Alright. Since Edmonton City Council is sticking its neck out for active transportation (including bike lanes) I'm making a commitment to commute responsibly this entire year. +
Some stats: I live approx. 6km from work. I have a home office and an employer who requires me to be "in the office" 2 days per week (to teach). If I go into the office more than that, it's by choice. I love my colleagues. I'm lucky. Very lucky.+
I live in the River Valley and my workplace is uphill in the mornings (approx 21 minutes on bike). My commute home is downhill (15 minutes). +
Transit is an option (bus to LRT). But it's about 3 times as long as it takes me to bike. +
In the summer months, I bike to work 4/5 days per week. This involves 9km each way, factoring in my kids' day camp drop-off and pick-up. (Yes, they biked to camp, too.)+
During the school year, I can half that distance (~12km total per day). I drop kids off at 830 and pick up at 330.
I bike for 4 reasons: exercise, cost, efficiency (time), and environment.+
I've never biked in winter before, so this will be challenging.+
I will log my thoughts in this thread. Is it worth the hassle? What seasonal adjustments will I make? Will I cave and stay home or drive my car in the winter? Stay tuned to find out. #yegbike
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In democracies like the US & Alberta, we are witnessing a struggle to define "political culture," that set of norms & values that define what it's acceptable to say, do, or think in politics.
There are more than two sides to these struggles.
On one side are those who seek to roll back democratic norms to the 1950s (or earlier). They want to restrict rights, dismantle checks on government power that have been built ober the past 7 decades, and rule behind closed doors.
On another side are those seeking to preserve the gains made over the same peiod. They stick up for exiating democratic institutions.
On another side are those seeking to expand rights and spread equality to include more equity-deserving groups. They want to reform or replace.
To my conservative friends: It's okay to speak out against this UCP government. Many of us have supported conservative parties all our lives. We're scared of losing face, friends, or respect. This is bigger than us and bigger than party, though.
Conservatives respect voters' intent, local autonomy, the rule of law, limited government, incrementalism (not radicalism), timeworn institutions, Confederation, and -- above all -- stability.
The UCP represents the antithesis of these values. It's okay to acknowledge that.
If you're a card-carrying member, like I used to be, it's time to make a choice.
Staying silent is the same as condoning the authoritarian slide we're witnessing every day.
Speaking out within the party needs to become louder and more public.
First, the new law must designate who has final authority over federal-municipal agreements. It might be the minister of municipal affairs, or it could be added to the responsibilities of the IGR unit of Executive Council. I worked in the latter for 6 years under 5 premiers... +
It would make sense to keep all of the expertise for intergovernmental agreements in the same shop. This allows for coordination across policy files and would create a lot of efficiencies. So let's assume they make the minister of IGR (usually the premier) the ultimate approver.+