• jadero
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    4 months ago

    As long as we’re spinning things, maybe they chose to follow the will of the people rather than imposing their own views.

    At this point, we don’t and can’t know whether letting it go to plebiscite was deliberately choosing to follow the will of the people, hoping to distance themselves no matter the outcome or a tactical error that led to a result they claim to be disappointed with.

      • Auli
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        It still had the majority so they still have to follow it. Roughly 30% of the people even bothered to vote on this. Most just don’t care enough to vote on these issue as it doesn’t effect them.

      • jadero
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        That result came after the decision that led to the plebiscite so could not be factored into the decision. Unless you think they had a crystal ball telling them the outcome ahead of time.

        A plebiscite is, by definition, the means by which a governing body lets the people decide. You can easily argue that an outcome should be valid only if there is, say, 2/3 majority, but that’s not the system we have.

        Also, I’m not a huge fan of being called a twat when I was being civil, respectful, and thoughtful. I’m too old to put up with much shit, so… blocked.

        • Hootz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          I could care less if you block me, they chose the plebiscite instead of dealing with it in council because they thought the town was better than this, but like it’s Alberta…