[Coprolite]

why are people still arguing about whether the remand centre should or should not be saved... IT'S ALREADY DOWN! Instead, lets try to save the Tegler Building.

And good riddance.

 

[SarcasticMarmot]

why are people still arguing about whether the remand centre should or should not be saved... IT'S ALREADY DOWN!

We still debate/lament the teardowns of the Tegler Building and the Carnegie Library (travesties!).

But yes, glad the remand is going down.

 

[kcantor]

I realize people who make a decent income often want to live in nicer or more prestigious areas, but I would prefer those people paid from city tax funds actually live in our city.

Of course, people on more limited budgets, don't have the same choice or freedom and have to make the best of it in less desirable areas, but those areas are not always as bad as made to seem.

I do feel with housing prices increasing, some people who would have otherwise moved to suburban areas will start to look at some of those other areas more and that may lead to improvement.

It’s a two way street… If you prefer that people paid from city tax funds live in our city, do you also believe that people living and paying taxes in our city should be denied the opportunity of working or selling their goods and services in/to other jurisdictions?

 

[supplanter]

It’s a two way street… If you prefer that people paid from city tax funds live in our city, do you also believe that people living and paying taxes in our city should be denied the opportunity of working or selling their goods and services in/to other jurisdictions?

That’s not really the same though. The equivalent would be Edmontonians working for tax funds from other municipalities. I’m not completely sure and it’s possible they don’t care, but I suspect the outlying municipalities place some level of priority on hiring their own residents over Edmontonians.
I don’t necessarily have an issue with people on the municipal payroll from outside of Edmonton if they’re doing something like street cleaning, snow clearing, leisure attendant, but I think personal investment in how the city is run is a helpful asset for the more involved jobs like police or administration. People from St Albert are inherently going to care less about the city and how it’s running.

 

[kcantor]

^
What about architects and engineers? Contractors and sub-contractors? Doctors and dentists? Nurses and teachers? Lawyers and court reporters? Building inspectors? Machinists and building engineers? Students and day care workers? Physiotherapists and accountants? Bus drivers and landscapers?

It is possible to care about both where you live and where you work.

 

[husky]

^
What about architects and engineers? Contractors and sub-contractors? Doctors and dentists? Nurses and teachers? Lawyers and court reporters? Building inspectors? Machinists and building engineers? Students and day care workers? Physiotherapists and accountants? Bus drivers and landscapers?

It is possible to care about both where you live and where you work.

Not to mention that many of these people also see Edmonton as where they exist. Even if they live in a suburb community, they may spend significant time/money in the City, and may be incredibly passionate about the City and Metro area as a whole.

But hey maybe I'm biased, as I am one of those people.

 

[constance_chlore]

Surely there's some boundary there though—the only question is where it lies. Nobody would be too upset about their hairdresser moving to St. Albert, but we would and should be if our city councillor did.

 

[kcantor]

^
You don’t need to live in a riding to run or be elected to Parliament although you do need to reside in Canada.

You don’t need to live in a riding to run or be elected to the Legislature although you do need to reside in Alberta.

You don’t need to live in a ward to run or be elected to City Council although you do need to reside in Edmonton.

Personally, I’m not hung up on any of the requirements to be a resident. If you can convince more voters in a federal or provincial riding or a city ward than any other candidate that you are the most capable person to best represent their interests regardless of where you live, so be it.

 

[constance_chlore]

^
You don’t need to live in a riding to run or be elected to Parliament although you do need to reside in Canada.

You don’t need to live in a riding to run or be elected to the Legislature although you do need to reside in Alberta.

You don’t need to live in a ward to run or be elected to City Council although you do need to reside in Edmonton.

Personally, I’m not hung up on any of the requirements to be a resident. If you can convince more voters in a federal or provincial riding or a city ward than any other candidate that you are the most capable person to best represent their interests regardless of where you live, so be it.

Yes, and I've always found those rules to be strangely lax, but they do all maintain the principle that if you're someone who is granted a lot of power to make decisions at a certain level (federal, provincial, municipal), you should be subject to the consequences of those decisions. In other words, you should have skin in the game. I would say the same of police officers, who are granted a near-monopoly on the legitimate use of violence—and who aren't even elected, so it's not even a question of the will of the voters.

 

[thommyjo]

Not to mention that many of these people also see Edmonton as where they exist. Even if they live in a suburb community, they may spend significant time/money in the City, and may be incredibly passionate about the City and Metro area as a whole.

But hey maybe I'm biased, as I am one of those people.

Sounds like an argument for annexation?

 

[archited]

When my brother joined the EPS the only place that he could afford as a purchase for a place to live was Bon Accord -- a duplex. I don't know if it is still the case (he has since retired) but there was a tight monitor for policemen and policewomen in terms of their credit usage while serving (the idea that they should not fall under suspicion in terms of financial strain). As individual human beings with wants and needs like any other I can't imagine being forced to live in any given area unless society is willing to subsidize their choices (which would probably open up another whole can of worms).

 

[kcantor]

Yes, and I've always found those rules to be strangely lax, but they do all maintain the principle that if you're someone who is granted a lot of power to make decisions at a certain level (federal, provincial, municipal), you should be subject to the consequences of those decisions. In other words, you should have skin in the game. I would say the same of police officers, who are granted a near-monopoly on the legitimate use of violence—and who aren't even elected, so it's not even a question of the will of the voters.

Elected officials are subject to the same consequences whether they live in the riding/ward/jurisdiction or not. If they can’t convince sufficient voters to elect them, they don’t get elected and if they can’t please sufficient voters during their term, they don’t get re-elected.

As for police officers, that near-monopoly is the same whether they live in the jurisdiction or not and if they abuse that near-monopoly they should be fired regardless of where they live. That they’re too often not is s legitimate concern but residency has nothing to do with it.

 

[_urbanite]

Almost gone

 

[Out of Towner]

While they are at it they should knock down the old train bridge over 97St and bring the road up to grade.

 

[archited]

I disagree -- it is a character bridge and one of the last vestiges of Edmonton's downtown CN presence plus it is attached to an urban park and it makes an excellent pedestrian connection across 97th Street between Qualico's development and whatever comes next for the demolished Remand Centre site.