tmilogo900

We want to hear from you! 
Email Letters to the Editor to:   editor@themeafordindependent.ca
All letters must include the author's full name, address and telephone number for verification purposes.
Only your name and the city/town where you live will be published.

Opinions expressed in letters to the editor are those of the letter authors and not of The Meaford Independent.

Letters

Report Doesn't Meet the Needs of All Parts of Municipality

Editor,

I have spent some time going over the “Municipality of Meaford - State of the Infrastructure – Roads” report. Roads are the single most important service which a municipality provides directly.

The report is approximately 175 pages long and presents far too much detail for me to comment upon except in broad terms.

For those of you who have not driven on the roads in Sydenham Township, this report should make it very clear to you why the residents of the first incorporated municipality in Grey County (in 1850) are so upset and feel utterly ignored in this amalgamation.


+ 0
+ 0

Read more ...

Mayoral Candidate Feels Council Should Have Left Some Decisions to Next Council

Editor,

Several important items of business were dealt with at Council meetings on September 15th  and 22nd. The State of the Roads Infrastructure Report was presented to council and it was adopted.

This means that this council, most of whom would understand very little of what this 100 page report  said, accepted it as gospel  and gave the green light to Staff to start incorporating these ideas in their 2015 budgets. This report recommends a minimum annual preservation budget of  $2.1 million and a recommended preferred budget of $3.8 million annually.


+ 0
+ 0

Read more ...

Precautionary Principle Doesn't Require Certainty

Editor,

In your recent editorial re the location of cell towers in urban Meaford (My Tongue Hurts From all of the Biting) you state that "from a personal perspective , Rogers or any other cell company could put a tower in my backyard and I would have zero concern." You support your point of view by stating that "we don't know for certain" [ about the health risks] and there "is no provable immanent danger."

You also state that you "by default always support a precautionary principle when considering things like cell towers or incinerators coming to any community." The precautionary principle however  does not require certainty or "provable imminent danger." That's the whole point. That  principle says that decision makers have a general duty to take preventative action to avoid harm before scientific certainty has been established.


+ 0
+ 0

Read more ...