Mail bag: 08/13/26
‘Vulgar boils”
Dear Editor:
Like some alien disease, giant blue bins have appeared like vulgar boils along our streets.
How does an 80-year-old woman, a 90-year-old man or a weary single mother of three (who might only be 5’2”) push an awkward, heavy four-foot-high bin down the front steps of a small apartment or house, along a driveway, through pouring/freezing rain or snow to the curbside? And then haul it back again?
This is a case of an efficient “theory” being far from the living fact.
The new bins are an abomination to the eyes and a recipe for broken bones.
Bronwen Stanley-Jones,
Mount Forest
‘Where’s the logic?’
Dear Editor:
An open letter to Wellington County council.
I am writing to you regarding the adoption of the new recycling bins where I live in Elora. When the new system was proposed to the public, I applied for the smaller style of bin. When it showed up a couple of weeks ago, I thought there had been a mistake because the bin left in my driveway was huge. The person delivering the bins assured me that I was, in fact, receiving the smaller version.
Where are we supposed to put these things? My wife and I live in a townhome with a single-car garage, and we keep one of our two cars parked in it. It is impossible to fit the recycling bin in the garage when the car is there.
Was there any thought put into the design and selection of these bins? I have just about had it with the waste and recycling methods and operations in this county. It used to be that I could take my recycling to the local transfer station and drop it off. Now it costs a minimum of $10 to do so. Where is the logic in that?
I am of a mind to drop the bin off at the Wellington County administration centre on Woolwich Street and, going forward, put all my household waste in the garbage. To heck with recycling if it’s going to be this much of a hassle.
Steve Shields,
Elora
‘Build a legacy’
Dear Editor:
This summer marks an exciting new chapter for the Centre Wellington Community Foundation (CWCF).
Following Randall Howard’s 16 years of dedicated leadership as chair, we are honoured to work together in our roles to continue building on that strong foundation and strengthening local philanthropy for generations to come.
Summer brings us together for local festivals, farmers’ markets and time with family and friends. It’s also a wonderful opportunity to reflect on what makes Centre Wellington such a special place to call home. From Fergus and Elora to our surrounding rural communities, our strength has always come from neighbours helping neighbours.
At CWCF, we work to ensure that spirit of generosity continues for generations to come. Our mission is simple: to build a permanent endowment that supports local charities, community organizations and initiatives forever. Gifts to the foundation’s endowment are invested and the income they generate is granted each year to local charities and community initiatives, while the original gifts remain intact.
One of the things we hope more people will discover is that philanthropy isn’t reserved for the wealthy. Every gift, regardless of size, becomes part of a lasting legacy. Over time, individual contributions combine to create a permanent source of support for the causes that make Centre Wellington a caring, resilient, and vibrant community.
Community foundations are built by the people they serve. Whether you’ve lived here all your life or recently made Centre Wellington your home, you can help shape our community’s future.
This summer, if you’re curious about how community foundations work, have ideas for strengthening our community through philanthropy or simply want to learn more about CWCF, we’d be delighted to start the conversation.
Together, we can build a legacy that will benefit Centre Wellington for generations to come.
Jean Prichard (chair) and Judy Foster (executive director),
CWCF
Candidate treatment
Dear Editor:
Whether the election is for prime minister, president, premier, governor, MP, MPP or mayor, when a man announces he’s running for office, we hear words like experienced, strong, qualified, a proven leader. We debate his ideas, his policies and whether he’s the right person for the job.
When a woman runs? She’s ambitious. Not brilliant, not highly educated, not accomplished, not qualified. She’s just ambitious.
Ambition isn’t a bad thing. In fact, I’d actually argue it’s a prerequisite for anyone who willingly signs up to have strangers dissect every sentence, every facial expression and every decision they’ve ever made. But have you noticed how differently we use words? When a woman runs and she’s called ambitious, it’s like someone is whispering in the background, “Bit full of herself, isn’t she?” Or she’s “too emotional,” “too aggressive,” “too nice.” Funny how that works.
Many women entering politics (or any leadership role) today have spent decades proving themselves before they ever print a campaign sign. They hold PhDs. They run successful businesses. They lead classrooms, they lead charities, corporations, they lead their peers. They’ve managed budgets, built organizations from scratch, solve complex problems and somehow they’ve still remembered it was pajama day at school. Some have qualifications that could wallpaper an entire campaign office. Yet somehow they’re still asked to prove they’re “ready.”
Ready compared to whom?
Because we’ve elected plenty of men whose greatest qualification seemed to be owning a suit and speaking confidently(ish) into a microphone. Just turn on the news these days, it’s everywhere.
Politics requires ambition. Every single person who puts their name on any ballot believes they can do the job. That’s literally the point. Yet when women do it, many times their ambition somehow becomes their description word instead of their qualifications.
Language matters because words quietly shape perceptions. When we repeatedly describe one group of people as collaborative, cooperative leaders and other as only ambitious, we’re sending out subtle messages that one’s desire to lead is expected, while the other’s is somewhat less than unattainable. Maybe that’s why women often feel they have to be twice as qualified just to be considered equally capable.
The next time a woman announces she’s running for office, maybe let’s skip the commentary about her ambition. Tell me about her experience, her education, her ideas. Judge her by exactly the same standards you’d judge the man standing beside her.
Kristen Reilly,
Fergus
Councillor conflicts
Dear Editor:
RE: And then there were five, July 30.
I fully agree with Dave Adsett’s recent editorial regarding the upcoming municipal election. There are important issues such as housing, employment and finances that need to be addressed by the new council.
As Adsett noted, it is imperative that Centre Wellington elects a mayor who possess “good, sound judgement that will respect members of council and the community.” A mayor must be a leader, a person that is able to work with councillors and guide them through the important issues.
Throughout the current session of council, councillor Bronwynne Wilton has declared a conflict of interest 30 times, which accounts for 57% of the total number of conflicts of interest identified by the entire council.
Wilton has declared most of these conflicts because her husband is a senior partner at MHBC Planning, which has provided planning services to landowners/developers and council in the areas of zoning by-law amendments, environmental servicing, and the South Fergus Secondary Plan.
Centre Wellington must have a mayor who can lead, not someone who must sit on the sideline due to conflicts of interest.
David Smith,
Fergus