Midland Today welcomes letters to the editor. They can be sent to [email protected]. Please include your daytime phone number and address (for verification of authorship, not publication).
Dear Editor,
While I appreciate the coverage of local (especially Midland) news, I did have a couple of concerns about two of the articles of the Midland budget process.
A recent budget article ("Midland residents raise concerns about CAO office wages, proposed tax increase") suggests that all respondents were on the same page on this topic, but misses the fact that of the few Midland residents who did comment at the public meeting one (myself) was largely supportive of the budget and felt that staff had mostly made reasonable, prudent, and necessary decisions. It is not that I want a tax hike, but that I do not feel the Town of Midland is in a position to avoid one, due to too many years (and then being hit by 2020) of 'punting' necessary expenditures down the road.
For instance the IT infrastructure badly needs updating if the town is to avoid a repeat of the 2018 ransomware attack or to experience other cyber-security 'incidents' (smaller municipalities are justifiably seen as easy targets by 'malicious actors' such as criminal hackers). Likewise the water and wastewater rates are going up for two reasons: the past lack of reserves for major capital expenditures, which has become an issue because the funding model has changed from tax levy with the support province for this type of infrastructure to the province mandating that the full cost of these system be covered through rates and fees (i.e. user-pay).
Ultimately I think the decisions that have been made may in fact be cutting too close to bone in an effort to keep taxes down (although there are some minor items one could dispute, I do not think in the scheme of the entire budget that they amount to much). Yes we are in a pandemic, but I feel like the 'chickens have come home to roost' for Midland at an inopportune time, but one that is not reasonably or prudently further delayed.threats.
That's a rather bleak or pessimistic view perhaps, but I think it's more in vein of realism than the sky is falling, or chasing rainbows and unicorns.
Also, I feel that the title "Midland library wants $76.500 to hire PR flack" is inappropriate for a news article because 'PR flack' is generally viewed a pejorative term for someone on marketing. If this was an opinion piece rather than a news article, I would not feel the same way. It also isn't even about what I feel about the concept of the position being added this year[1].
Regards,
Daniel Dickinson
Midland
P.S. TANSTAAFL (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch)
[1] I hope as a volunteer at the library in the MakerPlace (but not speaking for the library, simply expressing my personal opinion) and avid participant in MakerPlace programs, that I won't get in trouble for saying this, but for this position I am at best undecided or uncertain what to think. I do appreciate that I am one of the people who has commented that I didn't know about programs or events before they were occurring, or even of all that much of what the library has going on where I am not directly involved, but whether the solution is a marketing and communication professional — that I'm not so sure about. I love the library but that doesn't mean I'm instantly onboard with everything that comes from above.[2]
[2] The idea that if one supports (or volunteers, or wishes work for) an organization (non-profit, government, or private) or political party that one has to be publicly advocate for, or at least not say anything against an official position, without risk of being penalized is something I see as an increasing threat to freedom of expression, informed public debate, and therefore democracy. I appreciate their are serious issues with misinformation and disinformation to worry about, but I think that is being used as an excuse to stifle dissent and discussion in our society.
