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

- Orono Weekly Times Wednesday, June 30, 2004 Weekly Times Subscriptions $29.91 + $2.09 GST = $32.00 per year. Publications Mail Registration No. 09301 • Agreement No. 40012366 Publishing 48 issues annually at the office of publication. 'We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the.Publications Assistance Program (PAP) toward our mailing costs." Canada ORONO WEEKLY TIMES - 5310 Main St., P.O. Box 209, Orono, ON LOB 1M0 Email: oronotimes@rogers.com or Phone/Fax 905-983-5301 Publisher/Editor Margaret Zwart Sports and Display Advertising - Donna Battersby Front Office and Classified Advertising - Rosey Bateman The Orono Weekly Times welcomes letters to the editor on subjects of interest to our readers. Opinions expressed to the editor and articles are those of the writers and do not necessary refet the opinions ( 3 ^^®.£ rc ? f n ° • . Y times Letters must be signed and contain the address and phone number of the writer. Any letter considered unsuitable will not be acknowledged or returned. We reserve the right to edit for length, libel and slander. Ifyour retail or classified ad appears for the first time, please check carefully. Notice of an error must be given before the next issue goes to print. The Orono Weekly Times will not be responsible for the loss or damage of such items. Directions If it weren't for the prolification of election signs on our roadsides these past 38 days; for most of us, it would have been easy to forget we were in the midst of an election campaign. Having a local candidate in the race made the campaign campaign more interesting from our perspective. In fact, Oda received 46 per cent of the vote in Orono, well above the results in the rest of the Riding. While the leader of the Conservative Party, Stephen Harper, and the Liberal Leader, Prime Minister Paul Martin made stops in Bowmanville during this campaign, campaign, Orono did not even rate a whistle stop. The CBC however, did make their way to Orono last week Friday in anticipation of the Prime Ministers's visit. When the CBC van pulled into town and parked in front of our library, I naturally had to inquire as to the nature of their visit. The driver informed me that the Prime Minister was going to be at the Clarington Library on Church Street that morning, and as the sign on the Library lawn read "Clarington Library', and they were on Church Street, all they had to do was sit and wait. When I informed them that the Prime Minister was scheduled to stop at the Clarington Library's Main Branch on Church Street in Bowmanville, not the 'Clarke Branch' in Orono, they were totally confused. Wondering where Bowmanville was--the crew asked for directions. They turned the van around and got out of town as quickly as possible. While the Prime Minister probably doesn't know that Orono even exists, we can be comforted by the fact the CBC has to come to Orono to get directions to Bowmanville. Viewpoint by Rob MacDonald A skunk is a skunk Last Wednesday night, I attended the fifth of five public public information sessions, held throughout Durham Region, regarding "Bio-solids." The Bowmanville session was held at the Garnet Rickard Centre. As I am more wont to call a spade a spade, the sessions were really concerning sewage sludge! The consultants consultants for the Region also like the politically correct "landfill" "landfill" and "soil enrichment", but I know they mean "dump" and "sewage sludge disposal". You can call a skunk the cute little moniker, 'Pcpc la Pew', but he still smells like a skunk! The Region had five representatives representatives at the meeting who had set up a large impressive display, along with a presentation, presentation, question-and-answer period, followed by a request that the public complete a survey. survey. There were four of us representing the general public, public, amongst whom was our Regional councillor, Mr Charlie Trim. None of us could complain about not being given the opportunity to voice our concerns! Let's be clear. Sewage sludge - "bio-solids" - isn't just human sewage. Therefore, it's not just a nontoxic nontoxic human version of manure. My concerns about the 'fertilization' of our foodgrowing foodgrowing lands stem not from the disposal of human excrement excrement on farmer's fields, but from the fact that the sludge contains all kinds of stuff other than some human excrement. excrement. Manure has been used forever forever by farmers, to their great benefit. Again, sewage sludge isn't manure! National Geographic magazine once wrote that a city of 100,000 uses 4 tons of toilet bowl cleaner and an equal amount of drain cleaner PER MONTH! Where docs it go? People and industry dispose of a toxic stew of chemicals down their drains - pharmaceuticals pharmaceuticals (outdated and ingested), ingested), paints, solvents, heavy metals, oil, chemical fertilizer, phosphates and on and on! Sewage plants are not equipped to adequately eliminate eliminate all of these substances. When they concentrate the sludge and send it out to be dumped on farmer's fields, those chemicals are introduced introduced into our food chain and water tables. The Region issues application licences that allow them to apply 17,000 gallons/acre over a five year period. Since it's more cost-efficient for those applying it, the whole 17,000 gal/acre are usually injected into the soil, over a couple of days, instead of applying one fifth of it, once a year, over five years! They do have to make sure they stay at least 300' from a shallow well! The other method of disposal the Region utilizes is incineration, but the consultants informed us that the preferred method is dumping the sludge on food- lands. Sadly their fancy presentation presentation did nothing to allay VIEWPOINT sh page 3 Letter to the Editor Parking contradiction Dear Editor: I enjoy reading your paper and appreciate the local coverage. coverage. Although last week's coverage coverage (June 23 6 04) on local parking issues, left me very confused. On pages one and four, local councillors and planning staff are looking into waiving the parking requirements for a new store in Newcastle. Under the law they are required to provide five parking parking spaces and they only have two. Then on page five, the mayor and local councillors want to have parking enforcement enforcement officers out on weekends to enforce the parking downtown. downtown. One can only reason that it is OK for the businesses businesses not to provide parking, but if the little person parks where they need to so they can access the businesses, then they will be ticketed and/or towed. The irony between these two columns is very funny and sad at the same time. Is local government concerned concerned about parking or not? Or is it that they are not concerned concerned about parking when it concerns a high-end business but they are when it concerns your and my vehicles? This raises another question question with regards to the parking parking officer who is now working working weekends. Is this just a change of the existing hours or is this an increase of hours. If it is an increase of hours, please remember that it is our tax dollars that are paying for this (our tax dollars are also paying for the local councillor's councillor's raise to provide clear and fair leadership). Why must we pay for the enforcement of parking if the business has no responsibility for providing parking? If anyone can justify this apparent contradiction on parking, 1 would be very interested. interested. Thank you. S. Duquette Orono