^ Even though the Mayor did not vote to support the size of the contingency fund for the bridge, she correctly thought it needed to be higher, whether the bridge should have been built or not is not the current issue.
The issue today is that we have outstanding lawsuits, warranty problems, missing fenders, and what could be a catastrophic design failure and/or premature 'warping' (my words) of a critical component. We know from the first go around with the bridge that when the going gets tough City staff gets going so I am not holding my breathe that they are going to sort this out alone. There needs to be some oversight and leadership to make sure that the taxpayer has their interests represented, that we get the bridge that we paid for and one that lasts for the period of time it was promised to. Can you imagine the impact to the City and/or its industrial users if the bridge is out of commission for an extended period of time?
Perhaps I am wrong but it seems to me that our bridge strategy is based more on hope then it is any planned outcome.
It would have been nice to see CFAX pick up this issue, especially since City staff lied to them on June 28th stating that the bridge was "fixed" when clearly and according to FOI materials it was not. Alas, it seems that the talk show circuit will be engulfed again today with the bugger who posted a comment on his personal twitter account.