To the editor:
I find it ironic that Thunder Bay should be struggling with the issue of plebiscites, a fundamental democratic process allowing residents a say in significant matters that affect them, at the same time the federal government is poised to ram through legislation that will effectively 'muzzle and declaw' the very person charged with overseeing our elections and ensuring that they are run fairly and democratically.
What is it about being elected to public office that causes some to assume that only their vision, their perspective and their opinion counts? Is it a lack of oxygen up there?
Having read the many letters and articles of late pertaining to municipal taxes, spats between city administration and the business community, and council's determination to push through a major project that it considers a 'done deal' apparently, one gets the impression that as mere taxpayers we are expected to simply pay up, shut up and just go away.
The arrogance of civic leaders today is such that even thwarting our basic democratic rights and sweeping them aside like so many inconvenient nuisances is quite O.K. Really?
In a recent letter to the editor, Neil Ward is bang on with his critique of the Chronicle Journal's editorial of Feb. 13 (People have had their say).
The title, as well as the comments throughout the latter were no less than jaw-dropping and I was pleased with the concise and straightforward way in which Mr. Ward set the record straight.
Quite correctly, open houses and online surveys (while interesting) cannot and should not replace more widely inclusive and democratically-entrenched actions designed to determine the wishes of the majority. On that note, we have only until the end of April according to existing rules to get the matter of an Events Centre on the next ballot.
City council now claims it is "premature" to do so although they, themselves, have moved ahead with expensive consultations, the gathering of "world-class partnerships", and the setting aside of millions of dollars in a contingency fund for this purpose. If so convinced that the majority of Thunder Bay residents are in favour of it, a plebiscite to prove this will cost nothing and the matter can be put to rest once and for all. What is the problem?
I, for one, do not support such an initiative but, contrary to Mr. Hobbs' comments of Feb. 05th, it's not because I'm unwilling to pay for a "fine-looking city" and "improved roads".
Like many others I'm proud of Thunder Bay and want the best for her. But in the words of a famous rock band, "you can't always have what you want".
Like others, I also want to know that the taxes I pay are respected and dealt with responsibly. A "transformation dream" we can't afford, didn't vote for, had no hand in designing, and have observed being rushed through in a questionable and haphazard way isn't my idea of fiscally responsible management.
Not when our city's infrastructure is crumbling around us due to decades of neglect despite more recent efforts to increase the budget in this area in order to play catch-up. Or when artificially inflated housing prices, a shrinking tax base, too few businesses to help offset the cost to individual taxpayers (not to mention lower taxes for those that remain), and lower assessments of our mills and other industrial interests by MPAC are driving taxes through the stratosphere.
The Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce is right on at least one count: this council needs to wake up and get real about its spending.
However, it's wrong about where that spending needs to be curtailed as it isn't necessarily at city hall.
Louise Fisher,
Thunder Bay
