Comments on: Column: 5 Amendments, Municipal Obsession?

By: Jurist

Jurist — Wed, 15 Jul 2015 02:08:14 +0000

What is the commie/socialist saying?

By: Terry

Terry — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 21:06:23 +0000

What garbage Onion.
Front Street boys.

When it is empty what will you say then.

By: steve

steve — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 20:51:23 +0000

Hey Mr Starling, you forgot to make a vague reference to some mistake by the PLP in order to appear even handed. Tell me , does Dunkley’s f-bomb aimed in your direction still burn? -you work on that, And i will work on why i waste time reading and commenting on this type of piece…

By: Terry

Terry — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 19:55:17 +0000

Once again I state; tell us why and whom Mr. Famous

By: Truth and Nothing but the Truth

Truth and Nothing but the Truth — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 19:46:24 +0000

STARLING,,, I`M SORRY………….. WHAT???

By: Sad

Sad — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 18:02:17 +0000

Whose personal account was the $18mn wired to before it disappeared along with the parking lot?

By: Terry

Terry — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:57:31 +0000

And your point is what.
Was it done in good faith et al.
Enlighten us.

Signing something means jack s***

By: Chris Famous

Chris Famous — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:38:45 +0000

Who signed for the $18 million from the COH?

By: cs

cs — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:23:52 +0000

If the $18million that the Corp is now on the hook for was Mr. Starlings money he’d be singing a different tune. As a taxpayer who prior to May this year had no vote, I am glad the Govt has seen fit to institute controls so another 18mil can’t disappear.

By: PBanks

PBanks — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 14:22:31 +0000

I think what’s overlooked is his statement regarding people who work in the city having no representation, he appears to suggest that those who work in the city should also have a say in who runs it. Personally I think that is a non-starter.

By: Terry

Terry — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 13:36:45 +0000

Once again I’ll state:- What else do you expect from Comrade Starling.
Self confessed Communist Marxist Lenonist.

You be the judge.
Shalom.

By: Unbelievable

Unbelievable — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 12:47:34 +0000

Johnny Starling has become so biased against the OBA his columns are not even worth reading anymore. Yet he failed to criticise his alma mater, the PLP, at every turn through out their 14 years of mismanagement.

By: Sad

Sad — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 12:40:37 +0000

And don’t forget that Mr. Starling conveniently omits the crucial fact that the new voting/representing structure includes guaranteed seats for both resident and business councillors. So his claim about non-resident reps is a lie.

I also find it strange that he did not demand earlier the release of the $800k PLP commissioned corporation review that was paid to a foreign firm. No continuous articles or sit ins over that lack of transparency.

Seems that he is a tad obsessed by the OBA given his double standards for each Party.

By: hmmm

hmmm — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 12:20:04 +0000

Who are these mythical front street boys?

By: hmmm

hmmm — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 12:17:33 +0000

A commercial centre reintroducing a business vote is NOT controversial !!

What was controversial was taking away a business vote from a commercial centre.

By: Mumbojumbo

Mumbojumbo — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 12:09:06 +0000

A city town possessing a corporate existence usually with it’s own local govt….

By: aceboy

aceboy — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 12:00:55 +0000

However, others have been much more controversial, such as the reintroduction of the business vote which has, at least in the case of the City of Hamilton, given de facto control of the municipality to the business vote rather than balancing the interests of both residents and businesses – while workers and consumers remain without representation whatsoever.

OMG. You didn’t just write that surely?

The residents went ahead and voted in Team Hamilton. Do you think that worked out well? Team Hamilton handed a 262 year lease to a totally inappropriate contractor who is now embroiled in a controversy which sees a Mexican finance company owning Par-La-Ville car park as a result of payment defaults and a potential %$90 million lawsuit the government will need to defend. They also handed money to a woman who anyone with half a brain could see would rip them off….and she did. They insisted on being paid, when the positions held were not paying jobs…a fact they absolutely knew and were aware of, yet they ran for office anyway, clearly with a view to being financially rewarded.

Do you think it responsible of the OBA to allow that kind of thing to happen again?

The businesses pay the majority of the tax and thus provide the most support for the City of Hamilton. For them to NOT have a vote is a complete farce and equates to taxation without representation. The residents still have the ability to vote but somehow they should also control in your mind….why?

By: Onion juice

Onion juice — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 11:40:42 +0000

Well you know de Front Street boys have to have control.
Remember what Jim Woolridge stated.