Raise the Hammer
The proposed anti-idling by-law needs your support at the May 10 public consultation.
By Ryan McGreal
Apr. 30, 2007
It's far past time for Hamilton to enact the proposed idling control by-law that has been kicking around for over a year and a half.
Idling vehicles (RTH file photo)
First proposed in 2005, the by-law was defeated in early 2006 by the previous council in favour of a less-costly public education program that inexplicably failed to reduce idling.
Incoming Mayor Fred Eisenberger promised to revive the by-law, but his efforts have been mired in procedural delays by a tiny group of councillors who oppose it dogmatically.
Councillors Lloyd Ferguson (Ancaster), Dave Mitchell (Glanbrook) and Maria Pearson (Stoney Creek) have actively opposed the by-law since its introduction, attempting at each step to stall and delay it by whatever means they can.
First, in January Mitchell and Ferguson insisted that the agricultural and rural affairs committee, on which they both sit, also review the by-law.
After five weeks and an amendment to except farm vehicles, Mitchell and Pearson then insisted on additional public input before voting. Before that could take place, city staff had to decide how to gather such input.
Once that was settled, Councillor Brian McHattie, a strong supporter of the by-law, moved to hold a special committee of the whole meeting "to receive input from stakesholders and the public on the draft anti-idling by-law".
Incredibly, Ferguson, Mitchell and Pearson voted to oppose the meeting they themselves had insisted on holding before the by-law came to a vote.
This led Mayor Eisenberger to complain that some councillors are "thwarting the process" of trying to vote on the by-law.
The public committee of the whole meeting will take place in Council Chambers on Thursday, May 10 at 6:00 PM. If at all possible, please register to make a public delegation in defence of this by-law.
If you cannot attend in person, you can still submit your comments in writing, but it is more effective to present in person.
Alternately, you could argue, along with Councillor Pearson, that the anti-idling education campaign failed because it did not include signs at entrances to the city (presumably the only people still idling are those who commute from elsewhere).
As CATCH reported:
"I think there's a lot more that can be done as an education process," [Pearson] argued. "Also I think we should publicize that we are an idle-free community to everybody coming into Hamilton."
Of course, if Pearson and her obstructionist cohorts get their way, Hamilton won't be an idle-free community.
Until this issue came up in council, I assumed that Hamilton like any other sensible place had an anti-idling by-law. I guess my assumption of sensible and Hamilton in the same sentence was misplaced. Pearson's demand for an educational campaign is absurd -- if you idle the police/by-law enforcement can educate you and if you are beyond help fine you.
''I guess my assumption of sensible and Hamilton in the same sentence was misplaced.'' Amen to that!
If Pearson has such an issue with there being no signs as drivers come in to Hamilton, then why doesn't the City erect those signs?
Why wouldn't the city erect those signs?
Ask Pearon what exactly those signs would say? We don't have a bylaw, we don't have any awareness, we don't have any education or enforcement. So the signs would have to say "Hamilton doesn't care, go ahead, idle you face off".
Looks like we're headed in the right direction after tonight's Committee meeting. It is quite frightening that we have had two smog advisory warnings all ready this spring. Something must be done and the City can lead by example!
NewsfeedsISSN: 1715-1554
James North Holiday Displays - Saturday, December 6, 2008, at James North Arts District, .
Read More...
Harper: GG to Prorogue Parliament (Dec. 4, 2008) -
Prime Minister Stephen Harper just announced after meeting with Governor General Michaëlle Jean that she has agreed to his request to prorogue the two-week-old Parliament until his government
Read More...
City Traffic Staff: Actuated Signals Will Accommodate Cyclists (Dec. 4, 2008) -
Earlier this week, the City Traffic Department announced that they want to try and speed up traffic on James and John Streets, including spending $60,000 to convert four intersections to actuated
Read More...
Harper crosses the line in speech to nation (Dec. 4, 2008) - In a cynical speech last night, Prime Minister Stephen Harper crossed the line from partisan into more dangerous territory as he implied that the Liberal-NDP coalition was an attack on Canada's de
Read More...
McMaster ruffles some feathers with child ward renaming (Dec. 3, 2008) - An article in the Globe and Mail, Health care in a bucket with fries, came to the attention of a RTH reader recently, who sent it along for us to check out (thanks, by the way!)
The article is ab
Read More...
Can Harper Prorogue Parliament? (Dec. 3, 2008) -
Given the paucity of Prime Minister Stephen Harpers options as Monday's confidence vote draws closer, pundits and analysts are coalescing around the conclusion that he will ask Governor Genera
Read More...
Picking a Prime Minister: A Parliamentary Primer (Dec. 2, 2008) -
We will use all legal means to resist this undemocratic seizure of power.
-- Prime Minister Stephen Harper
With the Liberals and NDP agreeing to a coalition with the support of the B
Read More...
Bratina: City Hall Plan Could Save $110 Million Over 20 Years (Dec. 2, 2008) -
Councillor Bob Bratina, who has proposed that the City remain at Hamilton City Centre, is claiming that this move will cost only $50 million over the next 20 years, compared to $150 million to com
Read More...
City Backs Down on Airport Development Size (Dec. 1, 2008) -
Citizens at City Hall (CATCH) reports that the city has backed down on at least one aspect of its dispute with the province on the size of the Airport Economic Growth District (AEGD), a planned in
Read More...
By trey
Posted 5/1/2007 10:04:43 AM
Nice review of the events.
Regarding the signs at the entrance of the city. I'm assuming Pearson wasn't aware that Burlington, Oakville, Mississauga and Toronto all have anti-idling bylaws. There would be no reason for those drivers to assume Hamilton wasn't 'idle-free'. The truth is the signs should be saying, "It's okay to idle in Hamilton but not in the city you're coming from".
(Permalink)