Merely for personal enjoyment I am going to rewrite yesterday's response (harsh, rude ?) that I sent to Nathan Cadeau. I will remove all critical editorial comments that could be viewed as insulting. Here goes:
Folks: So as I read Nathan's comments I understand that "TRAC does not exclude substantive concerns because they are uncomfortable or inconvenient." TRAC however obviously does exclude my concerns and others for their own, unilateral reasons. Allegedly they are because those concerns "...cross established standards of conduct...". Well first my alleged conduct is none of his business. What is his business is remediating Elmira's groundwater and he has been unsuccessful at doing that. With his intense five minutes of experience on the issue clearly our mayor made a mistake in giving him a job that he is unqualified for .Secondly he and the Township are taking advice from Lanxess, GHD and the Ontario MECP. Woolwich Township apparently don't believe that there is a conflict of interest which there certainly is. Nathan believes that vulgarity or personal attack are not necessary. I agree it isn't but so what? Just because I might insult the Township does not absolve them of either their moral or legal responsibility to work on behalf of the citizens of Woolwich Township. Maybe Nathan down the road you might want to fly your reasons for ignoring good advice in the public interest to someone who cares about your feelings. Perhaps on a good day I do, just a tiny bit. The Township, GHD, MECP, Uniroyal and corporate successors have spent the last 36 years gilding the lily about the Elmira Water Crisis to me and the public. I do not reward lily gilders with my respect.
Nathan your job is not to criticize citizens or volunteers. I believe that Woolwich Township irrevocably ruptured the relationship with long term informed citizen volunteers when they dissembled and blamed CPAC for Chemtura and the Ontario M.O.E. informally abandoning public CPAC meetings.
Nathan stick to your job as a councillor and focus on that.
Alan Marshall
O.K. I did it and while it wasn't impossible nevertheless it may lack some zest. Or not. Nathan as is usual pissed me off a couple of days back with his attitude hence my upset response. If I'd taken more time I would have added that I agree that "vulgarity or personal attack is not necessary to ensure that critical information is heard or acted upon.". Then I would have added that yes it is critical information I have been presenting by e-mail that was also heard decades ago in open, public meetings but was not acted upon then or since. Courtesy of Mayor Shantz we no longer have open, two way discussion at meetings (eg. TAG & TRAC) in which citizens can express their opinions publicly. That is the problem not my alleged conduct albeit it appears that Nathan and his ilk believe that polite, courteous lying and bulls*t peddled to the public are perfectly O.K. but rude responses by citizens to those lies are not.
Woolwich, Lanxess , GHD and the Ontario Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks (MECP) currently are in full pass the buck mode. They and they alone (eh go ahead and add the Region (RMOW)) are responsible for ignoring good advice from CPAC between late 2010 and September 2015 and occasional good advice from earlier CPACs and UPAC decades earlier. The 2028 groundwater cleanup failure is theirs and they don't want to wear it. Watch the buggars run for cover possibly as early as this next municipal election.
No comments:
Post a Comment