The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Whltby Free Preas, Wednesday, Octobor 26, 1994 Page 37 E - Ir- E - To the odfitori With the municipal elections so MFPWnfà aUâKked To the editor: An open letter to Richard Woolger. In a recent open letter ('A done deal?') published in The Free Press, you allude toaa potential environmental disaster at the Lynde Shores Conservation Area. I found your unexpounded comments ta be condemning of an elected official who, in fact, has worked very hard on behaîf of the constituents of this riding. I wish ta clarify several points which you overlooked. The provincial goverriment lands are north of Whitby Psychiatric Hospital. They are not adjacent ta the Lynde Marsh nor will their development in the distant future affect the marsh. Mr. White, as MPP for this riding, was heavily involved in bringing in the wetlands policy which is protecting environmentally sensitive areas. The current governiment has brought forth more legisiation and policies ta protect the environment (such as the Envirorimental Bill of Rights) than any previaus goverriment in Ontario. Any agreements involving the province as a principal are a matter of public record and you or I or anyone are welcome ta access them through the usual channels. There is no mystery involved in the development of the lands south of Victoria Street -- al procedures were obeyed and al agencies consulted. Susie Arrowmith Whitby close, Fd have thought the incumbents would welcome the chance to encourage a referendum on Lynde Marsh, especially in the face of substantial and growing opposition. Instead, they seem to want to fast track it, seal the deal, se ta speak, before the elections. SAn outcome of major issues such as Lynde Marsh and Wirtby General Hospital are causing an increasing number of people ta reflect on the kind of development we want in our community, and the potential approaches that enhance the democratic process. Regarding Lynde Marsh, on the one side, there seems to be a strong likelihood of monetary To the editor. If you build it, they will not came. Sunday morning, Oct. 23, I was asked ta go for an information walk with a group of Bave Lynde Marsh supporters. I admit, I held seme reservations as ta the validity of this exercise. My understanding had left me ta assume the proposed developrnent was a done deal. If it is, same.orie should stand up and undo this injustice. Lynde Marsh is Whitby's 'Garden of Eden,' to be experienced by its residents whenever and as oflen as possible. Our walk started at the foot of Jeffrey and Victoria streets. We proceeded south to an opening in the trees entering a large field of recently harvested cariola beans. This field of approximately 500 acres was hast gain in the short run for the developers (Rose Corporation and the provincial government), monetary gain that would be water under the bridge in not so distant a future. On the other sie, in preserving this sniall but complete ecological system, we demonstrate values transcending greed and myopia that have caused so much misery in our times. Besides, we'd be establishing an edifying pattern for the future. Since the incumbents have already shown where they stand, how about voting them out as a starti ng point. Parviz Mirbaghi Whitby ta maybe 3,000 migratary birds -- geese, ducks, swans and many other species -- a site ta behold and one tobe cherished. This 'Field of Dreams' is owned by the Rose Corporation and they are proposing a subdivision ta be home ta as many as 5,000 residents. The ecological damage here will be insurmountable. If any other Town council members have been ta this site, I amn sure they must be harbouring some misgivings about approving this subdivision. SLM is continuing their fight -- next step 0MB with any luck. Someone will surely see the atrocities being committed here. Everyone should have a Field of Dreams. This one, I hope, cari be saved for aur tuture generations. ]ikSde Brooklin (North ward candidate) To the editor. The articles which appared in the Oct. 5 issue of The Fee Press dealing with the Save Our General Hospital Committee, and the staff reductions at the Whitby General Hospital have prompted, me ta, write this letter. I amn greatly offended by the remarks attributed ta, Marc Kealey, vice-president of Whitby General Hospital.. As one of 20 or so volunteers serving on the SOGH committee, I cari state without equivocation or qualification that the committee has but one objective - the continuation of WGH as an acute care hospital. To denigrate the motives of the committee, and by inference the motives of 30,000 Whitby resi *dents who signed the petition urging the continuation of the hospita, simply demonstrates how out of touch the hospital board and its. senior administration are with the community they purport to serve. In, these articles, it is also reported that Mr. Kealey implies that the SOGH committe has, in some way, harmed the hospital's fundraising efforts. In my opinion, this is not the case. The District Health Council discussion paper proposes the closure of Whitby General Hlospital, and its replacement by a regional rehabilitation centre. The WGH board's response was te accept the designation of the facility as a rehab centre, and to suggest that such services as urgent care, outpatient surgi cal services and outpatient clinics be included as well. Given this situation, people are not going te provide financial support for a general hospital when even the WGH board doesn't support its continuation. Mr. ICealey also complains that the people of Whiitby won't support the hospital, especially the emergency services. It is very difficult to, support a service which is offered only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. As far as I amn aware, these limitations on emergency services were put in place by the hospital itself. On the subject of certain members of the SOGH committee seeking municipal office, the last I heard anyone can stand for election if he or she chooses to do so. Personally, I arn amazed that more members of the committee aren't running in this municipal election given the level of support for the community by the current council on this issue. I have lived in Whitby for 21 years, and I can't imagine former mayors Des Newman and Bob Attersley being-as docile on this issue as our cunt mayor seems to be. All 30,000 people who signed the petition have been given, by way of support from Whidtby council, is a rather'tepid resolution. Two of their members, Messrs. Brunelle and Fox, who represent Whitby council and, therefore, the people of Whitby on the WGH hospital board, appear, from hospital board minutes of July 4, to have voted in favour of the hospital's response ta the health council's discussion paper. Council. was elected -ta represent the wishes of the people and, on this issue, 30,000 people seem to have been unrepresented. There will very ýsoon be a provincial election,and thereis every reason to believe that this will be an election issue there as well, inasmuch as the chronic underfunding of Whiitby General Hospital, and the restru-cturing of hospitals in Durham Region bath emenate from the province. Here again, the lack of public and vocal support from the current MPPs- representing Durham Centre and -Durhamý East should be sufficient-.reason for voters ta question tlieir re-election. Many years ago, the province attempted ta close a number of local hospitals across the prvnce. In each case, the local MP -a member of the governing party -- joined with the local council, the local hospital board, and local citizeni? groups ta persuade the government ta change its direction. Today, in Whitby, the provincial government, through its agency, the District Health Council, is proposing ta close Whitby General Hospital. Unfortunately, it would appear that only the SOGH committee, and the 30,000 signataries ta the petition, are opposed ta this closure. Normian Mealing Whitby LYNDE MARS11.H Incumbents want to seal the deal before election Hospital board out of touch 'Undo the injustice', at Lynde Shores