The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

PAGE 4, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 1984, WHITBY FREE PRESS whitby Voice of the County Town Michael lan Burgess, Publisher - Managing Edito The only Whitby newspaper independently owned and operated by Whitby residents for Whitby residents. Published every Wednesda by M.B.M. Publishing and Photography nc. Phone 668-6111 The Free Press Buildin r 131 Brock Street North, P.O. Box 206, Whitby, (j y MICHAEL KNELL Community Editor CONWAY DOBBS Advertising Manager Second Class Mail Registration No. 5351 g, )nt. Euclid residents know whether they need sidewalk A scant two weeks after Whltby Town Council said It would honor the wishes of the residents of Euclid St. and not build a proposed sidewalk, our town fathers did a quick about face Monday night and decided to go ahead with the $160,000 project. The majority of residents on the street in- dicated to the town by petition that they not only did not want the sidewalk, but they felt it was un- neccessary. l'm afraid it's going to be a miserable summer for a lot of people. I'm not making a long range weather forecast, but a political one. I make it because of two things chiefly: the date of the Liberal leadership con- vention, June 14 to 17; and the date of the Pope's visit, September 9 to 20. I think that the Pope's visit can safely be regarded as a rock in the political stream. Whatever happens politically will have to be accommodated to it. No government would run the risk of the kind of backlash that might occur if the visit were postponed or cancell- ed for anything as temporal as a general election. And the Vatican has already made it quietly clear that the Pope will not come to Canada in September if an elec- tion campaign is already under way. What that means to me is that a general election will either be held in August, before the Pope's visit, or not before Monday, November 12, which is about fifty days after the visit ends. • The magic number in these equations is, of course, fifty days. Under the most recent changes to the Elec- tions Act, an election is held a minimum of fifty days after the writ is issued. The old practice was sixty days, but Parliament threw out the practice and enshrined fif- ty days in law in May of 1982, on the theory that two solid months of election campaign is more than anyone would be expected to take, and that seven weeks is plenty. Amen. So, to me, the scenario begins to shape up this way. On June 16 in Ottawa, John Turner is chosen as the new Liberal leader. That's a Saturday. Give him a few days for the transfer of power and some desperate private polling to see how close the Liberal leadership hoopla has moved the Grits to the Tories in the popular vote. Say he waits until the following Friday. That's June 22. That means we could go to the polis as early as Monday, August 13. I suspect that the actual timetable will be very close to that. The old shibboleth against holding elections in the summer and winter has been put to rest. We have now had general elections in every month of the year. Prime Minister Trudeau was chosen party leader in April of 1968. Mike Pearson was put to pasture with what some feit was indecent haste, and the new leader led his party to the poils on June 25. Mr. Turner will have to get a seat, of course. It seems hardly likely that he would undergo the rigors of a by- election to remedy that deficiency, knowing that he will have to fight a general election anyway, in a matter of months. I'm going out on a limb with Mr. Turner, of course. But i have feIt, since before the P.C. convention last year, that the Tories, if they chose Brian Mulroney for themselves, would be effectively choosing Mr. Turner for the, Liberals as well. Against Brian Mulroney, who else? As long as l'm out on a limb anyway, let me edge out a little bit further. What do you bet that by the end of the summer we won't find ourselves with minority government again? And from the evidence that this newspaper has seen to date, the residents' position is a fair and good one. However, the issue at hand here is not necessarily the sidewalk itself, but Whitby Town Council's attitude towards these particular residents. Our elected officiais, who are supposed to represent the taxpayers and voters of this com- munity implemented a prdject that was not wan- ted. When the residents first appeared before the operations committee some three or four weeks ago they said that there wasn't sufficient pedestrian traffic to warrant a sidewalk on both sides of Euclid St. The one already there is suf- ficient to meet their needs. Frankly, who should know better than they whether or not the sidewalk is needed? The residents also protested the town's bylaw which requires residents to clear the sidewalks in front of their home within 12 hours after a storm. Most of the residents in this area do not have children, they are older people and may not in ail cases be capable of performing this task. This newspaper has opposed this bylaw since its inception for a couple of reasons. However, the major one is that we pay taxes for such services and yet the town says that we must do it our- selves. What, pray tell, is to prevent some future coun- cil from telling local residents that they must clear half of the road in front of our homes after it snows? Furthermore, what constitutes 12 hours? Does the town mean 12 hours after the snow begins to fall or 12 hours after it has stopped? The bylaw Is not very specific. The average Whitby homeowner pays some $340 in local property taxes each year and the very minimum that he or she should be allowed to ex- pect is snow clearing and garbage collection ser- vices. Having the residents do something for the town when he or she is (was) already paying taxes for It is ludicrious. Another arguement against the Euclil St. sidewalk is that it does not fit the town!s established criterla for such work. The first requirement is that sidewalks shall be required on both sides for arterial, collector and some major local streets. While our memory is not perfect, we do not recall that Euclid St. has been so designated in the town's official plan. Besides, Euclid St. already has one sidewalk. In his report to council, public works director Dick Kuwahara admitted that the town does not possess an exact traffic count for Euclid St. although he does point out that the area in question does lie between two collector roads. He also stated in the report that one of the major reasons residents oppose sidewalks Is because "they do not want to be bothered with clearing off the snow." It is not a question of being bothered, It is a question of getting what you pay for. In this case, council should have respected the wishes of the local residents who really are the people in-the-know. l,,w, - "~~qLEq4><'6r What downtown? ditâ Lit