| |
|
Newest Letters - at
bottom of this page...CLICK
HERE |
|
Sent to the Rural
Council MAILBOX:
Democracy
loses out to bureaucracy
The 'Shortliffe Amalgamation Scheme' seen as
a pre-ordered 'fix'
|
To: contact@ruralcouncil.ca
After reading the fine print on my fire
permit and reading what the fire
chief said about rurals being allowed to burn yard waste I
would like to
have him explain just how that is possible with all the
regulations attached
to it. I thought this was to be modified and made sensible.
I have burned yard waste for years and been told by the fire
dept my burn
area was safe. Now I had to pay ten dollars to find out it is
now illegal.
Let's get the hell out of Ottawa before we pay for much more
of their
excesses of the past.
|
|
Also suggest you do not put too much emphasis on quotes from
Glen
Shortliffe. I suspect he was a political tool with a set of
instructions on
how to play the charade of being democratic.
There has been nothing democratic about this from the very
start and I have
often wondered how constitutional the process was. Please do
not reference
the "vote", that was so blatantly rigged it was not funny.
Doug Gordon
West Carleton |
Ottawa Citizen -
Letter to the Editor:
De-amalgamation is one rural option
The Ottawa Citizen
Friday, April 02, 2004
 |
|
Bob McKinley says
there is widespread dissatisfaction among rural and
suburban residents with the efficiency and
effectiveness of an amalgamated Ottawa. |
|
CREDIT: Michael
McGee, The Ottawa Citizen |
|
Re: Rural
citizens belong in city, March 26.
Rural residents of Ottawa must thank the Citizen
editorialist for leading us down the path of enlightened
understanding. Your editorial might more appropriately have
been headlined: "Rural citizens belong to city."
The Citizen's assurance that "rural Ottawans" can depend
upon their new Big Brother for help when needed is comforting.
After all, we've never been capable of looking after our own
affairs, nor have we ever had a sufficient tax base to support
a proper police force or our own public-health unit. I guess
we were just darn lucky for
the 111 years prior to
amalgamation.
I'm equally enlightened to learn that rural representation
at city council should decline to bring representation more in
line with our population. I wrongly assumed rights to
representation were protected by the principles enunciated by
the Supreme Court of Canada and reinforced by the Ontario
Municipal Board when it repealed the city's odious
ward-boundary bylaw.
The new Rural Council has been instructed by its members to
re-evaluate the relationship between rural taxpayers and the
amalgamated City of Ottawa. The current relationship is not
acceptable. De-amalgamation is one option to be studied.
Megacities have been studied across North America and have
been repeatedly identified as failures. Rural and suburban
municipalities outside the Greenbelt once functioned as a
public service, responsive to the needs of their constituents.
The level of dissatisfaction with city government has
reached an all-time high since amalgamation. Rural Ottawa is
not alone in expressing its dissatisfaction with the
inefficiency, over-regulation, and big-spending practices of
the new city. Many suburban taxpayers also believe that
inefficient government poses a dire threat to providing
essential services and to sustaining social programs and
culture.
Bob McKinley,
Rideau
© The Ottawa Citizen 2004
|
Rural voices can't seem to be
heard.
|
The Ottawa
Citizen
April 11, 2004 |
Re:
'Barnyard circus' a tale of
hardship, APRIL 7.
As columnist Kelly
Egan points out, the "coalition of rural interests" is
broad in focus, but there's good reason for that -- if we
press individual causes, we just can't get anyone to pay
attention to our concerns.
Case in point: Richmond residents have
been warning of the potentially disastrous consequences of
installing a sewage forcemain through our village. Why
anyone would route a sewage forcemain through a village
where residents rely on shallow wells is beyond us.
We have tried numerous avenues to get our
point across but no one is listening -- even our
councillor dismissed our petition with 690 signatures
opposing the forcemain. We were told the matter was
closed, that all environment assessments were done
(however, one was never done within the village of
Richmond), and the city
|
|
was going to proceed with a forcemain since the city says the on-site solution would
release an unacceptable amount of phosphorus into the Jock
River -- but only the equivalent of one tablespoon a day.
Somehow this "contamination" of the Jock
outweighs the potential contamination of our well water.
Where's the respect and attention there?
And why can the city now decide to reopen
the issue about handling leachate from the Trail Road
landfill: "Due to concerns expressed by the public
regarding the proposed pipeline route, the city is now
re-evaluating all ... options, including on-site treatment
with discharge to the Jock River." What up with that? Are
Richmond's concerns about one pipeline somehow less worthy
than Nepean's about another?
The coalition is
so broad because sometimes it's the only way to be heard.
Diane Cloutier,
Richmond
© The Ottawa Citizen 2004
|
A widening split
|
The Ottawa Citizen
April 11, 2004
Be it municipal, provincial or
federal government issues, it appears that the split
between urban and rural concerns is getting greater.
If this continues, we will be seeing more
demonstrations. As time passes, frustrations and the
sense of "not being listened to" do not make for a
good atmosphere.
At the municipal level, the passing
of the Ottawa budget highlighted the great differences
between urban and rural. With regard to the last
provincial throne speech, there was no mention of any
rural
|
|
Ontario problems. Federally, how can one forget the
boondoggle of gun-control registration?
With all the
ongoing regulations, it has come to the point of
literally changing rural lifestyles. It is a shame
that society has come to the extreme point of rural
versus urban, as the number of urban voters greatly
exceeds those who are rural.
Douglas Scheels,
Arnprior
© The Ottawa Citizen 2004
|
|
| |
|
National Post - April
21, 2004 - Lawrence Solomon:
In a major turning
point, an Ontario government report
suggests a restructuring
and eventual abandonment of
much of the provincial
hinterland:
"Rural
phase out" |
Related - NATIONAL
POST... |
|
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
|
Phase-out city standards in rural Canada
|
Randy Hillier
Financial Post
Monday, May 03, 2004
Lawrence Solomon's column illustrates the contempt and
ignorance with which the far-removed urban and bureaucratic
mindset views rural communities (Rural Phase-Out, April 21).
It's no wonder the "Rural Revolution" started in Eastern
Ontario is gaining wide acceptance and broad support when
such people as Mr. Solomon have the government's ear and
common people and common sense are absent from our
democratic process.
The only dangers and obstacles threatening the rural economy
and culture are government intrusion: legislation such as
the Nutrient Management Act, which slowly starves family
farms; new Ontario water regulations that parch all rural
businesses of profits; the gun registry, which creates
lifestyle criminals; the Environmental Protection Act, which
cuts down our logging operations because sawdust is thought
to be toxic; and the Species at Risk Act, which endangers
all property owners with legislated theft of our lands.
These are but a few examples of the government's assault on
rural communities, but the list is as endless as a
bureaucrat's quest for meaningful tasks. Leave rural people
and communities alone and we will thrive and survive long
past the cities' demise, just as we have for hundreds of
years, and throughout history.
It is evident
the rural economy is being dismantled, and its people are
under siege, but this is being done by people such as Mr.
Solomon and urban bureaucrats who legislate misplaced |
|
urban
standards and regulations upon rural residents and their
businesses.
Metropolitan legislation intended to protect urban dwellers
from the dangerous effects of an intensive and dense living
environment has no place or purpose in the wide-open and
clean countryside.
The consequence of urban legislation on rural communities is
hardships and a dying culture and heritage.
Clearly, the same consequence would befall urban communities if
rural living standards were allowed in densely populated cities.
To suggest that rural residents and communities cannot sustain
themselves and require the guidance and support of the cities is
to have a complete lack of knowledge or understanding of rural
people and our lifestyle. It is a clear contradiction of
reality: It is the densely populated cities that need rural
people and their communities, in order to protect Canada's
environment, food supply, culture and heritage of democracy.
Government academics are building fences that divide rural and
urban, causing each to look upon the other with disdain, but
rural people know who will climb to the other side first.
The only question is will we in the rural areas let them in and
allow them to escape the culture of socialism that entraps them?
Or will we create a new rural province first, in order to
protect our rural heritage, culture, property and democracy --
and separate ourselves from the dangers of academic minds empty
of reality and filled with ignorance.
Randy Hillier, president, Lanark Landowners Association, RR2
Carleton Place, Ont.
|
|
Terrence MacLaurin
Financial Post
Monday, May 03, 2004
Rural Phase
Out suggests that financial support to rural areas in Ontario be
phased out because "most of rural Canada cannot sustain itself."
The comment
goes on to applaud the government of Ontario's Panel on the Role
of Government, saying its report has spoken with rare courage
and clarity.
To add to
the panel's courageous suggestions, perhaps the government
should examine a few other unsustainable programs. Welfare,
subsidized housing, breakfast programs in schools and drug
needle programs should be phased out. Employment Insurance only
encourages workers to take government-funded holidays and should
be abolished. Arts and culture programs, libraries, museums and
publicly funded recreational centres should be 100% privately
funded. The government cannot afford to support public
entertainment.
All irony aside, we don't have to
look far to find programs that heavily burden the taxpayer. Some
|
|
tax-supported
programs or services should be eliminated immediately,
namely the Ontario government's Panel on the Role of
Government.
This panel
has conveniently overlooked the high cost of supporting the
infrastructure of high-density urban areas and has focused on
the lightly populated rural areas with fewer votes.
The motive
for this report is transparent and serves only to alienate urban
and rural dwellers and further the government's attack on rural
residents. The government of Ontario is waging a war against the
rural lifestyle through studies such as this, onerous
environmental regulations and complete disregard for property
rights.
We will not
back down from the attack and will not surrender our rights. We
pay taxes, as do all other citizens, and demand the services and
respect normally expected by other residents. What we really
need is to phase out the government of Ontario.
Terrence MacLaurin, Woodlawn, Ont.
|
|
The rural burden
|
Frances Thurlow
Financial Post
Monday, May 10, 2004
Re:
Lawrence Solomon's Rural Phase-Out, April 21.
Slowly
and methodically over the past years, rural communities
have had their post offices, schools and churches (all
community establishments) closed. The latest affront has
been the forced amalgamation of our townships. It now
appears the Ontario government's Panel on the Role of
Government is recommending relocation of communities.
Rural
areas are burdened with regulation heaped on regulation.
They are harangued by every conceivable government
ministry. They are tired of being the fall guys for major
pollution problems, which are actually traced to heavily
populated urban areas -- e.g., regular urban sewage spills
that are polluting our rivers lakes and streams.
Infrastructure in urban areas is so old and fragile it is
unable to contain the vast amounts of waste coming from
heavily populated areas. Urban centres seem to be allowed
to continue on their regular pollution kick without too
much government intervention. If that were to happen in a
rural area, the |
|
authorities would sit on our doorstep and impose stiff
penalties or even incarceration. As for polluted air, just
step out in the city and take a deep breath.
The
panel suggests rural communities are not worthy to receive
funds for assistance. Let me assure them, urbanites are
just as quick to sidle up to the trough as rural folk.
Listen to the news, read the papers. Who cries for
financial assistance any more than city politicians? As
for giving support to rural communities, Mr. Solomon, our
hard-earned tax dollars are just as valuable as urban
money. We deserve good roads, education and health care as
much as any citizen of this province.
Farmers
are the lifeblood of the nation. The slogan "If you ate
today, thank a farmer" should be emblazoned in every home.
Dedicated farmers work their soil, tend their animals and
harvest their crops so the likes of columnist Solomon and
other Ontarians will have food on their tables.
Frances
Thurlow, secretary,
Frontenac Landowners, Godfrey, Ont.
|
|
Two-Billion-Dollar,
Botched Gun Registry Topic:
Related - OTTAWA CITIZEN...
|
|
LETTERS
TO THE EDITOR...
|
Liberals out of touch on gun registry
|
The
Ottawa Citizen
May 4, 2004
Re:
Voluntary gun registry idea irks MPs, April 30.
MP Marlene Jennings's comment summed up nicely how out of
touch she and the Liberal party are with the mood of most
Canadians. Responding to a proposal for a voluntary
firearms registration, Ms. Jennings said, "The
overwhelming majority in every single province want
compulsory gun registration."
It's obvious Ms. Jennings has no grasp of what the term
"overwhelming majority" means.
Since December 2002, four separate polls (two by Ipsos-Reid
and two by JMCK Communications) have shown national
support for the gun registry ranging from 37 per cent to
43 per cent. |
|
In January, an Ipsos-Reid-Globe and Mail-CTV survey
that asked "Is it time to scrap the Canadian gun
registry?" garnered nearly 27,000 responses, 71 per cent
of which said "yes."
Just as surreal was Ms.
Jennings comment that "the gun registry ... is vital for
police to track illegal firearms that are used in crime."
This statement ignores the obvious fact that illegal
firearms aren't included in the registry.
The firearms registry is the poster issue for Liberal
waste and corruption that a real "overwhelming majority"
of Canadians is fed up with. It's unfortunate that Ms.
Jennings and her Liberal colleagues are too busy living in
their fantasy world to realize it.
Gerry Gamble,
St. Catharines |
© The
Ottawa Citizen 2004
Right to protection
|
The
Ottawa Citizen
May 4, 2004
I
find it hard to believe that some people, especially some
women, still advocate this worthless, ineffective firearms
registry that has cost taxpayers almost $2 billion. I am a
law-abiding taxpaying family woman who believes that God
gave me life and only God will have the right to take it.
Therefore I choose never to be a victim.
To me, victimization is a myth; you make your own
destiny. If someone chooses to try to harm me, I have the
right under natural law to preserve and defend myself and
my family. No one, not even the government of Canada or
misguided lobbyists, can ever take that away. |
|
I don't understand why some women are allowing the
government to coddle criminals while leaving themselves
and their families unprotected. Why do criminals have more
rights than law-abiding citizens?
It's time to scrap the firearms registry and put the
money into something that will help: a registry for
criminals.
Tracey Kleim,
Moose Jaw, Sask.,
Canadian director,
Women against Gun Control |
|
© The
Ottawa Citizen 2004
|
Absurd waste
|
The
Ottawa Citizen
May 4, 2004
Given that the majority of gun-related homicides and
crimes in Canada are committed by career criminals using
unregistered handguns, it seems absurd that the federal
government has wasted nearly $2 billion on the
gun-registry program that targets rural duck hunters and
their long guns.
Rather than reeling out the same old diatribe, it's
time the Liberals scrapped the registry and |
|
diverted the hundreds of millions of dollars that will be
needed to run it each year into programs that have a
proven track record of saving lives, such as putting more
police on the streets and providing more money for health
care.
Chris Rumbold,
Vancouver |
|
© The
Ottawa Citizen 2004 |
| |
|
The OTTAWA CITIZEN
- May 3, 2004 - Kelly Egan - Commentary: |
Re: Who
can afford 'clean' water? May 3 - by Kelly Egan
...on the new "Safe Drinking Water Act" of Ontario:
Link to
Article
Related - OTTAWA CITIZEN...
|
|
LETTERS
TO THE EDITOR...
|
Rural folk need urban help
|
The Ottawa Citizen
Thursday, May 06, 2004
Re: Who
can afford 'clean' water? May 3.
Columnist
Kelly Egan likened Ontario's clean-water legislation enacted
in 2002 to taking a hammer to a flea. At a meeting a few weeks
ago, I likened it to a cannon against a mosquito -- either
analogy works to describe the situation.
This is
not to say that clean water is not a major issue and the
Walkerton tragedy is to be taken lightly or readily forgotten,
but enough has to be enough. The law's requirements could
bankrupt many in rural Ontario, forcing the
closing of churches, community centres,
corner
|
|
stores, tent and trailer parks, motels, resorts, and
eco-tourism providers.
The most
disturbing part of this issue has been the lack of coverage
and solidarity. This is front-page news and should not to be
buried in the city section. We rural folk need the support of
our urban partners in Ontario. Maybe by raising the visibility
of this issue we can rally around it together. We, in rural
communities, are all trying to catch the same tail -- if we
could get together, maybe we can catch the dog.
Rev. Lynn
Watson,
Carleton Place,
Boyd's-Franktown pastoral charge,
United
Church of Canada
|
|
|
© The
Ottawa Citizen 2004
|
|
The OTTAWA CITIZEN
- May 18, 2004 - Randall Denley: |
Re:
Mayor belongs on hydro hot seat:
Link to
Article
Related - OTTAWA CITIZEN...
LETTERS
TO THE EDITOR...
Hydro sets dismal example
The
Ottawa Citizen
May 25,
2004
Re:
Mayor belongs on hydro hot seat, May 18.
|
|
|
|
It is shocking to learn that Mayor Bob Chiarelli
and his cohorts run a public utility with
virtually no governance and based on the facts
known, appear to be engaged in unethical
activities. This is unacceptable.
|
|
|
|
|
Congratulation to the Citizen, especially columnist Randall
Denley and reporters Ken Gray and James Gordon, who have
obviously done a lot of investigation and produced excellent
articles on the Hydro Ottawa fiasco.
In the last few years, shareholders of many corporations have
not been properly served by unscrupulous corporate executives
or directors. In many cases, this result was facilitated by
poor, or nonexistent, corporate governance.
It is shocking to learn that Mayor Bob Chiarelli and his
cohorts run a public utility with virtually no governance and
based on the facts known, appear to be engaged in unethical
activities. This is unacceptable.
Perhaps it's
also time to do an assessment of Telecom Ottawa, the secretive
and wholly owned Hydro Ottawa communications subsidiary. We
might discover that we are getting a good bang for our buck,
or we might unearth another fiasco.
Rene
Trumpler,
Gloucester
© The Ottawa Citizen 2004
Letter to
Environment Minister,
regarding water Regs-170/03.
Letter
to Env. Minister argues that Regs: 170/03 would do more harm
than good
| |
|
The OTTAWA CITIZEN
- July 27, 2004 - EDITORIAL |
We are one city
Amalgamation hasn't caused the City of Ottawa's budget
problems...
|
Related Ottawa Citizen... |
|
Letters
to the Editor
|
Yes, we are one city -- a very unhappy one
The Ottawa Citizen
Wednesday, August 04, 2004
Re: We are one city, July 27.
As your editorial notes, we are indeed one city -- one very
unhappy city! Amalgamation was supposed to save us money. It
has failed to do so. Our taxes are rising but our services are
declining.
It is not only the "rurals" who are complaining. Comments
sent in to our rural council website (www.ruralcouncil.ca)
indicate that our urban and suburban neighbours are unhappy,
too. In fact, I don't believe there is a community anywhere in
Ottawa that has benefited from amalgamation.
Ottawans aren't alone in their misery, however. From
Sudbury to Hamilton, throughout Ontario the people are unhappy
with their new, unmanageable municipal structures. Michael
Prue, the MPP for East York, told the audience at the Ontario
Local Democracy Conference in May that the amalgamation of
Toronto was still the topic that most people wanted to talk
about at their doors during the last provincial election
campaign. They felt it wasn't working. A recent poll by a TV
station in Sudbury covering all six former cities amalgamated
into the City of Greater Sudbury showed that 93 per cent of
the respondents were in favour of de-amalgamation there.
The editorial suggested that our online survey samples
"only people who visit our website." However, on July 28
alone, the site, which is not restricted to members, received
more than 1,000 hits. That's a lot of interest shown in just
one day.
Adele Muldoon,
Ottawa,
Director, Rural Council
© The Ottawa Citizen 2004
Democratic deficit
The Ottawa Citizen
August 4, 2004
Your editorial is correct: "Amalgamation hasn't caused the
City of Ottawa's budget problems."
What amalgamation has done is take away rural residents'
democratic right to have any meaningful influence in stemming
the political and bureaucratic excesses that are the real
cause of the budget problems.
A worsened "democratic deficit" is the true legacy of
amalgamation for rural residents. The regional-government
governance model we had before was far more responsive to all
of its component parts. That is why, as wasteful as the region
was with our tax dollars at times, it was far less wasteful
than the abomination we have now.
If de-amalgamation is not the ultimate way this will be
solved, then there will have to be a brand new deal struck,
similar to the former model, where rural representation is
brought back to where it was before ... both within each
community and at the council table.
Richard Bendall,
Goulbourn
© The Ottawa Citizen 2004
|
Sent to the Rural
Council MAILBOX:
|
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 2004 12:07:29
-0400 |
| From: |
Bruce Webster <bruce_webster@sympatico.ca> |
| To: |
contact@ruralcouncil.ca |
| Cc: |
Glenn Brooks <Glenn.Brooks@Ottawa.ca>,
Doug Thompson <doug.thompson@ottawa.ca>,
Rob Jellett <rob.jellett@ottawa.ca>,
Peter Hume <Peter.Hume@Ottawa.ca>,
Clive Doucet <Clive.Doucet@Ottawa.ca>,
Shawn Little <Shawn.Little@Ottawa.ca>,
Diane Holmes <diane.holmes@ottawa.ca>,
Jacques Legendre <Jacques.Legendre@Ottawa.ca>,
Georges Bedard <georges.bedard@ottawa.ca>,
Michel Bellemare <Michel.Bellemare@Ottawa.ca>,
Diane Deans <Diane.Deans@Ottawa.ca>,
Gord Hunter <Gord.Hunter@Ottawa.ca>,
Rick Chiarelli <Rick.Chiarelli@Ottawa.ca>,
Alex Cullen <Alex.Cullen@Ottawa.ca>,
Janet Stavinga <janet.stavinga@ottawa.ca>,
Eli El-Chantiry <eli.el-chantiry@ottawa.ca>,
Peggy Feltmate <peggy.feltmate@ottawa.ca>,
jan Harder <Jan.Harder@Ottawa.ca>,
Rainer Bloess <Rainer.Bloess@Ottawa.ca>,
Herb Kreling <herb.kreling@ottawa.ca> |
| Subject: |
Continued
Rural Inequalities |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sirs:
I
attended a meeting in Richmond last night (Aug 4). It
was convened and hosted by The Lanark Landowners
Association, a group of people who have Rural Issues
and support of the Rural Populace as a prime concern.
Two items of significance were brought to my
attention. They are:
1) The complete lack of noxious
and poisonous weed control by a major property
owner
...namely The City of Ottawa
2) The callous disregard for PUBLIC safety by
Taggart construction, while building the
sewer
forcemain between Richmond and Munster.
I believe these issues are a violation of
Provincial Statute, and in the first instance, the
city should be held accountable for its abysmal
stewardship and not be allowed this 'DOUBLE STANDARD "
when dealing with rural situations. Farm crops are
being ruined by the allowed proliferation of invasive,
noxious,
weeds from the road verges and the city must recognize
this fact and make amends.
As to the second item: If this construction
were taking place within the urban area, the contractor
would NOT DARE to have unfenced pits of such depth
half filled with water. These are an open invitation
to a child`s death or other mishap, but the contractor
-when approached on the subject- replied that those were
not of his concern, only the active site on which he
was working was of interest to him. DOES THIS MEAN A
RURAL LIFE IS WORTH LESS than the life of one who lives on Lisgar
St. or Holmwood?
The Ministry of Labour does not seem
to think so, yet a city official (also on site) had no
interest.
If the city has its way, most of the people
along the sewer route will die of pollution by way of
sewage influx into the aquifer, so why should this
continued attitude surprise anyone?
Bruce Webster,
a 35-year resident of Rural Richmond who sees no gain for the Rural component of
Ottawa ...only loss..
|
|
|
Sent to the Rural
Council MAILBOX: |
Nepean resident finds Website:
"like a breath of fresh air"
To Concerned Citizens:
Reading your Web Site was like a breath of fresh air. I think the rurals have every reason to
be upset, and those of us who are not in the rural area are also upset. I live in Nepean having
moved here in 1962. Before amalgamation we were debt free and had reasonable taxation.
Now it's the other way around! I forget the name of a former mayor in the east who said
after amalgamation it was costing something like $160 million more than the sum total of the
previous 12 municipalities combined per year. In theory amalgamation should save money
but I have yet to hear of one that has. I hear that already the city is expecting a shortfall
of about $40 million next year unless we have more services cut.
I would suggest advertising your Web Site even more so that those of us who don't live in the
country can add our voices to yours. Keep up the good work.
Sincerely.
Jim Rennie
Nepean
|
|
The OTTAWA CITIZEN
- August 22, 2004 --- LETTERS TO THE EDITOR |
| |
Boat bypass
fails on finances
and environment
|
Re:
Committee delays decision on Fitzroy Harbour boat bypass, Aug.
18.
Councillor Rob Jellett tried unsuccessfully at the City of
Ottawa's corporate services committee meeting on Tuesday
to delay the Chats Falls Boat Bypass project.
The
motion that was subsequently passed simply passes the buck
to another level of government. The city voted to accept
the staff report that recommends that a 150-metre rock
barrier or berm (almost as long as two football fields) be
built out into the Ottawa River at Willola Beach to serve
as the downstream terminal for the bypass. The city will
strongly encourage the upper levels of government to
conduct an environmental assessment.
Staff
made it clear that if the other levels of government do
not order an assessment, the project will go ahead.
Councillor Rainer Bloess pointed out that he couldn't even
have a calming bump built in his ward without an
environmental assessment. He supported the Jellett motion
that the city has a responsibility to insist on a review
for a project of this size on public property.
As a
taxpayer, I want to know which level is taking
responsibility for overseeing the undertaking. Who is
holding the company behind the plan accountable and
examining the books? Millions of taxpayers' dollars are
flowing into the Ottawa River Project. The lack of
substantial financial information was a glaring deficiency
in the developer's presentation.
I was
outraged when several former politicians dismissed the
protest by the Willola Beach Property Owners Association
as a NIMBY (not-in-my-back-yard) protest. When the city is
prepared to allow a project of this magnitude to go ahead
without ensuring that an environmental assessment is going
to be done, all Ottawa citizens are affected. The Ottawa
Riverkeepers, the Sierra Club and Greenspace Alliance and
the Rural Council supported the position of the Willola
Beach residents.
Evidence was presented to show that Hydro One has a
contractual obligation to see that boats that want to get
around the dam do so and that a private company working on
the Quebec side provides a bypass service there. Are city
taxpayers, who have had to sit back and see their services
cut in many areas and who face another tax increase this
year, prepared to allow the city to spend more than
$350,000 on this questionable project?
Adele Muldoon,
Dunrobin
|
|
Biological diversity
The
proposed boat bypass around the Chats Falls Dam has raised
numerous questions with local residents, river stewards
and City of Ottawa taxpayers.
Former Ottawa councillor Dwight Eastman is pulling the
wool over our eyes when he refers to the opposition to
this project as NIMBYism. True, there is a strong
contingent of local residents who oppose the project and
do not want to see a 150-metre rock pier built into the
river where their children swim, canoe and fish. But if
local residents are not looking out for the health of the
river, who is?
The
remarkable riverine vegetation found in abundance at the
Willola Beach Road access point (the proposed site for the
development) represents a vegetation type never before
reported in the Ottawa Valley and contains both
provincially significant and regionally significant flora.
This
area is biologically rich and diverse. If we want to
maintain a healthy, biologically diverse Ottawa River we
must begin to protect our shorelines. Otherwise, Ottawa
residents will be forced to travel upstream to Petawawa
and Timiskaming to experience biodiversity and beauty on
the Ottawa River.
We
have these ecologically rich areas in our own backyard --
let's do everything possible to protect them.
Meredith Brown,
Ottawa,
Ottawa
Riverkeeper
Waste of money
The
boat-bypass project has only been excluded from an
environmental assessment because of a loophole in
municipal and provincial regulations. But even if an
assessment is done, that will not address the fact that
this project is a waste of taxpayer money.
The
project supporters claim that when complete the bypass
will attract between 500 and 1,000 boaters a year but, in
fact, similar operations upstream of Ottawa (Rapides des
Joachims, Chapeau, Desjardinville, Bryson, and Portage-du-Fort)
are struggling to stay afloat. Upstream communities such
as Deep River, Petawawa, Arnprior and Renfrew County have
withdrawn support for the operation as the economic
benefits have proven negligible.
The
City of Ottawa has committed $350,000 to the project in
hopes that new boat tourist traffic will appear. This
money would be better spent promoting Ottawa as a
destination on the long established and successful Rideau
Waterway.
Sean
Stuart,
Arnprior |
|
|
© The
Ottawa Citizen 2004
| |
|
The Toronto Star
- August 25, 2004 --- LETTERS TO THE EDITOR |
| |
What citizens want is important
Return power to the people
Letter,
Aug. 24.
Current
provincial and federal governments need to quickly accept
the fact that democracy needs to be returned to the
people. Leaders who elect to ignore this loudly spoken
"back to the people" requirement, clearly do so at their
own political peril.
In a
true democracy, it is not what government wants that is
important; it is what the citizens want that is. Today's
political leaders need to clearly understand this basic
aspect of democracy and to once and for all, stop
pretending they know what is best for us.
It is
we who know.
Bob
Beyette,
Campbellville, Ont.
September 24, 2004
Re "Rurals
press the issue," (Sept. 19): Great story by Derek
Puddicombe. Timing is everything and I believe the timing
of the Free Press Advocate is perfect in order to address
the municipal and provincial issues that plague urban and
rural residents alike. We are being overrun by costly
amalgamations that nobody wanted, bureaucracies that are
out of control and we have hitherto lacked the press
scrutiny required to stay on the tails of so many inept
and lying politicians.
I was intrigued to hear that the FPA
editor feels that, "This is not just an issue in the small
towns or the countryside." It involves everybody. Kudos to
Derek Puddicombe, and to the Ottawa Sun for doing the
story and bravo to the Free Press Advocate for creating a
newspaper for "democratic advocacy." Their motto has
become: "Ontario -- Yours to Recover!"
Richard Bendall
Ottawa
(We wish them well
-[SUN Editor])
|
|
|
The Ottawa Sun - LETTERS TO THE EDITOR |
| |
(Amalgamation to create efficiencies?)
With regard to yet another property tax
increase, I am completely confused. Amalgamation was
supposed to decrease duplication and offer us the same
services for less cost as a result of new efficiencies
brought about by amalgamation.
Why is it that, prior to amalgamation,
the separate cities of Kanata, Nepean and Gloucester were
able to provide top-notch services without significant tax
hikes every year? Why is it that the amalgamated City of
Ottawa has allowed Kanata (I cannot speak for the other
former cities) to suffer from reduced public maintenance
(check out the long grass and weed-infested boulevards),
while raising our taxes each year on top of the
out-of-line property evaluations which bear little or no
resemblance to actual sale prices?
We had a $20-million shortfall this year
and a corresponding rate hike. Our new deficit is in
excess of $50 million. It would appear that our city is
grossly mismanaged. Perhaps we should be restored to our
pre-amalgamation state.
Richard Lane
Kanata
(We're still waiting for those
promised efficiencies -[SUN
Editor])
Sent to the Rural
Council MAILBOX:
October 5, 2004
Urban agenda is out of
step with past
suburban and rural governance successes
Amalgamation has only created greater
inefficiencies
I have reviewed your site
and for the most part am in complete agreement with the
views that you are expressing. I used to live in Dunrobin
but have since located to Marchvale (rural Kanata) in
order to reduce commuting times for my wife.
I believe that it is foolish
to implement one governance structure for an area as
diverse and large as the current City of Ottawa.
Furthermore people live in rural areas because they
cherish the autonomy that comes with such a decision. The
city does not seem to understand this and is really
focused on the imposition of an urban agenda for all of
us, with all the associated baggage.
I love it when they talk
about tax hikes and the reasonableness of an additional
3–6%. I am currently paying $5500 per year on a nice but
not overtly extravagant home so these kinds of increases
have a real impact to my family’s finances as opposed to
the 70 dollar per home increase that was touted in the
last budget debacle.
I will close now but for the
record, I just returned from a visit to my sister-in-law
in Georgetown. She and her husband live in a beautiful
subdivision in a home currently valued between $410,000
and $430,000. Their property taxes are $3200 annually and
their township is impeccable.
Shame on you Mr.
Chiarelli !!
Keep up the good work.
Regards
Joe Vermette
Kanata
| |
|
|
The Ottawa Citizen - LETTERS TO THE
EDITOR
Council must seize power
The Ottawa
Citizen
Tuesday,
October 19, 2004
Re: Staff urges more council
secrecy. Oct. 15.
Citizens elect councillors to
make informed, considered and at times courageous
decisions. That can't happen when they don't have
reports early enough, yet still allow themselves
to vote. They do have the power to amend the
agenda, giving them final control over whether
items linked to late reports are reviewed at that
meeting or a future one.
My expectation is that most
citizens would rather an item not be voted on if
councillors, and the public, haven't reviewed the
report, rather than having another uninformed vote
contributing to the flip-flops this council is
noted for.
As we head into budget season,
we all should be thinking about the relationship
between expected performance and cost. If there's
a disconnect, as there is when reports are not
available in time for considered decisions and
city business is slowed, we need to look at the
cause and ensure it is rectified. If necessary,
council should use its existing right to review
personnel matters in camera to hold staff and
departments accountable.
It's time council stood up for
minimum performance standards, like reports being
publicly available seven days ahead of meetings
and most meetings remaining open.
Peter Childs,
Ottawa
© The Ottawa Citizen 2004
City secrecy shows disdain for taxpayers
The Ottawa Citizen
Wednesday,
October 20, 2004
Re: Do business in open, council
told, Oct. 16 and Staff urges more council
secrecy, Oct. 15.
Just when taxpayers were giving
increased scrutiny to city abuses of the public
trust, what do the mayor and staff try to do? You
guessed it: hide behind closed doors. This is one
more example of our how some of our public
officials discharge their obligation to serve the
public interest.
Since we lack the safeguards of
impeachment legislation or provision for
"recall,'' which some other jurisdictions can
employ, it is critically important that, come
election time, we remember such displays of public
disrespect by our elected officials. That will be
our very last opportunity to finally remove from
office those who have been consistently
dismantling, or circumventing, every remaining
vestige of our feeble -- post-amalgamation --
democracy. Be heard in 2006 ... or forever hold
your silence!
Richard Bendall,
Ottawa
© The Ottawa Citizen 2004
Outrage is justified
The Ottawa Citizen
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
What in the world is going on at
City Hall? First, city council calls for the
Ontario Municipal Board to be disbanded because it
is too restrictive (allowing pig farms the
councillors don't want, perhaps). Now, the city
staff are seeking what may be total secrecy from
those who pay their salaries and fund all city
services by way of taxes.
We should be outraged! What are
they trying to hide -- besides a budget totally
out of sync with the public's wishes? Is the
mismanagement so bad that these people are trying
to hide behind smoke and mirrors?
Bruce Webster,
Richmond
© The Ottawa Citizen 2004
Rural request ignored
Re: Rural residents unreasonable
about wards, May 6.
In setting up the framework for the 2005
ward boundary review, city council agreed that the
overriding principle would be effective representation.
This was the principal lesson from the
Ontario Municipal Board appeal launched by the rural wards
against the 2002 boundary changes. It seems this was a
lesson that was not learned.
While many of the rural residents at the
public consultations supported the consultants' option of
adding two to five councillors to balance the large
populations in the suburban wards, we asked that the rural
wards not be reduced in number. We were willing to pay for
the increased number of suburban councillors if our wards
remained rural and did not decrease in number. Sadly, the
review became a revision based on population numbers, not
on effective representation, so our voice is reduced.
Yes, the urban centres enjoy many
economic, social and cultural opportunities subsidized by
taxpayers' money. I invite letter-writer Adam Bentley to
come out to the rural wards and experience caring,
connected and vibrant communities, thanks in large part to
the dedication and hard work of our many volunteers, where
theatre, the arts and sports are
de rigueur, where helping your friends
and neighbours in good times and bad is the custom and,
incidentally, where many of us live and work.
Mr. Bentley says amalgamation means that
the rural areas can get urban services but fails to give
examples of what urban services we might want out in the
rural areas.
Amalgamation has meant fewer services
and many hours of wasted time spent travelling downtown to
speak at public consultations and committee meetings to
try to explain our views on such issues as ward boundaries
and one-size-fits-all bylaws.
We don't presume to know what's best for
the urban areas. I don't know why some urbanites think
they know what is best for the rural residents.
Shirley J. Dolan,
Woodlawn
© The
Ottawa Citizen 2005
The Ottawa Citizen - LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
|
|
|
The Ottawa Citizen
Saturday,
May 14, 2005 |
Re: Rural residents unreasonable
about wards, May 6.
Letter-writer Adam Bentley says that he
supports amalgamation because it means that rural areas
can get urban services. Just the opposite is happening.
The few municipal services that we had
are being reduced: road maintenance, snow clearing,
garbage pickup and client services.
The city's Official Plan states that
water and sewage services will not be extended beyond the
rural and urban boundary. Rural residents have made it
quite clear that they do not want OC Transpo service
because it cannot meet our needs in a cost-efficient way.
We also want nothing to do with the problems of Hydro
Ottawa.
Rural Ottawans have faced more changes
due to amalgamation than any other area of the city. We
have gone from being masters of our own destiny to being
subjects of uncaring rulers.
Some councillors argue that they do not
want to add more councillors because of the cost involved.
There are other ways that council could save money,
including looking for a less expensive way of setting up
the new councillor's offices and phasing in councillor's
salary increases instead of taking a 25-per-cent increase
all at once.
The one area where this council has
shown a strong desire to save money is in the area of
providing citizens with effective representation, which is
a democratic right. Keeping the number of councillors down
has the effect of increasing their own power.
In the end, the decision belongs to
council. Will it continue to use the divide-and-conquer
approach or is it ready to try conciliation?
I hope that council looks at what is
best for the city as a whole. If Ottawa is to become a
strong, united city, it is absolutely imperative that all
areas have effective representation at City Hall.
In his column ("Worn down by ward
baloney," May 5), Randall Denley showed surprising insight
and an understanding of the rural issue with the proposed
ward boundary changes. I appreciate Mr. Denley pointing
out that the "it's-too-late" argument is a bunch of
self-serving baloney.
Adele Muldoon,
Dunrobin,
Director, Rural Council
© The Ottawa Citizen 2005
The Ottawa Citizen - LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
Urbanite interference
The Ottawa Citizen
May 31, 2005
Re: Farmers, city hall clash over selling roadside
produce:, May 27.
Once again the urbanites of City Hall are trying to
tell the people in rural communities how to live.
The only reasonable concern about roadside produce
stands is safety: They should be located in places where
there is room for passing motorists to stop without
obstructing or endangering other road users. Apart from
that, those offering their own produce for direct sale
at the roadside should be allowed to do so, as many have
done for years, offering the consumer a fresher product,
often at a better price than that in the supermarkets.
For many, the roadside produce stand is also a
significant portion of their income, and to disrupt it
could cause real financial harm.
Clive Horne,
Cumberland
© The Ottawa Citizen 2005
Ban farming altogether
The Ottawa Citizen
June
01, 2005
Re: Farmers, city hall clash over
selling roadside produce, May 27.
For the humourless city officials,
the ban on farmers selling produce at roadside stands
probably doesn't go nearly far enough. It would
probably take a ban on farming anywhere in the city to
make them smile.
Why make bylaw officers drive all
over the expanse of Ottawa to nab these naughty
farmers, when we could just make the practice illegal
and be done with it?
Like most people, I want my produce
in the supermarket -- fresh from the United States.
These farmers are a small fraction of the city
population and are causing such a hassle. Who needs
it?
Alan Viau,
Kanata
© The Ottawa Citizen 2005
Rural Goulbourn residents are
being robbed
May 3, 2005
The Stittsville News
Dear editor:
Rural Goulbourn residents are being
robbed of $1.5 million and no charges are expected to be
laid.
I was
very disheartened while attending the recent meeting at
the former Goulbourn municipal building.
To see the Ontario Ministry
of Natural Resources attempt to rezone almost 650 acres
from general rural to wetlands with very little input
from the people who own that land is what I call
criminal.
City of Ottawa and MNR staff
told those present that their land will be rezoned and
that there is very little that they can do about it.
People were told that even
after hiring someone from MNR’s list of qualified
biologists to reassess their property, the MNR may still
not accept the results.
People were also told that
they could appeal to Ontario Municipal Board. However,
my experience with the OMB is that if you are going to
show up there, you had better have a lawyer, an engineer
and a biologist at a cost of thousands.
What I find not fair about
the process is that if I wanted to rezone some land, I
would have to post it, have the public meetings and
provide an opportunity for people to object to it. When
the government wants to rezone people’s private
property, it just seems to do it and not care.
So, average, everyday
taxpaying rural residents from Goulbourn will be seeing
their rural land go from a value of around $2,500 per
acre to about $200 per acre as wetlands, with no
consideration or compensation or even an apology.
Ontario Premier Dalton
McGuinty should take some responsibility and get the MNR
under control and stop abusing rural landowners.
Steven Lewis
Ashton
The Ottawa Citizen - LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
Carp market
shows that local farmers can grow produce
The Ottawa
Citizen
Sunday, June 26, 2005
Re: The Byward Market secret, June
18 and Ottawa's homegrown markets, June 19.
John Andrew of Queen's University
School of Urban Studies is writing off very
successful Eastern Ontario producers when he says
that "people in Ottawa, everybody, would like to see
local farmers showing up on a Saturday morning
selling their own produce that's just come out of
the field. But the economy may not support those
kind of retail operations."
Mr. Andrews must never have
visited Carp on a Saturday morning.
| |
| |
Carp is the largest
producer-based market in Ontario.
|
|
|
|
|
The Carp Farmers' Market vendors
have seen steady growth over the last decade -- Carp
is the largest producer-based market in Ontario.
What this means is that all of its
products are either grown or made by its vendors.
What it represents, even showcases, is that given an
equal playing field, farmers can produce a lot more
of the food for this region.
The same cannot be said about the
situation at downtown city-regulated markets in
city-funded facilities. When well-meaning
bureaucrats decide to become involved, markets
inevitably run into problems.
| |
| |
If the city is serious about
increasing the number of local producers, it should
start by abandoning its plan to impose licence fees
on the market food-court vendors in all
the various communities including Carp.
...City
officials and their bureacratic red tape will surely make it more
difficult for markets like Carp's to remain in
business.
|
|
|
|
|
If the city is serious about
increasing the number of local producers, it should
start by abandoning its plan to impose licence fees
on the market food-court vendors in all the various
communities including Carp. The fees will place in
jeopardy the viability of many small businesses and
entire producer-based markets.
Health department regulations are
also a troubling issue for vendors. The current
system of serving food at the markets has been run
very well without health problems in the past, so
why does the city need to insist on running hot and
cold water for each food court?
Expansion of local food production
through viable farmers markets will improve the
health of the general public. City officials and
their bureacratic red tape will surely make it more
difficult for markets like Carp's to remain in
business.
Grant Dobson,
Cobden,
Connaught Nursery
© The Ottawa Citizen 2005
The Stittsville News - LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
►
July 19 -
2005
650 acres of land are dry forest, not wetland
The Ottawa Citizen - LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
In Harris's
footsteps
The Ottawa Citizen
August 7, 2005
Your article states that "Ontario
Premier Dalton McGuinty promised that Ottawa won't
de-amalgamate on his watch." I must admit to being
surprised at Mr. McGuinty's stance and can only
conclude that he has more admiration for former
premier Mike Harris than he led us to believe. If he
so strongly supports the changes the former premier
made to the structure of our cities, he must feel
that Mr. Harris made the right decisions.
Was it because of all the money
the larger, amalgamated cities of Toronto and Ottawa
were supposed to save, or the taxes that the
residents were suppose to have seen reduced?
Perhaps Mr. McGuinty can take a
minute out of his busy schedule to clarify his
stance. I'm sure voters, especially those in rural
ridings, would love to hear why he believes
amalgamation was a good decision.
Jane Campbell,
Richmond
© The Ottawa Citizen
2005
The Ottawa Citizen - LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
Farmers want farm-gate rules at
organized markets
The Ottawa Citizen
October
30, 2005
Re: Farmers' markets must
follow health rules, OCT. 24.
The issue is simple. I can no
longer buy my fresh eggs from Pearl at the Perth
Farmers' Market. I bought her eggs because it was
from her that I first tasted "fresh eggs," which
are spectacularly different in taste and texture
from the eggs I buy at the big-box stores. She
raises endangered species of various fowl and has
traditionally sold the eggs produced at the Perth
market.
She has educational displays for
the delight of the smaller customers who may never
have seen where eggs come from. These birds are
free range, not factory birds. You needed to get
there early since her very limited supply would
disappear quickly. Now, since her eggs are "ungraded,"
it is illegal for her to sell at the market.
| |
| |
If health were really
the issue, I shouldn't be able to buy
them under any circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
Officials all the way up to the
federal minister of agriculture insist that this
is done to protect my health. However, the reality
is that if I hop in my car and drive to Pearl's
farm, I can buy those eggs quite legally there. If
health were really the issue, I shouldn't be able
to buy them under any circumstances.
All that the farmers' markets
across Ontario are trying to do is get "farm-gate
rules" extended to farmers' markets. Instead of
200 or more customers jumping in their cars and
driving all over the county, a couple of dozen
farmers bring their legal produce to a central
location, hence preserving the environment and a
scarce resource.
This will hardly lead to "chaos
in the food industry," as Ian MacDonald Gemmill
asserts in his letter.
I wonder what the agenda really
is? My wonderment increased when the market
received a list of allowed things to sell, that
included pop, candies, gum and other junk food
that no self-respecting farmers' market would even
think of selling.
I trust the farmers at the
market far more than I trust the global
multinationals. At least the farmers are not
distracted with the need to deliver double-digit
return on investments to their shareholders. They
are only concerned with delivering quality farm
goods to willing customers.
It is also useful to note that
any "rules" about healthy food supply ultimately
originated from the people who have been doing
this for a living for centuries -- the local
farmer.
Hugh Chatfield, Nepean
© The Ottawa Citizen 2005
Most recent...
The Ottawa Citizen - LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
Incineration
experts
The Ottawa Citizen
Saturday, March 04, 2006
Re: Snuff out incinerator idea,
councillor says, Feb. 24.
The recent debate over garbage
dumps versus incineration is long overdue, both in
this city and in the province at large. The
knee-jerk reactions against incineration point to an
urgent need for education or this debate get bogged
down in the usual shortsighted "we-can't-afford it"
or NIMBY arguments that typically arise in this city
to derail everything from the Congress Centre
expansion to light-rail transit.
It was good that Ottawa city
officials ("Staff, councillor off to Spain to talk
trash," Feb. 23) went to Spain to see Rod Bryden's
Plasco facility. Now other officials should head for
Europe to take a tour of the other 400
waste-to-energy facilities that are to be found from
Sweden to Spain and from Britain to Hungary. What
they will find is that this is not new technology as
some seem to think, nor is it polluting as others
think.
On May 18, they will be able to
attend the third congress of the Confederation of
European Waste-to-Energy Plants in Vienna where they
will learn about waste-to-energy in European policy
as well as the experience of EU member states in
developing alternatives to landfilling.
The CEWEP website (www.cewep.com)
states that its membership includes "waste-to-energy
plants from across Europe: Austria, Belgium,
Denmark, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary,
Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain,
Sweden and Switzerland." These plants, operated both
by municipalities and by private companies, generate
both electricity and heat depending on local needs
and infrastructure. Denmark alone, a tiny country of
fewer than five and a half million people and
geographically about the same size as Eastern
Ontario, has 31 such facilities treating more than
three million tons of garbage annually.
So yes, this discussion is long
overdue because we can't keep expanding dumps, and
we need to find alternatives to generate energy
instead of burning scarce oil and natural gas.
Ron Whitmore,
Ottawa
The Carp Road Landfill
© The Ottawa Citizen 2006
The Ottawa Citizen - LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
Councillors'
failure
The Ottawa Citizen
Saturday, March 04, 2006
Re: Incineration the solution
for Carp Road landfill: Tory, Feb. 25.
Ottawa councillors have ignored
the important issue of waste management in our city
until the final year of their mandate although they
knew that this landfill site would soon reach its
capacity.
I raised this concern at a city
corporate services committee meeting three years ago
when I addressed the proposal to establish a buffer
zone around hog farms. I pointed out that there was
a greater need for one around the dump because the
smell was worse and there were water-pollution
problems in the area that did not exist on modern
hog farms. I asked if councillors would take this
into account when selecting a new site.
Yet council waited until Waste
Management Canada put forward its proposal for
expansion of the present site without looking into
alternative solutions themselves. Councillors who
are now proposing incineration as a solution should
be prepared to name a suitable site and outline
clearly what it will cost taxpayers and how soon it
can be in operation.
Without a concrete proposal, these
councillors are simply going through the motions of
opposing a project that they know will not be
popular with their constituents.
Ontario Conservative leader John
Tory states that the application process for new or
expanded landfills takes years and that getting
approval for and constructing incineration-powered
plants takes several years. We have less than four
years left until we run out of space at that dump.
Either council members have been
negligent in their duty and simply ignored this
growing crisis or they have known what they were
going to do for a long time and have been waiting
until the last minute to inform the public. If there
is only one proposal before council, how can
citizens be sure that they are getting the best
solution for their tax dollars and their
environment?
Adele Muldoon,
Dunrobin
© The Ottawa Citizen 2006
| |
The Ottawa Sun - LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
Politicians' about-face in
election year
The Ottawa Sun
March 18, 2006
What great coverage the Ottawa
Sun is giving to the Carp Dump mountain and how
nice to read about one councillor who chose to
dissent on the expansion request in 2001.
Jacques Legendre and Eli El-Chantiry
seem to be the type of councillors Ottawa is
sadly lacking. We need representatives who have
the concerns of the city and residents as their
focus with some foresight. Not the type who vote
for a motion then wonder what they voted for and
find they need to do an about-face in election
years.
If all our representatives
acted in a concerned and inquiring fashion, we
would not have this garbage mountain but would
reuse and recycle more and might even be in the
21st century rather than the dark ages of
garbage "disposal." Who knows, we could even be
using our time more productively considering an
improvement to the east-west transit chaos!
Bruce Webster
Chair, Rural Council of Ottawa
Carleton
(Sun Editorial Comment: "You crazy dreamer, you")
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|