Brodbeck round 3

GOM. I hope you weren't holding your breath.

Orlicker is asking around to see how he thinks.

orlikow is out at his cabin, with his family! He shouldn't have said at the end on the week, unless he is counting Sunday!
i know he will anser you, he is a really great person and a very, very good councillpr, in the likes of Bill Clement!

Hello Phillip,

It is nice to hear from you.

I am actually organizing an information session with Todd Dube and Larry Stefanuik from WiseUpWinnipeg with Congressman Loudermilk from the US.

I hope that by lengthening the amber light or delay of starting the green will result in reduced accidents which I would support 100%.

I also am not sure if this will affect revenue but that is not relevant. Safety is the only issue we should be considering.

There is a report also going to the Executive Policy Committee where I will endeavor to find out the contract question. I certainly hope not.

I will let you know what I find out.

Yours truly,

Councillor John Orlikow
204-986-5236

JTF- are you always this cynical? I think I will have to get together with you, and purchase all of your paintings, or else ask you to contact my daughter at 803 Gallery and see if you can set up a show for Fall time.

"Orlicker is asking around to see how he thinks."

I'm surprised that John would write this (below)


"I hope that by lengthening the amber light or delay of starting the green will result in reduced accidents which I would support 100%."

Note that he states "or". Delaying the start of the green light is irrelevant to the issue of inadequate amber-times. I'm not too sure why people (especially interested parties) have a hard time grasping the matter of needlessly dangerous inadequate amber times. It's like we're living in Bizarroworld. In any case - I'm sure it's something that he will understand at the presentation and be properly peeved about. Fact is - many of our intrersections already have delayed greens - that's called mutual reds (for 1 second). If you really want safety, you do everything possible to eliminate crisis in the intersection. When we took CKY to film us measuring Lagimodiere at Grassie - they were amazed at the number of vehicles breaking hard to stop. That's a 100' intersection at 80kph with no grade - it should be 5.0. Or, if you want to experience real safety increases - adopt Georgia's legislation it would be 6.0 by law. CKY filmed the road approaching the intersection. It looked like an airport runway with a half-inch of rubber laid down for 20 feet. Trucks simply can't reasonably stop. This is not science people - this is common sense. It's one thing to have a department of paid traffic engineers who don't seem to understand this but it becomes a whole other matter when they plug their ears to the facts and install fine-cameras to capitalize off of something they claim to know nothing about. Anybody in politics who professes to not get it should be put into a corner to face the public - and then fired.

One would think that amber lights on streets that have a higher speed limit, eg 80 KMH, would automatically have a corresponding longer amber time, as opposed to a 50KMH speed limit!
Wouldn't that be automatic?

Rosey the City Of Winnipeg uses 4.0 second ambers across the board - that means all intersections. Sargent at Balmoral is 50kph and 35 feet across. Most people getting through that intersection don't even reach 50kph. Compare that to Lag/Grassie at 80kph and 103'. Having to explain this to a Mayor and his paid Traffic Engineers should anger the masses. Their "research" of the facts had better be a short conclusion or the whole matter will go to court - where it deserved to go last year. Hopefully they recognize this as their last opportunity to right this egregious wrong before a class action suit sees tens of millions refunded to abused drivers.

I am wondering if the calculation is at 80KMH and a bigger intersection you should clear is as compared to a narrower one at 50KMH?

Probably makes sense to some mathematicians?

I spoke to Sam the other day, and his policy, clearly outlined on his office wall is, NO REFUNDS!! lol

Actually there are 5 factors to the formula and that is aspect is considered. The determination can be quickly determined with a chart. The city could do it immediately however it would cause the traffic engineers to do something as well as causing the entire justslowdown scheme to be blown out of the water. Proper engineering and infrastructure address makes intersections safe - not pictures - and they know it. The safety results (and dramatic decrease in "violations") will shock people so if anybody's still wondering why there would be resistance to making ambers adequate.......

Does anyone think that it is about the money, when an outside company pays millions of dollars? to put up these cameras and gets a commission on the fines?
What a ridiculous situation!
Our do nothing City councillors I am sure have been taken in because no one has asked knowledgeablr questions.
Now , the questions are being asked and "safety" is being questioned and things will be corrected, fter the contract runs out!

rosencrentz wrote:

"Orlicker is asking around to see how he thinks."

He's a politician isn't he?

He wants to get re-elected eh?

He wants to be on the best side of this issue eh?

He needs the input from other councillors to make up his mind?

Jondo wrote:



Having to explain this to a Mayor and his paid Traffic Engineers should anger the masses.

HUH??? We have traffic engineers???

Here is the latest reply from my city councilor John Orlikow:

I am still attempting to find out why my replies do not go through to you.

It seems there is a technical glitch preventing Mr. Orlikow from formulating an opinion and conveying it to me.

FYI There are no eMAILs from Mr. Orlikow trapped by my spam filters. I have invited Mr. Orlikow to post here in the sandbox, thereby avoiding those technical problems.

What did I tell you....he's waiting for someone to make up his mind.

JTF wrote:HUH??? We have traffic engineers???

Several years ago they presented a detailed report about speed limits to Council, in many cases recommending that the limits be increased. Council essentially told them to go f*ck themselves. I don't blame the traffic engineers for playing Nintendo in the basement when council treats them like that.

I have the exact wording somewhere, but essentially they were told that it is not the business of council to make decisions on speed limits, and that they should go get the support of area residents first and then go through a series of committees and reviews, and only then council might consider the recommendations.

That explains much. Our councilors are proving themselves incapable of running this city. They have it back-asswards. The councilors should take advise from their constituents and tell the planners to make it happen. Then the planners need to make it happen or demonstrate why it should not happen.

Bingo.

Problem is we have such a weak bunch of councillors.

One thing is for certain though - they all cash their pay-cheques without delay. Maybe that is what needs to be "reviewed". Just what the hell are they doing in their respective capacities? I want to see report cards for every paycheque.

Jondo - check your PMs.

John Orlikow is an excellent representative! he answered my letter in 1 day or less, and I believe he was out at his cottage?

Why do we complain about our elected officials? We should be complaining about our stupidity for continually electing representatives who have "no vision", no "aptitude" for serving our needs, "no nothing" going on!
Our City, our Province, our Country, our Municipality is run by elected representatives who have no "Vision", and we havent elected Eadie yet, so there can be no excuses! lol

Rosen, Orlikow will read your post and believe you. You should tell the truth and give him an opportunity to see his flaws so he might correct them.

I cannot do that, because each year there is only one Jewish person allowed by Hassadic law to fix flaws, and I have done that already!

It has now been about four weeks since I wrote a letter to John Orlikow asking for his views about this issue. I asked some very specific questions. Orlikow has chosen to not answer.

I’m guessing that since you’ve not bothered to provide me with any further feedback regarding your OPINION on this matter that you’ve not elected to take a stand. That’s too bad. It will very likely cost you my vote. I will also publicise your indecisiveness and inaction on the sandbox (winnipegsandbox.com). Feel free to contact me any time when you’ve formulated your opinion.

Some will argue he is waiting to hear from the wiseupwinnipeg group. That's not good enough. Surely he has an opinion. I want to hear his views today. If after hearing from Loudermilk and wiseupwinnipeg he has a change of heart then great.

Well Orlikow? Care to discuss this issue in this forum?

How about you Livio Ciaralli? You have an opinion you'd like to share with the sandbox and your future constituents?

Any other civic candidate care to wade in on this subject?

It sure seems unusually quiet...

This is the right tact to take. It's politicians who need to start appreciating the difference. We expect to know what THEY think - not to hear what they "believe" WE want to hear.
Waiting to see which way the wind is blowing so they know whether to frown or smile will soon be old-school politics. We'll look back at this period as the period of political uselessness that cost citizens true representation. We already know we've lost representation - most just haven't figured out how and why.

If 30 people did what Grumpy did - be specific - on the record - political mountains will move. It's no wonder politicians don't even feel the need to return calls - we're a bunch of apathetic, spineless fools who need leaders. When these "leaders" gain office (often not difficult to do and anybody can do it) they must be floored at how easy it is to rule the people. That's where that dynamic begins to shape. The fact is - it's a illusion in the minds of the politicians only. We just have to get organized.
I challenge 29 more people to take 20 minutes and write to their councillor to ask what their view is of inadequate, dangerous ambers. For heaven's sake - if we can't do that much then I have to wonder if we even deserve to be heard.

Here's your opportunity to make a difference. Post your letters/contact here after you've done it. Grumpy you're number 1. I've done my share. How long before 29 others stand up?

GOM since you asked the question and I can Login, I repasted From The other thread

I think the work Larry and Todd are doing and the suggestions they are bringing to the table are very good.

I like Redlight Cam's. What I don't like is how they factored in Speeding.

My opinion comes from personal experience. We humans can't react as fast as a digital signal. Sometimes you get caught in this "reflex' situation. When that happens I really don't like that people get penalized. It revolts me that alot of people get these tickets because for whatever reason they didn't clear the intersection. I'll be looking at how these things work and i will ask that it be changed. If its red lights, then thats it. If increasing ambers helps drivers, then do it.

If putting speed signs up helps us to reduce our speed, let's do it. If you want to catch speeders, lets find a system of motion detection that does that. But to tie it into a reflex type of situation, is wrong.

I would look at the contract and see how much we would be on the hook for a reduction in tickets being issued. I would also look at who signed the contracts and find out what they were thinking. Were they thinking this was a game and a clever way to increase revenues or, were they thinking about the taxpayer. And why sign a contract that had the potential implication that if we indeed reduced the amount of tickets issued ( which is what we want isn't it ) somehow we'd still be penalized.

And yes, I believe all those people who got a ticket during that infamous construction period where it was clear the sign said - While construction workers present - I believe they should be reimbursed. It's not acceptable we are getting treated this way. Sorry, I don't like like this lazy pompous attitude towards taxpayers, which includes me.

Finally, I would send this message to all administrators, if the intent is to get more money out of taxpayers by imposing these types of traps or "clever " schemes, I would suggest they hand in their resignations and I won't be shy about it.


Great, now you got me all riled up and I have to film.

GOM I don't think you are being fair to Mr. Orlokow. I sent him an email and had an answer within 2 days. I bet you he responds. How do councillors keep track of inquiries? if Mr. Orlikow missed yanswering you, then shame on him. To me that is the most important thing for an elected official to do!
Bill Clemenent answered every inquiry, every phone call to everyone, and did it without any paid secretary. Pretty impressive.
A few councillors ago in River heights whomever was my councillor did not respond to one of my inquiries, and he lost his seat the next time around.