Peak Thunder Bay brilliance! After years of tie votes, surveys, delays, and 'overwhelming feedback,' we're blowing hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on fences, screens, and pallets to officially turn three parks into tent resorts.Remember when a councillor suggested planting pollinator gardens with bees and thorny bushes to gently discourage camping? We laughed that off... but now we're funding the deluxe version with city cash.Taxpayers, you're not just bankrolling the circus... you're the VIP suckers paying premium prices for managed chaos while bridges get delayed and real solutions collect dust.At this rate we'll need a $1 million consultant report next year titled 'Why the Tents Multiplied Anyway.' Keep those taxes flowing, heroes. The bees are busy, but the encampments are thriving.
Cases like this are exactly why many people have lost confidence in the Youth Criminal Justice Act. When someone young is facing charges as serious as attempted murder, it raises a bigger question than sympathy alone. A justice system still needs real accountability and deterrence, or it stops protecting both the public and the youth themselves. Reform is overdue.
@ssmmbb, Perfect! Next up: outlaw fresh air, running, and laughing. Those dopamine hits from real fun are dangerously unregulated. Screen time is the only safe addiction left.
@Taxesupagain, Well said. The FOI documents confirmed this.Bruno’s/Di Gregorio proposal, a 14-unit vacation resort with a couple of executive par-3 holes and a putting green, tied to their ownership of a nearby golf course, won on subjective scoring for ‘tourism benefits’ and ‘economic spin-offs.’ It beat out Doug Treichler’s plan to keep the course operating as a public golf course, plus higher cash offers (Wilco at $800,000 and others willing to pay more than the $650k appraised price).The appraiser had even warned that the resort component was likely a money-loser and that the highest and best use was continued golf operations. Yet council/staff picked the resort vision in a closed session without putting strong, enforceable timelines or performance guarantees in the purchase agreement.Taxpayers got neither the promised tourism boost nor maximum value for public land. Seniors housing may be needed now, but this history explains the ongoing skepticism.
Taxpayer money helped support this expansion in 2022 ($100K FedNor grant), so it’s fair for the public to ask what happens to that investment if the business changes hands. Hopefully there’s transparency around how those funds were used and whether the community still sees the intended benefits.
Hopefully they can follow Peterborough's transitional housing program. Lots of rules/regulations, have to agree to a care plan, plus their charged rent.