Opinion
The city is expending great capital to accommodate a developer while abandoning taxpayers,
The debate over proceeding with the Molly Bannister Extension has raised many questions, left many with a feeling of abandonment.
The recent council meeting after decades of consultation, meetings, polls, requests for input, and with the result always being approximately 57% +/- in favor and 43% +/- against, it was brought as “too close to call”, “even split” requiring more input.
Quebec would have separated if it had achieved 50%+1 votes, and the consensus appears to be if the public had been at any time 50%+1 against the bridge, city council would have jumped at it.
Some have stated that they are against the bridge, no matter what. The poor taxpayer has no chance with these politicians. I was at first against the bridge ten years ago, but I have seen the costs and the damage to many lives, especially along 32 St.
The environment has been used as a scapegoat more often than not. Selective environmental concerns, is how I would put it. Where was the environmental concerns when we could have had the whole parcel on condition on keeping it a park or garden? Nowhere to be found.
Where was the environmental concerns in regard to the North-Connector bridge? Nowhere.
The plan would see 700 houses with the bridge or 750 houses without the bridge. How does adding 50 more houses backing onto Piper Creek increase park space?
We are heading into a public meeting where the council seems determined to abolish the bridge. A developer has lots of money and has an opportunity to make millions more. We are just homeowners and taxpayers trying to protect our homes, enjoy our lives and have everything to lose.
The biggest issue is the sense of abandonment by city hall. They seem to be going to extreme measures for this developer. Widening streets, Traffic circles. Pedestrian Bridge over 19 St. Carving up Sunnybrook to make a second entrance/exit point.
Under the pretense of environmentalism; making thousands of people per day drive an extra 4 kilometres, for generations to come. Burning fuel, and emitting carbons into the atmosphere so hikers, bikers and skaters don’t have to use a crosswalk.
How do we, average people, compete with a developer who socializes with planners and politicians? It is obvious that we will lose at the Public Hearing on October 26, or they will move another motion and extend the game.
I think they are counting on voter or taxpayer fatigue. Don’t count on it.
There is a municipal election and we might find it necessary to find candidates who “truly” represent the taxpayers.
Why do they keep attacking our homes? We don’t want millions in profits. We just want to enjoy our homes.
By Ken Macon
AI-driven surveillance is shifting from spotting suspects to mapping ordinary life, turning everyday travel into a stream of behavioral data
|
|
U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan declared a mistrial Monday afternoon in the high-profile foreign-agent and corruption case against former New York state official Linda Sun and her husband Chris Hu, after jurors reported they were hopelessly deadlocked on all 19 counts.
After restarting deliberations Monday morning with an alternate juror, the panel sent a note to Judge Cogan stating:
“Your honor, after extensive deliberations and redeliberations the jury remains unable to reach a unanimous verdict. The jurors’ positions are firmly held.”
Cogan brought the jury into court and asked the foreman whether they had reached agreement on any counts. They replied that they were deadlocked on every one. The judge then declared a mistrial.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Alexander Solomon immediately told the court that the government intends to retry the case “as soon as possible.” A status conference is scheduled for January 26, 2026, to determine next steps.
Jury selection began November 10, 2025, and the government called 41 witnesses to the stand, compared with eight for the defense and one rebuttal witness for the prosecution. Deliberations began on December 12, and by this afternoon the jurors had sent three notes to the court — each indicating deadlock.
As The Bureau reported in its exclusive analysis Friday, the panel’s fracture had become visible as jurors headed into a second week of deliberations in a landmark foreign-agent and corruption trial that reached into two governors’ offices — a case asking a jury of New Yorkers to decide whether Sun secretly served Beijing’s interests while she and Hu built a small business and luxury-property empire during the pandemic, cashing in on emergency procurement as other Americans were locked down.
Prosecutors urged jurors to accept their account of a dense web of family and Chinese-community financial transactions through which Sun and Hu allegedly secured many millions of dollars in business deals tied to “United Front” proxies aligned with Beijing. The defense, by contrast, argued that Sun and Hu were simply successful through legitimate, culturally familiar transactions, not any covert scheme directed by a foreign state.
Sun and Hu face 19 charges in total, including allegations that Sun acted as an unregistered foreign agent for the People’s Republic of China; visa-fraud and alien-smuggling counts tied to a 2019 Henan provincial delegation; a multimillion-dollar pandemic PPE kickback scheme; bank-fraud and identity-misuse allegations; and multiple money-laundering and tax-evasion counts.
Prosecutors have argued that the clearest money trail ran through New York’s COVID procurement scramble and a pair of Jiangsu-linked emails. In closing, Solomon told jurors that Sun’s “reward” for steering contracts was “millions of dollars in kickbacks or bribes,” contending the money was routed through accounts opened in Sun’s mother’s name and via friends and relatives.
The government has tied those claims to a broader narrative — laid out in Solomon’s summation and dissected in The Bureau’s reporting — that Sun functioned as a “trusted insider” who repurposed state access and letterhead to advance Beijing’s priorities, including by allegedly forging Governor Kathy Hochul’s signature on invitation letters used for Chinese provincial delegations, while keeping those relationships hidden from colleagues. The defense, in turn, urged jurors to reject the government’s picture of clandestine agency and argued prosecutors had overreached by treating ordinary diaspora networking, trade promotion, and pandemic procurement as criminal conduct — insisting none of the evidence proved the “direction or control” element central to the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
Whether a future jury will see the same evidence as corruption and covert foreign agency or as culturally familiar commerce and politics — will now be tested again, on a new timetable, in a courtroom that has already shown just how difficult this record is to unanimously interpret.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Death by a thousand clicks – government censorship of Canada’s internet
Chinese Billionaire Tried To Build US-Born Baby Empire As Overseas Elites Turn To American Surrogates
Viral TikTok video shows 7-year-old cuddling great-grandfather before he’s euthanized
Politicians should be honest about environmental pros and cons of electric vehicles
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta’s huge oil sands reserves dwarf U.S. shale
-
armed forces2 days agoOttawa’s Newly Released Defence Plan Crosses a Dangerous Line
-
Energy2 days agoCanada’s sudden rediscovery of energy ambition has been greeted with a familiar charge: hypocrisy
-
Alberta2 days agoCanada’s New Green Deal
-
Business2 days agoCOP30 finally admits what resource workers already knew: prosperity and lower emissions must go hand in hand
-
Business2 days agoOttawa Pretends To Pivot But Keeps Spending Like Trudeau
-
Agriculture7 hours agoWhy is Canada paying for dairy ‘losses’ during a boom?
-
Indigenous2 days agoResidential school burials controversy continues to fuel wave of church arsons, new data suggests