Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Assiniboine Avenue Vindication

All the work done by myself and The Great Canadian Talk Show in 2009 and 2010 about bike lanes and the systemic problem of public consultation has finally, and unsuspectingly, been vindicated.

We've been right all along.

The City Auditor did in fact write a report based on the complaint I made in August 2010 about the gross mismanagement of the Assiniboine Avenue bike path. In that report the auditor echoes my concerns, and proves that politicians and residents alike were lied to: consultation DID NOT happen.

I will write more later, but for now:

The Winnipeg Sun story by James Turner and this Free Press piece by the prolific and insightful Staff Writer are up.

It was particularly comforting not only to have the Mayor personally thank me afterwards, but to say on the record that he agreed with the criticism that myself and TGCTS have brought forward. Russ Wyatt also mentioned prior to voting on the report, that the Auditor had done "good work" and that the report was "very revealing."

More to come.

4 comments:

bwalzer said...

From the Free Press article: "Hnatiuk said the bikeway is "sparsely used" in summer, ...".

That might be a good topic for a future post. My impression was that the bikeway was fairly heavily used. The bike people have some statistics based on actual counts that back my impression. Since this was a statment made at a public meeting this is a fairly big deal.

bwalzer said...

I've gone through the auditors report. I mostly agree with the recommendations made to improve the consultation process. I am not sure how important it is to have the costs in the actual notification of the meeting, but such things should be available in general.

I strongly agree that the meeting notices should clearly describe why the meeting is being held and what the attendees will be expected to decide (if anything). It is important that people know what is going to be discussed and what part the attendees are expected to play. I would extend this idea to having the options and the thinking behind them available before the meeting. I think this would be helpful even if this only ends up being a URL. Some of this stuff is complicated and it isn't fair to make everyone have to try to digest everything in the form of a dense slide presentation before they have to decide something.

Graham said...

Your impression was, well, wrong.

The bike counts were obtained by TGCTS and they are complete bullcrap. The counts were done BY the lobbying groups, with no statistical standards and irregularity in monitoring schedules.

Meanwhile, the vehicular traffic counts that I obtained via FIPPA were clearly not taken into consideration. Those were done to statistical standards and the Traffic Engineers have no ulterior motive to inflate the numbers of cars going down any road.

Absolutely everything, BWalzer, that was done by the consultants was done in a blatantly biased manner to further the bike lobby's goals. You referencing these counts and believing them, is proof that, you too, got hosed.

The Audit report confirms all of my accusations that I made at EPC. There is absolutely NO reason to trust these consultants with anything they say. The process was rigged. Period.

bwalzer said...

"The bike counts were obtained by TGCTS and they are complete bullcrap. The counts were done BY the lobbying groups, with no statistical standards and irregularity in monitoring schedules."

So the numbers are the result of a conspiracy? The counts were done by pretty much anyone who bothered to show up. Are you really claiming that these people who really didn't even know one another somehow organized this deception in complete secrecy?

I really don't know how to respond to this. Do you have any proof for this astonishing assertion?

"Meanwhile, the vehicular traffic counts that I obtained via FIPPA were clearly not taken into consideration."

Show how these documents support your assertion...