By Pepper Parr
August 2nd, 2022
BURLINGTON, ON
FOLLOW UP: We received the following from the city after the story was published:
Sharing we are still in the process of updating these development webpages and configuring our website. Some site configurations, like the development projects pages, can’t be fully completed in a staging\testing environment so they need to be done on the live site. We are in the process of migrating supporting documents for applications, this is a extensive process as there are almost 60 application pages with at times over 20 large documents for each application.
If you require specific documents please reach out if you do not yet see on the site.
That new look web site turns out to be hiding much of the information that was available on the older version.
We will take you through the changes – the question before we start is who determined what the changes should be and at what level were they approved..
I think this one is going to smell quite a bit.
It was possible with the old web site to go to the page with the developments taking place in a ward.
The only thing you can now learn about this project – next to Joe Dogs on Brant is that is has been appealed to the OLT.
You could scroll through each of the developments.
You could look at and read the Planning Justification reports, the Parking Study, the Storm Water study – everything that the developer was required to submit.
None of that data is available on the new web site.
This is critical stuff for both those who stay on top of development issues but also those people who are looking to buy an property and do their homework rather than believe everything the real estate agent tells them.
Why was that information removed?
Do the members of council know about this?
Does the Mayor know about this ?
If they do – why did they not ask that the information remain on the various development sections of the city web site?
If they do – what the heck is going on at city hall?
It seems that almost every time you turn around there is more and more information that is no longer available.
This from a city staff that brags about how much engagement they do with the public and at the same time take steps to remove the information that citizens need to be engaged.
City communications department is getting back to us with an explanation. We’ll pass that along to you.
We would also like to know if Council authorized the closing of the Clerk’s Office during the election. The construction surely should have been scheduled before or after the election that is once every four years with the date known four years in advance. Access to information such as procedure by-laws missing from the new website, results and financial information also missing from the new website should be available from a computer as it used to be but now is not. It has been taking a week to get some questions answered and that does not compare to being able to attend at the Clerk’s office and get exactly what you want, without an appointment to help you make your mind up whether to run or not. We are really disappointed in the number of people running but cannot blame them as trying to get information from city hall these days is worse than having a tooth extracted.
As is usual, both the Gazette and Candidate Marsden jump the gun with their complaints and whining. It’s surprising the other usual suspects have not already had their ill-informed whine.
Perhaps the Gazette should have held its story back until it had word from the City. But no, just as with the Love My Neighbourhood Event The Gazette goes with just one side of the story throwing more stones at the Mayor, Councilors, and staff.
Gazette, please revert to journalism from tabloidism!
Mary seemingly you call those who seek availability of the public information that leads to decisions being made in terms of how this city is administered for the well-being of families and businesses, “whiners”. We gladly join the ranks of those you call “whiners”. Far better to have a city full of whiners and begin to see the prospects of a transparent and accountable council than what we have had for the last four years. Whenever we consider speaking out about non-availability of public information we think of those who believe their loved ones
death on The Redhill Expressway may well have been avoided if the surface results report had not been buried. Not speaking out about the non availability of public information is not an option to those who care about the well-being of their neighbors particularly if you believe as we do that we must love your neighbor as yourself.
As a mayoral candidate you must listen and read better. No, I did not describe those who seek information as whiners. If you read my comment again you will note I am referring to the Gazzette and those that seem to always go with just half the story as being whiners. The spokesperson for the city explained why previously available information was currently missing from the new website. The spokesperson said over the installation and launch period of the new site the missing information would again become available. So the Gazette and other whiners jumped the gun by not waiting to get the other side of the story.
I’m all for transparency and information to be broadly available. I’m against unbalanced reporting and commenting.
I note you still have not responded to any of the questions put to you in this forum by myself and others as to your policy positions and to strict adherance to the City’s Code of Good Governance
Great! Thank you!