Dear Editor,
Thank you for that insightful article about the budget talks! I’m glad to read that Mr. Linton realizes there’s a huge problem with the way we talk budgets. Unfortunately, I think Mr. Linton and his team are just urinating counter to a severely strong gale.
No matter how hard they crunch the numbers they aren’t addressing the real problems. Their calculations merely look good on paper as to give us a false sense of a better future. How can the future of our infrastructure look better if it crumbles faster than the numbers say we can fix them?
For example, my ward has had a bridge out for the last five years due to an accident that compromised the structure. The repair on it is said to be started in 2024, roughly. That’s lots of time to save up for a bridge, right? It turns out we didn’t know how inconveniencing this was until recently. Without any kind of local warning, yet another bridge was closed down in the same area. This one said to be started in 2019!?! Bummer!
If talks about proposed bridge closures are discussed well in advanced, wouldn’t the starting date of repairs closely match that of the road closure date? Even if there’s an accident with a bridge (or any structure) shouldn’t there be at least some reserved funds to start fixing it? Not in this reality, I guess. We have to wait 4-20 years after the fact and probably still no money to fix them to top it off.
My community isn’t all that demanding on the infrastructure. Not to mention we don’t indulge in any other service other than road maintenance. So what are my property taxes paying for if they can’t cover the cost of two lousy bridges?
It sickens me to think we rely on OLG to cover most of the infrastructure cost. That feeling is compounded by the lack of help from our Provincial government. The future looks bleek, especially if we try and solve our issues the exact same way we’ve been failing before! Mr. Linton may be looking at it with a new perspective, but I’m afraid it isn’t drastic enough.
Doug Vanderveen
Belwood
DOUG VANDERVEEN