Letter: Keep Meadowbrook for recreation

Re: ‘Beautiful future’ proposed for site of golf course” (Gazette, April 24)

Meadowbrook is an 18-hole golf course completed after the Second World War. It was originally a private course for CP employees, but in 1970 was made a public course for all to enjoy. The front nine is in Lachine, the back nine in Côte St-Luc. The land is currently owned by Groupe Pacific and their intention is to turn it into a $150 million real estate bonanza.

Fortunately, the demand is not there because of market forces, the economy and geography. Côte St-Luc took has long realized Meadowbrook is a precious green space and has zoned it as a golf course. Bravo! Lachine is guided by the all-mighty dollar and has not closed the door to real estate. Shame! The Meadowbrook Golf Club leases the land on a seasonal basis and runs the course from spring to fall.

Most Montrealers agree Meadowbrook is a jewel that must be preserved. Building houses and condos is about the last thing that should be done, nor is there a need. For a landowner to even contemplate this option is an affront to our fragile ecology, and a disservice to future generations.

A recent article in the Gazette described plans to turn the golf course into a nature park. This would of course be paid for by governments whose debts are in the billions, and whose infrastructure is literally crumbling. The island of Montreal has many nature parks. Mount Royal, Cap St. Jacques, Angrignon, Lafontaine and the Botanical Gardens are some of the larger ones, with many smaller parks in every borough and suburb. As well, off-island there are many more beautiful parks only a short drive away. Do we really need another one at Meadowbrook, and is it worth spending millions of taxpayer dollars to build?

What’s wrong with keeping Meadowbrook as a golf course? The number of golf courses on the island has been decreasing steadily over the past 30 years, with only a handful left. Of recent, Dorval has been cut in half and the Challenger has disappeared. Per capita, Montreal probably has the lowest number of public golf courses of any large Canadian city. This is nothing to brag about for a city that prides itself on sport and recreation, nor for a population whose obesity rate is 25 per cent (BMI over 29) and diabetes rate 8 per cent, and both climbing. Golf courses are good for body and soul, and the environment.

As a golf course, Meadowbrook has seen better days. The course needs improvement and the clubhouse is barely hanging on. The Meadowbrook Golf Club is reluctant to invest the big bucks because it never knows its fate the following year. This cycle of neglect must be stopped.

Meadowbrook needs a new perennial vision of recreation, sport and health promotion. The golf course should remain, but much more can be done over the four seasons. Cross-country skiing, skating, fitness, theatre, bike paths and nature trails can all be worked into the fabric of Meadowbrook. Place for social activities and gatherings can be found, and weddings could be celebrated on a refreshing green space. A train station could be built, and the STM could stop there, too. The sky’s the limit for Meadowbrook, as long as government decides real estate will never be built. Let’s get Montreal and Quebec to make this commitment so that a great future can begin.

Norman Sabin

N.D.G.

© Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Letter+Keep+Meadowbrook+recreation/8320576/story.html#ixzz2SEW7gdCM

In my opinion:

An excellent letter by Norm Sabin.  He presents a cogent and practical solution that benefits more than just golfers. The important element is to have the certainty that Meadowbrook will indeed be preserved as green space, as we have done on the Cote Saint-Luc side by zoning it golf course, long ago.

Related articles

• A vision for Meadowbrook: An urban nature heritage park, accessible to all (gjnashen.wordpress.com)

Opinion: Changes proposed by Bill 14 risk serious rights violations

By Pearl Eliadis, Special to The Gazette April 18, 2013

MONTREAL – Last Friday, the Quebec Bar Association testified at legislative hearings in Quebec City on Bill 14, which proposes to amend several laws, including the French Language Charter, and impose new restrictions on (mainly) anglophone rights.

When I first wrote about Bill 14 last fall (Opinion, Dec. 11, “Bill 14 chips away at English minority rights”), I highlighted the bill’s proposed change in definition of “ethnic minorities” to the nebulous “cultural communities.” Other writers have discussed this as well. The proposed new term, in my view, is worrisome because it serves as prologue to a litany of substantive rights violations in the bill.

The Bar found more than a dozen of these, in a number of areas. Among them:

Jobs: Let’s say your employer hired you because she needs well-educated employees who speak two or more languages. After all, you work in the Montreal area, so you probably serve clients of different linguistic backgrounds. Under Bill 14, your employer would be obliged to “subsequently review such needs periodically” to justify not only your job, but also the job of every other employee whose skills in a language other than French were seen as an asset when they were hired. It does not matter how big or small the company is. If requiring a language other than French cannot be justified to the satisfaction of the language bureaucrats, your job or your promotion would be jeopardized. This applies even if you are fluent in French.

Public services: Bill 14 proposes to require communication with the provincial government in French, in order to obtain a licence, authorization, assistance, indemnity or any other benefit. Applications, then, would have to be made in French. All supporting documents would have to be in French, too. Otherwise, the government would insist on translating it, at your expense. This provision would create a disadvantage mainly for English speakers. If Bill 14 is passed, forget about English versions of driver’s licence forms, income-tax forms and other tax-related information, not to mention English versions of government websites, which are already inadequate. Then there is Bill 14’s proposed new passive right for government officials to be addressed solely in French. The corollary is that public servants would be entitled to refuse to even acknowledge anything said to them in English.

Health and social services: Under Bill 14, workers in health and social services would be able to demand full translation of files into French. Translation costs would be borne by the English-language health-care system. But what if there were a real emergency, and your file had to be transferred from the English-speaking system to a specialist in the French-speaking system? The English version of Bill 14 says that the person authorized to receive your documents may require “a quick rundown of their content” in French — and this, in addition to the full translation of the file. The French version of the bill can be interpreted as saying only a “quick rundown” would be required. The translation contradictions are not helpful. To be sure, there are perfectly valid reasons for wanting unilingual workers to understand what they are reading. However, Bill 14’s proposals would impose financial burdens on an already-beleaguered health system. (I am betting there was no consultation with the English system on this point).

Your child’s schooling: Let’s say you move. Or you want to transfer your child to another English school, for whatever reason. Education officials under Bill 14 would, in these cases, be entitled to disregard your child’s years of schooling to date if this schooling in English were obtained through “trickery,” deception or a “temporary artificial situation.” These terms are all undefined, and interpretation would be left to the discretion of bureaucrats.

These are but a few examples of what awaits us if Bill 14 is passed. The bill promises years of litigation and legal instability.

Who will pay? For starters, the taxpayer.

The Quebec Bar Association’s brief, which highlights the legally problematic aspects of Bill 14, should be reassuring to anyone who believes that the rule of law should prevail regardless of one’s mother tongue or home language.

Protecting French is a legitimate political objective. But Bill 14 goes too far, and risks becoming a launch pad for multiple legal challenges that will further damage Quebec’s reputation.

Pearl Eliadis is a Montreal human-rights lawyer. She was part of the legal advisory team for the African Canadian Legal Clinic of Toronto, an intervenor in the Whatcott case. She teaches civil liberties at McGill University.

© Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette

Related articles

• Bill 14 would strip Anglos of rights: Quebec Bar (montreal.ctvnews.ca)

Globe and Mail letters: Linguistic purity

Globe and Mail, Letters, Jan. 18, 2013. Click to enlarge.

Read Globe article

The best snow removal

Free Press Jan. 16, 2013. Click to enlarge.

Le Devoir opinion piece by Mayor Housefather: Un statut bilingue légitime et essentiel

Libre opinion – Un statut bilingue légitime et essentiel

24 décembre 2012 | Anthony Housefather – Maire, Ville de Côte-Saint-Luc

À la suite de l’article publié dans Le Devoir intitulé « La moitié des villes bilingues ne remplissent plus les critères », précisons que la Charte de la langue française originale ne se basait pas sur le critère actuel pour déterminer si une municipalité obtenait le statut de ville bilingue. Depuis plus de 25 ans, le critère utilisé pour déterminer l’octroi de ce statut était si la majorité des résidants de la municipalité parlaient une autre langue que le français. Il n’était nullement précisé que ce statut était basé sur la langue maternelle.

Aujourd’hui, à Côte-Saint-Luc, plus de 82 % de nos résidants ont une autre langue maternelle que le français et seulement 15,1 % des résidants parlent uniquement français à la maison. Il n’y a aucun doute que nous remplissons largement les critères qui à l’origine conféraient le statut de ville bilingue.
Dans le contexte de la législation sur les fusions forcées en 2000, le gouvernement péquiste d’alors a adopté la loi 171 et changé la critère, soit 50 % des résidants de langue maternelle anglaise, ce qui est la définition la plus étroite possible de communauté de langue anglaise. Une statistique bien plus appropriée pour déterminer qui est anglophone est la première langue officielle parlée ou la langue parlée le plus souvent à la maison. Cependant, puisque le statut bilingue était un droit acquis et pouvait être révoqué uniquement à la demande de la municipalité elle-même, il n’y a pas eu de problème avant l’arrivée du projet de loi 14, qui permettrait au gouvernement provincial et à ses organismes de contester ou de révoquer notre statut.

 

Unique au monde
Contrairement à ce qu’affirme dans votre article Jacques Beauchemin, sous-ministre à la Politique linguistique au ministère de l’Immigration et des Communautés culturelles, soit que le statut de ville bilingue est une « anomalie », ce qui est anormal, c’est que les municipalités ne peuvent pas décider d’elles-mêmes la langue dans laquelle elles veulent servir leurs résidants. À ma connaissance, le Québec est le seul État dans le monde occidental qui interdit aux municipalités de fonctionner dans les langues de leur choix. Certains pays, États et provinces exigent des municipalités qu’elles servent les minorités linguistiques dans leur langue lorsque cette tranche de la population atteint un certain seuil (bien inférieur à 50 %). Cependant, le Québec est le seul endroit où le gouvernement interdit aux municipalités d’utiliser la langue de la minorité, à moins que la minorité ne forme la majorité définie selon le critère le plus étroit possible.
En plus d’alléguer de façon incorrecte que les municipalités ne satisfaisaient pas au critère d’origine, l’article donne des chiffres incorrects pour la langue maternelle des municipalités et qui sont largement plus bas que ceux publiés par le recensement 2011 de Statistique Canada. En ce qui concerne Côte-Saint-Luc, l’article indique que seulement 40 % de nos résidants sont de langue anglaise, ce qui est faux. En effet, selon le recensement de 2011, 45,4 % de nos résidants indiquent l’anglais comme langue maternelle (soit comme choix unique, soit comme réponse multiple). De plus, ce chiffre n’inclut pas les personnes vivant dans les huit maisons de retraite ou les deux hôpitaux sur le territoire de notre ville (si tel était le cas, ce pourcentage serait bien plus haut). Par ailleurs, environ 63 % de la population a déclaré qu’elle parle anglais à la maison (4 fois plus que le français) et plus de 70 % a déclaré que l’anglais était la première langue officielle parlée.
C’est pourquoi il est faux de dire que la communauté d’expression anglaise est une minorité dans notre municipalité. Avoir une situation qui permet au gouvernement actuel d’exiger que notre municipalité cesse de communiquer avec ses résidants, d’adopter des règlements et d’afficher en anglais et en français est complètement absurde. Par tous les moyens possibles, nous continuerons de nous opposer à cette législation et tout Québécois épris de justice et du principe d’équité devrait faire de même.

Related articles

• First five bilingual municipalities adopt resolutions opposing Bill 14′s provisions on removing bilingual status (gjnashen.wordpress.com)
• Council speaks out against Bill 14, supports bilingual status quo (gjnashen.wordpress.com)

 

Where is CSL EMS?

Letter to the Editor (Response), The Suburban, September 21, 2011

CSL EMS is here

In response to the letter from Concerned Sports Enthusiast (Sept. 14, 2011, see below) Cote Saint-Luc EMS is here when lives are on the line and seconds count. For over 30 years, the volunteer EMS first responders have put their heart and soul into helping the sick and injured. But EMS does not respond to every medical call in Côte Saint-Luc and here is why:

When someone calls 9-1-1 for a medical incident, the call is answered by an Emergency Medical Responder at Urgences-santé, who gathers as much information as possible, such as the level of consciousness, and assigns a code and a priority. In the other cities on the island of Montreal, the Fire Department responds to high priority calls. In Côte Saint-Luc, EMS responds to both high and medium priority calls.

Calls that are determined to not be life-threatening, such as sprains and strains are classified as low priority, where the ambulance response time can be up to 3 hours. EMS does not respond to these calls. Not because we don’t want to help those in need, but because if the first responders go to a low priority call, they are no longer available to respond to a high priority call. This puts patients who really need the service at risk of receiving no first responder care. It is these high priority calls where the first responder can make a real difference, with their advanced training and equipment. For example, the incident at the baseball diamond was assessed to be a low priority call and as such, EMS was not dispatched to this call.

As for the missing AED in the arena, it was removed earlier the same day to fix a malfunction. Although it would not have been used in this case, the City has since revised its procedures to ensure that broken AEDs are replaced with a spare unit while they are being repaired. The arena’s AED was repaired and replaced the next day.

In 2010, the CSL EMS volunteers responded to over 3,000 medical emergency calls, as well as being on hand at community events, fires, disasters and more. The 80+ highly skilled and dedicated volunteers take great pride in their service and thanks to outstanding community support, CSL EMS is not only here to respond to medical calls today, but for many years to come.

Glenn J. Nashen

City Councillor – Public Safety

City of Côte Saint-Luc

*

Jordy Reichson

Director of Public Safety

City of Côte Saint-Luc

The Suburban, Letters to the editor, September 14, 2011

***

Letter to the Editor, Suburban, Sept. 14, 2011

Where is CSL EMS?

Dear CSL EMS,

Where are you? Why don’t you respond?

We see you driving around CSL, we see you parked behind buildings or at the sports fields, but twice in the last two weeks an ambulance needed to be called and you were nowhere to be found.

The first incident was about a week ago at the softball field. A batter in his late 30’s pulled his groin terribly running to first base. He could not even stand to get off the field. After being assisted to the bench he passed out. We were very concerned and called 911. It took the ambulance about 25 minutes to respond – which I guess was ok because the patient had come to by the time we were on the phone with 911…but where was EMS…how far away could they have been?

Then last night after hockey at 11:30 pm one of the players (age 69) had severe chest pains, was lying on the floor in the dressing room and also was looking like he would pass out or was having a heart attack. The ambulance took about 15-20 minutes but where were the first responders everyone is always so proud of? I hope they were busy responding somewhere else. But someone should look into these incidents before something tragic happens.

By the way – the defibrilator in the arena also seemed to be missing.

Concerned Sports Enthusiast

————————————

 

Letters: In defence of Nashen

2011-08-17 In defence of Nashen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Letters to the Editor: Glenn Nashen’s prioritizing of traffic complaints

Letters to the Editor: Glenn Nashen’s prioritizing of traffic complaints

The Suburban

August 10, 2011

 

Councillor Nashen is right that CSL has many streets and taxes are an issue. He’s also probably right that not every case is a life and death one. But safety for all Côte St. Lucers in all neighbourhoods should be his priority and he should be more incensed at the danger on our streets than at our “alarmist” reactions.

Is it alarmist to think we deserve safe streets?

Is it alarmist to compare our roads to neighbouring boroughs or towns replete with bollards, bumps, signs, planters and other measures?

Is it alarmist to want the same safe streets new buyers are anticipating in the new Cavendish development?

Is it alarmist to say not all Côte St. Luc streets are family-friendly? Should we have consulted the engineering department before we closed on our home?

Statistics show numbers, but they don’t show me yanking my kids from the curb because of: endless parades of commuters speeding up to make the light; pizza delivery guys playing F1; hundreds who discover my street is a shortcut to another neighbourhood; morning commuters racing past each other; the disregard for the corner stop sign – a corner made more dangerous by encroaching bushes and low light (apparently a nearby light destroyed during the ice storm was never replaced).

Hampstead had it right, blocking off some streets. They rightly care more about their residents than their neighbour’s commutes.

For crying out loud, we slapped up an Aquatic Centre in just a few months, surely we can get a speed bump, shorten lights, brighten a corner and enforce a stop. It’s a no-brainer.

I suggest nightly driving tours through other areas of Côte St. Luc – commuter flash mobs – respecting speed limits – but traveling on other small streets ad nauseum until we see how alarmist those residents get. One hundred and forty-six streets… Wow. Any suggestions where we should start?

Pina Trengia

District 3

Côte St. Luc

Helmet legislation is long overdue

Letters to the editor, Montreal Gazette (Published July 18, 2010)

Velo-Quebec is on the right path promoting a healthy, active lifestyle through cycling for leisure, for work, for life. Sure, we need to work on motorists’ attitudes in sharing the road, designing bike-friendly streets and lowering speed limits. These are good long-term strategies for a healthy and cycling-friendly society.

However, it is counter-intuitive for Velo-Quebec to oppose mandatory helmet laws because bicycle accidents occur every day and those who do not wear helmets are far likelier to sustain serious head injuries than those who do. In fact, serious head trauma and brain injury is reduced by 80% by wearing a helmet.

Helmet legislation across Quebec is long overdue.

Glenn J. Nashen

City Councillor responsible for Public Safety

Cote Saint-Luc

Einstein Ave to get traffic calming devices / Aux résidants de l’Avenue Einstein

Letter to Einstein Avenue Residents:

Since taking office in 2006, the Côte Saint-Luc city council has tested new methods to help reduce the speed of vehicles on our city streets and improving pedestrian safety. This has included street level crosswalk signs, bollards and speed cushions.

Following discussions with several residents on your street concerned with speeding cars and the safety of their children, our city engineers conducted a traffic study in your area and determined that Einstein Ave would benefit from traffic calming measures. Therefore, we will soon install new speed cushions (several small speed humps installed across the width of the road with spaces between them) and bollards (a short vertical post) on your street.

The traffic calming items will be installed near the homes at 5789, 5790, 5785 and 5786, but will not reduce the number of parking spots on the street.

If you have any technical questions about the traffic calming measures, you can contact either of us or speak directly to our traffic engineer, Charles Senekal (csenekal@cotesaintluc.org, 514-485-6800 ext. 1501).

We are happy to be responding to the needs of residents on your street with innovative traffic-calming methods and communicating with you to explain why we are making this change.

Best regards,

Anthony Housefather                      Glenn J. Nashen

Mayor                                                      Councillor (District 6)

ahousefather@cotesaintluc.org          gjnashen@cotesaintluc.org

In my opinion:  The new installation is actually a speed cushion, not quite a bump. It is made of rubber and will be removed at the end of the season. It is not meant to be a year round installation nor will it be permanent. It is meant as a temporary means of traffic calming.

The traffic engineers conducted speed testing on Einstein and verified that the speeding was problematic. They received requests for traffic calming by residents and it was studied by the Traffic Committee.

We have followed up with police patrols and the speed limit will soon be reduced to 40km/h as well.

Personally, I am opposed to humps and bumps as I find them to be an annoyance, a danger to unsuspecting cyclists and they slow down emergency vehicles and are most unpleasant for the patient on a stretcher (or worse yet, backboard even though they’re not used much anymore) in an ambulance.

The cushions are not from sidewalk to sidewalk and therefore safer for cyclists. They are just wide enough as to allow a fire truck to pass without going over the bump but not a passenger vehicle. The rubber absorbs the impact of the vehicle and isn’t nearly as noisy as bumps nor are the vibrations as severe.

I should note that I am not aware of any accidents having occurred on Einstein in the last several years.

The main problem with Einstein is that it was designed wider than an average side street and therefore the distance between stop signs, the width, the fact that the park and arena is at the end all contribute to speeding.

I think between this temporary measure, lowering of the speed limit and a few more tickets and the situation should be greatly improved to the satisfaction of local residents.

***

Chers résidantes, chers résidants de l’Avenue Einstein:

Depuis son entrée en fonction en 2006, le conseil municipal de Côte Saint-Luc a mis à l’essai de nouvelles méthodes afin de réduire la vitesse des véhicules dans nos rues et d’accroître la sécurité des piétons. Les essais ont porté notamment sur des panneaux placés dans la rue aux traverses de piétons, des bornes de protection et des coussins surélevés.

À la suite de discussions avec plusieurs résidants de votre rue qui se disent préoccupés de la vitesse excessive et craignent pour la sécurité de leurs enfants, nos ingénieurs municipaux ont effectué une étude de circulation dans votre secteur, et ils ont déterminé que des mesures d’apaisement de la circulation seraient utiles sur l’avenue Einstein. Par conséquent, nous installerons bientôt sur votre rue des coussins surélevés (séries de petits dos d’âne espacés les uns des autres posés transversalement sur la chaussée) et des bornes de protection (petits poteaux verticaux).

Ces éléments destinés à ralentir la circulation seront installés près des maisons portant les adresses 5789, 5790, 5785 et 5786, ce qui ne réduira pas le nombre de places de stationnement sur la rue.

Si vous avez des questions de nature technique concernant les mesures d’apaisement de la circulation, vous pouvez contacter un de nous deux à notre adresse ci-dessous ou parler directement à notre ingénieur de la circulation, Charles Senekal : csenekal@cotesaintluc.org, ou 514-485-6800 poste 1501.

Nous sommes heureux de répondre aux besoins des résidants de votre rue avec des solutions novatrices d’apaisement de la circulation et de communiquer avec vous pour préciser les raisons de ces changements.

Cordialement,

Anthony Housefather                      Glenn J. Nashen

Maire                                                             Conseiller (District 6)

ahousefather@cotesaintluc.org     gjnashen@cotesaintluc.org

Les Québécois défavorisés pour les soins d’urgence préhospitaliers

EN

La Presse

Montreal

Lettre à l’éditeur par le conseiller Glenn J. Nashen

Le 7 avril 2009

* * *

Pourquoi les Québécois sont-ils encore défavorisés quand il s’agit des soins d’urgence préhospitaliers ? Il y a au moins 20 ans que l’on souligne la nécessité de se doter d’hélicoptères médicaux pour les traumatismes majeurs et les urgences médicales dans les régions rurales, mais nous n’en avons pas encore au Québec. Il est indéniable que les ambulanciers en soins avancés préhospitaliers possèdent les compétences nécessaires pour assurer la survie, sauf si vous habitez au Québec.

Et pourquoi le port du casque protecteur n’est-il pas obligatoire pour les cyclistes et les skieurs, alors qu’il est prouvé qu’il peut réduire de 80 % le risque d’un traumatisme crânien ? La prévention des blessures et la réduction du nombre d’hospitalisations et de visites aux services déjà encombrés permettraient des économies pour les contribuables et allégeraient le fardeau qui pèse sur notre système de santé déjà trop sollicité.

Le Québec se dit à l’avant-garde et fier de son esprit d’initiative, mais il reste loin derrière en matière de soins d’urgence préhospitaliers et de préparation aux situations d’urgence. Il est grand temps de rattraper le temps perdu. Ambulances aériennes, ambulanciers paramédicaux de soins avancés, casques protecteurs et vaste programme de formation à la réanimation cardio-respiratoire : voilà des facteurs qui permettent de sauver des vies. Il est temps d’investir là où ça compte vraiment, car nos vies en dépendent.

Glenn J. Nashen

Conseiller municipal (Sécurité publique)

Côte Saint-Luc

Letter to the Editor, The Gazette, English safety signage allowed on Quebec highways

Letters to the Editor – Printed in the Montreal Gazette on Nov. 19, 2008

Re: “Electronic highway messages must be brief to be safe” (Gazette, Nov. 17, 2008, Page A8)

So says Transport Quebec. But the Gazette didn’t respond to Ms. Wales’ question as to why these emergency messages are not in English as well. The language laws allow for emergency messages in English.

Think back to when a motorist died in a fiery crash entering an exit to the Ville Marie tunnel due to miscomprehension of the French only signage.

Yet the transport department continues to ignore the safety of hundreds of thousands of residents and visitors. Just ask any English-speaking motorist who uses the “met” (autoroute 40) what that huge flashing sign indicating “cahoteuse” means?

Glenn J. Nashen
Cote Saint-Luc

Montreal Gazette, Nov. 17, 2008 (Pg. A8)

Electronic highway messages must be brief to be safe
Road closed: no list of alternate routes
COMPILED BY MAX HARROLD, The Gazette
Q: I have often wondered why the overhead electronic highway signs are not in English as well. Also, why is there no alternate route listed when an access on the road is blocked up ahead? This would alleviate traffic tie-ups, don’t you think?

How much are we paying for those signs? I hardly ever see *4141 for the (Sûreté du Québec) listed anymore for emergency contact. It is fortunate that I have a long memory for this number, as I have used it many times from my cell to call in for a stranded motorist who might not have a cell phone. I always note the number for the state police as I pass through different (states in the) United States. I remember once being on Alligator Alley in the Florida Everglades just as night was falling and seeing a car with two flats on the side of the road with five people outside milling around. There were alligators around too. I called the emergency number for Florida and gave them the highway location of the stranded people. I like to think I saved them from the jaws of death.

Elspeth Wales

A: Alternate route suggestions on the electronic signs on highways would take too long to post and might cause accidents as drivers try to read them, said Mario St-Pierre, a spokesperson for Transport Quebec, which operates the signs.

“The message has to be brief and safe,” St-Pierre said. “People can make their own decisions (on alternate routes) after that.”

There are 31 fixed electronic message boards (that cost $100,000 to $150,000 each) and 67 much smaller mobile signs on Quebec’s highways, St-Pierre said. The average duration of each phrase on the signs is two to three seconds, and a message may take two phrases – but not more, as that would pose a safety hazard, he said.

Messages are about temporary road closings and road conditions that are affected by weather. They also give suggestions like changing to winter tires.

The information on the signs is fed to them through a cellular network. Transport Quebec monitors traffic cameras around the clock and uses what it sees to post messages on the signs.

St-Pierre said he did not know how often the Sûreté du Québec’s emergency phone number is posted on the signs.

SQ Sgt. Mélanie Paul said the police force has its own permanent signs posting the phone number, which is *4141 from any cell phone and 310-4141 from a land line (no area code is required within the province). The phone line is staffed 24 hours a day and may be used to report roadside emergencies.

Answers Compiled by Max Harrold

Cross over crosswalks

Cross over crosswalks
An open letter to the Quebec Ministers of Transport and Public Security
The Suburban
May 30, 2007

For many years I have been frustrated by the extent of lawlessness that exists on Quebec roads with regard to pedestrian crosswalks. One need only travel to neighbouring provinces and states to see the vast difference in how those authorities take this matter very seriously, much more so than in Quebec.

As a pedestrian and a cyclist I am amazed at the total lack of respect for those crossing a street within designated crosswalks. What’s more, it seems to me that the Quebec government is a party to this free-for-all as the signage, education and enforcement to protect pedestrians is negligible at best. This point is only magnified by observing how our neighbours handle this dossier.

For example, in Ontario, standardized panels bearing a large black ‘X’ on a white background indicate crossing zones. Most often, this is accompanied by amber warning lights that signal a pedestrian in the crosswalk.

Furthermore, many urban centres have overhead lights that illuminate as the pedestrian crosses the road at night, increasing visibility and safety.

In the northeastern states, and beyond, crosswalks are often painted in a highly visible manner, are prominently marked with ample signage and very often have a median sign in the centre of the road in reflective orange and white reminding motorists very effectively, “State Law. Stop for Pedestrians in Crosswalk.” These laws are very strictly enforced by local police and State Troopers.

In Ontario and many states, one need only step off the curb, or even signal ones intention to cross by pointing one’s arm into the roadway to gain control of the crosswalk, providing ultimate safety. On bike paths that cross roadways, and even state highways, signage is posted alerting cyclists to dismount so that pedestrian/crosswalk laws are in effect.

In Quebec, one takes their life into their own hands by thinking one can safely traverse a roadway by virtue of the crosswalk designation. There is little respect by motorists and rarely any law enforcement. Signage is inconsistent – not nearly as visible as in the jurisdictions outlined above, road markings are irregular, enforcement is usually absent and therefore pedestrians are simply not nearly as safe as they ought to be.

During the school season I have noticed motorists ignoring crosswalks, directly in front of schools, and this while crossing guards, large Stop Signs in hand, unsuccessfully try to gain control of the crosswalk. This should not – cannot – be tolerated.

In Côte St. Luc we are continuing to improve our signage and street line markings for crosswalks and will begin installing median warning signs this summer. Our Public Security department conducted a school zone safety blitz with our neighbourhood police station last winter and will do so again this year. I hope that Quebec might learn from its neighbours and can increase safety in crosswalks by adopting best practices in use elsewhere and order provincial and municipal police forces to show zero tolerance to motorists who disregard fundamental safety regulations.

Glenn J. Nashen
City Councillor (Public Safety)
Côte St. Luc

We Support a Ban on Smoking, Letters, Suburban

Letter to the Editor-We Support a Ban on Smoking

May 12, 2005

It was April 1985 that the City of Cote Saint-Luc passed a comprehensive no smoking bylaw #1867 that regulated and prohibited smoking in public places. Twenty years ago this municipality was spearheading a campaign that restricted smoking with the intent of protecting its residents from the nuisance of second hand smoke. The proactive move to help reduce heart disease, cancer and respiratory disease was a bold move for a small municipality.

In 1997 the bylaw was amended to prohibit smoking in all municipal buildings and City-owned vehicles in the interest of furthering public health. A complete smoke free environment was the intended goal.

Finally in March of 1999 bylaw #2202 was enacted that outlined the prohibitions that extended to commercial establishments, places of public assembly, restaurants, and the workplace.

As one can see the previous Councils of the City of Cote Saint-Luc have shown leadership in the fight against smoking and the undersigned support the Government of Quebec in its effort to enhance the quality of life for all.

Anthony Housefather

Borough Councillor

Ruth Kovac, Councillor 1990-2001

Glenn J. Nashen, Councillor 1990-2001

Mitchell Brownstein, Councillor 1990-2001

City of Cote Saint-Luc

Bring in Paramedics

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

March 22, 2005

The Suburban

It’s one thing for the government to review the financial management at Urgences Santé and to ensure that our tax dollars are spent in the most effective and transparent manner.  But please Dr. Couillard, don’t delay implementation of Paramedics in Quebec any further.  Quebec remains the last jurisdiction in North America to have these lifesaving professionals aboard its ambulances.

Rapid Paramedic intervention increases survival rates, leads to shorter hospitalization and saves the health care system millions of tax dollars. Paramedics should be legalized in Quebec because they provide a win-win situation for everyone involved. And that’s money well spent.

Glenn J. Nashen

Cote Saint-Luc