HomeMy WebLinkAboutClinton News Record, 2014-04-30, Page 5Wednesday, April 30, 2014 • News Record 5
www.clintonnewsrecord.com
letters to the editor
Reader weighs in on
deamalgamation issue
Dear editor,
As someone whose parents immigrated here
more than 60 years ago, as someone who was
born in Goderich Township and have lived
nowhere else my whole life, literally grew from
the produce of it soils and gardens, who during
my teen years discovered all of its roads and side
roads, got to know them even in the dark! I have
tilled its soils and walked miles of its rivers, dark-
ened
arkened in its sun and trudged its snow banks.
I now have five children doing the same and
attending its schools. I have seen some of my
closest relatives, dear pets and prized livestock
returned to its soils. So when Mr.McHale talks
about "the People of Goderich Township," he is
talking about me. When he says we don't want
outsiders telling us what to do I am in complete
agreement and therefore must point out that in
this discussion I am a resident and one of the
people, he and Ms. Moyer are not!
Sure politicians make promises every election
Mr. McHale! But they never come flying in my
lane asking me to put down my mark right then
and there and tell me who else did too. After poli-
ticians are done making their promises we are
allowed time to consider and given a neutral
location with neutral staffers to make our final
decision, which is exactly what I had suggested
in my letter as a fairer way of doing this petition.
Itis also our democratic duty to question politi-
cians as to how their promises will work, at what
cost, in dollars and in human turmoil and have
them show us the proof.
That was exactly the crux of my whole letter, is
that this whole process is started without any
idea of whether it could or would fulfill the spirit
of the idea, itis only about rushing off to the
Queen to get it done.
While Mr. McHale speaks to me so sternly
about democratic rights, I should like to remind
him that there are two main ways of one express-
ing their democratic freedoms. One is by taking
part in an open and transparent election process
and voting for those candidates that will best rep-
resent your views. The other is to let your name
stand for that public office which you feel is not
being well represented. As I have said publicly in
the past, to those who have issues with how we
are represented - put your name on the ballot! If
you know now exactly how we should have been
govemed 23 years ago or sixyears ago or even
last year and if you have all the exact answers for
what our local government should be doing and
you are attending all the council meetings any -
ways to tell council how it should be done, then
allow yourself to be elected! Iwillvote for you! I
want someone who recognizes that it is their
duty to do exactly as the people with the power
see fit at any given time!
"Goderich Township had elections ("four
years dictatorship and two months of democ-
racy" Mr. McHale quoted News Record March
26, 2014), "a Reeve, and Council without tur-
moil:' Mr. McHale lectures in last week's letter.
Those residents still do! The only turmoil on
council came after this issue was raised; it was
not the cause of it! The residents of Goderich
Township also did indeed have all the services
mentioned, I in no way said that they didn't or
implied that they couldn't have again, I only
asked the obvious question that those advocat-
ing lower taxes should easily be able to answer
-at what cost?
The marriage has happened long in the past
and what is being requested by "de amalgama-
tion" is a legal divorce and I have yet to see where
a snow blower that had cleaned a shared drive
was still used by both parties after the divorce.
So, what exactly does smaller, self-govemment
entail? Details in Mr McHale's rebuttal to me
were sadly absent.
200 years ago when Goderich Township was
created, the population of Canada was 2.5 mil-
lion people. There was no Internet, no cars or
paved roads or drinking and driving, no trains or
rail cars, no planes or airports, no firearms any-
thing like today, no sophisticated illegal drug
industry, no health care, no Charter of Rights,
etc., etc., etc . Today, the population of Canada is
35.5 million and we have this complex society.
So if someone is advocating for smaller govem-
ment or self-government, explain to us first what
exactly this means? Which laws have got to go?
What part of government will you reduce?
Do we eliminate government support of
renewable energy as well as nuclear, hydro elec-
tric, coal, natural gas and biogas and all the
industries associated with them, which never
would have come about without government
support in the first place? Do we eliminate gov-
ernment
overnment support of public transit, airports, the
ethanol and biodiesel industry? Does it mean,
speaking of unfairness in tax bases, that we will
reject Federal payments to Provinces or Provin-
cial transfer payments to municipalities?
How big of an area will we designate that must
be self reliant from only taxes it collects within
that base - no more high population areas send-
ing funding to lower ones for what? Anything?
Re: your comments on Clinton vs. Goderich
Township?
Quite contrary to Mr. McHale's implications, it
is I who am standing for our small local govem-
ment and it is most curiously our smallest, clos-
est to the people, level of government that these
petitioners seek to dismantle. The provincial gov-
emment is many times far larger than the local
government and the federal government is many
times larger than that. So why does someone
against big government attack the smallest? Most
interesting is that the very PC party that now
touts itself so boldly as being for rural Ontario
and returning powers to local municipalities and
for whom some of the very people behind this
petition, in the last election, just couldn't pound
in campaign signs fast enough - is the very PC
party that, so offensively to these petitioners, did
indeed tell local municipalities, the last time the
PCs were in power, that they would amalgamate
or else!
Since my implication to the monarchy was
missed, I must say that the petition of right was
enacted in 1628 to actually limit the powers of
the monarchy head (King or Queen) upon its
subjects. Now after generations of elected Cana-
dian officials trying to gently wiggle our way out
from under a distant Monarchy (a curious thing
to petition for self -governance to a monarchy, a
system where there is but one person ultimately
deciding for all subjects) itis now the head of the
monarchy that they will now give credence to by
just such an appeal - a long way from the former
Goderich Township to go for local control. Even
more interesting is to consider that in 1628 this
area had the smallest govemment ever, much
smaller than even Goderich Township's (formed
almost 200 years after this) as it was ruled by the
native peoples. So how far back in time do we
want to go?
Anyone who wants to question our commu-
nity need only go to the thank you notes of last
week's News Record to see an emotional account
of what an incredible communitywe have here!
John M. Brand
Clinton, On.
Remembering the Main Street of yesteryear
Dear editor,
Last week on a sunny day I was walking down
Main Street and my mind quickly traveled to
Memory Lane.
As I crossed Highway 8 and up Albert Street, I
thought of the recent passing of former local
business men. I remembered Bob Campbell as
he stood on his step greeting all passersby with a
cheery hello, while inside his partner Ken Pickett
was measuring a man for a "made to measure"
three-piece suit. My fond memory of Bob is how
he persuaded my hubby to give up his white
sports socks for colour coordinated knee-high
socks - such a gentlemanly look.
As I move on there is John Anstett greeting all
would-be customers. He was always helpful in
selecting the right gift. His motto of "one dollar
down and a dollar a week" was how my
engagement ring was purchased. Being spring, I
look across the street and imagine Sutter Perdue
where I went every spring to purchase my skip-
ping rope.
Mr Perdue and I would go to the back of the
store where he would show me the different
sizes of rope coming up through the holes in the
floor and I would carefully judge the length of
rope I needed, whether regular or double -Dutch
skipping.
Further up is the Aiken Bros. store where Art
Aiken would quietly offer his men's work wear
and if a bargain was wanted he would offer
pants for $7.95 a leg. As a child I bought my
skates there. I can almost feel sitting in the chair
while I tried on the most beautiful new pair of
figure skates. Also in the back of the store, the
smell of leather and Willard sewing harnesses on
an antique sewing machine.
Nostalgia takes over and as I pass Bartliff's I
remember Mr. Bartliff handing me an ice cream
cone and in later years on a teen date enjoying a
coke at the counter sitting on a stool. There are
many memories of Main Street.
The Roxy costing ten cents for a show, the
need to parkyour car at the four comers on a
Friday night to watch the people or the search to
find enough change to buy some gas to drive up
and down in a friend's car.
Memories change with time and place and I
know another wallc may bring different ones
while other people will enjoy their own special
memories.
Reminiscing,
Polly Powell
Bayfield arena partners
bringing pitch back to
council
Dear editor,
On Monday, May 5 at 7 p.m. the Bayfield
Arena Community Partners (BACP) will
make our Business Plan presentation to
Municipality of Bluewater councillors. We
need your support, either by attending the
council meeting or writing the council.
You may or may not use the facility,
however I am sure you know someone
who does. I would even go one step further
and would suggest that everyone of you
will regret it's gone if we don't stand up to
save the ice now. Many family Christmas
or Birthday parties will have to find another
option. That option will not include ice
skating because every other local arena is
almost always fully booked.
Bluewater council has maintained all
along the facility is not used enough and
has a large deficit. We have discovered
through our investigation over these past 6
months, that the actual cost to maintain ice
is $40,000 per year. The remaining portion
of deficit is overhead costs which will
remain even without ice.
Summary of Financial Statements and
Projections of Bayfield Community Centre
Annual Revenues...
Annual Expenses....t
Annual Deficits....
Our group has always felt that with mar-
keting and our enthusiasm we could
increase usage and reduce the deficit. This
past winter our group was already success-
ful by increasing usage of the ice.
Our plan will not put anymore burden
on taxpayers and hopefully with our busi-
ness plan in place the projection is a
decrease in tax burden by 2017.
If we let our council continue on their
current path, the ice pad portion of the
building will sit empty for the winter of
2014 through spring of 2015. At that time, if
they re purpose the building, it will cost in
excess of $500,000 taxpayer dollars and
they don't even know if anyone will use it.
In our plan we are striving to increase ice
usage during winter months. In warmer
months we plan to have more shows, more
culture and more sports. Our plan would
disclose financial statements so everyone
can help measure our success.
Hopefully Bluewater Council will agree a
Management Partnership is the best
option for the facility. Convincing the
councillors will take the entire community.
We have gained a tremendous amount
of support over the past 6 months and I
would like to thank everyone for their
backing.
Now is the time to really stand up and
speak to save the ice. You can help, but
time is naming out, write a letter, email or
call your councillor today.
Sincerely,
Ron Keys
Chair
Bayfield Arena Community Partners