Gallo’s letter was ironic, says Reader

September 25, 2013 · 0 Comments

In a rather delicious touch of irony, Councillor Gallo asks how Council is making decisions. He is specifically referring to the possibility of implementing an accessible park in what is now referred to as Diamond Jubilee Park (formerly Civic Park). Currently, that park seems to be an undersized soccer field.
The Councillor is somewhat forthcoming in his letter, admitting that he lives in the area and, therefore, has a vested interest. However, he does leave out that he is an active member and very vocal supporter of the soccer community.
The Councillor is lamenting the fact that the Mayor and some Councillors supported this project moving forward yet would not support Councillor Gaertner’s request that Council spend over $100,000 on revamping the Council Chambers to be accessible.
I am confused: Councillor Gallo supports spending a lot of money for an accessible chamber, which quite frankly will serve a minimal number of people, but doesn’t support a park, that admittedly will cost more money, but will probably serve many people. Can’t have anything to do with his convenience for soccer can it?
The Councillor is concerned that the public hasn’t had input yet (I believe that is still in the works). Yet, he was perfectly okay with being appointed to Council when former Councillor Marsh resigned. Public reaction was overwhelmingly against an appointment and in favour of a by-election. So, public input is okay, but only when you can tailor it to your purposes.
The Councillor was fully in favour of the former Mayor suing Aurora residents (even though he has admitted he had no idea what he was voting for at the time), and has stated that he would vote again in favour. And that was after the case had been dismissed. Yet, he states in his letter that he has “to be focused on what is in the best interest of the entire community”.
Clearly, Councillor Gallo, you are not focused on what is in the best interest of the entire community – unless that community is very small…and that is indeed “wrong on many levels.”

Bruce Walkinshaw
Aurora