Forum
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
who_me

Member
Registered:
Posts: 67
Reply with quote  #1 

It’s rare that I have anything positive to say about our City Hall or Municipal Government, but hats off to the Development Appeal Board for squashing the attempt by an angry mob of pedophobes to block a group home in Pinewood.

As reported in today's Gazette, dozens of residents were speaking out in opposition to a group home in Pinewood to house 6 siblings, all under seven years old. These are little kids, not a bunch of teenage delinquents. 

To be polite, I will say I found the multitude of reported arguments put forth to be quite inventive, although claiming the character of the neighborhood would be affected could not be more true.

Good Grief. Did someone there actually say “loss of a sense of community” ?

You truly have shown your true colors, and managed to cast shame on us all. I just can’t wait to see what sort of spin the major news media will put on this story.

 

 

0
Murray Lambert

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 287
Reply with quote  #2 
I believe that most human beings harbour a certain fear of the unknown and are resistant to change but when it results in despicable attitudes and actions such as those revealed during this appeal board hearing, we should be reviled, disgusted and outright ashamed of certain of our fellow men.
0
danapop

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 268
Reply with quote  #3 
Once I have written my formal decision I'll speak to the issue.
2
EnoughAllready

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 388
Reply with quote  #4 
As taxpayers, these people have a right to their opinion. No taxpayer should be above another. Whether their opinion is right is another issue. How children this young could be an issue is beyond me.

Group homes offer a very safe and protective space for children who need it and have a very certain purpose and are intended as a positive experience.

I wish these children well and hope this group home improves every aspect of their lives.

What I would like to know is who owns these group homes? Is it AHS or are they individually owned?
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #5 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danapop
Once I have written my formal decision I'll speak to the issue.


Once you have written and filed your formal decision, you are functus officio and should not be speaking further on the issue as the written decision speaks for itself.
0
danapop

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 268
Reply with quote  #6 
Quote:
Originally Posted by theskeptic


Once you have written and filed your formal decision, you are functus officio and should not be speaking further on the issue as the written decision speaks for itself.


I am not bound or restricted from providing my personal input and option in anyway. I just choose to wait until I have the formal decision written prior to speaking or answering questions.

As a citizen I am free to speak of my own accord.
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #7 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danapop
I am not bound or restricted from providing my personal input and option in anyway. I just choose to wait until I have the formal decision written prior to speaking or answering questions. As a citizen I am free to speak of my own accord.


Actually you are not a "a citizen I am free to speak of my own accord" on these matters as you are the Chair of the SDAB and perform a quasi-judicial function. As such, you make decisions which are characterized as "judicial" and provide written reasons for those decisions.

Thereafter your function is completed and prudence dictates you should not muddy the waters by making additional verbal statements.

However, if you choose to do so and that provides grounds for someone to file an appeal or a legal complaint that, of course,  is your perogative.

0
danapop

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 268
Reply with quote  #8 
Once the decision is public, I am free to speak as I wish as long as it is not the specifics of in camera debate and discussion.  

As I am sure you are aware, if someone wanted to appeal SDAB the appeal to the Alberta Court of Appeals can only relate to the process not the decision.  I know you just like being argumentative, so Ill leave it at that.  
1
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #9 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danapop
Once the decision is public, I am free to speak as I wish as long as it is not the specifics of in camera debate and discussion.  

As I am sure you are aware, if someone wanted to appeal SDAB the appeal to the Alberta Court of Appeals can only relate to the process not the decision.  I know you just like being argumentative, so Ill leave it at that.  


And, of course, talking about your written decision and possibly saying something which can be construed as altering your written decision is what creates the process or procedural problem. But hey .... if you want to cause yourself problems... as I said .... that's your prerogative.

0
danapop

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 268
Reply with quote  #10 
Which is why I said I will be refraining from commenting prior to my written decision.  Further, the decision has been already provided verbally.

If you are so confident, perhaps collect $10K and take it to alberta court of appeals.


0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #11 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danapop
Which is why I said I will be refraining from commenting prior to my written decision.  Further, the decision has been already provided verbally.

If you are so confident, perhaps collect $10K and take it to alberta court of appeals.




The relevance of the above to the conversation, I must say, totally escapes me.
0
kellex98

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 170
Reply with quote  #12 
Honestly Dana and Skeptic...you guys get annoying.  We get it, you will never agree on anything, and you both like to goad (sp?) each other on and/or get in a pissing match about everything. I don't know about the other readers on this forum, but I find it tiresome.
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #13 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellex98
Honestly Dana and Skeptic...you guys get annoying.  We get it, you will never agree on anything, and you both like to goad (sp?) each other on and/or get in a pissing match about everything. I don't know about the other readers on this forum, but I find it tiresome.


Then don't read it ... I found your post on holidays in Haiwii really boring and tiresome. 
2
kellex98

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 170
Reply with quote  #14 
LOL Skeptic, you are funny. If I could filter out particular posters I would, but unfortunately we need to scroll through the constant back and forth posts between the two of you to find new stuff to read. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate most of your detailed posts, I just find the back and forth between you and Dana annoying.
0
theskeptic

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,484
Reply with quote  #15 
Kellex 98:  

I'm sure you do find it annoying. However we were dealing with a topic which is critical to Dana since he is the chairman of a very important committee.

On my part, I was simply pointing out a procedural area in which I see he could run into problems in the future. On Dana's part, surely he is allowed to defend his actions.

If you are an objectivist or realist, point and counterpoint is a perfectly legitimate way to pursue Truth. However, if one is steeped in subjectivism so that everything is a matter of perception and every perception is equally valid, then I suppose the "back and forth" is seen as boring because the pursuit of truth is not important. 

Unfortunately, the "you have your truths and I have mine" approach has two problems: (a) it is very much a factor in creating the existing polarization in our society since no one bothers to determine which perception corresponds more closely to reality, and (b) it creates an environment in which all deliberations are characterized as unjustifiable preferences which cannot be adjudicated

0
who_me

Member
Registered:
Posts: 67
Reply with quote  #16 
Dana;

Nothing more or less than an observation or two.

Starting with your first post, you have been "speaking to the issue", but saying absolutely nothing over and over and over. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if there's nothing relevant or constructive to add to the topic, then why bother? There's no need to ramble on about what you might do.

"You may seriously want to rethink your statement  "I am not bound or restricted from providing my personal input and option in anyway." Not a very politically astute
challenge to toss into the shark tank IMHO.



 

0
Mark Cassidy

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #17 
I am not sure how it received the attention it did but there was an appeal, there was people allowed an opinion, the opinions were heard but not regarded as appealable under the appropriate guidelines.This process was simple and thank goodness democratic. Again not sure why it was on the front page of the Gazette and used as a social piece to shame people allowed freedom of speech maybe an email sent it to the Gazette and told someone where it should be headlined,who knows.Who is Danapopp seems to be the one that has the most zest for this story and it's degree of importance as a headline story more than anyone.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.