Gazette Disappoints Again

Re: Hard Times (Editorial, May 20). I find your editorial troubling in several ways. The Gazette has often tried to position itself and the free press as bastions of democracy and free speech in a deeply troubled world. That stance I find deeply ironic, given that your paper regularly refuses to print letters that do not correspond with your views.  Letters from myself and from other writers have almost routinely been ignored because they take a view contrary to your own. This is something I would expect to see happen in places where democracy is not the case.

PEC has two local newspapers, for which we should be grateful, but it is sad to see one paper trashing a personal column in The Times and attacking Councillor Engelsdorfer, who has made clear that he separates his duties as a Councillor and as owner of a paper (and there are other members of Council who have potential conflicts of interest when dealing with certain matters at Council).  

Yes, possibly Rick went a bit far in his description of the Housing committee, but let’s face it, this Committee has achieved little if anything in several years, has nothing concrete in its pipeline and deserves to be held to account.  It is hard to defame someone, or a group of people, when the accusations are largely true.  

Likewise, Council, its staff and our mayor need to be held to account, particularly when they are talking about spending large sums of taxpayer money and putting the County at serious financial risk.  On the contrary, however, the approach of your paper has been almost sycophantic towards Council and towards developers, to the point where one might suspect that there are hidden ties to one or both.

Perhaps your paper is frustrated that The Times has a more loyal reader base and that many of us appreciate Rick’s willingness to tackle local political issues head on. We may not always agree with his views, but he is always worth reading. As for The Gazette…. well, it’s usually about two pages of fairly bland news items and then the rest is mostly real estate ads, a very short read. 

With its long history as one of Canada’s oldest newspapers that is rather disappointing.

Kevin and Sheila Hanbury, Wellington

Delhi the Worst Place for Pickleball

Re: Delhi Best Place for Pickleball (Letters, May 27). If you visit the community gardens in Delhi Park, you will see people working quietly, or sitting at picnic tables talking about their gardens and how to best grow things. It’s a travesty that they will be subjected to the noise from six pickleball courts directly across the road from them, never mind the increased traffic. Six courts is 24 people playing with a changeover after matches. And at least 12 cars. Playing goes until 9:30 at night so there is no relief for anyone for 12 hours a day. 

Our community gardeners face noise and, potentially, health issues. It is disingenuous for Prince Edward Pickleball to insist that they are only taking up an acre of the park. The noise generated will take away the quiet enjoyment from acres of the park. 

The Pickleball club says it is willing to work with everyone. To that end, The Friends of Delhi park requested a meeting that was attended by the PB club as well as representatives from PEPtBO, the Heritage Committee, the Community Gardens, the two adjacent cemeteries, and private citizens.  We asked to see a layout of the courts, for assurances that no trees would be harmed, a sound attenuation study, etc.  Nothing has been forthcoming. We also asked that this whole process be slowed down until it could be properly studied. 

A sound attenuation study from a similar project in Seattle involving eight courts makes clear how loud the courts are and how far the noise travels. 

There are dozens of articles about the health issues caused by the constant noise — and lawsuits in Canada to stop the play. We should not let it get to this point.

Monica Kingenberg, Prince Edward County

Market Correction 

Re: Market Season (News, May 6). I I would like to address a statement attributed to Patricia McDermott. You quote Ms. McDermott as saying her market was “forced out of the Church parking lot by a group of vendors.” This characterization is not accurate.

The Wellington United Church issued a call for proposals for use of the space. The Wellington Farmers’ Market did not submit a proposal for that opportunity. As a result, the Church selected a different proposal and chose to rent their parking lot to the Wellington Community Market. At no point was Patricia McDermott “forced out” by another group. Her previous lease arrangement with the Church operated on a year-to-year basis. Given the importance of clarity on this matter, it is essential that readers understand the distinction between perception and the documented process that took place.

We support a not-for-profit, vibrant, community-focused market environment in the heart of Wellington. Profits from this market are donated to charitable organizations in our community. Accurate reporting plays an important role in maintaining public trust.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide this clarification.

Natalie Normand, Wellington Community Market Board