“Why are culture, history and tourism being used to trump NOTL residents’ need for meaningful health care and seniors’ facilities?” writes Gee Rende.

“The only possible way of a return to democracy by this council, as seen by this writer, would be for Mr. Niven to now decline the position offered, even though he has accepted, in the face of obvious public outrage,” writes Derek Collins.

“If NOTL doesn’t defend itself and developers are allowed to do whatever they want, what is the cost to the community in terms of quality of life and property values?” writes Stewart Hall.

“We applaud library board and staff members who uphold the principles of neutrality, viewpoint diversity, free speech and intellectual freedom,” writes FAIR in Libraries.

“The dam has now broken. We can either submit to going under or insist that changes be made to this behaviour,” writes Terry Mactaggart.

“As a member of an election team that spent long hours, walking endless miles, at no small cost, to reach out to the NOTL electorate only to have the practice tossed away as irrelevant … I find (that) infuriating and disheartening to say the least,” writes Carol Williams.

“The lord mayor just missed a golden opportunity to change the tone and build trust,” writes Paul Kirkconnell, following up his Aug. 8 letter about the municipality’s response to the July protest held outside NOTL town hall.

“By not following the precedent established by previous councils … (council) has, in my view, turned away from democracy and fairness. And, it has yet to justify or explain the rationale for its decision,” writes Terry Davis.

“Why was this done in-camera? What criteria did council use to select Andrew Niven? Where is the transparency? Why does council seem to not listen to voters opinions?” writes Sandra Hardy.

“The democratic process in which the electorate can express an opinion has been completely ignored by this council,” writes Derek Collins.

“Of the numerous benefits offered by mature trees, the one most valued by me is the mental and spiritual well-being that I experience when in the presence of these silent members of our community,” writes Win Laar.

“It should be perfectly clear to the town’s residents where our priorities lie, without the need for another survey to obfuscate the issue,” writes Paul and Elizabeth Masson.

“It appeared that town council was in a rush to quietly pass as many approvals for developments by amending the official plan, rezoning, completely ignoring the parking and traffic challenges and the availability of services,” writes Luba Fraser.

“The electorate is fed up with our ever-increasing taxes, at a time when we continue to lose critical infrastructure,” writes Samuel Young.

“How does the town expect us bus drivers to do our job of transporting tourists from hotels to wineries when we aren’t even allowed to park close to the hotel to pick up these tourists?” writes Barry Wilding.

“It is obvious that bylaw enforcement really is flawed and in trouble and Patrick Devine’s comprehensive reporting on heritage is a real eyeopener,” writes Christopher Allen.

“All efforts should be made to follow the process under the Ontario Heritage Act to adopt a new, comprehensive heritage conservation district plan for the Old Town,” writes Patrick Devine.

“Why are residents of Niagara-on-the-Lake having to sue the town for non-enforcement of its own bylaws?” writes John Morley.

“Everyone in the decision-making process had prior knowledge that the infrastructure was inadequate to handle any new developments that increased water drainage, so would they be personally liable?” writes Gienek Ksiazkiewicz.

“Huge thanks to all the dedicated volunteers and participants — you make this world a better place,” writes run organizer Joan King. “You embody the passion and energy ‘no matter what’ it takes to beat this dreaded disease.”

“I have never attended one of the town’s 9/11 ceremonies,” writes Elizabeth Masson. “I prefer to watch the ceremonies at the World Trade Center, at the Pentagon, and in Shanksville, Pa., in which family members of those who died that day participate.”

“I understand that Bell takes the position it cannot do anything to prevent incursions into Canada by U.S. communication towers, but I do not understand why Bell takes the position that it is the subscriber who must bear the risk and the cost,” writes Endre Mecs.

“Want to know why some residents think there are two sets of planning rules in NOTL? Because planning on a case-by-case basis is becoming the norm … and it just doesn’t work,” writes Lyle Hall.

“Right now, people have to pay out of pocket for the test, which means many men cannot afford to get the test,” writes MPP Wayne Gates. “Many others choose to forgo the test … they assume, due to the fee, the test is optional or not important.”

“If we tried all day we couldn’t possibly come up with something that could look worse,” writes Ken Porter.