City Excludes Effective Accessibility Advisory Committee Chair
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Add Comment
More fun and games in Kingston. The latest is a refusal by the city to bring back a very strong, efficient, but unfortunately vocal, chair of the Municipal Accessibility Advisory Committee. It has a lot of people in the disability community upset because it is becoming abundantly clear that, despite the government mandating that the Accessibility Advisory Committees exist to advise on barrier issues and work with City officials to prevent or remove them, the city isn't listening. This is evidenced by the strict rules that were released about a year ago that limited the committee members' ability to communicate with the public to learn more about accessibility related issues, or to communicate with city staff on how to prevent or remove a barrier. The new rules stated that everything had to be approved, and addressed by city staff, not the members who sat on the committee. The rules also got more strict about how members of the public, who were not a member of the committee, have to report barriers as well. Everything must now go through the the city, ideally by email, but I think there is a phone number we can call as well.
Rather than tell my own story, I am going to share the 2 news articles that were recently printed in the Kingston Whig Standard. I'll also share the comments I made in the comment section of where the news item was printed online.
First the news article and a link to the actual source:
Article 1
'No good reason to drop him'
Local News
By PAUL SCHLIESMANN, THE WHIG-STANDARD
Published January 13, 2011
When the list of nominees for city committees is released today, one prominent name won't be on it.
Glenn Outhwaite, chairman of the city's accessibility committee under the previous council, was not recommended for reappointment.
Of 11 committee incumbents, Outhwaite was the only one not returned.
According to Councillor Bill Glover, Outhwaite was the only incumbent applicant on any city committee not invited to return.
"The fix was in," said Glover who is not on the selection committee but watched the process unfold last Wednesday.
Glover said it appears Outhwaite's comments in a December Whig-Standard story may have led to his ouster.
In the article, Outhwaite expressed concern about restrictions that were preventing him and other accessibility committee members from speaking to the media, communicating with accessibility groups around the province or going directly to city staff with queries.
"It's the only explanation I can think of," said Glover.
Outhwaite declined comment yesterday.
Members of the selection committee were councillors Sandy Berg, Kevin George, Dorothy Hector, Rob Hutchison, Bryan Paterson and Brian Reitzel.
George chaired the meeting. "I don't agree with that at all," George said when informed of Glover's comments.
"I don't think that's very professional of him. I take offence to that comment. I feel personally offended."
Hutchison championed Outhwaite's reappointment.
"My perception is Mr. Outhwaite did the job and there was no good reason to drop him," said Hutchison.
The accessibility committee has 15 citizen members. Eleven, including Outhwaite, had applied to return.
Hutchison made a motion to accept all 11 incumbents and then appoint four new members.
"When no one seconded my motion to (accept) the incumbents, I was wondering what was going on," said Hutchison.
"It's rare you get five people agreeing on an issue and you don't know why they're doing it. It's rare you can't get a seconder."
The committee then proceeded to cast votes for the nominees in a process of elimination.
"They dropped somebody from the committee who had been a little bit controversial because he had so adamantly pursued the accessibility agenda," said Hutchison.
"Surely, that's what we want." In the Whig-Standard interview of Dec. 23, Outhwaite described what was essentially a gag order on his committee outlined in an unsigned letter issued last year by the office of sustain-ability and growth.
George said he read the story but that "it didn't have any bearing" on his decision.
"My response was that I evaluated the resumes that were put forward and made a few phone calls and received phone calls. That's what I based my judgment on ... what their background was, whether they served in the past.
"I was looking for someone who could make an honest contribution. I feel there's always room for change," George said.
As for no one on the committee seconding Hutchison's motion, George said "the outcome was based on (the votes of ) six councillors."
"I didn't feel that was the way to go. To simply say that out of 18 or 20 people applying, to automatically say, 'This 11 are back on,' I don't think that's fair.
"Just because you're an incumbent doesn't mean people want you back. No incumbent should assume they're an automatic shoe-in."
Mayor Mark Gerretsen was the last councillor to sit on the accessibility committee and spoke in glowing terms of its work.
"I'm not going to judge what the (nominations) committee did," said Gerretsen.
"The one thing I can say about the (accessibility) committee, because the majority (of members) are affected by one disability or other, is there's more passion on that committee than on many committees."
George said he received an e-mail from Outhwaite asking for an explanation for his exclusion.
He said he responded that he was under no obligation to do so.
Glover doesn't agree.
"It is a horrible precedent being established," he said.
"If somebody isn't working very well, there's normally a discussion with a superior. Shortcomings are discussed and a person has an opportunity to straighten things out.
"This was a high-profile chair, but guess what? He was not leading the band. He was telling us what to do to be consistent with provincial legislation."
Article ID# 2927327
Here are the comments I wrote in response. I was mad so I made sure I was vocal in expressing my support of Glenn and my anger at the city for failing to listen to, or in some cases, accommodate, the needs of the disabled.
Comment 1:
Official's ouster divides council
Local News
By PAUL SCHLIESMANN, THE WHIG-STANDARD
Posted January 18, 2011
Barely a month into its mandate, city council is fractured by infighting.
The controversy stems from the time when the chairman of the municipal accessibility advisory committee, Glenn Outhwaite, was not reappointed by the nominations committee comprised of six city councillors.
In the wake of the decision, councillors Rob Hutchison and Bill Glover claimed Outhwaite had been dropped because he had spoken to the Whig-Standard about being prevented from talking publicly by city administrators.
More developments have since taken place:
* At its first meeting this year, the entire accessibility advisory committee threatened to quit in support of Outhwaite;
* Two councillors have asked to defer a motion to reinstate the rural affairs advisory committee from tonight's council agenda because they consider Hutchison and Glover's actions a serious breach of "decorum."
"As such, we do not wish to have this issue debated in council until clear standards of council decorum have been established," wrote Councillor Jeff Scott in an e-mail to his fellow councillors, Mayor Mark Gerretsen and newly appointed city clerk John Bolognone.
"A few of us are upset that Bill Glover and Rob Hutchison would go public with something that they should have taken to councillors on the nomination committee," said Councillor Brian Reitzel, who sits on the nomination committee. "They make it public rather than give us the opportunity to discuss it. We have nothing to hide.
"(The process) was very fair."
Reitzel supported Outhwaite's reappointment.
He also seconded Scott's motion to reinstate the rural affairs advisory committee and supports its deferral tonight.
The controversy erupted on Jan. 13, when Glover told the Whig-Standard that Outhwaite hadn't been reappointed because "the fix was in."
He was particularly concerned when Hutchison made a motion to reinstate all 11 of the incumbents reapplying for the accessibility committee but no councillor would second it.
In the end, the other 10 incumbents were all reappointed.
According to Glover, Outhwaite was the only citizen not to be reappointed to any of the numerous committees of council.
Reitzel took the heat for the decision when he sat in on the Jan. 6 accessibility committee meeting, the first since Outhwaite was dropped.
"I was the one that faced the angry wrath of the committee," said Reitzel. "They were all going to resign en masse. I let them vent for a while. I told them, 'When people get emotional they're not thinking right.' "
The committee passed a motion expressing its "sincere disappointment and displeasure with the actions of the nominations advisory committee" and called for Outhwaite's reinstatement.
Reitzel said he promised he would ask nominations committee chairman Councillor Kevin George to reconvene and discuss the Outhwaite situation.
By then, Glover and Hutchison had gone public with their concerns and the councillors on the nominations committee, according to Reitzel, were in no mood to discuss the issue further.
"When it blew up there was no hope of doing anything," he said. "It got out of my control."
The nominations committee consists of Reitzel, Hutchison, George, Sandy Berg, Bryan Paterson and Dorothy Hector.
Reitzel said he understands how the councillors feel.
"They're upset because their integrity is being challenged," he said. "I was, too, even though I voted for Glenn."
Yesterday morning, the mayor said he didn't know what Scott meant in his e-mail about clearing up standards of decorum.
"I have not talked to him about his e-mail," said Gerretsen, "but we did talk about the (rural committee) motion."
When asked if council had been following its standards of decorum, Gerretsen replied, "Absolutely."
pschliesmann@thewhig.com
Article ID# 2933874
My Comment 1 on this article.
Council refuses to add position
Local News
By PAUL SCHLIESMANN, THE WHIG-STANDARD
Posted January 19, 2011
Efforts to reinstate the former chairman of Kingston's accessibility committee failed last night.
Glenn Outhwaite, who travels in a wheelchair, made the trek to City Hall last night on the Kingston Access Bus only to hear a slim majority of city councillors uphold the decision of the nominations committee that rejected him.
"I feel very discouraged," said Outhwaite afterward. "People will be appalled at how the city treats its volunteers."
Outhwaite spent four years on the committee, the last three as chairman.
He said its future is now uncertain. Committee members recently threatened to resign en masse over his rejection and sent a motion to council calling on him to be reinstated.
"The committee had gelled. We were working very cohesively as a team," said Outhwaite.
There were tense moments during last night's council meeting as the matter was debated.
A motion was presented to add an extra position to the accessibility committee and give that spot to Outhwaite. It failed by one vote.
Two weeks ago, Outhwaite, a longtime advocate for Kingston's disabled, had his re-application for the disability committee rejected by a panel of city councillors.
Councillors Bill Glover and Rob Hutchison told the Whig-Standard that they thought Outhwaite was turned down because he had complained publicly about being muzzled by city administrators.
They became suspicious when council committee members refused to discuss their choices for the accessibility committee and would not explain why Outhwaite was turned down.
Last night, the chairman of the nominations committee, Councillor Kevin George, called on Glover and Hutchison to publicly apologize for their statements.
"I feel that my reputation and others on the committee has been damaged," said George. "Making statements without grounds is damaging to each and every one of us."
George said there was no "fix" as Glover had told the Whig.
"There was nothing going on but to elect members to the commit-tee," he said.
Both Hutchison and Glover said after the meeting that they had nothing to apologize for.
"No. That was my impression of what happened," said Glover. "I'm quite happy to accept the statement there was no agreement or discussion. Nothing changes my impression of that meeting. When there's no discussion at all it certainly begs the question why. I remain unconvinced."
Councillor Lisa Osanic presented the motion to add the 16th committee position.
She said e-mails began to "flood" in when people realized Outhwaite hadn't been reappointed.
"No reasons had been given," she said, noting Outhwaite's credentials. "This is looking really bad on our council."
Opponents of the motion argued that adding a position to one committee would set a bad precedent and be unfair to others who were also rejected.
"I think this is the wrong approach. It's not recognizing all the applicants equally," said Councillor Dorothy Hector, who sat on the nominations committee with George, Bryan Paterson, Sandy Berg, Brian Reitzel and Hutchison.
Paterson said he hoped council could move on from the controversy.
"The point needs to be made that the nominations committee job is a thankless job," he said. "We have to say no to a lot of good people."
Outhwaite said he agrees his criticism of city communications policy hurt his chance at returning to the committee.
"I think the whole issue goes back to the fact that I spoke out," he said. "How can things be transparent if you're not allowed to speak?"
This is how council voted on the failed motion to increase the accessibility committee by one person:
In favour: Rick Downes, Bill Glover, Rob Hutchison, Jim Neill, Lisa Osanic and Liz Schell.
Opposed: Kevin George, Mark Gerretsen, Dorothy Hector, Bryan Paterson, Brian Reitzel, Jeff Scott and Sandy Berg.
... [I cut out the news of other city council business because it is not related to accessibility]
pschliesmann@thewhig.com
Article ID# 2935709
My Comment: (and I really mean it):
Transit: http://wheelchairdemon-transit.blogspot.com
Health: http://wheelchairdemon-health.blogspot.com
Rather than tell my own story, I am going to share the 2 news articles that were recently printed in the Kingston Whig Standard. I'll also share the comments I made in the comment section of where the news item was printed online.
First the news article and a link to the actual source:
Article 1
'No good reason to drop him'
Local News
By PAUL SCHLIESMANN, THE WHIG-STANDARD
Published January 13, 2011
When the list of nominees for city committees is released today, one prominent name won't be on it.
Glenn Outhwaite, chairman of the city's accessibility committee under the previous council, was not recommended for reappointment.
Of 11 committee incumbents, Outhwaite was the only one not returned.
According to Councillor Bill Glover, Outhwaite was the only incumbent applicant on any city committee not invited to return.
"The fix was in," said Glover who is not on the selection committee but watched the process unfold last Wednesday.
Glover said it appears Outhwaite's comments in a December Whig-Standard story may have led to his ouster.
In the article, Outhwaite expressed concern about restrictions that were preventing him and other accessibility committee members from speaking to the media, communicating with accessibility groups around the province or going directly to city staff with queries.
"It's the only explanation I can think of," said Glover.
Outhwaite declined comment yesterday.
Members of the selection committee were councillors Sandy Berg, Kevin George, Dorothy Hector, Rob Hutchison, Bryan Paterson and Brian Reitzel.
George chaired the meeting. "I don't agree with that at all," George said when informed of Glover's comments.
"I don't think that's very professional of him. I take offence to that comment. I feel personally offended."
Hutchison championed Outhwaite's reappointment.
"My perception is Mr. Outhwaite did the job and there was no good reason to drop him," said Hutchison.
The accessibility committee has 15 citizen members. Eleven, including Outhwaite, had applied to return.
Hutchison made a motion to accept all 11 incumbents and then appoint four new members.
"When no one seconded my motion to (accept) the incumbents, I was wondering what was going on," said Hutchison.
"It's rare you get five people agreeing on an issue and you don't know why they're doing it. It's rare you can't get a seconder."
The committee then proceeded to cast votes for the nominees in a process of elimination.
"They dropped somebody from the committee who had been a little bit controversial because he had so adamantly pursued the accessibility agenda," said Hutchison.
"Surely, that's what we want." In the Whig-Standard interview of Dec. 23, Outhwaite described what was essentially a gag order on his committee outlined in an unsigned letter issued last year by the office of sustain-ability and growth.
George said he read the story but that "it didn't have any bearing" on his decision.
"My response was that I evaluated the resumes that were put forward and made a few phone calls and received phone calls. That's what I based my judgment on ... what their background was, whether they served in the past.
"I was looking for someone who could make an honest contribution. I feel there's always room for change," George said.
As for no one on the committee seconding Hutchison's motion, George said "the outcome was based on (the votes of ) six councillors."
"I didn't feel that was the way to go. To simply say that out of 18 or 20 people applying, to automatically say, 'This 11 are back on,' I don't think that's fair.
"Just because you're an incumbent doesn't mean people want you back. No incumbent should assume they're an automatic shoe-in."
Mayor Mark Gerretsen was the last councillor to sit on the accessibility committee and spoke in glowing terms of its work.
"I'm not going to judge what the (nominations) committee did," said Gerretsen.
"The one thing I can say about the (accessibility) committee, because the majority (of members) are affected by one disability or other, is there's more passion on that committee than on many committees."
George said he received an e-mail from Outhwaite asking for an explanation for his exclusion.
He said he responded that he was under no obligation to do so.
Glover doesn't agree.
"It is a horrible precedent being established," he said.
"If somebody isn't working very well, there's normally a discussion with a superior. Shortcomings are discussed and a person has an opportunity to straighten things out.
"This was a high-profile chair, but guess what? He was not leading the band. He was telling us what to do to be consistent with provincial legislation."
Article ID# 2927327
Here are the comments I wrote in response. I was mad so I made sure I was vocal in expressing my support of Glenn and my anger at the city for failing to listen to, or in some cases, accommodate, the needs of the disabled.
Comment 1:
This one requires a full letter to the editor to speak to. I am writing it now.Comment 2 (this was sent to the paper as a Letter to the Editor. So far, it has not been printed):
Suffice it to say, there is a lot more going on behind the scenes than meets the eye. For example, the mandate of the Accessibility of the Committee, as per the Ontarian's With Disabilities Act, is to work with the City to prevent and remove barriers. If the doors of communications have been closed by the city then the committee members can't adequately do their job.
Likewise, I discovered as an outsider that I can no longer write directly to a committee member to identify an issue so they can take it to the next meeting and properly address it. Instead, I have to write the city and they are given the task to look after it.
The problem is, when they get the issue in an email an acknowledgement will be sent to say it has been forwarded to the appropriate department, and then I never hear anything more after that. If I resend the message, the same thing will happen over and over again and, in short, the issue is just dropped off the face of the planet. I later found out by asking specific questions that a report of the complaint is never summarized and given to the committee. Instead, the only thing the city does is summarize the number of complaints into the annual report they must submit to the provincial government and council once a year. This is hugely frustrating when, as a person who has been losing accessibility as of late, it appears the city is doing nothing. I am now considering taking legal action. It is the last thing I want to do, believe me.
This is the letter to the editor....I'll share it here and with the paper for later printing:Comment 3:
In 2001 the Ontarian's With Disabilities Act was passed. It was this act that required the city of Kingston to form the Accessibility Advisory Committee in the first place.
The purpose of the act is:" To improve opportunities for persons with disabilities and to provide for their involvement in the identification, removal and prevention of barriers to their full participation in the life of the province. 2001, c. 32, s. 1."The committee's duty is to create an accessibility plan and to remove and prevent barriers to persons with disabilities. Members are to be people with disabilities, or their representatives, and their job is to identify barriers and then work with city officials to take steps to eliminate them. This cannot be done effectively if the city has closed the door to communication between people with disabilities who live in the community or serve on the commitee, and the staff who work for the city and are in a position to accomplish this goal.
The committee members provide input based on lived experience and, in many cases, support it with examples from other parts of the province; best practices, or the Facility Accessibility Policies and Guide (FADS) that was originally drafted by engineers and city officials in London, Ontario. The document was freely made available, to all who wanted to access it. Kingston just recently adopted the standard and tweaked it so it could be used as a resource to address the removal of barriers here. See: Facility Accessibility Design Standards (City of Kingston)
I was on the Accessibility Committee several years ago and I have been providing input to the city for years, including prior to the first Grand Theatre renovation, but the city was not always listening. I suggested, when they solicited input prior to doing the renovations the first time, that they use the numbers contained in the FADS document but, for reasons I cannot explain, the city chose to do the renovations their way. As a result some costly mistakes were made. Interestingly enough, when the Built Environment Standards were written for the Ontario government to provide guidance for the law that is about to be released, the numbers used mostly came from the FADS government. They also closely match a lot of the standards contained in the American’s With Disabilities Act. When the standards are officially cast into law the city will soon find a third renovation will be needed for the Grand because it will become mandatory to make the stage accessible accessible as well. This was asked for in the beginning but the city chose not to listen and we don't get it.
As a brief educational, especially to those who made comments about Glenn’s big scooter, the engineers who designed the FADS document were able to take into consideration the turning radius of a wheelchair. The visual size is one thing. The space they need to turn around is another. If someone requires tilt and recline or some other specialized feature, the client can't always choose to get the smallest chair. Glenn’s scooter moves within the confines of the bigger wheelchairs being considered.
I'm sure these reasons and more can explain why Glenn, in complete and total frustration, went to the media and, to be honest, I don't blame him. I got so frustrated with the committee and process that I could not in good conscience, remain on the committee. I could see that we were powerless to prevent some costly mistakes from being made, and that it would later be costly to the taxpayer, so to regain some peace of mind, I quit.
If you want to take time to read the newer act, read the Accessibility For Ontarian's With Disabilities Act, 2005 on E-Laws.
It will mainly tell you that 5 more acts (that will tell you what to do) will soon be released. The new acts will cover Customer Service (this act is now law for the public sector and will soon become law for the private sector in 2012), the Built Environment Standard, Transportation Standard, Information and Communication Standard, and Employment Standard.
The committee knows about these things and they know the law will eventually apply to both the public and private sector. When we, as people with disabilities, are finding it more and more challenging to point out barriers that need to be removed or prevented from being built in the first place, we cannot do our job and that bugs at us.
I want to close by asking, "if you were a committee member and you knew the new law would soon be released AND there is already a Human Rights Law that protects our right to access things, like the stage of the Grand Theatre or the new hotel that went up a few years ago and won't have full access, would you not be upset if you know these places will eventually have to pay fines for non-compliance because the doors of communication to the staff were ignored, or that we, as committee members were told we had to ignore the barriers because the city was only willing to address the current law? We basically have to rubber stamp things and not warn you that by not being in compliance with the new standards that will soon be released, you will be placing yourselves at risk of facing some pretty hefty fines from the province.
Please, rather than criticizing Glenn, thank him for trying his best to do his job and be accountable to all, taxpayers included.
Post #15 By wheelchairdemon
The City's Accessibility report 2011 showing planning for the upcoming year1 is almost impossible to find online, but it is a must see.
Now, scroll down to page 30 to see where it starts to list how much the city is spending on accessibility. If you look on page 37, where it lists the spending for Rideaucrest, you will see the city has spent a grand total of $290,300 on the following:
Railing on the lower level corridor ($7,300),
Video display terminals for information sharing ($12,000).
Ergonomically appropriate dining room furniture ($113,000),
Ergonomically appropriate resident furniture for the terrace($30,000),
Ergonomically appropriate office furniture for staff ($5,000).
Slings for residents and refurbished the ceiling lifts ($41,000).
Replaced worn carpet in the main lobby with linoleum ($6,500),
Painted all our stairwells to visually demarcate steps for safety ($5,000).
Policy on the assessment and usage of wheelchairs and scooters ($75,000).
These should be long-term care expenses, not accessibility expenses because it only benefits the seniors who are on the inside. It has no benefit to those of us who are out in the community and finding it harder and harder to survive because of the lost access and the ongoing complaint about there being a lack of funding to fix things.
Post #20 By wheelchairdemon
Official's ouster divides council
Local News
By PAUL SCHLIESMANN, THE WHIG-STANDARD
Posted January 18, 2011
Barely a month into its mandate, city council is fractured by infighting.
The controversy stems from the time when the chairman of the municipal accessibility advisory committee, Glenn Outhwaite, was not reappointed by the nominations committee comprised of six city councillors.
In the wake of the decision, councillors Rob Hutchison and Bill Glover claimed Outhwaite had been dropped because he had spoken to the Whig-Standard about being prevented from talking publicly by city administrators.
More developments have since taken place:
* At its first meeting this year, the entire accessibility advisory committee threatened to quit in support of Outhwaite;
* Two councillors have asked to defer a motion to reinstate the rural affairs advisory committee from tonight's council agenda because they consider Hutchison and Glover's actions a serious breach of "decorum."
"As such, we do not wish to have this issue debated in council until clear standards of council decorum have been established," wrote Councillor Jeff Scott in an e-mail to his fellow councillors, Mayor Mark Gerretsen and newly appointed city clerk John Bolognone.
"A few of us are upset that Bill Glover and Rob Hutchison would go public with something that they should have taken to councillors on the nomination committee," said Councillor Brian Reitzel, who sits on the nomination committee. "They make it public rather than give us the opportunity to discuss it. We have nothing to hide.
"(The process) was very fair."
Reitzel supported Outhwaite's reappointment.
He also seconded Scott's motion to reinstate the rural affairs advisory committee and supports its deferral tonight.
The controversy erupted on Jan. 13, when Glover told the Whig-Standard that Outhwaite hadn't been reappointed because "the fix was in."
He was particularly concerned when Hutchison made a motion to reinstate all 11 of the incumbents reapplying for the accessibility committee but no councillor would second it.
In the end, the other 10 incumbents were all reappointed.
According to Glover, Outhwaite was the only citizen not to be reappointed to any of the numerous committees of council.
Reitzel took the heat for the decision when he sat in on the Jan. 6 accessibility committee meeting, the first since Outhwaite was dropped.
"I was the one that faced the angry wrath of the committee," said Reitzel. "They were all going to resign en masse. I let them vent for a while. I told them, 'When people get emotional they're not thinking right.' "
The committee passed a motion expressing its "sincere disappointment and displeasure with the actions of the nominations advisory committee" and called for Outhwaite's reinstatement.
Reitzel said he promised he would ask nominations committee chairman Councillor Kevin George to reconvene and discuss the Outhwaite situation.
By then, Glover and Hutchison had gone public with their concerns and the councillors on the nominations committee, according to Reitzel, were in no mood to discuss the issue further.
"When it blew up there was no hope of doing anything," he said. "It got out of my control."
The nominations committee consists of Reitzel, Hutchison, George, Sandy Berg, Bryan Paterson and Dorothy Hector.
Reitzel said he understands how the councillors feel.
"They're upset because their integrity is being challenged," he said. "I was, too, even though I voted for Glenn."
Yesterday morning, the mayor said he didn't know what Scott meant in his e-mail about clearing up standards of decorum.
"I have not talked to him about his e-mail," said Gerretsen, "but we did talk about the (rural committee) motion."
When asked if council had been following its standards of decorum, Gerretsen replied, "Absolutely."
pschliesmann@thewhig.com
Article ID# 2933874
My Comment 1 on this article.
What a sad state of affairs.Comment 2:
The person trying to do his job to help city comply with the provincial law, gets ousted and the council becomes polarized as a result.
What is sadly encouraging though, is to read these comments about the lack of accessibility and enforcement in the City of Kingston.
The City Bus that was once fully accessible to people in wheelchairs on some routes has now been limited. If you read the bus map you will see wheelchair users are to call into the city to find out if their required bus stop is accessible. If it is not, the person may find the same thing as me. They will go to a bus stop and find the driver will no longer let you into the bus.
I was shocked to loose access.
It's time for a war. Care to join me?
Post #18 By wheelchairdemon
I forgot to add, I was relieved to see I was not alone in seeing the failures of accessibility around this city.Now for today's news:
If you were to point the new barriers out to a person who is in a position to remove barriers them about this, they will get defensive and say, how come you are the only one who is complaining about this?
The key is folks, if you don't write the city formally to complain, the city will consider they are doing a good job. The email address to write is: contactus@cityofkingston.ca.
If you write a city councilor, be sure to copy it to this address so they can get the formal stat and stop patting themselves on the back because there aren't enough people complaining.
Post #19 By wheelchairdemon
Council refuses to add position
Local News
By PAUL SCHLIESMANN, THE WHIG-STANDARD
Posted January 19, 2011
Efforts to reinstate the former chairman of Kingston's accessibility committee failed last night.
Glenn Outhwaite, who travels in a wheelchair, made the trek to City Hall last night on the Kingston Access Bus only to hear a slim majority of city councillors uphold the decision of the nominations committee that rejected him.
"I feel very discouraged," said Outhwaite afterward. "People will be appalled at how the city treats its volunteers."
Outhwaite spent four years on the committee, the last three as chairman.
He said its future is now uncertain. Committee members recently threatened to resign en masse over his rejection and sent a motion to council calling on him to be reinstated.
"The committee had gelled. We were working very cohesively as a team," said Outhwaite.
There were tense moments during last night's council meeting as the matter was debated.
A motion was presented to add an extra position to the accessibility committee and give that spot to Outhwaite. It failed by one vote.
Two weeks ago, Outhwaite, a longtime advocate for Kingston's disabled, had his re-application for the disability committee rejected by a panel of city councillors.
Councillors Bill Glover and Rob Hutchison told the Whig-Standard that they thought Outhwaite was turned down because he had complained publicly about being muzzled by city administrators.
They became suspicious when council committee members refused to discuss their choices for the accessibility committee and would not explain why Outhwaite was turned down.
Last night, the chairman of the nominations committee, Councillor Kevin George, called on Glover and Hutchison to publicly apologize for their statements.
"I feel that my reputation and others on the committee has been damaged," said George. "Making statements without grounds is damaging to each and every one of us."
George said there was no "fix" as Glover had told the Whig.
"There was nothing going on but to elect members to the commit-tee," he said.
Both Hutchison and Glover said after the meeting that they had nothing to apologize for.
"No. That was my impression of what happened," said Glover. "I'm quite happy to accept the statement there was no agreement or discussion. Nothing changes my impression of that meeting. When there's no discussion at all it certainly begs the question why. I remain unconvinced."
Councillor Lisa Osanic presented the motion to add the 16th committee position.
She said e-mails began to "flood" in when people realized Outhwaite hadn't been reappointed.
"No reasons had been given," she said, noting Outhwaite's credentials. "This is looking really bad on our council."
Opponents of the motion argued that adding a position to one committee would set a bad precedent and be unfair to others who were also rejected.
"I think this is the wrong approach. It's not recognizing all the applicants equally," said Councillor Dorothy Hector, who sat on the nominations committee with George, Bryan Paterson, Sandy Berg, Brian Reitzel and Hutchison.
Paterson said he hoped council could move on from the controversy.
"The point needs to be made that the nominations committee job is a thankless job," he said. "We have to say no to a lot of good people."
Outhwaite said he agrees his criticism of city communications policy hurt his chance at returning to the committee.
"I think the whole issue goes back to the fact that I spoke out," he said. "How can things be transparent if you're not allowed to speak?"
This is how council voted on the failed motion to increase the accessibility committee by one person:
In favour: Rick Downes, Bill Glover, Rob Hutchison, Jim Neill, Lisa Osanic and Liz Schell.
Opposed: Kevin George, Mark Gerretsen, Dorothy Hector, Bryan Paterson, Brian Reitzel, Jeff Scott and Sandy Berg.
... [I cut out the news of other city council business because it is not related to accessibility]
pschliesmann@thewhig.com
Article ID# 2935709
My Comment: (and I really mean it):
I hope the whole Municipal Accessibility Advisory committee gets up and walks on the refusal to bring Glenn Outhwaite back.Please read my other Blogs:
As I said before, the goal of the committee is to advise on what is needed to create accessibility for all so progress can be made in a way that will meet the full requirements of the upcoming law.
If the city closes the doors to communication between the disabled and the officials who can prevent and remove barriers, the city will eventually have to pay some pretty hefty fines. We're failing on accessibility big time.
Post #20 By wheelchairdemon
Transit: http://wheelchairdemon-transit.blogspot.com
Health: http://wheelchairdemon-health.blogspot.com
0 Response to "City Excludes Effective Accessibility Advisory Committee Chair"
Post a Comment