(Aired on February 16, 2010)
It is probably a wise move for the federal government to put some new rules in place for people to qualify for a mortgage to buy a home. Some kind of mortgage affordability test is probably necessary in light of the fact that there is real concern we're taking on way more debt than we should. With the hot housing market, low interest rates and a new crop of people looking for first time homes, people have been stretching themselves to the limit. Older people, meanwhile, have been borrowing heavily against their homes.
While Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is absolutely right that we don't have a housing bubble yet, there is concern that if the economy struggles for too long, many of those with extended debt will have their feet cut out from under them. And that would be a troubling thought.
The government is facing a fine line here. They don't want to put the brakes on the fragile economic recovery, but they also must ensure that we don't let people extend themselves too far. That could create more problems down the road. And when you look at the results of a new study showing that household debt as a whole is soaring, the time has come for some restraint. Average debt climbed to $96,000 last year. That puts the debt to income ratio at 145%, the highest ever recorded. There was also a dramatic increase in late debt payments. So when you combine all those factors together, it becomes pretty clear that we need to get a better hold on our personal finances, and live more within our means.
No one is suggesting we're in a panic mode, but sometimes, as the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Violence Detracts from Legitimate Olympic Protests
(Aired on February 15, 2010)
A civil liberties advocate is concerned Saturday's protests in Vancouver may have diverted the message away from legitimate protesters taking advantage of the world spotlight for the Olympic Games. You think?
Legitimate protesters who have legitimate concerns are now in the unenviable position of losing their momentum on the world stage after 200 protesters smashed windows, spray painted vehicles and caused havoc while marching through the downtown core. It was an absolutely abysmal display. And did it take away from the protesters' message? Of course. How could it not?
When I was out and about on the weekend, at the local coffee shops, in the grocery stores, all I heard was two things. How terrible it was for that group of veterans who waited patiently for the torch to come by Friday, people who served their country to make it free enough to have those protests in the first place, denied the opportunity because the route had to change because of the protests. And the fact that protesters were damaging vehicles and businesses, supposedly in the name of getting some message out. Not one comment about the message.
And then there was someone who complained about police violence. Say what? Even the B.C. Civil Liberties Association has praised police for their restraint. And do you think the message gets out to people now afraid to take their kids downtown because they're afraid another incident could break out? I hardly think so.
One of the protest organizers says it's not a violent protest because people weren't hurt. Try telling that to some poor shop owner cowering in his store as someone smashes his windows. Or some poor mother and child trying to get out of the way while these terrorists roam the streets. It's quite possible that some of the violence Saturday was caused by violent people bent on destruction infiltrating legitimate protesters. Doesn't matter. The damage has been done. Even marches like the memorial yesterday to the missing Vancouver East Side women lost momentum because of the violence Saturday. Now the focus of any future protest will be on whether it turns violent, not on the message being put forward. Legitimate concerns have been put on the back burner by the actions of a few idiots. Unfortunate, but that's the mob mentality that often happens in these events.
A civil liberties advocate is concerned Saturday's protests in Vancouver may have diverted the message away from legitimate protesters taking advantage of the world spotlight for the Olympic Games. You think?
Legitimate protesters who have legitimate concerns are now in the unenviable position of losing their momentum on the world stage after 200 protesters smashed windows, spray painted vehicles and caused havoc while marching through the downtown core. It was an absolutely abysmal display. And did it take away from the protesters' message? Of course. How could it not?
When I was out and about on the weekend, at the local coffee shops, in the grocery stores, all I heard was two things. How terrible it was for that group of veterans who waited patiently for the torch to come by Friday, people who served their country to make it free enough to have those protests in the first place, denied the opportunity because the route had to change because of the protests. And the fact that protesters were damaging vehicles and businesses, supposedly in the name of getting some message out. Not one comment about the message.
And then there was someone who complained about police violence. Say what? Even the B.C. Civil Liberties Association has praised police for their restraint. And do you think the message gets out to people now afraid to take their kids downtown because they're afraid another incident could break out? I hardly think so.
One of the protest organizers says it's not a violent protest because people weren't hurt. Try telling that to some poor shop owner cowering in his store as someone smashes his windows. Or some poor mother and child trying to get out of the way while these terrorists roam the streets. It's quite possible that some of the violence Saturday was caused by violent people bent on destruction infiltrating legitimate protesters. Doesn't matter. The damage has been done. Even marches like the memorial yesterday to the missing Vancouver East Side women lost momentum because of the violence Saturday. Now the focus of any future protest will be on whether it turns violent, not on the message being put forward. Legitimate concerns have been put on the back burner by the actions of a few idiots. Unfortunate, but that's the mob mentality that often happens in these events.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Brock Trustees Meeting
Brock School Trustees Meeting
Last week's editorial on the Trustees meeting in Brock produced some interesting emails. Some of them are obviously written by very angry people, some by people who took the time to think things out a little more. As I said in the Editorial, I don't mind people who disagree with me, but when they make it personal, you have to wonder what makes people tick.
I enclose some of the many emails I received. I took out the names mainly to protect some peoples' ignorance.
Doug
1)
I couldn't agree more with your comments regarding the meeting at Brocklehurst. I as a parent was embarrassed and dismayed at the approach taken by many. Have we forgotten that even more important than what school our child attends is teaching them (many of whom were sitting right next to the parents) to be open minded, reasonable and respectful citizens?
That being said, I do understand their frustration and whether intentionally or not, they were blindsided. Yes, the board is doing their best in trying circumstances, but the plan they have put forth has not taken all factors into consideration, does not allow enough time to consider all of the implications and devise solutions for them, and creates HUGE inequality within our own city. As if Kamloops doesn't have enough division already...
Very respectfully submited :)
a future Brock parent.
2)
Wow, I wonder if you and I were at the same meeting? Were you at the meeting?
When I left the meeting I felt very proud of the North Shore residents. I think that they asked some important questions, raised some valid points, and demonstrated great respect for the trustees.
Most speakers made a point to thank the board for their efforts and their time. I can only think of one speaker who made a disrespectful remark. The community has a right to demand sound educational decisions, it is their tax dollars that pay for public education.
While middle schools may be gaining some popularity, it does not mean they are in the best interest of the students. Also, many of the speakers did not disagree with the idea of a middle school but rather with the time frame that the trustees have proposed.
Switching from a high school to a middle school is a major undertaking. Professional development for teachers to learn the new curriculum and new classroom management techniques, removing inappropriate books from the library and replacing them, creating a new school philosophy, developing age appropriate courses, creating a workable time table....the list goes on and on...Can that be done, successfully by next September?
Lastly, I do agree with Brock residents that they were blindsided. The trustees laid out a plan and people were prepared for the possibility that Brock may become a junior high. No where in that plan did it say anything about a middle school. This new proposal does cause a lot of chaos and uncertainty about transportation, sports, courses, and ultimately the well being of their children.
Perhaps your rant should have been directed toward our government that continues to financially slash public education and healthcare. I think that the 500+ (not 200 as reported by the media) people that showed up to the meeting at Brock should be commended for their activism and commitment to their community.
3)
Comment : Re: Brock Parents Fight for Conformity Was anyone from TV7 actually there?
If so, either they were from the \"favoured\" south shore, or they need a lesson or two in objective journalism...90% of the irate parents attending that meeting were NOT for conformity...they were about maintaining the status quo and protecting their childrens\' rights and opportunities as students and/or student athletes not to mention undue hardship for low income parents to provide SAFE transportation to and from the PROPOSED new schools. This proposed change impacts the majority of parents and children on the north shore in a negative or potentially negative fashion. What should be considered by all student parents in the north shore is breach of trust litigation and recall of all elected officials involved for this apparent \"throwing to the wolves\" of our children, their education, their opportunities for bursaries and scholarships, and, most importantly, their safety.
And Mr. \"One Man\'s Opinion\" Doug Collins should consider taking his fork out of that pie and actually attending the topic of his forays before inflicting his uneducated, biased opinion on the people of Kamloops. As a Brocklehurst resident, I would suggest that the School Board consider what the enrollment would be if all the designated catchment area students were forced to attend their \"catchment\" schools and quit finding reasons to keep South Shore schools open (my apologies to those who could be affected). Try one of these \"test\" runs in another area for a change...and cut the BS Mr. Spina; we all know that all school boards are under pressure to cut costs...imagine the lawsuit should one of these students be injured or harmed travelling out of his or her neighbourhood to live up to your supposed \"wave of the future\"...gutless wonders, the majority of our elected officials it seems (sorry Bev)
4)
Dear Doug,
You usually hit the nail right on the head. Tonight in your comments about the public meeting concerning the future of Brocklehust Secondary you were right on. Not one word was wasted. You expressed so well what needs to be said. My compliments and admiration.
For years I have travelled the province visiting schools and following education research. There are many exceptional middle schools in BC and the US, England and elsewhere serving their communities and students well. I have spent a lifetime in schools. Many as a student (20 between public elementary and secondary school, University, Post Graduate studies and diploma courses in North Carolina, McGill etc.) followed by 53 years as a professional educator (teacher, principal, school district and Ministry official). I have read much research and have experienced many grade configurations in Kamloops, BC, Canada, the USA, England, Germany, France and Ghana. The bottom line is that any configuration works if the community, parents , teachers and students make it work, get behind the school, are in involved in setting, and support the aims of the school. The most important thing that makes for successful schools is parent-teacher-student relations and respect. The most important "driver" in making decisions about school configuration is economics. Does it make economic sense? Enrolments have declined. Conditions have changed. I was the vice-principal of Brocklehurst Jr Sec.in 1968 (grades 8-10) and it was a very successful school as it was when it became an 8-12 School and can be if it becomes a Middle School. The School Board and District Administration are working hard to meet the challenging demands of declining enrolments and escalating costs. Change is rarely welcomed, but is a necessity of life. You expressed better than I could the current situation. Well done!! In a challenging and changing world we need clear thinkers, Thank goodness we have you!!
5)
To: Doug Collins: One Man\'s Opinion I was disappointed with your comments during last night\'s newscast regarding the new and surprising reconfiguration plans for the North Shore. Given your comments, I don\'t think you were at the meeting as you presented a misleading picture of the Brocklehurst students and parents. I was at the meeting and what I observed was students and parents who were passionate about their school and community and who asked that the North Shore receive equal treatment as compared to the South Shore and Westsyde. I believe that they have this right and I hope that you, as a longtime newsman, would also believe in this right.
Last week's editorial on the Trustees meeting in Brock produced some interesting emails. Some of them are obviously written by very angry people, some by people who took the time to think things out a little more. As I said in the Editorial, I don't mind people who disagree with me, but when they make it personal, you have to wonder what makes people tick.
I enclose some of the many emails I received. I took out the names mainly to protect some peoples' ignorance.
Doug
1)
I couldn't agree more with your comments regarding the meeting at Brocklehurst. I as a parent was embarrassed and dismayed at the approach taken by many. Have we forgotten that even more important than what school our child attends is teaching them (many of whom were sitting right next to the parents) to be open minded, reasonable and respectful citizens?
That being said, I do understand their frustration and whether intentionally or not, they were blindsided. Yes, the board is doing their best in trying circumstances, but the plan they have put forth has not taken all factors into consideration, does not allow enough time to consider all of the implications and devise solutions for them, and creates HUGE inequality within our own city. As if Kamloops doesn't have enough division already...
Very respectfully submited :)
a future Brock parent.
2)
Wow, I wonder if you and I were at the same meeting? Were you at the meeting?
When I left the meeting I felt very proud of the North Shore residents. I think that they asked some important questions, raised some valid points, and demonstrated great respect for the trustees.
Most speakers made a point to thank the board for their efforts and their time. I can only think of one speaker who made a disrespectful remark. The community has a right to demand sound educational decisions, it is their tax dollars that pay for public education.
While middle schools may be gaining some popularity, it does not mean they are in the best interest of the students. Also, many of the speakers did not disagree with the idea of a middle school but rather with the time frame that the trustees have proposed.
Switching from a high school to a middle school is a major undertaking. Professional development for teachers to learn the new curriculum and new classroom management techniques, removing inappropriate books from the library and replacing them, creating a new school philosophy, developing age appropriate courses, creating a workable time table....the list goes on and on...Can that be done, successfully by next September?
Lastly, I do agree with Brock residents that they were blindsided. The trustees laid out a plan and people were prepared for the possibility that Brock may become a junior high. No where in that plan did it say anything about a middle school. This new proposal does cause a lot of chaos and uncertainty about transportation, sports, courses, and ultimately the well being of their children.
Perhaps your rant should have been directed toward our government that continues to financially slash public education and healthcare. I think that the 500+ (not 200 as reported by the media) people that showed up to the meeting at Brock should be commended for their activism and commitment to their community.
3)
Comment : Re: Brock Parents Fight for Conformity Was anyone from TV7 actually there?
If so, either they were from the \"favoured\" south shore, or they need a lesson or two in objective journalism...90% of the irate parents attending that meeting were NOT for conformity...they were about maintaining the status quo and protecting their childrens\' rights and opportunities as students and/or student athletes not to mention undue hardship for low income parents to provide SAFE transportation to and from the PROPOSED new schools. This proposed change impacts the majority of parents and children on the north shore in a negative or potentially negative fashion. What should be considered by all student parents in the north shore is breach of trust litigation and recall of all elected officials involved for this apparent \"throwing to the wolves\" of our children, their education, their opportunities for bursaries and scholarships, and, most importantly, their safety.
And Mr. \"One Man\'s Opinion\" Doug Collins should consider taking his fork out of that pie and actually attending the topic of his forays before inflicting his uneducated, biased opinion on the people of Kamloops. As a Brocklehurst resident, I would suggest that the School Board consider what the enrollment would be if all the designated catchment area students were forced to attend their \"catchment\" schools and quit finding reasons to keep South Shore schools open (my apologies to those who could be affected). Try one of these \"test\" runs in another area for a change...and cut the BS Mr. Spina; we all know that all school boards are under pressure to cut costs...imagine the lawsuit should one of these students be injured or harmed travelling out of his or her neighbourhood to live up to your supposed \"wave of the future\"...gutless wonders, the majority of our elected officials it seems (sorry Bev)
4)
Dear Doug,
You usually hit the nail right on the head. Tonight in your comments about the public meeting concerning the future of Brocklehust Secondary you were right on. Not one word was wasted. You expressed so well what needs to be said. My compliments and admiration.
For years I have travelled the province visiting schools and following education research. There are many exceptional middle schools in BC and the US, England and elsewhere serving their communities and students well. I have spent a lifetime in schools. Many as a student (20 between public elementary and secondary school, University, Post Graduate studies and diploma courses in North Carolina, McGill etc.) followed by 53 years as a professional educator (teacher, principal, school district and Ministry official). I have read much research and have experienced many grade configurations in Kamloops, BC, Canada, the USA, England, Germany, France and Ghana. The bottom line is that any configuration works if the community, parents , teachers and students make it work, get behind the school, are in involved in setting, and support the aims of the school. The most important thing that makes for successful schools is parent-teacher-student relations and respect. The most important "driver" in making decisions about school configuration is economics. Does it make economic sense? Enrolments have declined. Conditions have changed. I was the vice-principal of Brocklehurst Jr Sec.in 1968 (grades 8-10) and it was a very successful school as it was when it became an 8-12 School and can be if it becomes a Middle School. The School Board and District Administration are working hard to meet the challenging demands of declining enrolments and escalating costs. Change is rarely welcomed, but is a necessity of life. You expressed better than I could the current situation. Well done!! In a challenging and changing world we need clear thinkers, Thank goodness we have you!!
5)
To: Doug Collins: One Man\'s Opinion I was disappointed with your comments during last night\'s newscast regarding the new and surprising reconfiguration plans for the North Shore. Given your comments, I don\'t think you were at the meeting as you presented a misleading picture of the Brocklehurst students and parents. I was at the meeting and what I observed was students and parents who were passionate about their school and community and who asked that the North Shore receive equal treatment as compared to the South Shore and Westsyde. I believe that they have this right and I hope that you, as a longtime newsman, would also believe in this right.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Too Good to be True
(Aired on February 12, 2010)
It is hard to believe that people still get fooled by some of these scams that come to us via the internet. The internet has become one of the most-used and enjoyable inventions of the last 20 years. But it is fraught with people who want to rob us of our hard-earned cash. There are those we have some difficulty controlling, the hackers who break into the system and steal our financial information. Who get hold of our credit card numbers and try to access our accounts. We try to be as careful as we can, but internet transactions are more and more common, and in fact financial institutions often give us a break if we access our information online instead of getting a paper statement each month. We must take all precautions we can to avoid giving financial information to the wrong parties.
But there are many forms of fraud on the internet we do have control over. When we get the email from the Nigerian prince offering us a bunch of money to invest for him, we should simply hit the "delete" key on our computer. Don't bother reading it. As the old saying goes "if it looks too good to be true, it probably is." I can't believe how many people still get fooled by this type of scheme.
There are many forms of this scam, but they all amount to the same thing- you get overpaid by this scammer, and then you're to take what's left and send it back to him, or forward it to someone else. The cheque they send you bounces, you've already paid money to someone else, and you're holding the bag. Sometimes it's a few hundred dollars, other times, many thousands. Don't be fooled. Anything that looks suspicious, delete it. Don't respond to emails that seem to be coming from your bank or credit card company, asking you to reconfirm you financial details. Those are scams. Banks don't do that. If you're suspicious, call them to find out what's going on.
It's easy to be fooled on the internet. But there are lots of things to do to protect yourself. Number one is "don't buy into get-rich schemes." They are indeed too good to be true.
It is hard to believe that people still get fooled by some of these scams that come to us via the internet. The internet has become one of the most-used and enjoyable inventions of the last 20 years. But it is fraught with people who want to rob us of our hard-earned cash. There are those we have some difficulty controlling, the hackers who break into the system and steal our financial information. Who get hold of our credit card numbers and try to access our accounts. We try to be as careful as we can, but internet transactions are more and more common, and in fact financial institutions often give us a break if we access our information online instead of getting a paper statement each month. We must take all precautions we can to avoid giving financial information to the wrong parties.
But there are many forms of fraud on the internet we do have control over. When we get the email from the Nigerian prince offering us a bunch of money to invest for him, we should simply hit the "delete" key on our computer. Don't bother reading it. As the old saying goes "if it looks too good to be true, it probably is." I can't believe how many people still get fooled by this type of scheme.
There are many forms of this scam, but they all amount to the same thing- you get overpaid by this scammer, and then you're to take what's left and send it back to him, or forward it to someone else. The cheque they send you bounces, you've already paid money to someone else, and you're holding the bag. Sometimes it's a few hundred dollars, other times, many thousands. Don't be fooled. Anything that looks suspicious, delete it. Don't respond to emails that seem to be coming from your bank or credit card company, asking you to reconfirm you financial details. Those are scams. Banks don't do that. If you're suspicious, call them to find out what's going on.
It's easy to be fooled on the internet. But there are lots of things to do to protect yourself. Number one is "don't buy into get-rich schemes." They are indeed too good to be true.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Don't Ever Laugh at Me
Too late.
Abel Leblanc's meltdown in the New Brunswick legislature yesterday was absolutely magnificent. One of the most entertaining displays I've ever seen in Canadian politics. Check it out.
And here's a bit of explanation.
Abel Leblanc's meltdown in the New Brunswick legislature yesterday was absolutely magnificent. One of the most entertaining displays I've ever seen in Canadian politics. Check it out.
And here's a bit of explanation.
Attacks on Trustees Ignorant
(Aired on February 11, 2010)
I certainly don't mind people passionately defending their views on any subject whatsoever. I have never had issue with any person opposing my views on this program.
But when it starts to get personal, that's another story. And, unfortunately, that's what happened earlier this week when parents in the Brocklehurst area turned out to oppose a proposed plan for a middle school in their area. They didn't like the idea - it's their right to state their views. But quite frankly, many of these parents were just ignorant in their comments, suggesting the Board blindsided them, or sabotaged them by bringing up the middle school idea. They demeaned the board in their comments, and tried to suggest that the board had the middle school idea in mind all the time, and had a hidden agenda.
That's a bunch of crap, and those parents should be ashamed of themselves for their attitude and the way they talked the other night. I understand they're upset. I get it. But I don't get making a personal attack on people who are trying to find solutions in the midst of very trying situations.
The School Board is dealing with a serious issue - funding is not enough, enrollment is declining. Changes have to be made. Middle schools are becoming more and more popular. Why not try it, especially in an area where it makes sense? To suggest that the Board is picking on Brocklehurst parents by putting a middle school there and nowhere else is just illogical at best, and ignorant at worst. The comments of some parents Tuesday night were just plain hurtful, and to deal with a tough situation by personal attacks doesn't help anyone.
That was a tough night for trustees. They've been diligent in having this brutal series of public meetings so they can meet face to face with the people. It's been very demanding and very very stressful. They could have easily made changes without the kind of public consultation they chose. They should be commended for the way they're trying to deal with the problem, not kicked in the teeth like they were the other night.
I certainly don't mind people passionately defending their views on any subject whatsoever. I have never had issue with any person opposing my views on this program.
But when it starts to get personal, that's another story. And, unfortunately, that's what happened earlier this week when parents in the Brocklehurst area turned out to oppose a proposed plan for a middle school in their area. They didn't like the idea - it's their right to state their views. But quite frankly, many of these parents were just ignorant in their comments, suggesting the Board blindsided them, or sabotaged them by bringing up the middle school idea. They demeaned the board in their comments, and tried to suggest that the board had the middle school idea in mind all the time, and had a hidden agenda.
That's a bunch of crap, and those parents should be ashamed of themselves for their attitude and the way they talked the other night. I understand they're upset. I get it. But I don't get making a personal attack on people who are trying to find solutions in the midst of very trying situations.
The School Board is dealing with a serious issue - funding is not enough, enrollment is declining. Changes have to be made. Middle schools are becoming more and more popular. Why not try it, especially in an area where it makes sense? To suggest that the Board is picking on Brocklehurst parents by putting a middle school there and nowhere else is just illogical at best, and ignorant at worst. The comments of some parents Tuesday night were just plain hurtful, and to deal with a tough situation by personal attacks doesn't help anyone.
That was a tough night for trustees. They've been diligent in having this brutal series of public meetings so they can meet face to face with the people. It's been very demanding and very very stressful. They could have easily made changes without the kind of public consultation they chose. They should be commended for the way they're trying to deal with the problem, not kicked in the teeth like they were the other night.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
More Parking Troubles Coming for RIH
(Aired on February 10, 2010)
Two years ago when my wife and I had our first child, I used this space to bemoan the sorry state of parking at Royal Inland Hospital. Now, as we are expecting our second child, I have to bring up the situation again. This time, it's not the hospital itself I have a beef with.
City council moved yesterday to add parking meters to Third and Fourth Avenues, in the blocks closest to the hospital. This was already a two-hour limit zone, but by-law officials themselves admitted it was a tough one to enforce, meaning many people parking there could rest a little easier if their hospital appointments went overtime. Now, it will remain a two-hour zone, with regular metered rates, and by-law officers say they will have an easier time enforcing those rules.
I should also note that city staff have made it no secret that this is a revenue generator. The 43 new meters will bring in about $28,000 to city coffers annually.
Normally, I wouldn't have a big problem with something like this, but this is a special case. Royal Inland Hospital has quite possibly the worst parking situation of any property in the entire city. Though Interior Health officials have pledged to make changes to address the problem, it's clear that making R.I.H. a regional health centre has led to far more demand for parking than was originally predicted. Patients and visitors are forced to search for parking off-site, many of them using street-side spots on Third and Fourth. To install meters there borders on predatory.
The city is already banking on a huge increase in revenue from parking thanks to a new high-tech enforcement method that will lead to far more tickets being issued. It seems this is an area where the city could have called off the dogs - at least until Royal Inland has addressed its own problems.
Two years ago when my wife and I had our first child, I used this space to bemoan the sorry state of parking at Royal Inland Hospital. Now, as we are expecting our second child, I have to bring up the situation again. This time, it's not the hospital itself I have a beef with.
City council moved yesterday to add parking meters to Third and Fourth Avenues, in the blocks closest to the hospital. This was already a two-hour limit zone, but by-law officials themselves admitted it was a tough one to enforce, meaning many people parking there could rest a little easier if their hospital appointments went overtime. Now, it will remain a two-hour zone, with regular metered rates, and by-law officers say they will have an easier time enforcing those rules.
I should also note that city staff have made it no secret that this is a revenue generator. The 43 new meters will bring in about $28,000 to city coffers annually.
Normally, I wouldn't have a big problem with something like this, but this is a special case. Royal Inland Hospital has quite possibly the worst parking situation of any property in the entire city. Though Interior Health officials have pledged to make changes to address the problem, it's clear that making R.I.H. a regional health centre has led to far more demand for parking than was originally predicted. Patients and visitors are forced to search for parking off-site, many of them using street-side spots on Third and Fourth. To install meters there borders on predatory.
The city is already banking on a huge increase in revenue from parking thanks to a new high-tech enforcement method that will lead to far more tickets being issued. It seems this is an area where the city could have called off the dogs - at least until Royal Inland has addressed its own problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
