Don, in your blog article of today's date you state that "We generally approve all comments, even the critical ones, but will reject anything that is defamatory, racist, sexist, homophobic or otherwise hateful (we’ve only ever rejected three out nearly 1000 comments made). As of this election, we’re also respectfully declining to post comments from other candidates (in all races) if we feel they are blatantly campaigning in the comments section—there are plenty of public forums for that sort of thing."
The below post which you did not publish was not campaigning, but it was critical. I get that you are running for mayor and want to be seen in the best possible light, but don't misrepresent the level of transparency you are actually displaying to Edmontonians on your blog.
The post is a bit blurry so I'll transcribe it again below:
Don,
On June 26 I blogged coverage of a City of Edmonton Open House regarding Century Park here:
http://www.curtispenner.ca/1/post/2013/06/century-park-an-abrogation-of-responsibility-by-council.html
The jist of the blog entry was that it appears Council either does not know what is going on at Century Park, or that it is willing to relax z oning regulations and make concessions to the developer, Procura, with little to no promise from them in terms of what landscaping and urban village elements they will be delivering and when. Either is unacceptable after investing $690M in the LRT.
In the Open House which you advertised as "a housekeeping change around the parking," there was a poster that said the next steps were:
- Summarize results of Open House (which had no agenda, no speakers, and no Q&A)
- Prepare Bylaws for Council
- Public Hearing
After I questioned the lack of public process and the fact that Edmontonians have learned absolutely nothing of Procura's actual plans for the site, you replied in a tweet to me:
@curtis_penner Purpose of the open house *was* to commence public engagement. It is the beginning of due process, not the end. cc/ @b_sway_d
- June 28, 2013
If this is the case, what are the next steps in the public engagement process? Surely the Public Hearing is not, because the Public Hearisg is, based on our community eperience, a fait accomplit for most developers. Mayor Mandel bragged to the Prban Development Institute in April of this year that "only two projects have been rejected by Council".
As you yourself summarized this as "housekeeping", I'm sure you would not be voting against it. Who would not want to do their own housekeeping? The probem is there is nothing in Procura's presentation regarding what they will actually be delivering to Edmonton in terms of the promises made to Edmonton regarding the urban village and the common area amenities.
Why isn't council holding Procura's feet to the proverbial fire on Century Park?
The below post which you did not publish was not campaigning, but it was critical. I get that you are running for mayor and want to be seen in the best possible light, but don't misrepresent the level of transparency you are actually displaying to Edmontonians on your blog.
The post is a bit blurry so I'll transcribe it again below:
Don,
On June 26 I blogged coverage of a City of Edmonton Open House regarding Century Park here:
http://www.curtispenner.ca/1/post/2013/06/century-park-an-abrogation-of-responsibility-by-council.html
The jist of the blog entry was that it appears Council either does not know what is going on at Century Park, or that it is willing to relax z oning regulations and make concessions to the developer, Procura, with little to no promise from them in terms of what landscaping and urban village elements they will be delivering and when. Either is unacceptable after investing $690M in the LRT.
In the Open House which you advertised as "a housekeeping change around the parking," there was a poster that said the next steps were:
- Summarize results of Open House (which had no agenda, no speakers, and no Q&A)
- Prepare Bylaws for Council
- Public Hearing
After I questioned the lack of public process and the fact that Edmontonians have learned absolutely nothing of Procura's actual plans for the site, you replied in a tweet to me:
@curtis_penner Purpose of the open house *was* to commence public engagement. It is the beginning of due process, not the end. cc/ @b_sway_d
- June 28, 2013
If this is the case, what are the next steps in the public engagement process? Surely the Public Hearing is not, because the Public Hearisg is, based on our community eperience, a fait accomplit for most developers. Mayor Mandel bragged to the Prban Development Institute in April of this year that "only two projects have been rejected by Council".
As you yourself summarized this as "housekeeping", I'm sure you would not be voting against it. Who would not want to do their own housekeeping? The probem is there is nothing in Procura's presentation regarding what they will actually be delivering to Edmonton in terms of the promises made to Edmonton regarding the urban village and the common area amenities.
Why isn't council holding Procura's feet to the proverbial fire on Century Park?
