CKPC News

Trying to listen to news on CKPC is much like playing a game of chance. It might start at two minutes to the hour or three minutes after the hour or mostly likely, after running the the promo "Now the latest from the CKPC Newsroom..." ,we get music and no news at all.

If this is how the new owners of CKPC, Evanov Communication, runs a radio station they are obviously in the wrong business and CKPC will not survive for long. Either that or they fired the wrong people.

Naming Names

So The Expositor is upset that the Brantford City Police didn't release the names of those charged in a recent downtown prostitution sweep. Kind of a curious stand for a paper that often doesn't publish the names of people charged with other offenses even though they are sometimes reported on the local radio station. Just who is The Expositor protecting? And there are those charged with much more dangerous offenses, such as stunt driving, whose names are rarely released but the Expositor seems okay with that.

Aren't those who are charged innocent until proven guilty? But The Expositor has stopped reporting on the courts (except in the case of sensational murder trials) so the guilty go unreported. Talk about being inconsistent.

Prostitution is not illegal, just the communicating in public for the purpose of such. An odd law. And in Brantford the City has seen that massage parlours and strip clubs have been forced out of business, so of course, sex workers have been forced to the streets. Although there are ads for prostitution in that same Expositor. Are they not just as guilty of communicating for the purpose of prostitution as those who were recently charged? And because they are also paid for these ads, could we not add the charge of living off the avails as well?

Sidewalks

There is a dispute over the placing of a new sidewalk on Lyons Ave. Some of the residents are upset that a sidewalk is being installed. And there is some question about the petition requesting this sidewalk.

First, I don't understand why the residents even have a choice. All city streets should have sidewalks and on both sides. I know that this is not the case in many areas of the city where sidewalks have never been installed. In fact, some of the streets adjacent to Lyons have either no sidewalks or they are only on one side. And the worse cases are streets with elementary schools on them such as Woodman Drive, Baxter St. and Lynwood Drive where children have had to walk to school on the road for years. Much of the older part of Echo Place and most of Grand Woodlands have never had sidewalks. I can understand residents not wanting sidewalks because then, they not only have to pay a portion of the cost, but they are also subject to the sidewalk snow clearing bylaw. But for safety sake sidewalks are a necessity. I don't like having to clean my walk either. If I can get 60% of my neighbours to sign a petition, can we get our sidewalk removed? And if I was ever charged under the existing bylaw, I think that I would have an excellent case as this is clearly a discriminatory law.

Second, why are petitions in such matters (parking is another example) handled by someone in the neighbourhood. Surely the highly paid city staff are not that overworked that all such petitions should be handled by them. But then if a uniform policy for sidewalks was in place (all streets without sidewalks should get them, no objections allowed) no petitions would be needed.