Council makes poor choice on rec multiplex location

By  | July 10, 2015 | 3 Comments | Filed under: Cambridge Council 2014/2015

Cambridge Times

If you were hoping city council would come to its senses and forego the planned $53-million recreation multiplex deal with Conestoga College in favour of something more central to … well, everybody, you’re out of luck.

This week council approved a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the college – in a 6-3 vote – that will see the project move forward on leased land near Highway 401.

The finite details are yet to be worked out, but, as multiplex task force chair and city councillor Frank Monterior prematurely said last month, the location has now been “dealt with”.

Unfortunately, Coun. Nicholas Ermeta’s motion to delay consideration of the MOU until after the summer was not passed and another quick decision was made.

Council members didn’t even receive a copy of the MOU until Monday afternoon – a highlights report was released late last week – giving them little more than a day to review the document and give it the consideration it deserved, let alone hear from residents.

Yes, some citizens had already made their stance on the proposed location known, but no one had a reasonable amount of time to ponder the MOU and its contents.

That aside, the college campus is a poor location choice – larger-scale events held there will not significantly benefit Cambridge businesses and residents who will struggle to even get there.

http://www.cambridgetimes.ca/opinion-story/5714171-council-makes-poor-choice-on-rec-multiplex-location/

****

COMMENTS FROM THE ALL KNOWING DEX… lol

(((( He knows first hand what was in the MOU ))))) and hates hates hates freedom of any “Press”..

Does he not get what a JOKE he is..??? probably not.. or else he would just shut the  F…. up !!!

Dex | JULY 09, 2015 06:50 PM
Did anyone even read the MOU? If Council received it at the close of business on Monday, they had 27hours to read it. It’s not a difficult read, it’s non-binding, it just moves negotiations a long so they can get into the details of a binding Lease agreement. In fact, if people read it, they would probably have a THOUSAND QUESTIONS that could not be answered at this point because it hasn’t even been discussed in great detail.

The Editor has once again shown in ignorance to Municipal Affairs, rather than inform, it would seem he wishes to incite.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plus
debbie_vitez@rogers.com'

About 

3 Responses to Council makes poor choice on rec multiplex location

  1. Bingobongo@wtf.com'
    Bozo July 10, 2015 at 6:50 am

    So sitting thru the drone of council the other night while the Mayor totally screwed procedure in an effort to shut up his detractors was interesting and was clear to me at least that obedient sheep will be following the Mayors election platform till the bitter end.
    To hell with facts and evidence of why their decisions are completely groundless.
    Even more important, the tax paying public can also go to debtor hell too.
    Their opinions are completely unimportant.

    At the end of it all, the Mayor, in front of stunned onlookers and the press, decides to loudly ball out Liggett that she is asking too many questions and holding his council hostage. I’m the Mayor damn it ! What an ass.
    However, If the PUBLIC decides to stay home rather than get involved, HIS WARSHIP, will get his way. With a firm grip on the 3 other former teachers and 2 retired cops on board for the ride to glory, the 6 votes he needs to ensure we are taxed into oblivion due to having lost all sensibility and logic or representation of the public purse, is set in stone.
    The Craig legacy is in motion. He said it all in his campaign and convinced the 10 or so percent of the voting public to buy it.
    We will all face a fixed tax rate that will never go down for the next 50 years onto which will go all additional taxes that actually look after the rest of the needs of the community. And that my friends doesn’t even cover the regional rates.
    Fear not. The super 6 can handle it.
    Their pensions are indexed and likely average twice or more than that of the average citizen.

    Job well done. Only thing left now is to name the new Library after him.

  2. gthompson@hotmail.com'
    Gloria July 10, 2015 at 9:46 am

    “6” is the number of the devil…and appropriately suits the hell we live in with the decisions being made by council. Liggett is an elected Councillor who represents people of our city and if she is asking valid questions, then there are necessary answers. Muzzling questions by belittling in Council and making accusations of holding Council hostage is an insult to Liggett and shows the control issues of our Mayor. He does this each and every time things progress in a manner that he does not wish…so again, the Mayor is acting like a spoiled bully and using his position to get what he wants, regardless of the upset of the public…the residents who are the ones who have to pay for all these mistakes…and the ones who have to live with decisions being made that are not fully thought out or agreed upon.

    This is not even a dictatorship…it is ANARCHY!!!…complete chaos.

    “Anarchy – a condition of lawlessness or political disorder brought about by the absence of governmental authority.”

    From a song by Marianne Faithful…”it’s time for a “revolution” (A revolution is a fundamental change in power or organizational structures that takes place in a relatively short period of time.)

  3. barry@bell.net'
    Barry S. July 12, 2015 at 7:32 pm

    Unfortunately Bozo, the taxpayer doesn’t seem to give a damn. Most seem to dislike the mayor but he gets things past in this city with these clowns on council. The two members that seem to have a hidden agenda are Frank and Mike. The two women don’t ever vote against the mayor and Shannon looks totally lost. If he can’t do the job he should quit. It is a good thing Liggett brings barrels full to council. It is all a poor example of leadership.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Archives