Friday, October 5, 2012

$90,000.00 Sliding Away?

From the "Things that will Drive a Taxpayer Nuts" file, a story in the Stoney Creek News advises that patrons of the new Stoney Creek Rec Centre, won't be able to use the pool slide that was built for the pool.

 Due to its small deck, there is an issue with the potential for a passerby to stick an arm out and cause an injury. 

 A new slide to replace the new slide has cost $90,000.00.  The city is consulting with its legal department to determine whether the contractor who installed the first slide, could be held liable for costs.  

 The full story is here. 

2 comments:

  1. $90,000.00 is a lot of coin. Someone needs to get to the bottom of this and made accountable.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ward 9 residentOctober 11, 2012

    Are you kidding me! A brand new pool, a and a new slide that can't be used because of a poor design. Who approves these things? I say, take the $90,000.00 G's out of the paychecks of the those responsible for the design and those who approved the plan. I don't think its fair for the taxpayers to be eating the costs of people who can't do their jobs right.

    Ward 9 resident

    ReplyDelete

Your comments are welcome. Please abide by the blog's policy on posting. This blog facilitates discussion from all sides of issues. Opposite viewpoints, spirited discussion and even pointed comments are welcome, provided they are respectful. Name calling is not allowed and any posts that violate the policy, will simply not be authorized to appear. This blog also reserves the right to exclude comments that are off topic or are otherwise unprofessional. This blog does not assume any liability whatsoever for comments posted. People posting comments or providing information on interviews, do so at their own risk.


Comments posted on this blog, may be used as excerpts in whole or in part, in other media sources .
This blog believes in freedom of speech and operates in the context of a democratic society, which many have fought and died for.

Views expressed by commentators or in articles that appear here, cannot be assumed to be espoused by The Hamiltonian staff or its publisher.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)