Thanks for a strong editorial, and a good rebuttal to those that might want to shut down everything in Meaford.
But - and a very important sort of 'but' - kindly reread this part of the argument: "The fact is that ... you can't put a dollar value on providing a quality of life that is beneficial to your residents".
Well, if we don't put a dollar value on the benefits, then, very simply, the time wasn't taken to analyze the spending decisions adequately.
Do the benefits outweigh the costs ? Is there better value available for those same funds ? Are smart decisions being made for the limited funds available ? And, just as important, are follow-up reviews made to ensure that the benefits were as expected and the costs in line ? Without a detailed statement of the expectations, we can't know if the money was well spent.