Your Worship Mayor Sobeski and Members of Council:
Let me begin by thanking you for having requested that clarification
regarding medical condition complaints be included in the Open Air Burning
By-Law.
The response in Item I-1 of tonight’s agenda, is to include
“a new Sentence” in the By-Law, referring to “an established Woodstock Fire
Department policy”. I would respectfully
request a commitment to making that policy public, given that two weeks ago no
one, including most of you, seemed to know of its existence. Unless the details are available to the
public, I don’t think you are meeting your own Accountability and Transparency
Policy.
I would like to know, for example, the radius of the smoke
free area around an affected home.
In my home we had a carbon monoxide detector set off by a fire pit about
130 ft. away.
We heard here on April 4 how both the number of permits and
the number of complaints have increased.
With greater public awareness of the medical
condition policy, I expect the trend to continue.
For implementation I am imagining a map of
the city at the Fire Dept. with thumbtacks marking affected homes, and little
circles drawn around them representing the “no burn” areas.
But how many thumbtacks will there be?
According to the Canadian Lung Association,
over 8% of the Canadian population suffers from asthma.
Add the homes where residents suffer from
heart problems or COPD.
And what about pregnant women, who are
supposed to avoid second hand smoke?
I trust they will be eligible for the no-burn zone privilege?
And since second-hand smoke is a risk
factor for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, I expect that homes with babies will
also qualify?
I think that you may be facing an
administrative and a public relations nightmare, as you grant permits, get complaints,
get doctor’s notes, revoke permits, and if you collect fees, you will be
refunding fees… lots more money spent on administration.
I wonder too if the city might be facing
liability issues in the future, as you know, or ought to know, that wood smoke
may cause very serious health problems.
At the Council meeting on April 4 there was discussion
regarding the permit fees in the proposed Open Air Burning By-Law.
No one mentioned the costs to individuals adversely affected
by the smoke, or the costs to society of poor air quality, so I will speak to
those issues.
Doctor’s notes
Doctors may or may not charge for notes. I called my family’s doctor’s office,
and their charge for a note is $20.00.
I can pay that, but I’m not a senior on a fixed income.
Medication
In my own home, we stock prescription “puffers” for asthma,
and over-the-counter antihistamines.
There is a direct correlation between poor air quality and necessary
consumption of both of those.
I don’t know about heart or COPD medications, but perhaps there are some
people watching at home right now who would like to tell you what poor air
quality costs them for medications or other treatments.
Energy costs
It seems to be taken for granted that those who don’t want
to be exposed to their neighbours’ smoke can just go inside, close their doors
and windows, and turn on their air conditioning. We are being forced to consume – and pay – for more power than
we otherwise would. I will
remind you here of your recently endorsed Strategic Plan, Objective 15: Reduce our energy consumption.
Physical suffering
It’s not a monetary cost, but as Chief Tegler pointed out on
April 4: not everyone has air
conditioning. What kind of choice
are you forcing on citizens, who either have to leave their windows open and
breathe their neighbours’ toxic smoke, or close their windows and endure stifling
heat.
Costs to society
On May 21 2009
Woodstock hosted the first Southwestern Ontario Clean Air Summit. Maybe some of you were there. Woodstock was a signatory to an
Intergovernmental Declaration on Clean Air. The full text is on the internet; here are two excerpts:
“The Ontario Medical Association
estimates that in 2005 air pollution in Southwestern Ontario caused almost 1300
premature deaths and health care costs from hospital emergency room visits was
in the amount of $112 million.”
Of course we all pay the cost of those
hospital visits. 2nd
quote:
“By sharing the best practices from
jurisdictions across Southwestern Ontario and beyond, we can support one
another in achieving improvements in air quality and climate change at
the local and regional level for the benefit of all.”
I suggest to you that those “best practices”
are demonstrated by the virtual elimination of open air burning , as in Guelph,
Cambridge, and Waterloo.
No comments:
Post a Comment