Nepean is a dirty word?

Some very expensive signs are sprouting up in Bells Corners.

This is the old library sign.

It seemed to do the job all right but the City decided it had to go – not bilingual enough and it featured the forbidden word Nepean.

So, to correct the problem, the City decided to cart the old sign off to the landfill and put up this beauty in its place.

I guess it’s only a matter of time (and tax dollars) before the Lynwood Park sign gets the same treatment.

I wonder how much it’ll cost to replace this sign? Is there a better use for our tax dollars?

The City has been after the tennis clubs for years to pay half the cost of replacing its old Nepean sign with an expensive metal bilingual version, but so far the club has said no.

It was very expensive to replace the old sign in Williams Park.

The councillor organized a public consultation in the Lynwood community building, but it wasn’t about whether or not to replace the sign, it was about where it should be located. The City supplied a spiffy satellite photo showing the three proposed locations.

I asked how much it would cost the taxpayer for the new Williams Park sign. The councillor said he didn’t know, but that one of his staff members would get back to me (which, of course, she never did).

But the most expensive new sign in Bells Corners is this one:

The Bells Corners BIA is financed by the Chiarelli tax, a levy on property taxes that all Bells Corners business owners, even the smallest ones, have to pay. It also siphons off lots of our tax dollars.

Where does the BIA spend its money? A big chunk of it goes for the hefty salary of executive director Alex Lewis, who used to work for Rick Chiarelli – it sure helps to have contacts! And now he has himself some nice digs in the Price Chopper plaza.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Nepean is a dirty word?

  1. wanderer says:

    What a waste of money – our tax dollars at work doing really important stuff.

    RC seems to always find new ways of spending OUR money, not necessarily in the right way for the right reasons. He must justify his existence, I suppose.

    I will forever live in Nepean, no matter how many signs they put up to indicate otherwise.

    – I agree that we’re damn lucky to live in Nepean- it was (and is) a fine place.

    But if we’re talking emotional attachment to a community, I think I’d define myself as a Bells Corners resident first, an Ottawa resident second and a Nepean resident third. Canadian and citizen-of-the-world would round out the geographic loyalties.

    Certainly NEPEAN is a very potent symbol for a lot of people in Bells Corners, especially for the old-timers.

    But as a symbol of WHAT exactly? It means different things to different people- for some it’s nostalgia for simpler times, for others it’s a commitment to getting value for tax dollars.

    Rick Chiarelli has appropriated the symbol NEPEAN as part of his brand – he’ll be glad to tell you how much better things were in the good old days of Nepean when he and Ben (praise be his name!) were in charge.

    In my opinion it’s mostly just smoke and mirrors.

  2. Ron Rancourt says:

    Again and again we see how amalgamation has cost us big-time, when we were told it would SAVE money.

    I think Mr. Watson should put his “borough” idea to work and allow Nepean and other “boroughs” to separate from the grand City of Ottawa!

    – Vive Nepean libre! If we had a referendum the oui side would win in a cakewalk.

    And then we could de-amalgamate Bells Corners from Nepean. 🙂 😉

  3. Chris says:

    I saw this new sign the last time I went to the library. It appeared to me that the new sign was just glued over top of the old one, but I may be mistaken. Good for the tennis club for resisting replacing their signs. The less Ottawa branding around the better, I say.

    – The new sign is glued onto the old one? Hmmm, maybe, but I don’t think so.

    The new sign isn’t bad in itself, although I liked the old one better for aesthetic reasons.

    But can someone please give us a rough idea as to the cost to the taxpayer? $500? $1000? $2000? It shouldn’t be secret information.

    The funds for converting the Centennial branch sign come from the LIBRARY budget – presumably someone there thought that replacing the old sign was a higher priority than buying more books. The local librarian and the taxpayer had no say in the matter – important decisions like this are made by the plodding City bureaucracy.

  4. I. Green says:

    Just some politician trying to make a name for himself. Bilingualisim has gone too far. We don’t want to offend anyone do we? Why don’t the people who want this so badly PAY for it themselves?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s