Comment 110225

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted March 13, 2015 at 18:13:58 in reply to Comment 110184

One other point regarding participation at the meeting.

Because Councillor Farr and the DNA were concerned that some residents of Bold and Duke were not aware of the change, they made an extreme effort to inform them of the meeting by ensuring that every resident of those streets received a hand delivered flyer advertising the meeting and emphasizing the reversions.

This is one of the reasons there was such a large turnout from residents of the streets.

The DNA's blog and Farr's weekly email did advertise the meeting as well, but only residents of the street received flyers.

If this was supposed to be a meeting to decide whether to cancel the conversions (not just inform the residents and make sure their concerns about the implementation had been addressed) this would have needed to be made clear in the advertising which would have not just focused on the residents of those two streets.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds