Councillor’s comment ‘ill-considered’

Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

Did Coun. JonathanGalgay really say, “They (councillors) are there to shape policy”? (“City breaking its own heritage rules,” The Telegram July 30.)

An interesting choice of words — “shape” rather than “make” — and an interesting suggestion that this shaping should take place incident by incident in council.

The inference is that policies, or in this case guidelines, are moving targets which are made one day and twisted round in subsequent days.

As an owner of a downtown rental property who has gone through the expense — and irritation (inspections, special ordering of windows, and final approval added at least six weeks to the renovation) — of respecting the heritage guidelines, I find his remarks ill-considered.

A number of St. John’s heritage properties are in Galgay’s ward.

One hopes that he is expending as much energy on the preservation of heritage buildings, such as the 1840s Richmond Cottage (Shaw Street) which is being allowed to fall to pieces, as he has expended in addressing the concerns of one landlord.

Suzanne Sexty,

St. John’s

Geographic location: Galgay

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • mw
    August 08, 2014 - 13:18

    Suzanne Sexty is just one of many who have a valid point to make in their criticism of Galgay and the other members of the Council who bend or ignore the Heritage regulations to save some of their constituents the expense of obeying them. Why would a business provide off street parking if they can get willing Councillors to grant them an exemption, as happened again in Georgestown? There is trend underway on Council to undermine building and zoning regulations on a case by case basis which provides an incentive to ignore them to gain or retain a competitive advantage. This needs to be stopped sooner rather than later before Development Regulations are debased beyond reclamation.

  • Have To Agree
    August 01, 2014 - 12:56

    I could not agree more with Suazanne Sexty on her concise and well pointed piece above about the type of ambiguity city councillor Galgay has projected here with words like "shape". That word shape smacks of convenience to both interested parties and not the overall policy set in stone (sarcasm) by the heritage boards. Afterall glass towers on Water Street meet the so called heritage window guidelines correct? Lastly the writer mentions Mr. Galgay's ward. Residents here in ward 2 would like to know which ward he lived in when he asked us to vote for him?