This evening, at least 350 people attended the open house on various options of increasing road safety on Westsyde Rd. Likely, many more attended. I know for a fact the first batch of 280 comment forms ran out in the first half of the event.
The main issue here is speed. Westsyde Rd has a general speed limit of 60 kms an hour. But, most people drive much faster than that. That the road has 4 lanes running through a semi rural area encourages speeding, sometimes even without drivers realizing it.
The grim statistic, however, is that, while the provincial percentage of all accidents that cause injury or death is 30%, on Westsyde Rd 48% of all accidents cause injury or death.
Anybody who reads the papers knows that the City staff have proposed narrowing a section of Westsyde Rd from 4 lane to 2 lane. And you would also know that there has been pretty vociferous opposition to that proposal.
Person after person came up to me at the open house to express their displeasure with the proposal of narrowing the road. Many said what is needed on Westsyde Rd is more consistent enforcement of the speed limit by the RCMP. Some used very colourful language.
Although some people asked why this was not a public meeting with a presentation and a question period, I was happy that it was an open house. With the passion in the room, I think a presentation / question period format could have easily generated into a public lynching. This serves no one well.
Unfortunately, the questionaire presented by city staff was worded very badly and gave the impression of trying to influence the answers. There was some band aid, crisis tweaking given to the questionaire when the second run was copied. But, too little and too late.
I am totally confident that this was an honest mistake, but we can't be making mistakes like this. There is already a perception out there that the City already has its collective mind made up, and that any consutation is token at best.
I know that this is not the case, having seen in my short time on Council many solid attempts by City staff and Council to get broad input.
What I think might solve this problem: a thorough, strict, and standard procedure for any City public meeting / open house. This would mean documents and questionnaires checked and double checked. This would mean rules about how information is presented to ensure not only balance but the appearance of balance. This is just my initial brainstorming.
At the end of the meeting, I met two people who thought narrowing the road might just be a good idea. It was interesting to hear their points of view as well.
I left with many great ideas, furiously scribbled down, and I thank all the people who came up to me to share their views.
Comments