Monday, April 22, 2024

Reader Offers Clarification to Previous Pumped Storage Letter

Mr. Editor,

It was not my intention to write two letters in two weeks. However, I feel it necessary to clarify my recent submission about the legitimacy of petition signature numbers.

Firstly, I do not believe that all SGB members who worked to get names on petitions used ‘alternative facts’ to persuade people. I am sorry if it appeared that way. Some SGB members who are friends worked legitimately and sincerely for a cause they believed to be important. They have told me that some of the tactics used over the past years to get support to stop the project do not sit well with them either. Other members have suggested that they did not want to stop pumped storage generation in Meaford. They just wanted to make sure that it was done right.

I appreciate that most of those who signed petitions when the pumped storage plans were first outlined were convinced that they had very good reasons to do so. Many more, despite the significant changes made by TCE, still have cause for their objections. Keep making your voice heard to TCE and our new Council about your current concerns.

Most SGB supporters have played an important part in bringing about positive changes in the plans for this proposed Green Energy enterprise and I commend them for their contributions. Meaford citizens will benefit from your honest efforts if approval is given. Credit should also be given to TCE who have listened and responded.

Jim Hepple, Meaford

Popular this week

Latest news