Connect with us

Opinion

10 years later and the city is presenting the same old 2 options, of possible Aquatic Centre locations.

Published

3 minute read

10 years ago the thinking was to build the Aquatic Centre by the recreation centre downtown or by the Michener pool. Committees were struck, consultants hired and time lapsed and nothing changed. The options our city bureaucrats are offering council to consider hasn’t changed.

I have never seen more lack-lustre, vision less proposal options. All our pools will remain within a good walk of each other. They will all be south of the river and east of 40 Ave. One proposal will have it down the road from the Collicutt Centre and the other would have it downtown with traffic issues. The budget means little because there will be other budgets for traffic, lighting, and demolition that won’t be discussed.

The pools are slated for construction in 10 years. They are also planning on opening the land north of 11a for another 25,000 residents, but the pool will be built near current pools on the other side of the city. When they started thinking about the south-east developments, they built the Collicutt Ctr. and 2 high schools and we never looked back.

Now it looks like we may end up with 5 high schools and 2 Aquatic recreational centres along 30 ave.

I could see the city approving the design, but they should table the vote on location because I believe they are too narrowly focused on the immediate time frame. The city once talked about keeping the Westerner downtown, but someone persuasive had the vision to move it away from downtown. We need that person now.

Perhaps they could table this for another council? A new council will be elected in October, 10 months away for something being built in 10 years.

I have been lobbying to build the Aquatic Centre on Hazlett Lake. Lethbridge built facilities on Henderson Lake, in fact they made Henderson Lake and now they have a widely popular tourist attraction in Henderson Lake Park.

Our Hazlett Lake is visible to QE2 and 11A, surrounded by farmland. The city wants to develop it. Why not replicate the Collicutt growth starter.

Why is it, our city has such limited vision? Why must everything be built downtown? Can you imagine if they had kept the westerner grounds downtown?

Am I the only one that sees tourism potential, stay-cation potential, growth potential? Anyone?

 

Follow Author

International

Bill Maher Breaks His Silence on His Private Meeting With President Trump

Published on

 The Vigilant Fox

You won’t believe what you’re about to hear.

Bill Maher just spilled the beans about his private meeting with President Trump on his show, Real Time, describing Trump as “different” in person than he expected.

On March 31, Maher met Trump at the White House, arranged by his friend Kid Rock.

And it turned out to be a surprisingly warm, candid, and friendly one-on-one conversation.

Maher was shocked when he presented Trump with a list of past insults Trump had hurled at him over the years.

And in epic fashion, Trump signed it—all in good humor.

“So, okay, so meet up in person. Maybe it’ll be different. Spoiler alert. It was. First good sign. Before I left for the Capitol, I had my staff collect and print out this list of almost 60 different insulting epithets that the President has said about me.

“Things like, stupid, dummy, low life, dummy, sleazebag, sick, sad, stone cold crazy. Really? A dumb guy, fired like a dog. His show is dead. 60. I brought this to the White House because I wanted him to sign it, which he did.

“Which he did with good humor. And I know, as I say, that millions of liberal sphincters just tightened. Oh, my God, Bill. Are you going to say something nice about him? What I’m going to do is report exactly what happened.

“You decide what you think about it. And if that’s not enough pure Trump hate for you, I don’t give a f***,” Maher said.

Bill Maher continued to explain that he was stunned to see Trump treat him warmly—and laugh like he’s “never seen him laugh in public.”

“When I got there, that [Mean tweet] guy wasn’t living there. Now, does Trump want respect? Of course, who doesn’t? My friend said to me, ‘What are you going to wear to the White House?’ I said, ‘I don’t know, but I’m not going to dress like Zelensky, I’ll tell you that.’

“Just for starters, he laughs. I’d never seen him laugh in public, but he does, including at himself. And it’s not fake, believe me, as a comedian of 40 years, I know a fake laugh when I hear it,” Maher said.

Want more posts like this? Join the email list and get hard-hitting stories like this delivered straight to your inbox.

To summarize the meeting, Maher’s mind was completely blown, saying Trump is much more self-aware and personable than he ever imagined.

Everything I’ve ever not liked about him was, I swear to God, absent,” Maher said.

He explained, “He’s much more self-aware than he lets on in public. Look, I get it. It doesn’t matter who he is at a private dinner with a comedian. It matters who he is on the world stage. I’m just taking as a positive that this person exists, because everything I’ve ever not liked about him was, I swear to God, absent.

“At least on this night with this guy, Bob, Kid Rock told me the night before, he said, ‘If you want to get a word in edgewise, you’re going to have to cut him off. He’ll just go on.’ Not at all. I’ve had so many conversations with prominent people who are much less connected.

“People who don’t look you in the eye, people who don’t really listen because they just want to get to their next thing. People whose response to things you say just doesn’t track. Like what? None of that with him. And he mostly steered the conversation to, ‘What do you think about this?’ I know your mind is blown. So is mine.”

Maher added that he felt far more comfortable speaking with Trump than he ever would have with Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.

He explained that contrast speaks volumes—and is “emblematic of why the Democrats are so unpopular these days.”

“I never felt I had to walk on eggshells around him. And honestly, I voted for Clinton and Obama, but I would never feel comfortable talking to them the way I was able to talk with Donald Trump. That’s just how it went down. Make of it what you will. Me, I feel it’s emblematic of why the Democrats are so unpopular these days,” Maher said

During their conversation, Maher told Trump, “Well, Mr. President… I didn’t like what you were doing regarding Obama’s birth origins. I thought that was low.”

To his shock, Trump responded with grace and no anger, Maher revealed. “Just a little smile as if to say, ‘Yeah, I get it.’”

The moment Maher described as the “most surreal” came after the meeting, when he watched Trump on TV—because the man Maher met in person, he says, was nothing like the one he sees on screen.

“Why can’t we get the guy I met to be the public guy?” Maher asked.

He explained, “The most surreal part of the whole night was when I got home. I flew back right after the dinner, and I’m in bed watching 60 Minutes from the night before. And there’s Trump in one of their stories, standing at a podium in a room that looked to me like one of the rooms and places we’d just been in.

“And he’s ranting, ‘Disgusting.’ ‘You’re a terrible person.’ And I’m like, who’s that guy? What happened to Glinda the Good Witch? And why can’t we get the guy I met to be the public guy?” Maher asked.

“And I’m not saying it’s our responsibility to do that. It’s not. I’m just reporting exactly what I saw over two and a half hours. I went into the mine, and that’s what’s down there.

A crazy person doesn’t live in the White House. A person who plays a crazy person on TV a lot lives there, which I know is f*cked up. It’s just not as f*cked up as I thought it was,” Maher said.


Thanks for reading.

If you appreciate this kind of reporting, follow me for more insights and stories you won’t find anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Carbon Tax

Trump targets Washington’s climate laws in recent executive order

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday targeting state-level climate policies – including Washington state’s Climate Commitment Act – calling them unconstitutional and harmful to domestic energy production

The executive order directs attorneys general to take action against state laws and policies that address climate change or involve environmental justice, carbon or greenhouse gas emissions, and funds to collect carbon penalties or carbon taxes.

That includes Washington’s CCA that requires emitters to either reduce their carbon footprint or purchase “allowances” via a cap-and-trade program, which sets a limit on emissions from the state’s largest polluters: oil refineries, utilities, and manufacturers.

The CCA’s cap lowers over time with the goal of getting to carbon neutrality by 2050. While the program has generated billions in revenue, only 11% directly funds emissions-reducing projects, with the rest supports climate resilience, public health programs, and infrastructure planning, as previously reported by The Center Square,

According to a press release from The White House, the executive order targets these state laws and policies because they “burden the use of domestic energy resources and that are unconstitutional, preempted by federal law, or otherwise unenforceable.”

Gov. Bob Ferguson does not believe the executive order has enough teeth to impact the state’s CCA.

“Voters upheld the Climate Commitment Act by a landslide, with 61% approval,” Ferguson told The Center Square in an email. “I am confident we will be able to preserve this and other important laws protecting our climate and investments in clean energy from this latest attack by the Trump administration.”

The Washington Department of Transportation told The Center Square it is working with federal and state partners to seek clarification about the implications and next steps of federal funding actions.

The Department of Ecology did not respond to The Center Square’s request for comment.

If U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi does go after the CCA and other environmental policies, Washington officials may argue that it’s within the state’s authority to regulate emissions for public health.

For example, The federal Clean Air Act allows states, including Washington, to adopt more stringent motor vehicle emission standards than the federal minimums in certain circumstances.

The 2007 Supreme Court decision Massachusetts v. EPA affirmed states’ standing to sue over carbon emissions, ruling that greenhouse gases endanger public health and are subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act.

This wouldn’t be the first time the state defended its environmental laws against federal challenges from the Trump administration.

Washington also fought emissions rollbacks during the first Trump administration when Ferguson was state attorney general.

One key victory came in 2024, when Washington helped defend California’s right to set stricter vehicle emission standards.

While Ferguson has not commented on the executive order, New York Governor Kathy Hochul and New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham – co-chairs of the U.S. Climate Alliance – issued a joint statement on Tuesday that states that the federal government cannot “unilaterally strip states’ independent constitutional authority.”

“We will keep advancing solutions to the climate crisis that safeguard Americans’ fundamental right to clean air and water, create good-paying jobs, grow the clean energy economy, and make our future healthier and safer,” the statement said.

Continue Reading

Trending

X