Enough with the council witch hunt, already
Sir: How much is councillor Cindy Scholten being paid to spend time looking through closets at city hall?
Although I, in my not so humble opinion, thought Anne Marie Gillis was as low as they go in her insistence on a deputy mayor’s position in her effort to undermine the mayor, Scholten has found a way to descend even further.
Do they think the public is too stupid to see their ulterior motives?
If Scholten is so concerned about costs, why was such a hefty raise given to the city manager - who is not even able to communicate with the mayor?
Why was a communications person hired - an unnecessary cost to the taxpayer?
Why was so much money spent on an unnecessary “integrity” commissioner’s investigation? Why is the taxpayer buying computers for councillors? And so on and so on.
The costs “discovered” by Scholten in poking through closets can be justified whereas those mentioned cannot.
Surely people who willing dedicate many hours of their time to serve the community as unpaid volunteers deserve some recognition and appreciation. As for the cost of newspaper subscriptions - good grief!
The public is surely sick and tired of the “witch hunt” or “vendetta” and determination of several councillors to further their political ambitions.
They should start doing what they were elected for and are well paid to do. Enough Already!
Bernice Rade
Forest
Editor’s note: This letter was written prior to the Oct. 7 release of a workplace harassment report involving Mayor Mike Bradley
........................................................................................................................
Scholten wasted council’s time
Sir: After reading Cindy Scholten's proposed fine-tuning of the Mayor's office budget, I decided to tune into the Monday city council meeting on Channel 6, where these proposals were to be discussed.
Usually, I don't pay much attention to city politics, so I must admit that this is the first televised meeting I have watched in the last five years. I have two personal observations.
First, city council spent over one hour of the meeting debating at great length Cindy's seven or eight proposals that, if approved, would have saved the city less than $20,000.
Many of her proposed cuts were, in my humble opinion, very worthwhile expenditures. To their credit, the majority of the council members agreed with my assessment.
To put it in perspective, the 2016 Sarnia operating budget is $132.5 million dollars. So these proposed cuts if implemented would represent 0.015% of that total. Not a very efficient use of city council's time and effort.
Second, what I found most disturbing was how aggressive and disrespectful Cindy was towards the mayor.
The mayor responded firmly but much more diplomatically. Thank goodness that all of the other council members, when they disagreed with the mayor's position, acted very professional and respectful in expressing their opinions.
Based on that meeting, it will be another five years before I watch another city council meeting.
Walter Frais
Sarnia
Editor’s note: This letter was written prior to the Oct. 7 release of a workplace harassment report involving Mayor Mike Bradley
................................................................................................................
Scholten has transparent dislike of the mayor
Sir: I hope those who watch city council meetings or read councillor Cindy Scholten's e-posts "get" her message.
Coun. Scholten has a strong dislike for Mayor Bradley. She wastes much of council's time with thinly disguised causes designed to discredit the mayor, or to find ways to minimize and undermine his duties.
The "Scrapbook Kerfuffle" arose because councillor Scholten "heard" there were cupboards and closets full of scrapbooks, wasting "precious" space. She thought it important to find them and get rid of them.
But why? If the whereabouts of these "precious" spaces is unknown, obviously they weren't needed and had no impact on the functionality of city hall.
The better solution is to house those books in proper cabinets, as a resource library. Two councillors see the true value in them, the others can't see past their iPads.
Using the guise of "budget expense" to explain her hours delving into all things "mayoral," (right down to the 1.2 person hours) makes me wonder why she didn't do the same to every other office and department. She hasn't demanded explanations for their expenses or use of space.
Clearly, Coun. Scholten spent much time researching and calculating the minutia of Mayor Bradley's time and expenses, indicating the extent of her fixation on, and enmity toward Mayor Bradley.
I find it hard to believe that Scholten's fellow councilors are blind to her real purpose. Possibly they're a party to it, as only one councillor dared to criticize Scholten's mayoral crusade and her wasting of time to pick apart the already approved mayoral budget.
Another councilor said he supported Scholten's efforts for transparency, although I'm not sure he was referring to the fact her actions couldn't be more transparent.
The mayor is her target.
Dorothy Allan
Sarnia
Editor’s note: This letter was written and received prior to the Oct. 7 release of a workplace harassment report involving Mayor Mike Bradley
.........................................................................................................................
Cap and Trade is a threat to Sarnia
Sir: Can you picture what this community would look like without companies such as Shell and Imperial Oil?
I ask because people need to realize that’s a possibility in the not too distant future.
The Ontario government has enacted legislation to establish a Cap and Trade system. It will offer incentives to companies that emit fewer greenhouse gases (GHG) and penalize those that emit a lot. Low emitters will receive carbon credits; large emitters must buy them.
The concept is sound. If a company emits more than permitted by the cap, it could purchase credits from a company that has reduced to below the cap.
The initial price is about $18 per carbon credit. One credit is needed to offset one ton of GHG emissions.
At current emission rates, Shell and Imperial Oil would incur an additional cost of doing business in Ontario of $3 million to $4 million annually.
But if the price rose to the ceiling of $50 per credit (the government says it will inject credits into the market to try to cap this price), it would cost each site $35 million to $40 million additionally each year.
Now, if you owned a refinery and operating in Ontario came at a premium, would you stay, or would you move production to another refinery you owned outside the carbon-taxed zone?
This is what we have to worry about.
Economists say each refinery job creates three to four spin-off jobs. With about 1,000 full-time employees between the two refineries, the potential loss is 4,000 to 5,000 jobs.
And we’re not just talking about those two sites.
Of the largest GHG emitters in Ontario, 24% of them are in Sarnia-Lambton. So if more companies left or closed it could be total economic devastation.
Understand, this is more than about Valley jobs. Cap and trade could impact just about everyone here, from the car salesperson to grocery store employees to your dentist.
So what can we do?
We have to educate ourselves and get engaged, including our politicians. We need to work together like we did to save our jail.
It will require a plan of action, and a commitment to participate.
Watch for future articles, listen for more information, learn about cap and trade, and be ready.
Mark Mathewson
President Unifor local 848
Shell, Sarnia
............................................................................................................
City’s 'cutting-edge' video system an appalling waste of money
Sir: I'm appalled that the city would waste so much money on "upgrades" to its council broadcasting system.
With reportedly around $50,000 inclusive to cover equipment and building upgrades and a cavalier "$16,000 per year" in expenses to run, it's a far more egregious use of funds than integrity commissions or scrapbooks.
Why? As any viewer who has used the supposedly “cutting-edge” system for London city council will confirm, it's nearly impossible to operate and a non-starter on mobile devices; the former disproportionately affects the area’s older residents, the latter is a huge problem for younger ones.
What should it really cost to produce high-quality live video? Well, with tripods, simple digital cameras (or cell phones), and switching software—at most—about 1/5 of what they've agreed to spend. It's simply not that expensive to get video online.
Even better, by investing in modern equipment and a digital-first workflow, the city would have been able to take the cameras out to the streets it was able to patch or community pools it was able to keep open with all of the money saved.
Instead, we get a setup that's unacceptably irresponsible in three ways: it's pricey, it will discourage (especially younger) citizens from staying informed, and it's in no way "future-forward" in terms of technology—expect to see the next “improvements” deliberated soon (the last big upgrade was only in 2014).
Both companies involved should be ashamed of their outlandish proposal, to say nothing of the (acting) City Clerk, Director of Finance, Budget and Accounting Manager, Purchasing Manager, Manager of Information Technology, Communications Coordinator, Property Manager, and Accessibility Coordinator who all signed off on it.
I'll gladly volunteer my time to help the city in this matter, as long as the purchase of that ridiculous system can be halted: once you factor in the equipment, it’s going to cost taxpayers roughly $4,000 per council meeting in 2017.
Michael Banovsky
Sarnia
.......................................................................................................................................
MP Gladu is anti-electoral reform
Sir: Conservatives continue to use the sound bite of “why change something that has worked for 150 years” as they ignore the history lesson.
Consider when first-past-the-post was established – there were two major parties – obviously a majority would be won and FPTP was the most democratic process at that time.
Now fast-forward to today – we have five major parties in government. Currently, our democratic process does not support the diverse opinions of the electorate, especially when you consider the last election. MP Marilyn Gladu won a federal seat with only 38.8% of the vote, the remainder going to left-leaning parties.
What we should be talking about is how the next 150 years will be shaped by the decisions we make today. Clearly, something needs to change to motivate people to get to the polls with only 72% of Sarnia-Lambton voting in the last election. This is without question.
We must review our democratic process to ensure it works for everyone, not just the two major parties that turnabout every few years; we need to ensure that all votes matter.
I do however think Marilyn hit it on the head, rather indirectly, regarding a referendum. If only 3% of people, as stated, are informed on the potential election models, then we should not allow said vast majority of uninformed people to direct country policy. We elect MPs to become informed on our behalf and make decisions based on the majority of constituents’ views. Again using the 3% rate of those informed compared to the thousands who responded via mail that they "like the current system," I have a hard time reconciling the two.
Also, adding to the unscientific selection of those who attended Gladu’s partisan (in my opinion) information sessions, the rate of response seems to be more akin to walking the party line blind then a representation of Sarnia-Lambton's view.
I implore everyone (especially my generation, yes you Millennials), to get informed, get out there and share your knowledge.
This is a conversation we all need to have. It has been going on 15 years, so there is lots of information available.
Lisa Gray
Sarnia
...............................................................................................................
Take my road. Please
Sir: Re: the Sept. 29 letter, “Our road to ruin is paved with bad patches.
People in my area around Blanche Lane are often upset and angry. It seems the longer it takes for street repairs work to be done, the more disillusioned and angry we all get.
People with wheelchairs, walkers and canes travel this road every day. In winter it takes days to get ploughed. When we call it appears no one is interested in our being trapped in homes and apartments.
Our anger turns to rage. Thus the phrase ‘road rage.’
Please, someone, hear our plea. All we want is a road that’s fixed.
Here's to all of us living with these conditions. We are being buried in tar-patch after tar-patch, and all that does is get in our pets’ paws.
I'm really going to be busy when the next election rolls around.
Pat Daamen
Sarnia
...........................................................................................................................
Trustees' decision has harmed the city
Sir: I couldn't agree more with Ms. Gasbarini's Sept. 22 letter. She certainly did her research and I agree with her criticism of the board's decision(s).
I have to admit that, when voting, I have not paid much attention in the past to the school board because I no longer have children in school. However, I believe that this decision affected much more than the high school students.
Closing down SCITS affects locally owned businesses in the Mitton Street shopping area, downtown Sarnia and the viability of the surrounding neighbourhood.
I believe the "big picture" should have been considered, not just which school is a better "financial" option. I don't think the board even made an accurate decision on that option either.
And so, I will remember all of the above at the next election.
Coincidentally, the Sept. 22 issue contained a letter from Rev. Lloyd A. Murdock, who wrote. "Don't build your house by tearing down mine," and, "Lord, may I do all the good I can, to all the people I can, for as long as I can."
Words of wisdom to live by.
Janet MacKey
Sarnia