I think I'll drop by to observe. If anyone else is interested, here is a copy of an email that eloquently addresses the concerns of many to the office of Mr Heaps from the desk of Joe Hendry, a man who would have been well aware of these issues had they actually been a part of any consultation process. The quotes around "long" are a reference to this excerpt of a letter dated May 17, 2007 from Mr. Heaps to the Planning and Growth Committee in order to submit the revised Terms of Reference.
Originally Posted by From the Desk of Adrian Heaps, May 17, 2007
Since my appointment as Chair of the Toronto Cycling Advisory Committee, I have taken the
opportunity to hold a series of meetings and conversations with Program Staff, cycling
community representatives, fellow colleagues and members of the public, regarding what the
needs and issues regarding cycling are from their perspective.
It would seem that since learning of his appointment March 26th 2007 Mr. Heaps has been hard at work meeting with his constituents which include all Toronto citizens in his role as the chair of the TCC, doesn't it? Like Joe I'd be interested to know who was consulted, when and where. There has been no response to date. It is reasonable to ask, if you have a vested interest and make efforts to stay abreast of TCC related activity & likewise all cycling activity in Toronto (Mr. Hendry has long been a member of the cycling community as well as a member of the TCC) how it came to be that a consultation process overlooked, as far as anyone can see, damn near the entire cycling community. No one has acknowledged discussing any TCC with Mr. Heaps, at least not publicly.
Originally Posted by From the Desk of Joe Hendry
Councillor Heaps
I would be interested to know which cycling groups were consulted
during the "long" process of revising the terms of reference. When
were
the meetings with the members of the public held? Can I request a
copy
of the minutes?
I would also be interested in understanding why you sent an e-mail on
May 17 to the cycling committee members stating "the Committee's
Terms
of Reference is currently under review." Yet on the same day you sent
another e-mail to the Planning and Growth Management Committee asking
them to endorse the revised terms of reference.
From appearances it would seem that review of the terms of references
was already completed before the committee was notified of the
review.
I'm also struggling with the logic that firing the committee members
from local cycling groups somehow "enhances the role of Toronto
Cycling
Groups" Perhaps you could explain further.
I would also be interested in understanding how reducing citizen
participation and the frequency of meetings will help cyclists. In a
city as large as Toronto. A mere eight members from across the city
representing each area equally poses a danger that the committee will
become strictly focused on recreational cycling as most of the voices
will come from areas where utilitarian cycling is rare.
Smaller less frequent meetings also creates the appearance that
decisions are made in the back rooms without participation and
consultation of cyclists, cycling groups and members of the public.
The fact that council has prevented the cycling committee from
meeting
over the past year only furthers the appearance.
Joe Hendry
I think that if Mr. Heaps has any intention of serving as the chair of anything that he change his tack, and immediately. Maybe he met with someone here? C'mon, which one of you cats gave this dude his advice?
I'm kind of angry about all this right now, though it doesn't particularly have anything to do with me, but I'm holding out hope that this is all a mis-understanding and that Mr. Heaps is simply completely new to City Hall and didn't understand that he'd be expected to actually consult with the interested parties before deciding their future.