Plebiscite not necessary in Springhill

Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

To the Editor,

On May 15, I attended the meeting in Springhill that reviewed the town's financials and explained why the decision was made to apply for the dissolution of town status.  

The reason was given, but many chose not to listen. When the forum was opened to questions, Murray Scott immediately, and I feel deliberately, ambushed and took control of the meeting, creating the environment for the negativity and hostility that followed.

Everyone has the right to express an opinion, but if someone strongly opposes something, you should have a better solution to the problem.

Demands were made by Mr. Scott for a plebiscite. This would only add to the debt load of an already financially-strapped town. I can only assume that those that want a plebiscite also want to pay more taxes if this amalgamation is halted.

Maybe I can send my higher tax bill to Mr. Scott for payment.

Perhaps I missed it, but I did not hear anyone come up with an alternate solution to our financial situation. Mayor Snow and council, made a very difficult and courageous decision that will benefit all Springhillers.  If Mr. Scott truly cared about the good people of this town, he will stop pushing for a plebiscite that will do nothing but lead us on a path of total destruction of this community. 

The situation we now find ourselves in is a result of many factors that go back several years. What was done then and since to "save the town:? How many jobs have been created here? How many new businesses? How many businesses closed? How many people encouraged to move here? The current mayor and council are taking the heat for years of mismanagement in Springhill.

Prior to retiring back to Springhill, I lived in Ontario where 17 communities were amalgamated into the City of Kawartha Lakes. That area is a shining example of how successful amalgamation can be. All communities maintained their identity. The area continues to thrive today. No plebiscite was held.

Would you rather live in a "town" with higher taxes, lower property values and little employment or a "community" that can prosper and draw new people and employment with the great asset base we have with the help of the county to develop? What's your choice?

Irene Albertson, Springhill


Geographic location: Springhill, Ontario, Kawartha Lakes

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Jack on the Rocks
    May 28, 2014 - 07:52

    Stick it to them Irene....everyone's only mad because they weren't informed from the start...if the fine folk had of paid some taxes/bills Springhill might not be in this mess...PS..Murray..go back to haven't been around for years....why start now???

  • Carmen Left
    May 27, 2014 - 04:28

    When they can not attack your message Irene. "They" will attack you ! Stay above the sewer they are trying to get you to swim in. any post that lacks as may facts as those attacking you , can only come from anger, not intellect. thank you for speaking up, my fellow Springhiller !

  • noodle
    May 26, 2014 - 11:22

    Carmen Wright - you really are making yourself look like a bully. It's okay to have an opinion but you really don't need to aggressively attack those who have an opinion that is different than yours. As far as Ms. Albertson moving back goes, I believe she stated she retired and came home - much like many others have done. Also, please do your research better - it was not Warden Hunter who said, "Anywhere but Springhill" in reference to the new jail. That statement was made by Coun. John Kellegrew who is a long time councillor for District 2 which is encompasses Fenwick and area just outside of Amherst. Warden Hunter was in support of the jail being in either Amherst or Springhill.

  • more of the same
    May 25, 2014 - 18:21

    Where is this voting hysteria misinformation coming from ? You already voted for your council and they are the decision makers . Items in Nova Scotia such School Board Jurisdiction , Health Board Jurisdiction , Provincial election riding boundries , Municipal boundries , and municipal governance configuration are not items that tax payers vote on directly... Those decisions are made by elected representatives . .. In this case town council of Springhill made a decision for this bottom up request for municipal amalgamation . The Province can and does order top down amalgamations such as was done to create HRM ... The taxpayers there had no vote , simply advised of the configuration of their new municipal government ...Springhillers like to huff and puff about the fact they are joining the dreaded County . When they get exhausted from all the huffing and puffing drama they get in their cars to drive to Amherst to shop or to their Cottage in the County : - )

    • Silas
      May 25, 2014 - 22:54

      Well put...

  • Irene Albertson
    May 24, 2014 - 12:53

    Mr. Wright, whoever gave you the information about me is definitely misinformed. I am indeed a Springhiller. I was born and brought up here and retired back here 10 years ago. I have voted in every municiple election since and pay my taxes to the Town of Springhill. As for your comment about my experience with amalgamation in Ontario, that community may indeed have a population of 72,000 now but they certainly didn't when the amalgamation took place. The growth in that area is a fine example of people working together.

    • Carmen Wright
      May 24, 2014 - 22:09

      I'm sorry... I must have been mistaken to think that living 6 or 7 houses past the Rodney sign equated to living in the county. My mistake. I'm glad that you have all the information YOU need to come to an informed decision about Springhill. Our taxes are not going to change, as in lower and we will be accountable for the debt and we will be giving assets away to a entity that will do nothing for the town. the county can't pave or do roadwork now, let alone service a town. Former mayor Dill had things under control and was decreasing the debt and the current mayor has no idea when he is doing and the counsel are selling out. They kept everything a secret and did this behind the towns back and you think this is right? You are truly a fool if you think this will be a positive experience. We will have base taxes plus pay more for additional Services if we want them... Services we now take for granted or did you miss what Warden Hunter said??? Just a reminder that he was the man who wanted the Provincial jail to go anywhere but Springhill when it was supposed to be built here or did you forget about that also? As for a plebiscite being a waste of time and money... if the current counsel can spend hundreds of thousands of dollars saying everything is bright and we will do well in 2014 (Mayor's words in January) to a state of panic 40 days later... saying we have no choice, what little is spent on a vote is nothing and ONLY the tax paying citizens should make that decision. Last time I checked we live in a county that we make our own decisions and voted!! Oh.. as for the population... there is just over 30,000 people in the entire county and you can't compare this county and Ontario. Plus it could not have been that good... you're back here.

  • Carmen Wright
    May 23, 2014 - 21:43

    I too attended the May 15th meeting at the SPRINGHILL COMMUNITY CENTER. Murray Scott was indeed demanding and visibly upset of the process that the ELECTED counsel chose. A counsel that YOU, Irene, did not vote in as you are NOT and never have lived in Springhill. the Success story that you speak of in Ontario had a population of over 72,000 people. Different province different circumstances. The Town Counsel "Numbers" were justifiably called into question as well as the integrity of the counsel's process that did not include the people that voted them in. It's well known that the Liberal faction in this town orchestrated the election of the mayor as well as 2 of the counselors worked against former mayor Allen Dill. How is this well known in the town?? There are a LOT of card carrying Liberals who are stating just that and in addition, they are speaking out on this issue. there is NO PLACE for party politics in this situation. Irene, your overbearing, condescending and sarcastic comments are inappropriate. You never lived in Springhill and STILL don't. The TAXPAYERS need to make this decision, not people who live on the outside of the town.

    • Irene Albertson
      May 24, 2014 - 09:47

      I do indeed live in Springhill. Was born and brought up here and retired back here ten years ago. I have voted in the elections and am a tax payer in Springhill

    • noodle
      May 24, 2014 - 16:31

      Ms. Albertson's comments were calm, rational and well thought out. Rather than offering a calm and rational counterpoint, you opted to accuse her of being a liar and not only maligned her opinion but also the way she expressed it. Attacking Ms. Albertson does absolutely nothing for your cause, but it certainly lends credibility to her comments about the viciousness of the May 15th meeting.

    • more of the same
      May 24, 2014 - 19:07

      Sorry to be repetitive but TAXPAYERS are not the decision makers in this process . The elected town council makes the decision for Springhill . Cumberland County Council or it's taxpayers have no say they just have to absorb . The province , URB is the other party to the decision other than the town council.....

  • noodle
    May 23, 2014 - 10:03

    Irene, that was one of the best explanations of what is going on that I've read so far. Your previous experience with amalgamation tells me your comments are well thought out and not based solely on speculation, like so many others'. It's so nice to hear from someone who doesn't have an angry mob mentality.

    • more of the same
      May 23, 2014 - 11:34

      The lady who slew the Bully with a single letter to the editor .

  • more of the same
    May 23, 2014 - 09:02

    My sentiments exactly . Time for Mr Scot to stop this tribal nonsense . Why doesn't the ADN do stories featuring enlightened people that support the benefits of working consrtuctively and co-operatively with neighbours instead of always writing up Murry's goofy negative stuff . He was totally blaise about the monstrous Provincial debt his government created ...Same approach now towards someone trying to fix the fallout from that Provincial debt .....Why should Springhillers have a vote on this amalgamation anyway ? The county folk don't have a vote .

  • Citizen Joe
    May 23, 2014 - 08:48

    Well said Irene. That is exactly what happened, the previous Mayor and Police Commission Chairman did nothing to help the newly elected council. They just took their ball and ran home. Amalgamation is the only way to go and right now we have the opportunity to have the Province assist us, once these other 10 Towns start dissolving we won't get the assistance needed, rather the Province will sit up a board, make strict rules and take considerable time for everyone to amalgamate, also this will cause a larger debt. You retired MLA's/MP's go enjoy your retirement with you large pensions and allow the minimum wage earner and senior citizen the ability to see a light at the end of the tunnel. The mayor and Council are doing what is best for the Town, which is more than any past MLA since Guy Brown.