Local councillor's position on roundabout all over the map

With less than three months to go before the muncipal election, I thought I'd give you an update on how the campaign is going so far.

In a word "excellent". Most people are extremely receptive to my candidacy and my twin message of developing fiscal sustainable solutions to our city's budget woes, while ensuring the east end gets its fair share of municpal services is really resonating with voters.

With that said, there's no doubt the local race will go down to the wire. Who will come out on top will depend on which candidate does a better job getting the vote out.

As I continue my door-to-door campaign, the two most popular questions I'm being asked are: "What is your position on the roundabout issue?", and "Who are you supporting in the mayor's race?"..

First, in regards to the mayor's race, I'm not officially supporting either candidate. However, it's hard for me to support a candiate who wants to add $50 million in interest paymerts to the budget as Larry O'Brien says we should do. I also don't support the dowtown transit tunnel which O'Brien wants to push through regardless of the potential cost.

Last, but not least, getting our fiscal house in order will require an open and frank dialogue between city councilors, union leaders and senior staff. The relationship between the current mayor and the union leadership has deteriorated to the point of no return. If O'Brien gets in we'll have continued labour unrest for the next four years.

Now, this is my opinion today. It may not be my opinion tomorrow. It depends on whether or not O'Brien plans to do anything about the two issues. I doubt very much he's going to budge on the transit tunnel, or his desire to nearly triple our debt load.

As for the roundabout, I've made no secret of the fact that it would not have been my first choice when it comes to beautifying St. Joseph Boulevard. Personally, I would have preferred to put $1.5 million in an account to bury the overhead wires, and used the remaining $1 million on streetscaping improvements that wouldn't have included turning the busiest intersection in the east end into a disaster area.

Given the fact that the funding for St. Joseph Blvd. was announced in May 2009, I would have become involved in the discussions with the Heart of Orléans BIA from day one to try and influence the decision-making process rather than leave them up to their own devises, which is what the current city councillor did.

Then if the BIA was hell bent on building a roundabout, I would have reserved taking a position on the project until after I consulted with my constituents, rather than throw my support behind it only to reneg a month later as the current city councillor did.

Then when it became unbundantly clear the project was going to receive council's blessing, I would have asked for three amendments addressing community concerns which the local councillor did not do.

Number one, I would have asked for additional money to put in flashing lights with sound attenuation at the crosswalks. Number two, I would have asked for a transportation study to look at the potential impact the roundabout will have on the surrounding community and especially traffic along Grey Nuns Dr., Youville Dr., Orleans Blvd. and Forest Valley Dr.

And last but not least I would have called on the Ottawa Police Service to deliver monthly accident reports to city council to quantify whether or not it's as bad as many people suspect it's going to be.

Finally, when the opportunity arose a second time to kill the project, as was the case last week, I would have worked the phones like a mad man, trying to convince the necessary number of councillors to vote against it. Yes. Mr. Monette introduced a motion to waive the rules in order to revisit the decision, but it didn't even come close to getting passed which makes me wonder how hard he lobbied his colleagues in the first place.

My opponent has been all over the map on the roundabout issue, and he has been completely ineffective in trying to stop it, or in trying to ensure the community's concerns are properly addressed.

At last week's city council meeting, he said that he was willing to "live with" the original decision, but now that the cost has gone from $1.7 million to $2.5 million he's against it. His statement makes it glaringly apparent that he was only worried about the money and not public safety. Why else would he admit that he was willing to "live with" the original decision to build a roundabout?

Speaking of the additional costs, if the price tag of the roundabout can go from $1.7 million to $2.5 million in five months, imagine what will happen to the cost of the downtown transit tunnel? It only adds further weight to the position that the tunnel will become a massive money pit that will end up costing us for years and years to come.

(If you wish to comment on this or any other View Point column please write to Fred Sherwin at fsherwin@magma.ca)

Return to Top

Return to Front Page