'Permit' to hate

[FairHamilton]

I was particularily disturbed by this Letter to the Editor in today's Spectator.

I don't know what disturbed me more, Margaret Ashley's use of the word hate, or the Spectator's decsion to print the letter. I will say that on the GO train this morning I was within a hare's breath of cancelling my subscription to The Spectator, and it will definitely play on my mind when my subscription comes up for renewal.

http://thespec.com/Opinions/Letterto...article/500084

January 22, 2009
Margaret Ashley
The Hamilton Spectator
Dundas
(Jan 22, 2009)
Re: 'Council vows building permit crackdown' (Jan. 15)

So builders can put up homes without a building permit. But it didn't take the city long to nail my son for a measly garden shed that some busybody reported.

Way to go Hamilton -- no wonder we in the 'burbs hate you.

[coalminecanary]

I have to agree that the bylaw enforcement hand comes down with bizarre priority most of the time. On the other hand, if you get along well with your neighbours they are less likely to rat you out. But back on the original hand, it is too easy for someone to get you in trouble through a simple phone call. For residential bylaw complaints, I think the city should charge a nominal fee to the complainant - $20 say - payable up front. If the complaint leads to a charge, it gets reimbursed. Maybe enforcement could be focussed oin real issues instead of petty "i'm gonna tell on you" cases.

[highwater]

I found the letter pretty shocking too, FH. But on further reflection, I think the Spec handled it well by titling it 'permit to hate'. It makes the woman out to be a mean-spirited hater. It wouldn't surprise me if they get Hamilton hate letters everyday. Perhaps this letter is just the tip of the iceberg, but I think they turned it around on her.

[highwater]

BTW, the bylaw allows for structures up to 100sqft to be built without a permit, so that was no "measly" garden shed. Something that big is bound to impact neighbours' sightlines. I probably would have complained too. And if this woman passed on her out-sized sense of entitlement to her son, then it's no wonder they got complaints. There's no excuse for breaking the law.

[oldcoote]

A shed built too close to the property line also contravenes the by-law. Mine is, however, I passed it by my neighbour before I built. No complaint, no worries.

[FairHamilton]

The fact she used the term 'busybody' tells me all I need to know about Margaret Ashley.

When I read the letter I immediately thought of Jerry's shed on Coronation Street (3rd paragraph and the picture where they are standing on the porch of the shed); http://www.digitalspy.com/soaps/a452...-his-shed.html

[MsMe]

I usually use the word dislike instead of hate less I'm talking about my neighbour. Who is an absolute moron. But his actions catch up to him every so often.

[coalminecanary]

By the way, I never realized that the spec letters section was a place to whine about your personal problems!

[Millstone]

I don't think the Spec is at fault here; I encourage the free expression of thought wherever possible.

[highwater]

Originally Posted by Millstone

I don't think the Spec is at fault here; I encourage the free expression of thought wherever possible.

Key word: thought. This wasn't thought. Just a random venting. I don't see why the Spec letters page should be a therapist's couch for cranks.

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by coalminecanary

For residential bylaw complaints, I think the city should charge a nominal fee to the complainant - $20 say - payable up front. If the complaint leads to a charge, it gets reimbursed.

Most complaints are resolved without charges, via the bylaw officer talking to the person violating the bylaw and asking them to stop doing whatever is causing the violation (e.g. loud noise).

A nominal fee would serve only as an effective gag order on poor people wanting to complain about bylaw violations.

Originally Posted by oldcoote

A shed built too close to the property line also contravenes the by-law. Mine is, however, I passed it by my neighbour before I built. No complaint, no worries.

I have a feeling that Margaret Ashley is not particularly on speaking terms with her neighbours - a common feature of low-density suburban sprawl neighbourhoods. Most of the people I know who live in the suburbs see the privacy and anonymity of not having to get to know their neighbours as a feature, not a bug.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

Most complaints are resolved without
A nominal fee would serve only as an effective gag order on poor people wanting to complain about bylaw violations.

Not to mention the cost of administering a returnable fee (nominal or not), would cost more money then the fee generates.

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

I have a feeling that Margaret Ashley is not particularly on speaking terms with her neighbours

That's most likely because they are all 'busybodys', sticking their noses in where they don't belong.

[adam]

If it was up to tax-paying citzens, I wonder who would have voted for the amalgamation of Hamilton in the first place? Probably nobody.

[highwater]

Let's create our own 'remanufacturing' jobs TheSpec.com - LettertotheEditor - Let's create our own 'remanufacturing' jobs

Ken Cryer
Hamilton
The Hamilton Spectator

(Feb 11, 2009)

Re: 'Blue box castoffs go to China, come back' (Feb. 9)

I expect the city to immediately create (or at least enable) the "remanufacturing" jobs to handle our own recycling.

If the city doesn't, I will. Whom do I call to take these "raw" materials out of the global loop and keep them here in town?

Same goes for compost facilities. Let's not send our compost out of the region. Instead, let's set up a facility north of Barton Street amid the other industries. Perhaps the natural "scent" of composting will neutralize the "odour" of the neighbours.

[FairHamilton]

^ Let us hope he was referring to industrial 'neigbours' that create a sulphur smell, and not the local residents.