Waterloo Public Library

The long-awaited westside branch has commenced construction – the Harper Branch of the WPL will be part of the larger and equally exciting YMCA/WPL/City of Waterloo complex that is being built at the corner of Laurelwood Drive and Fischer-Hallman.

People who don’t think it’s a good idea to expand the library often make general comments about “libraries” – that the internet makes them obsolete and that it’s a waste of their tax dollars to invest them in this way.   That people don’t read anymore.   That kids don’t use the library.  Well, they are wrong.   Flat out wrong.

I have a multitude of arguments at the ready for this issue – starting with “you sure don’t snuggle up with your kid and a computer to read him/her a bedtime story” and invariably leading to ” we’re arguably a community populated by intelligent people  … any ideas how we got so darn smart?”

This article from a year or so ago sums it up nicely.  Waterloo Council has re-established a very strong committment to our libraries and the community will continue to benefit beautifully from that.

Educated population helps library succeed

Liz Monteiro

While the number of visitors at public libraries in North America has flatlined because of internet technology, the Waterloo Public Library is experiencing a resurgence.

Over the past five years, visits increased an average of nine per cent a year, chief librarian Cathy Matyas says.

“We have refreshed and developed a more relevant library,” Matyas said. “We have literally moved every book in this library in the last four years.”

Waterloo is an educated community, influenced by the universities and institutions such as the Perimeter Institute, she said. Not only are people interested in the usual recreational books, such as cookbooks, but they’re also reading about quantum physics and astronomy.

“People read in different ways here than they do in other communities,” said Matyas, who has worked in libraries for 25 years. “People are reading in droves.”

Reporting on a survey in 2006, the American Library Association said public library usage had remained steady for four years.

But last year in Waterloo, 1.3 million items, including books, DVDs, videos and other library materials were borrowed — exceeding projections, Matyas said.

Half the population of Waterloo are library cardholders.

“I don’t think there is any other municipal service used by half of the population,” she said.

Library staff are constantly evaluating new technology, she said. “It’s a huge challenge developing collections for people,” Matyas said.

By the end of the year, both branches will have user-friendly kiosks, where borrowers can sign out their own library materials.

The main branch will have five kiosks and the McCormick branch two. Matyas also hopes to install a kiosk at RIM Park, where a library doesn’t yet exist but is in the plans.

The City of Waterloo has planned for an east end library branch in its 2012 capital budget. Before that, a library will be built on the west side. Council approved the plan to build a joint library and YMCA at Fischer-Hallman Road and Laurelwood Drive in 2011.

The library has a fundraising goal of $500,000 and has raised half of it by naming rooms and spaces after individual and corporate donors.

The 2008 library budget is $3.9 million, with $3.6 million coming from the City of Waterloo. The library receives an annual provincial grant of about $126,000.

In 2003, the Waterloo library was the lowest funded library of its size in the province. But funding is increasing, and by 2011, the library budget will be $4.5 million.

Matyas said she’s glad the city is committing to more money for the library, despite the city’s debt from the financing of RIM Park.

“You can’t close your eyes to this,” said of the library appeal to the public.

Fluoride debate, continued

 

Hmmm… I guess I have now formally shared my fluoropinion.

It’s up to the citizens of Waterloo to weigh the entire body of evidence, determine their parameters and vote in the referendum. 

 

The fluoride debate: New decade, same controversy

October 17, 2009

By Jeff Outhit, Record staff

WATERLOO — Pay attention to this word, fluoride. You may soon hear it a lot.

A decades-old controversy, out of public view for years, has erupted anew. Critics are once again attacking the fluoridation of drinking water. A public referendum is planned for Nov. 8, 2010.

The last time this was an issue here, Pierre Trudeau was prime minister, music was recorded on vinyl, and Great Britain was warring with Argentina. It was 1982.

The players have changed. The arguments haven’t.

Fluoride is added to water as a public health measure to help prevent tooth decay. This is common in Ontario, endorsed as safe and effective by a long list of health groups.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control has called it one of the top 10 public health achievements of the last century.

But locally, Waterloo is the only city to add fluoride to its water. The same fluoridated water is also sent to St. Jacobs and Elmira in Woolwich Township, to a small portion of Kitchener, and to a few houses in Wilmot Township. They all share a water system.

Here’s what you can expect to hear in the coming months:

 • Proponents will say the weight of the credible science strongly shows that adding fluoride strengthens tooth enamel and limits cavities, with no known health risks.

 • Critics will claim the chemical used to fluoridate water is a threat. They will dismiss scientific assertions that fluoridation is sound. They will allege health risks including cancer, bone disease and dental damage.

 • Fluoride proponents will in turn dismiss their assertions as scientifically unfounded.

While you ponder these competing health claims, it will become clear that disputes over science are just one part of the controversy. It’s also about personal rights, passionate opinions, and the fairness of the referendum process.

The last time this debate erupted, Waterloo was put on a rollercoaster.

The city has fluoridated its water since 1967. In 1981, critics forced a first referendum to get it out.

Neighbours erected competing lawn signs. People called each other names. A leading pro-fluoride campaigner said she was threatened anonymously.

“It was quite nasty,” recalls Marjorie Carroll, Waterloo’s mayor at the time.

Carroll supports fluoridation. She recalls being sent a postcard written in letters snipped from publications, like a ransom note from a kidnap caper. It said: “A fist in the face to you.”

Residents were asked to vote on an awkward question not written in plain English: “Are you in favour of the discontinuance of the fluoridation of the public water supply of this municipality?”

Mary Jane Mewhinney, on city council at the time, campaigned against fluoride. She contends it’s a violation of personal rights to force everyone to drink it.

“I was just very upset by the fact that you didn’t have a choice,” she recalls.

Fluoride critics lost the bitter 1981 referendum by just 313 votes. Undaunted, they pressed for a second referendum, held just 17 months later.

For the second vote, fluoride proponents pursued a low-key campaign, calculating it would be foolish to get into another shouting match.

Both sides adopted a more civil tone, Carroll recalls. Unlike the first referendum, the second vote was held during a municipal election. This put fluoride on a longer list of issues for the public to ponder.

In 1982, the pro-fluoride margin swelled to 2,838 residents. Fluoridation critics conceded a decisive defeat.

The issue fell out of public view, until Waterloo Coun. Angela Vieth revived it almost three decades later.

“I’m just pleased that it’s going to be brought up again,” Mewhinney said.

“I’m really quite surprised that this has come up again,” Carroll said.

Vieth has been unable to persuade council to stop fluoridating water. But her determined opposition to the practice has led to another public referendum, to be held during the next municipal election.

“We’re adding toxic waste to our perfectly fine drinking water,” Vieth said.

She’s persuaded fluoride has damaged the health of some residents. “I’m convinced that we shouldn’t be doing this. People are suffering because of it. We need to turn it off,” she said.

Coun. Karen Scian sees the debate as a controversy foisted on the public by one determined councillor who has limited community support.

She winces at the language used by Vieth and other critics to attack fluoride.

“You’re going to hear lots of words like toxic soup and poison and all sorts of things from the other side of the story,” Scian says. “It’s inflammatory.”

Scian is persuaded fluoridation is safe, effective and supported by science.

The latest Waterloo referendum is part of a wave of antifluoridation campaigns launched since 2008 in Ontario.

Several councils, including Hamilton, have voted to continue with fluoridation. Other councils, including Niagara and Thunder Bay, have balked at fluoridation.

Vieth points out the looming referendum on fluoride is unlikely to bind politicians. That’s because voter turnout is unlikely to exceed 50 per cent, the threshold required by law to make it binding.

“To me, it’s a waste of time, it’s a waste of effort, it’s a waste of money,” Vieth said.

She’s not reassured by the local tradition of respecting referendum results.

The public health department endorses fluoridation.

Authorities point to a rate of tooth decay among Waterloo schoolchildren at 32 per cent. That’s below the rate of 33 per cent in Cambridge and below the rate of 44 per cent in Kitchener, according to a 2006 study.

“It is a safe and effective way to prevent tooth decay, for a large number of people at a low cost,” said Dr. Liana Nolan, medical officer of health. “And there’s no known health risks associated with drinking fluoridated water within the recommended levels.”

Dr. Harry Hoediono, a Waterloo resident who practises family dentistry in Kitchener, says he sees far more tooth decay among the Kitchener children he sees than among Waterloo children.

He accuses fluoridation critics of practising a “misinformation campaign” that’s not based on credible science.

But if fluoridation is so safe and effective, why are authorities not pressing to also add it to drinking water in Kitchener and Cambridge?

“It’s my role to promote community water fluoridation,” Nolan said. “It’s not my role to force that on people.”

Kitchener residents voted against fluoridation in 1958 and again in 1967. The last result was 42 years ago, when the Beatles ruled the radio and before man walked on the moon.

Today, about a third of Kitchener residents wrongly believe their water is fluoridated, a public health survey found.

“We do know there is some confusion in the public’s mind,” Nolan said.

jouthit@therecord.com