Comment 120328

By guelphite (registered) | Posted October 26, 2016 at 11:26:58

Credit to Eisenberger and Merulla for what time they did manage to speak on the ridiculousness of both the double-standards of Hamilton's infrastructure planning and due diligence of councilors, respectively.

I watched the whole thing live but by the end I was having a hard time following the back and forth on the legal opinion mentioned here: "Whitehead's sense that Council was "tentative" in its support means reversing course would not actually require a reconsideration motion (it doesn't).

Hopefully I'm reading this correctly as Terry's intuition that council voted tentatively doesn't mean that it would not require a two-thirds motion?

Edit: that question is probably redundant considering the conclusion of the rest of the article, suppose I am asking that at this point there is no likely opportunity for a simple majority vote in the future that can serve as an "off-ramp" for LRT?

Comment edited by guelphite on 2016-10-26 11:41:55

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds