The city is graciously accepting early registrations (and fees) from owners of monitored security alarm systems.
The City claims residents have “clearly indicated” the bylaw to address false alarms is important to them, and they want to help the registration process “move forward quickly.”
If I understand correctly, the $15 registration fee will allow each user three “free” false alarm calls a year.
The non-registered will pay $100 per response. OK, the $15 may help pay for the supposedly unnecessary call outs, but how will registration reduce the number of false alarms or the crime rate?
City council’s decision to hire a consultant to educate the public on the pros and cons of fluoridating our water triggered a cheeky editorial in the Prince George Free Press. Referring to criticisms of that city’s communication person’s salary, the editorial notes that at least PG isn’t paying a staff person to communicate, then contracting out the city’s communications work. The editorial quotes our CAO as saying our communication co-ordinator is going “flat out” dealing with the city’s daily communications.
Okay, but what about the capable volunteers on the city’s Water Advisory Committee? Their (free) advice is no fluoridation. Rather than re-inventing the wheel, couldn’t someone who has strong feelings for fluoridation volunteer to make the case for renewing the practice?
Yes, I did say renewing. According to my information, the city stopped putting fluoride into our water quite some time ago for a couple of reasons.
This council doesn’t seem to be much on advisory committees. It dumped the Health Advisory Committee early on, and later the Sustainability Committee. I don’t know who or what replaced them. If the city has lots of dollars kicking around for consultants, that’s cool, but maybe committees made up of knowledgeable volunteers who happen to be local taxpayers just might have some valuable input on some issues.