Waitlisting, ticket limits, and unclear intent raise new concerns for downtown business owners who had hoped to have their concerns heard by police and City officials.
Miranda, I sent a response to your questions this morning, but just wanted to note that the event is in the Harmony Centre Commons and quickly reassure our business owners that no one is being turned away, as I've had a few queries this afternoon.
If you have any issues registering, you can reach me at the email above and I'll make sure you're added to the list.
We're working hard to ensure everyone is included. Thank you! -Rebecca (Eller)diem
Community & Business Development Advisor/ City staff lead for this meeting
Thanks for your engagement in the comments section. I published an update based on the responses you shared as soon as I was back at my desk.
In your reply, you noted that “I reached out personally to everyone who had requested multiple spots to explain and ask that they consider choosing one person to send.” This does indeed indicate that not all who originally expressed interest are being accommodated in full — specifically, that individuals from businesses wishing to send more than one representative are now being limited to a single attendee.
I want to emphasize that our role as media is to communicate the facts clearly to the public. When we report that some people are being “turned away,” it reflects the reality that invitations for multiple attendees from one organization are being scaled back. We intentionally filter out promotional or ambiguous language in order to avoid confusion for readers.
As always, if there is anything factually incorrect in our reporting, I welcome those corrections via email and will address them promptly.
To be honest, the meeting is a feel good event. It's well known what the large issues are. The structure of the meeting feels like a set up to guilt those dealing with the issues to just accept it because the various social agencies will tell you how hard it is. That pulling on local business owners empathy will somehow make them complain less while dealing with the reality of losing their shops.
Are we going to continue to hold forums, talks and surveys hoping that these talks alone will make some sort of progress? This has been done. The issues have been tabled. Why are we talking about it again instead of actually creating an action plan?
The bottom line is that the only ones who have any power to do anything sit on council and pretend the problem doesn't exist. Even if my some miracle a detailed effective plan is reached, nothing will happen. It will get stopped at council as always.
The meeting is a waste of time based on its current setup and transparency.
Your observations are spot on. It took the city manager three months to organize this meeting—and in the process, it was reshaped into something very different from what council originally intended. The city manager chose to shelve the 2050 survey results, and before that, withheld the consultant’s report from council until staff had a chance to “interpret” it for them. That raises a serious question: who is actually in charge at City Hall?
From what I’ve seen, council often treats the city manager’s recommendations as direction rather than advice. What we need is a city council that leads—one that drives real solutions instead of deferring to staff. That’s why it’s so important for people like you, who want to see change, to get involved in the search for new candidates in next year’s election. It’s not too early—the search starts this September.
Miranda, I sent a response to your questions this morning, but just wanted to note that the event is in the Harmony Centre Commons and quickly reassure our business owners that no one is being turned away, as I've had a few queries this afternoon.
If you have any issues registering, you can reach me at the email above and I'll make sure you're added to the list.
We're working hard to ensure everyone is included. Thank you! -Rebecca (Eller)diem
Community & Business Development Advisor/ City staff lead for this meeting
Hi Rebecca,
Thanks for your engagement in the comments section. I published an update based on the responses you shared as soon as I was back at my desk.
In your reply, you noted that “I reached out personally to everyone who had requested multiple spots to explain and ask that they consider choosing one person to send.” This does indeed indicate that not all who originally expressed interest are being accommodated in full — specifically, that individuals from businesses wishing to send more than one representative are now being limited to a single attendee.
I want to emphasize that our role as media is to communicate the facts clearly to the public. When we report that some people are being “turned away,” it reflects the reality that invitations for multiple attendees from one organization are being scaled back. We intentionally filter out promotional or ambiguous language in order to avoid confusion for readers.
As always, if there is anything factually incorrect in our reporting, I welcome those corrections via email and will address them promptly.
Best regards,
Miranda Miller
Editor, Owen Sound Current
Perfect, the update looks great and I'll follow up by email, but we'll be in The Commons, not The Auditorium. Thank you!
To be honest, the meeting is a feel good event. It's well known what the large issues are. The structure of the meeting feels like a set up to guilt those dealing with the issues to just accept it because the various social agencies will tell you how hard it is. That pulling on local business owners empathy will somehow make them complain less while dealing with the reality of losing their shops.
Are we going to continue to hold forums, talks and surveys hoping that these talks alone will make some sort of progress? This has been done. The issues have been tabled. Why are we talking about it again instead of actually creating an action plan?
The bottom line is that the only ones who have any power to do anything sit on council and pretend the problem doesn't exist. Even if my some miracle a detailed effective plan is reached, nothing will happen. It will get stopped at council as always.
The meeting is a waste of time based on its current setup and transparency.
Your observations are spot on. It took the city manager three months to organize this meeting—and in the process, it was reshaped into something very different from what council originally intended. The city manager chose to shelve the 2050 survey results, and before that, withheld the consultant’s report from council until staff had a chance to “interpret” it for them. That raises a serious question: who is actually in charge at City Hall?
From what I’ve seen, council often treats the city manager’s recommendations as direction rather than advice. What we need is a city council that leads—one that drives real solutions instead of deferring to staff. That’s why it’s so important for people like you, who want to see change, to get involved in the search for new candidates in next year’s election. It’s not too early—the search starts this September.
Learn more at www.remakecouncil.com.