prices/sales, but honestly, it was BOUND to happen. Prices in many areas have far exceeded what the homes are really worth, what did you think was going to occur? Prices remain at extortionate highs, or go even higher? It's really ridiculous.
Case in point: My city started building homes with Classic Communites. They were peddled all over via billboards, bus stop benches, tv, radio,,,, and advertised as being an answer for people with lower incomes. A friend of mine looked into it and brought back the spec sheets -this was only 2 years ago, a bit less in fact. The 2 bedroom homes in the south of the city were going for $95,000. I have now seen them listed for over $200,000. Are you kidding me? What kind of lower income family can afford that? I just found a listing in the exact same housing estate putting a 2 bedroom at $190,000 today. Going up a hundred grand in less than 2 years (the homes had only just started being built - and you can see from the link that this one was built in 2007 so I'm not fiddling numbers just to make it sound better).
How long could homes continue increasing in price at this rate? Of course they were going to start falling, but they would be falling to what their VALUE is, so what's the problem? If you had a huge 3000 sq ft home and it was suddenly only worth $125,000 then I can see where people would be up in arms. But a supposedly low income "affordable housing" home going for 200 grand?? You've got to be kidding me. The bubble HAD to burst some time or soon, many more people would be homeless than is being reported now.
There is a mortgage assistance program for these homes, but unless they have since changed their policy, this only runs for a few years, maybe 7 at the most. I cannot remember every detail of the paperwork my friend brought over, but we sat down and crunched numbers and realized that in only a handful of years, people would have to suddenly start paying a great deal more per month than they started out with, and the change was not affordable for my friend and her family - who together earned more than double minimum wage in Alberta. That was when the cost was under $100,000... what will people be suckered into paying with prices the way they are now?
Case in point: My city started building homes with Classic Communites. They were peddled all over via billboards, bus stop benches, tv, radio,,,, and advertised as being an answer for people with lower incomes. A friend of mine looked into it and brought back the spec sheets -this was only 2 years ago, a bit less in fact. The 2 bedroom homes in the south of the city were going for $95,000. I have now seen them listed for over $200,000. Are you kidding me? What kind of lower income family can afford that? I just found a listing in the exact same housing estate putting a 2 bedroom at $190,000 today. Going up a hundred grand in less than 2 years (the homes had only just started being built - and you can see from the link that this one was built in 2007 so I'm not fiddling numbers just to make it sound better).
How long could homes continue increasing in price at this rate? Of course they were going to start falling, but they would be falling to what their VALUE is, so what's the problem? If you had a huge 3000 sq ft home and it was suddenly only worth $125,000 then I can see where people would be up in arms. But a supposedly low income "affordable housing" home going for 200 grand?? You've got to be kidding me. The bubble HAD to burst some time or soon, many more people would be homeless than is being reported now.
There is a mortgage assistance program for these homes, but unless they have since changed their policy, this only runs for a few years, maybe 7 at the most. I cannot remember every detail of the paperwork my friend brought over, but we sat down and crunched numbers and realized that in only a handful of years, people would have to suddenly start paying a great deal more per month than they started out with, and the change was not affordable for my friend and her family - who together earned more than double minimum wage in Alberta. That was when the cost was under $100,000... what will people be suckered into paying with prices the way they are now?
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Repossesions on the Rise
Repossessions a busy business
Ken Gousseau
Medicine Hat News
Repossessions are on the rise in Medicine Hat as some residents struggle to pay debts during the global economic recession.
Kelly Beresowsky, a civil enforcement bailiff in the city, has recently seen his business increase 50 per cent.
“I’m a heck of a lot busier than I was six months ago,” he said.
Most of the vehicles Beresowsky has been repossessing lately are souped-up trucks belonging to young oilfield workers.
“A lot of the oil guys are travelling further to get the work,” he said. “Those that aren’t willing to are the ones I’m paying visits to.”
But the current economic turmoil is beginning to take its toll on people who aren’t stereotypical big spenders, Beresowsky noted.
“Unfortunately you are seeing a lot more of the hard working people having a tough time,” he said. “Through no fault of their own, they end up losing their job or getting a reduction in pay.”
Provincially, Prairie Bailiff Services has experienced a 15 per cent increase in civil enforcement actions launched by landlords and a 60 per cent rise in vehicle and equipment repossessions compared to last year.
“Medicine Hat and Lethbridge have increased a bit but not as close to the dramatic increase that the rest of the province is seeing,” said Travis Piercuy, a bailiff with the company. “Companies out there are a lot more stable.”
As repossessions rise in the province, bankruptcies have followed suit, increasing 24.8 per cent in between 2007 and 2008, according to Bankruptcy Canada.
___________________________________
Hmm, perhaps this is the line of work to get into!! I have a feeling they are going to be some of the most secure job spots in North America!
Ken Gousseau
Medicine Hat News
Repossessions are on the rise in Medicine Hat as some residents struggle to pay debts during the global economic recession.
Kelly Beresowsky, a civil enforcement bailiff in the city, has recently seen his business increase 50 per cent.
“I’m a heck of a lot busier than I was six months ago,” he said.
Most of the vehicles Beresowsky has been repossessing lately are souped-up trucks belonging to young oilfield workers.
“A lot of the oil guys are travelling further to get the work,” he said. “Those that aren’t willing to are the ones I’m paying visits to.”
But the current economic turmoil is beginning to take its toll on people who aren’t stereotypical big spenders, Beresowsky noted.
“Unfortunately you are seeing a lot more of the hard working people having a tough time,” he said. “Through no fault of their own, they end up losing their job or getting a reduction in pay.”
Provincially, Prairie Bailiff Services has experienced a 15 per cent increase in civil enforcement actions launched by landlords and a 60 per cent rise in vehicle and equipment repossessions compared to last year.
“Medicine Hat and Lethbridge have increased a bit but not as close to the dramatic increase that the rest of the province is seeing,” said Travis Piercuy, a bailiff with the company. “Companies out there are a lot more stable.”
As repossessions rise in the province, bankruptcies have followed suit, increasing 24.8 per cent in between 2007 and 2008, according to Bankruptcy Canada.
___________________________________
Hmm, perhaps this is the line of work to get into!! I have a feeling they are going to be some of the most secure job spots in North America!
This is who we pay to help run this city??
Locals wouldn't have predicted recession a year ago
ANGUS HENDERSON
Medicine Hat News
Three local business experts agree they would never have thought that nine months or so ago that they’d ever see Alberta headed for a $1 billion deficit and technical recession.
But now that’s it’s happened, they’d prefer to be in Alberta with it’s combined $22 billion in reserves — the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund (approximately $14 billion) and the Alberta Sustainability Fund (approximately $8 billion).
Jacquie Penner, dean of business at the Medicine Hat College, told the News Thursday that given the world economic situation right now, it’s not a surprise to her at all that Alberta is feeling the pressure from the global economic downturn.
“I think on the other side of it though, that here in Alberta, we have the kind of economy that yes we’re going to do some suffering, and yes we’re going to lose some jobs, and yes unemployment is going to go up,” she said.
“But we’re going to be so much better off than everybody else, and I think we need to remind ourselves of that.”
Penner credited the provincial government for having undertaken numerous initiatives that she says really are designed to help Albertans fare as well as possible through the present ordeal.
Those include the recently announced infrastructure initiatives and, on the post-secondary education side, a commitment to follow through on its nine-point plan to diversify the economy through technological development, the commercialization of technology and entrepreneurship in technology.
Alderman and acting mayor Ted Clugston just hopes the present downturn will be a short-lived one.
“I never thought six months ago that it would happen this quickly and I’d have said that it absolutely wouldn’t happen. So I’m hoping in a year from now that I’m not still having this discussion with the News,” he stressed.
“Locally, Medicine Hat seems to be weathering the storm, but that doesn’t take away from the reality that there are people here who have already lost their jobs.”
Clugston said he was somewhat heartened Thursday to hear that the price of a barrel of oil had moved up 12 per cent, and that one reason was that supplies are going down because there’s much less drilling going on right now.
As for an estimated 15,000 job losses throughout 2009 in Alberta, Clugston feels unfortunate that many are people who are probably new to the province and now may have to leave.
The city’s business development officer, Keith Crush, said that although the city has a pretty diverse economy, the local energy sector will continue to be a challenge for the foreseeable future.
Like Penner, he appreciates the province’s commitment to new technologies and related initiatives.
“I appreciate that it’ll take awhile to work its way through, but the fact they they’re putting investment into technology development probably bodes well in the longer term,” he said.
“In the short-term, it probably won’t stimulate a lot, but it will keep those local firms that are maybe at that point right now, a good kick-start and the opportunity to grow their businesses.”
_____________________________
How sad it is that bloggers across Canada have been talking about this for about 2 years, if not longer, and yet the so-called experts had no idea? UN FRICKEN REAL. We pay these goofs... that is sad.
ANGUS HENDERSON
Medicine Hat News
Three local business experts agree they would never have thought that nine months or so ago that they’d ever see Alberta headed for a $1 billion deficit and technical recession.
But now that’s it’s happened, they’d prefer to be in Alberta with it’s combined $22 billion in reserves — the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund (approximately $14 billion) and the Alberta Sustainability Fund (approximately $8 billion).
Jacquie Penner, dean of business at the Medicine Hat College, told the News Thursday that given the world economic situation right now, it’s not a surprise to her at all that Alberta is feeling the pressure from the global economic downturn.
“I think on the other side of it though, that here in Alberta, we have the kind of economy that yes we’re going to do some suffering, and yes we’re going to lose some jobs, and yes unemployment is going to go up,” she said.
“But we’re going to be so much better off than everybody else, and I think we need to remind ourselves of that.”
Penner credited the provincial government for having undertaken numerous initiatives that she says really are designed to help Albertans fare as well as possible through the present ordeal.
Those include the recently announced infrastructure initiatives and, on the post-secondary education side, a commitment to follow through on its nine-point plan to diversify the economy through technological development, the commercialization of technology and entrepreneurship in technology.
Alderman and acting mayor Ted Clugston just hopes the present downturn will be a short-lived one.
“I never thought six months ago that it would happen this quickly and I’d have said that it absolutely wouldn’t happen. So I’m hoping in a year from now that I’m not still having this discussion with the News,” he stressed.
“Locally, Medicine Hat seems to be weathering the storm, but that doesn’t take away from the reality that there are people here who have already lost their jobs.”
Clugston said he was somewhat heartened Thursday to hear that the price of a barrel of oil had moved up 12 per cent, and that one reason was that supplies are going down because there’s much less drilling going on right now.
As for an estimated 15,000 job losses throughout 2009 in Alberta, Clugston feels unfortunate that many are people who are probably new to the province and now may have to leave.
The city’s business development officer, Keith Crush, said that although the city has a pretty diverse economy, the local energy sector will continue to be a challenge for the foreseeable future.
Like Penner, he appreciates the province’s commitment to new technologies and related initiatives.
“I appreciate that it’ll take awhile to work its way through, but the fact they they’re putting investment into technology development probably bodes well in the longer term,” he said.
“In the short-term, it probably won’t stimulate a lot, but it will keep those local firms that are maybe at that point right now, a good kick-start and the opportunity to grow their businesses.”
_____________________________
How sad it is that bloggers across Canada have been talking about this for about 2 years, if not longer, and yet the so-called experts had no idea? UN FRICKEN REAL. We pay these goofs... that is sad.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
3 Bags or Else!!
Random local rant: Automated Garbage removal will be starting later this year. According to our local TV news, this is being done because 'It's what the people want'. What people? So far I have not found a single person in my friends and family who heard this was happening, let alone had the chance to voice their support or concerns.
To backtrack, over the years, the City had toyed with the idea of enforcing a 2 or 3 bag limit for weekly household garbage pickup. The idea was always pushed down because citizens' concerns were not met, such as differing family sizes (IE - why should a family of 5 have to put out the same amount of bags as a single person). But now it appears the City found a way around the issue. They have already puchased the new bins we will all HAVE to use. The bins fit 2-3 bags and will be picked up by an automated truck that has a mechanical arm to pick up the bin and dump it. There are rules to go along with this such as the bins have to be put on the street, handles facing towards the home, and there must be at least one metre clearance on either side of each bin. I went to the City website to find information on what was reported on the news and I will post the link later (but it does not say anywhere that I could find when this will start, it just talks about the Pilot project). The local news says the bins and trucks are purchased and will start by this Fall.
Anyway here are my concerns - While I think reducing waste is always a good idea, I don't think other problems have been addressed. The photo accompanying a leaflet on the City site shows a typical newer neighbourhood with large lots and no cars to be seen. But what about older areas of town or townhouses? They have to park on the street but will have to move their cars every single week on garbage day - move them where??? No driveways, garages, and often no back alley parking. Where are people in areas such as the Flats going to park their cars? My bf lived down there until last year and the cars were bumper to bumper on his street because the lots are small. He did not have a garage large enough to fit his vehicle, no driveway, and absolutely impossible to put his bin a metre away from the next door neighbour's car (also no driveway or garage) without moving his truck somewhere else, perhaps around the block (but then possibly blocking someone else's bin). Where these issues addressed? It is clearly stated on the website that they will not pick up your bin if it is not in the right place. So what happens if you put your bin out before you go to work, but then your neighbour comes home and parks to close, so the truck skips you? Is that fair?
I am all for waste reduction, but there also has to be a practical means employed to do so. If my boyfriend still lived in that area, he has no idea what he would have done with his truck, or what his neighbours would have done with their cars, once a week. Even the few times a year that steet cleaning is done, it's been a huge problem down there! So now it's going to happen weekly??
Was this a way to force people to do 2-3 bags with no further thought put into the logistics? And I still fail to see why I should have the same amount of garbage with a family of 5 as my single neighbour does... My whole basement is filled with recyclable items as it is because the bins to take them to are always full and we have not had another chance to take the piles of cardboard, glass, newspaper, and drink containers. We try hard to do our part, only to be thwarted again and again by the City. I can see things getting really messy around here soon.
I also should note that since moving back here in 2004, we have had the garbage collection rules changed 3 times so this will be change #4 in less than 5 years. Fun stuff!
To backtrack, over the years, the City had toyed with the idea of enforcing a 2 or 3 bag limit for weekly household garbage pickup. The idea was always pushed down because citizens' concerns were not met, such as differing family sizes (IE - why should a family of 5 have to put out the same amount of bags as a single person). But now it appears the City found a way around the issue. They have already puchased the new bins we will all HAVE to use. The bins fit 2-3 bags and will be picked up by an automated truck that has a mechanical arm to pick up the bin and dump it. There are rules to go along with this such as the bins have to be put on the street, handles facing towards the home, and there must be at least one metre clearance on either side of each bin. I went to the City website to find information on what was reported on the news and I will post the link later (but it does not say anywhere that I could find when this will start, it just talks about the Pilot project). The local news says the bins and trucks are purchased and will start by this Fall.
Anyway here are my concerns - While I think reducing waste is always a good idea, I don't think other problems have been addressed. The photo accompanying a leaflet on the City site shows a typical newer neighbourhood with large lots and no cars to be seen. But what about older areas of town or townhouses? They have to park on the street but will have to move their cars every single week on garbage day - move them where??? No driveways, garages, and often no back alley parking. Where are people in areas such as the Flats going to park their cars? My bf lived down there until last year and the cars were bumper to bumper on his street because the lots are small. He did not have a garage large enough to fit his vehicle, no driveway, and absolutely impossible to put his bin a metre away from the next door neighbour's car (also no driveway or garage) without moving his truck somewhere else, perhaps around the block (but then possibly blocking someone else's bin). Where these issues addressed? It is clearly stated on the website that they will not pick up your bin if it is not in the right place. So what happens if you put your bin out before you go to work, but then your neighbour comes home and parks to close, so the truck skips you? Is that fair?
I am all for waste reduction, but there also has to be a practical means employed to do so. If my boyfriend still lived in that area, he has no idea what he would have done with his truck, or what his neighbours would have done with their cars, once a week. Even the few times a year that steet cleaning is done, it's been a huge problem down there! So now it's going to happen weekly??
Was this a way to force people to do 2-3 bags with no further thought put into the logistics? And I still fail to see why I should have the same amount of garbage with a family of 5 as my single neighbour does... My whole basement is filled with recyclable items as it is because the bins to take them to are always full and we have not had another chance to take the piles of cardboard, glass, newspaper, and drink containers. We try hard to do our part, only to be thwarted again and again by the City. I can see things getting really messy around here soon.
I also should note that since moving back here in 2004, we have had the garbage collection rules changed 3 times so this will be change #4 in less than 5 years. Fun stuff!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)