Guest Dave Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Mike Del Grande just mentioned the stadium (opposed). Not actually discussing the Stadium issue yet, but Del Grande used it as an example of something taxpayers shouldn't fund while criticizing something else. Not an encouraging sign, however as I posted earlier, Del Grande appeared to have made up his mind earlier this week that he was opposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dave Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I just noticed that in the "green sheets" supplementary agenda, the stadium discussion is now scheduled to take place at 3 PM Eastern today. See y'all then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polish_LYNX_Fan Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 whats the link for the webcast ? Will it be online @ 3 pm ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dave Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 http://www.rogerstelevision.com/option.asp?lid=16&rid=16&tid=10754 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Dave Mike Del Grande just mentioned the stadium (opposed). He's opposed to nearly everything concerning spending, apparently, and judging by his website (www.mikedelgrande.ca) and the number of shots at the Mayor, is no fan of the Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dave Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca He's opposed to everything though, so that's not a surprise. I think we still have the overall lead. The supplementary agenda indicates that Del Grande has a "hold" on the stadium clause, which I believe means he has reserved the right to speak first on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealGooner Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Mike del Grande is a clown who drives around his ward looking for suspicious houses he thinks might be marijuana grow ops. Typical suburban NIMBY do-gooding prick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franky Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 ugghh....rushed home during my lunch break to find out the discussion will take place around 3pm. does anyone think there will be a final decision made or will it carry over into tomorrow's agenda??? i'm literally on pins and needles[] oh well, two and a half hours to go and back to work i go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john tv Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca He's opposed to nearly everything concerning spending, apparently, and judging by his website (www.mikedelgrande.ca) and the number of shots at the Mayor, is no fan of the Miller. Thanks for the link, was about ready to go down there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosehead Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 To think Toronto wanted the Olympics, but they can't even agree on a 15,000 seat stadium for the FIFA U20 World Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Moosehead To think Toronto wanted the Olympics, but they can't even agree on a 15,000 seat stadium for the FIFA U20 World Cup. Well nobody is agreeing to that at all. Its a 20,000 seater, expandable to 30,000 that we hope gets the green-light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saviola7 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Did I hear that correctly? They changed a motion to tomorrow morning, "after the business tax, which is after the soccer stadium". We may not get to this until tomorrow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 You heard wrong. It's coming up at approx. 3 Is it a simple majority or 2/3rds? Anybody know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saviola7 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Are you following it right now then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Saviola7 Are you following it right now then? Yes. Exciting stuff. All those in favour. Opposed. Carries. Where's all the personal attacks that make these things interesting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Moosehead To think Toronto wanted the Olympics, but they can't even agree on a 15,000 seat stadium for the FIFA U20 World Cup. That's what I was thinking when the York University deal fell through. These councillors don't seem to have any clue how huge an event the WYC is on the world stage, or how much influence FIFA has in the international sporting community. If Toronto blows this, it may be decades before anyone trusts them to host any major international sporting event. Seriously, can you imagine these people being in charge of organizing the Olympics? Thank God, Toronto's bid was unsuccessful. It would have been an embarassment to the entire country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saviola7 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 oooo ... "Use of the Scarborough Flag by the Scarborough Pipe Band" ... intense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Saviola7 oooo ... "Use of the Scarborough Flag by the Scarborough Pipe Band" ... intense Damn, I thought I heard wrong. They are like arguing over this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dave Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Saviola7 oooo ... "Use of the Scarborough Flag by the Scarborough Pipe Band" ... intense Hey, you missed a real classic from yesterday: Mayor: The clause is on the table. Councillor 1: I wish to make a supplementary motion... Councillor 2: I wish to put a hold on that... Mayor: On the motion? Councillor 2: Yes, on the motion. Mayor: You can't do that, we haven't heard the motion yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dave Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Hey, I hope someone is recording this for posterity... we can distribute the torrent later [)][}] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 There are only 37 councillors there by the sounds of the voting totals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Do we need to get permission from somebody before flying a provincial or Canadian flag - what's with this Scarborough thing? Scarborough doesn't even exist as an independent city any more does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealGooner Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Richard Do we need to get permission from somebody before flying a provincial or Canadian flag - what's with this Scarborough thing? Scarborough doesn't even exist as an independent city any more does it? Nope. It doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dave Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca There are only 37 councillors there by the sounds of the voting totals. This may be bad, since I suspect the anti-stadium councillors may feel more strongly about this than the pro-stadium ones, and so may be more motivated to be present for the vote. A high turnout is therefor preferable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Keep in mind that part of the debate will be held "in camera" - which doesn't mean in front of an actual camera, but an old legal term meaning held in private, without any tv coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.