Readers weigh in on rail

In your editorial "This court ruling must be appealed" (23 July), you argue against the court decision to exclude Orangeville's mayor and deputy mayor (and their thirteen weighted votes) from any county vote on whether to accept the Highland Group's purchase of the OBRAG railway.

You forget that the railway extension, if built, will run through rural townships, not the town of Orangeville. You overlook the $7 million that Orangeville - not the rural townships hosting the proposed extension - will receive if the vote is favourable.

There is a rural movement to prevent Highlands from opening a gravel pit, which - if it goes to the OMB for adjudication - will be approved. Obstructing the railway extension is the only method the NDACT has of overruling the OMB. It is not a tool they would willingly relinquish in an Orangeville-dominated vote.

Incidentally, have the good people of Orangeville who live near the existing railway or drive over the level crossings thought about the effect of many more long freight trains on their peace and mobility? Perhaps they should talk to their mayor.

Charles Hooker

Orangeville

- - o- -

Re: Rail Decision - Orangeville to file appeal

Why are we appealing? It seems like a just decision of a clear conflict even though it's bad for us. How much more will the appeal cost? Is it possible that rail deal is about to fall apart? Is council so dependant on the $7 million that the town has no other option but to file an appeal where there seems to be no hope of winning?

Here we have one tier of government fighting another tier with Orangeville ratepayers funding both sides. Can the province not step in and settle this matter for free?

Are you out there Dalton, Sylvia?

Let's hope this deal goes through otherwise what will happen with future tax increases... hold on to your wallets.

Chris Thompson

Orangeville