[Magdalen] Precip.

[Roger Stokes]

On 02/11/2015 19:34, Lynn Ronkainen wrote:
> Major rains here again over the weekend (here being Houston and the 
> burbs - my abode) and for the first time, possibly because we've had 
> so much rain in the last 4 weeks, TONS of sewage ended up in local 
> bayous and on the roads : P  as the waters receded. Really bad news 
> and on the heels of divisive issues of infrastructure neglect and 
> budget shortfalls.

That seems an appropriate comment on the rest of your (understandable) rant

>
> Our spunky 3 term mayor has sunk billions in to enlarging and 
> enhancing our green space, but in her last term (3 term limit here) 
> she has been especially bold in her creativity. What has gone wanting 
> during her tenure is any attention to infrastructure - our roads are 
> s**t, private and interstate, 2+ of which cross here, not to mention 
> other 6-8 lane non interstate roads. Sidewalks in the city (except for 
> downtown) - abysmal!!! and the underground water system (many, many 
> pipes burst two summers ago during huge drought, and only patch-patch 
> attempt to solve immediate problems). Me thinks her legacy will not be 
> positive. AND tomorrow the city votes on the famous 'bathroom measure' 
> that has been getting national press time, for one of several angles 
> for the last 18  months (subpoenaed pastor sermons!!, raising the 
> hackles of religious groups, championing the GLBTetc forces, creation 
> of sick negative ads... creating questionable positive ads, and 
> 'Gidget' even made an appearance last week on the 'for' side ... you 
> know, Sally Fields) all for a 'law' that common sense says is already 
> covered by federal law. As I said... what a legacy. I doubt that she 
> will be remembered for more than being our first gay woman mayor and 
> championing this bathroom issue... I think it may very well be voted 
> down and who knows what that will do with Houston as a venue with the 
> current rage of withdrawing conventions and such from cities that 
> become controversial in this vein?  sigh.

Having had a quick Google in what this is about I think she is backing 
the wrong horse here.  If all bathrooms are to become unisex then they 
will need to be all cubicles rather than having urinals for the males 
among us.  This would take more space and water, not to mention 
increasing demand.  Compare the length of the line outside the men's and 
women's facilities.  You would need to increase the total number of 
cubicles to cope.

If the concern is the relatively low number of transexual people then 
whichever the direction of their transition the cubicles are there. They 
are not "personal plumbing" related in their design, as we know in our 
own homes,  The problem will be that if this is voted down then some 
will argue it's an anti-LGBT act when it's really a case of refusing to 
countenance massive upheaval that is not needed.

Roger