Small erratum: I seem to have posted the same section of the very late approved (assuming they're approved at 16:15 today: I will not be watching) St Patricks Day grants three times.
Bit silly of me.
Here's the post that should have been made, with all three listings.
Anyhoo, that's it.
Thanks for following along, yadda yadda
Get out, go home
Anyway, I'm, busy later today and don't want to watch these (presumably) quick approval meetings anyway.
Might be busy on whatever day they move the full meeting to: we'll see. Can't even guarantee these wavering weirdos won't move it again, of course.
Can't even organise a meeting without multiple attempts is kinda funny, tbh.
So I can't tell you when the next full council meeting is going to be now they're moving it yet again.
The 16th? The 23rd? The 30th? A Not Monday? Who knows.
The first meeting later today is "to consider re-fixing the date for the March meeting of the Council".
If memory serves, they already moved it from March 16 to March 23, so looks like they're moving it again to either convenience someone or inconvenience someone else.
Here's the link to the full document if you feel like reading it: www.limerick.ie/sites/defaul...
Seriously: having to call a special meeting with the minimum three working days notice to approve all the St Patricks Day grants makes me feel much better about my occasional anxious inability to put on socks or go outside.
Hey, I'm not saying this is good :D
The second meeting (at 16:15), is to approve St Patricks festival (parades and the like) funding, which presumably someone realised actually needs to be approved by councillors.
Always a joy to see people who are less organised than I am. Thanks folks.
Traditionally, here's where I remind y'all of the date of the (far more interesting and amusing) full council meeting up next.
However, there are two called with minimum notice and presumably quick special meetings today...
That's the meeting over, then.
Kieran Lehane (Director Of Some Stuff But Now Less Stuff) reminds councillors they they'll have a free bus on St Patricks Day from Arthurs Quay to the parade start zone so that they can have an auld gawk at what's going on.
Response: it's being funded under the social housing scheme; at this time it doesn't make the cut on being eligible for an affordable housing allocation, pfo.
Cllr McSweeney does not like this at all.
Ah, he wants them "to go back and look at it".
It's a motion that effectively isn't a formal proposal, then.
Motion 5 (item 25):
Dan McSweeney wants the Barnakyle housing scheme (proposed as a part 8 mostly as a RightSizing scheme) to offer more houses under Affordable Purchase.
Is this a post-hoc de facto cheeky amendment to a Part 8?
Cllr McSweeney adds that he thinks they'll miss the boat on this: TII might just withdraw their funding.
ANyway, moving on...
Daniel Butler and Fergus Kilcoyne add their support, Cllr Kilcoyne adding that he'd have brought this issue forward "in 2029".
Is Cllr Kilcoyne a time traveller?
Response: yeah, they're doing that they can.
Cllr McSweeney is not impressed with this.
Moving back to motion 4 / item 24
Dan McSweeney, stressing his best "this is a serious matter and I am a serious person" voice, wants the advancement of the land acquisition for the walkway out the N69 in Clarina.
It's been 6 years, apparently.
Nobody's going to oppose this, obviously.
LETTER!
Motion 11 / item 31
Padraigh Reale wants a letter (HEY, A LETTER) written to TFI to officially add the Clare Street bus stop to the list of bus stops.
We're doing grungy unofficial bus stops again?
Motion 10 / item 30
Padraigh Reale wants a speed survey to see if traffic calming measures should be installed (he says they should) in Lower Park, Corbally.
I don't get out to Corbally much.
I have notions but not that kind of notions.
Traffic calming measures: always good
The undertone of the official response makes it clear that they know this is a weird "do the thing you're already doing" motion.
Moving on...
Sure, do your audit if you like.
But at least have the decency to present it as an actual safety measure, councillor.
DMURS and the Cycle Design Manual already requires junction design and signage every time they build a lane btw.
And the former (rightly) insists that prioritisation be given to sustainable modes of transport.
(hello to the person who pointed that out to me just now)
I mean, if you meant "motorists and cyclists", you could have said that.
The verbal intro to this motion makes it clear that Cllr Beasley is entirely concerned with cyclists not dismounting and being sassy with cars.
Motion 9: item 29
Sarah Beasley has one of those anti-cycling motions (bear with me) we sometimes see: she wants an audit of locations where cycle paths and roads intersect, "specifically calling out where cyclists do not have right of way".
Not motorists, just cyclists.
Damien from The Library is also answering in person: he says it's good, cheap, they're ready to do it, thinks they can do it for €1000/€1500
I am also willing to go to war for or with librarians, by the way. And not just because I watched all those The Librarian(s) movies.
I fall into the zone of people who think that people with specific needs, special needs, and many other needs should just be catered for.
Hey, maybe that makes me some sort of woke pinko something.
I am willing go go to war for disabled people / MH issue people: my people.
Anyhoo, the official reply includes a long list of things that the library* provide for people (leaflets, headphones, etc) and they haven't had a request for service users for communication boards.
*I dunno why the reply is almost entirely focused on the libraries
Reply: er, that'd cost money.
On this one, reps from the two major parties *are* up for saying this is a good idea, so one assumes they'd be up for putting money in next year's budget for it.
Motion 8: item 28 Shane Hickey O'Mara wants communication boards in council-run buildings, to aid neurodivergent people, folks with disabilities, etc to communicate their needs.
I'm being overly simplistic here, but those are the pointy boards. Cheap and useful.
The opposition councillors are getting another go at saying this is awful, so one assumes that nobody from the two major parties are going to say anything at all here.
