This is my opinion, and it is based on simple observations and is fueled by my wish to try to understand why we do things, which I feel in many cases go against the very common sense reasoning and practices which have given us previous satisfying results.
I am not against innovative ways to help us move forward and we should embrace and encourage new technology and must continue to grow. Changes, however, must focus on obtaining good outcomes and are subject to scrutiny.
What is the purpose of what we do if desired results are not attained?
I listened to council debate the need for Sudbury Hydro to pay out a yearly dividend, then I traveled our streets and saw old sodium lights as opposed to new energy efficient LED lights mounted on so many poles.
Some of those sodium-light-equipped poles are also newly erected poles. Wouldn't it be wise to reinvest those funds into the utility which generated these revenues as to acquire more efficiencies and eventually pass energy savings onto ratepayers?
Wouldn't it be grand to solicit the province to pass on more of the hydro infrastructure to our local entity as to serve all the citizens of Greater Sudbury? What a great example of inclusivity that would be.
I travel our roads and see bike lanes painted in late October at the end of cycling season and know full well that the paint will not last due to modified environmentally friendly paint standards, and I wonder why these lines were painted just prior to winter conditions falling upon us?
I see a three-foot paved boulevard between sidewalk and roadway along a newly reconditioned road and wonder, "why would we not accommodate a cycling path on that boulevard as opposed to painting cycling lanes on a roadway”"
I am told that cyclist safety is compromised when using boulevards, yet when I look at a previously reconditioned main thoroughfare (Lorne) and see just that — a boulevard on the north section which easily accommodates cyclists if they so choose to use this route as the curb drop starts at the roadway and not the edge of the sidewalk. I think something just doesn't add up here.
Yes the south segment does have a bike path, but planners did make the opposite side bike accessible (kudos to planners on that one). I hear talk of cycling safety, yet when I travel roads such as Southview Drive, with its painted cycling path, I come upon various bulb outs which create hazards for cyclists and which choke our already winter challenged road widths.
Is that any safer than cycling on boulevards?
I'd rather see lowered speed limits with speeders paying their fines than law-abiding homeowners subsidizing speed hump calming measures.
Please bring out the photo radars and invest in more officers monitoring our streets. I, for one, love their presence in our neighborhoods.
Contrary to the argument that this is a tax grab, no it is not. It is holding the person driving to own up for his or her actions.
It is hard to justify bylaws, policies and procedures if we keep ignoring or circumventing them. Has there ever been a $5,000 or $10,000 fine levied for any illegal dumping?
As for road work, I believe there is not a single contracted source out there that can't do stellar work if industry standards are followed, and I refuse to lay blame on any one of those contracted services because someone has permitted the circumventing of those standards.
No doubt there are challenges, but when people don't lend an ear to questions from members of the electorate who ask why certain practices are not followed, dealing with challenges that keep falling into our lap will not happen.
Coffers are empty and the sole source for replenishing is no longer able to sustain current demands. Maybe those spending the tax dollars could be a little more vigilant as I am certain savings can be had.
As I've stated, these are my opinions, and I'm certain I'm not the only one thinking along these lines. No doubt there are many who don't agree and that is OK.
Jean-Yves Bujold
Sudbury