HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2010-08-19, Page 6PAGE 6. THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 2010.
Solar program to ensure fairness in Huron
Economic impact ignored by ARC: writer
Getting a boot on it
Over-18 soccer was held in Blyth over the weekend as the
annual soccer season draws to a close. Brussels took on
Goderich in this contest. (Jim Brown photo)
Changes announced on Aug. 13,
following a 30-day consultation on
the popular microFIT program, will
ensure fairness to applicants and
continue to encourage Huron-Bruce
residents to participate in the
growing clean energy economy.
A press release from Huron-Bruce
MPP Carol Mitchell stated that
Ontarians who applied prior to
July 2 to feed solar power into
the electricity grid will be eligible
under the original pricing
structure.
A new pricing structure of 64.2
cents per kilowatt-hour will apply to
eligible applicants moving forward
on small ground-mounted projects.
The roof-top solar price structure
remains at 80.2 cents.
Consultations on a new price
category for solar projects were
initiated because of the
overwhelming number of
applications for ground-mounted
solar projects in the rooftop solar
category.
Huron-Bruce residents brought
forward important information on a
variety of cost inputs that resulted in
an adjusted new, fair price for
ground-mounted solar.
“This is a win-win for Huron-
Bruce residents and the economy of
rural Ontario. I have spoken to many
constituents about this issue over the
past month and I am confident these
changes will provide fairness for
those who have applied to the
existing program and clarity for
those wishing to apply to the
program going forward, which I
know many have continued to do. As
a part of the Green Energy Act, this
is about bringing clean energy to
Ontario at good value. It allows
Ontarians to be part of the solution,”
said Huron-Bruce MPP Carol
Mitchell.
The new and fair price for ground-
mounted solar projects will protect
the sustainability of the program and
provide a reasonable rate of return of
11 per cent over a 20-year period for
participating Ontarians.
The Ontario Power Authority
(OPA) is working to respond quickly
to microFIT applicants. Most
ground-mounted applications that
have been submitted will be
processed by the end of September.
Details on the timeline goals for
offering conditional contracts are
available on the microFIT website,
microfit.powerauthority.on.ca
THE EDITOR,
I read the editorial entitled “Time
to Consider” in this past week’s
issue of The Citizen, and refer back
to your past editorial entitled “Nice
Try but...” and wanted to comment
on the context of both.
I was one of the taxpayers who
didn't attend the Accommodation
Review Committee (ARC) meetings
for one very simple reason: not
being a parent of a student at Blyth
Public School I was not accorded the
same information courtesy as was
provided parents of students
regarding the pending meeting(s).
At that time I was not a reader of
The Citizen, which I understand
published notice of the meeting(s).
I learned that Blyth Public School
was under review when I saw little
red protest pylons appearing on my
neighbourhood street.
Since that time, however, I have
gotten involved because I believe
that not knowing is no longer a valid
reason, but a convenient excuse. I
now read The Citizen and attend
North Huron Council meetings from
time to time because as a taxpaying
citizen I feel we need to know what
is being decided upon on our behalf.
Too often, well-meaning people
make decisions on our behalf all in
the name of “for us” when, in fact,
these decisions are being done “to
us”. There is a big difference.
I think it’s safe to say that the
community did not cede “leadership
of the issue to the parents and
representatives on the
Accommodation Review
Committee”, and on the whole did
not “abandon its own school”, as
alluded by the July 15 editorial.
Those involved with the process, it
seems, did not look beyond the
education issues, and did not assess
the economic consequences which
would face the community. One of
the requirements of the ARC
guidelines is to complete an
economic assessment of school
closures on the communities
affected. I understand this was not
done, nor have they been done on
other communities. If the reality is a
10 to 25 per cent reduction in
residential property values, then who
do we hold accountable for that? It
seems the Avon Maitland District
School Board (AMDSB) is intent on
spending $11.6 million (or is it
$12.6 million? Or more?) to build a
school. Nothing else seems to matter
to this group.
After reading much of the
information on the Ministry of
Education’s website, and what
obligations the AMDSB were under,
it would appear that they met the
minimum requirements of the
guidelines and practised the
procedural justice which has marked
their meetings in every community
in which they have appeared. I think
you know to what I'm referring, and
anyone who attended the meeting(s)
had first-hand evidence that the
outcome had long been pre-
determined.
With what is now coming to light,
a $1 million shortfall (or more)
would lead one to conclude that this
group, and its advisors (the behind-
the-curtain bureaucrats), should be
brought to task for their lack of due
diligence and the wasting of
taxpayer money.
They should not only be
professionally embarrassed, but held
accountable for their “rock-scissor-
paper” master planning skills. It’s
becoming apparent that not enough
planning research was done on the
site planning process and now they
make comments about moving the
location of the school elsewhere. At
last check on the AMDSB website,
not one of the trustees made claims
to being a site/construction planner,
and one wonders what a change of
venue will do to the overall effort.
Or is this simply brinkmanship in
looking for another municipality to
bankroll their “super school”?
If “Time to Reconsider” is
intended to be a call to action similar
to a “do over” then I think we would
be better served if all stakeholders,
transparently and openly, go back
over this entire process and re-
review the AMDSB business plan,
and include people who understand
the broader ramifications of the
decisions being made.
If we believe that the best interests
for the public are being served, then
there is no need to be vigilant. If,
however, we believe that the best
interests of the public are not
necessarily being served, then there
is a great need for citizens to be
vigilant. Every level of government
and bureaucracies must be
challenged and held accountable for
its decisions.
In the case of the AMDSB, and in
my opinion, those trustees not
seeking re-election should not be
voting on ARC issues which carry
forward beyond their tenure, or on
anything affecting their particular
region. There is a real danger in
getting votes passed because the
incumbent won’t be around to be
held accountable for the
consequences.
Greg Sarachman
Blyth
Letter to the Editor
Dare to Compare...BUILDING SALE EVENT!
800-668-5422
25 X 40 X 18 value $12,300 NOW $ 9,850
32 X 42 X 17 value $13,500 NOW $10,900
50 X 120 X 22 value $55,200 NOW $42,400
OTHER MODELS & SIZES AVAILABLE!
Compare our prices and our quality. We’re all for it!
Tough, rugged buildings that last! Heavy gauge
AZ180 Galvalume steel.Totally maintenance free!
ONTARIO MANUFACTURER DIRECT SINCE 1980 PIONEERSTEEL.CA