Jim Hutton questions Owen Sound Council's decision to invest $75,000 in public washrooms that will not be open 24/7 and shares a solution municipalities across Canada are implementing.
Providing access to a 24 hour “loo” will not alone solve the issue of people having to sleep / roam the streets in the apparent absence of a broader plan to assist the unhoused folks who might want a flush toilet or better yet a warm bed & a toilet this winter .
Initially the idea of this Portland loo is great - maybe in a future budget - if identified for the unhoused specifically- Grey County budget could cover these in OS and the other urban centres in Grey - as we are well aware the unhoused is a county responsibility- you as part of a strategy to provide infrastructure that the unhoused may need / or/ use even.
I give staff and council full marks on this upgrade to the market buildings public washroom and the open hours daily .
It is easy to be an arm chair critic - and- this council provides a great deal of material to be critical of - however - I see this as a beginning - let’s say an acknowledgment that there are actual breathing citizens beyond the meeting rooms at city hall 👍
These citizen opinions affect who we each vote for.
The constant ads for members of the public to serve on city committees emphasizes the lack of interest the public seems to have in this council term- also- only such a low turn out for the public info night is very telling- and- all Council I expect is very concerned by this low level of interest. People are NOT stupid- they know when they are being given “lip service” and they know how to make changes in their community .
I recall many opponents to the Julie McArthur Regional Recreation Centre/ YMCA partnership - at that time- we had been elected to lead - and - lead is what we did. I am confident in saying the “rec centre” was and remains a positive outcome for so many people determined to
Make our community a better place for all- we pulled together and under tremendous circumstances got that job done - for all of the residents .
Does this Council project that message today ?
Improvement to a PUBLIC bathroom is indeed a challenging decision for the current council as they are required to look outward to the very people they serve / not inward and not to let staff lead them .
These wc upgrades will be appreciated by many families , visitors and seniors who may need to use the facilities and of course Saturday morning Farmers Market supporters !
Again- only part of looking outward, identifying issues/ concerns and taking measurable action to address the community’s concerns are being addressed by this Council decision - yet- maybe just maybe a bit of a lighting rod to focus on greater issue(s)
A bit of a rant from a public toilet- but- as I mentioned- easy to be an arm chair critic
I think it's worth pointing out that these conversations have been ongoing since Council decided to close access to City Hall washrooms and impose the responsibility of public washrooms on downtown business owners in 2017.
When the issue has come up recently in Committee and at Council, several councilors and staff said they're well aware of various options as they've been presented the last two years at AMO.
The need isn't new; the awareness of the issue is longstanding. People are tired of seeing others urinate and defecate in flowerbeds and on the street. There is a complete lack of dignity and I would go so far as to say a heartlessness around this issue, and it creates a lot of animosity between different groups in the community.
Residents who were looking to Council for a real solution are once again disappointed with a costly bandaid that doesn't address the issue.
Respectfully, I don't think it's fair to label concerned and engaged citizens with labels like "armchair critic." Jim has demonstrated his understanding of the issue. He's researched a potential solution. He's invested time in voicing that in a letter to the editor. Community members deserve to be a part of these conversations, especially when we seeing them going on unresolved as long as this one has.
Arm chair critic - just an expression - no need to be so sensitive - Mr Hutton clearly is well informed on the matter- wasn’t referring to Mr Hutton specifically - in fact- if you take a breath - I complimented the “loo” he mentions I certainly believe arm chair critic is far less offensive than “hysterical” or “boo bird” in my view.
I suggest that if you are planning to intervene on every opinion one of your paid subscribers posts and not allow a variety of comments or
Opinions - this publication becomes a closed group of like minded individuals with little friction for
1. This is the first comment I've left on any article in over a month.
2. When I see readers interacting inappropriately with other readers and contributors, it is well within my rights to gently correct the poor behaviour.
3. There was not an ounce of emotion or sensitivity in my post, and it's neither reasonable nor appropriate to attempt to discredit another woman in that way. I don't think a male editor would get the same knee-jerk comments about sensitivity and offence when responding with verifiable facts in a discussion.
Healthy debate is what we're here for. Let's keep it in that place -- "armchair critic" and ad hominem arguments are not it.
I just took a minute to re read my comments - To be accurate my intention with my comment Miranda- re “arm chair critic” was originally intended as a reference to myself - as I said “it’s easy to be an arm chair critic”that seems very clear - I do not know Mr Hutton - and-his comments were very interesting and thoughtful .
As for your fast response to my thoughts the descriptor “sensitive “ - was entirely appropriate for male or female editor ( I would have used the very same word for a male editor) some men and women are indeed sensitive to many things -I am by no means a writer - so- of course admonish my statements publicly when warranted .
Respectfully -I am a simply a citizen and - not elected - and a subscriber to your platform .
Providing access to a 24 hour “loo” will not alone solve the issue of people having to sleep / roam the streets in the apparent absence of a broader plan to assist the unhoused folks who might want a flush toilet or better yet a warm bed & a toilet this winter .
Initially the idea of this Portland loo is great - maybe in a future budget - if identified for the unhoused specifically- Grey County budget could cover these in OS and the other urban centres in Grey - as we are well aware the unhoused is a county responsibility- you as part of a strategy to provide infrastructure that the unhoused may need / or/ use even.
I give staff and council full marks on this upgrade to the market buildings public washroom and the open hours daily .
It is easy to be an arm chair critic - and- this council provides a great deal of material to be critical of - however - I see this as a beginning - let’s say an acknowledgment that there are actual breathing citizens beyond the meeting rooms at city hall 👍
These citizen opinions affect who we each vote for.
The constant ads for members of the public to serve on city committees emphasizes the lack of interest the public seems to have in this council term- also- only such a low turn out for the public info night is very telling- and- all Council I expect is very concerned by this low level of interest. People are NOT stupid- they know when they are being given “lip service” and they know how to make changes in their community .
I recall many opponents to the Julie McArthur Regional Recreation Centre/ YMCA partnership - at that time- we had been elected to lead - and - lead is what we did. I am confident in saying the “rec centre” was and remains a positive outcome for so many people determined to
Make our community a better place for all- we pulled together and under tremendous circumstances got that job done - for all of the residents .
Does this Council project that message today ?
Improvement to a PUBLIC bathroom is indeed a challenging decision for the current council as they are required to look outward to the very people they serve / not inward and not to let staff lead them .
These wc upgrades will be appreciated by many families , visitors and seniors who may need to use the facilities and of course Saturday morning Farmers Market supporters !
Again- only part of looking outward, identifying issues/ concerns and taking measurable action to address the community’s concerns are being addressed by this Council decision - yet- maybe just maybe a bit of a lighting rod to focus on greater issue(s)
A bit of a rant from a public toilet- but- as I mentioned- easy to be an arm chair critic
I think it's worth pointing out that these conversations have been ongoing since Council decided to close access to City Hall washrooms and impose the responsibility of public washrooms on downtown business owners in 2017.
When the issue has come up recently in Committee and at Council, several councilors and staff said they're well aware of various options as they've been presented the last two years at AMO.
The need isn't new; the awareness of the issue is longstanding. People are tired of seeing others urinate and defecate in flowerbeds and on the street. There is a complete lack of dignity and I would go so far as to say a heartlessness around this issue, and it creates a lot of animosity between different groups in the community.
Residents who were looking to Council for a real solution are once again disappointed with a costly bandaid that doesn't address the issue.
Respectfully, I don't think it's fair to label concerned and engaged citizens with labels like "armchair critic." Jim has demonstrated his understanding of the issue. He's researched a potential solution. He's invested time in voicing that in a letter to the editor. Community members deserve to be a part of these conversations, especially when we seeing them going on unresolved as long as this one has.
Arm chair critic - just an expression - no need to be so sensitive - Mr Hutton clearly is well informed on the matter- wasn’t referring to Mr Hutton specifically - in fact- if you take a breath - I complimented the “loo” he mentions I certainly believe arm chair critic is far less offensive than “hysterical” or “boo bird” in my view.
I suggest that if you are planning to intervene on every opinion one of your paid subscribers posts and not allow a variety of comments or
Opinions - this publication becomes a closed group of like minded individuals with little friction for
Healthy debate/ discussion.
1. This is the first comment I've left on any article in over a month.
2. When I see readers interacting inappropriately with other readers and contributors, it is well within my rights to gently correct the poor behaviour.
3. There was not an ounce of emotion or sensitivity in my post, and it's neither reasonable nor appropriate to attempt to discredit another woman in that way. I don't think a male editor would get the same knee-jerk comments about sensitivity and offence when responding with verifiable facts in a discussion.
Healthy debate is what we're here for. Let's keep it in that place -- "armchair critic" and ad hominem arguments are not it.
I just took a minute to re read my comments - To be accurate my intention with my comment Miranda- re “arm chair critic” was originally intended as a reference to myself - as I said “it’s easy to be an arm chair critic”that seems very clear - I do not know Mr Hutton - and-his comments were very interesting and thoughtful .
As for your fast response to my thoughts the descriptor “sensitive “ - was entirely appropriate for male or female editor ( I would have used the very same word for a male editor) some men and women are indeed sensitive to many things -I am by no means a writer - so- of course admonish my statements publicly when warranted .
Respectfully -I am a simply a citizen and - not elected - and a subscriber to your platform .
No harm or offense was intended . l
Just a citizen participating in free speech .