2012 CC Work Sessions
11/22/2016 2:48:21 PM
11/16/2016 9:15:09 AM
City of Seward Legislative Hist
Doc Type - Legislative History
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
All rights reserved.
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View plain text
TO: Mayor Seaward <br /> City Council Members:Jean Bardarson,Ristine Casagranda,Marianna Keil,Christy Terry,Vanta <br /> Shafer,Robert Valdatta, <br /> City Manager,Jim Hunt <br /> FROM: Maya Moriarty,Lead,Oral Health,Seward Wellness For All <br /> DATE: September 23,2012 <br /> RE: Ordinance 2012-009 <br /> In reference to the above Ordinance scheduled for public hearing on September 24,2012,please consider <br /> the following for discussion. <br /> BACKGROUND: In October 2009,the Seward community voted in favor of implementing community <br /> water fluoridation. On February 22,2010,City Council approved Resolution 2010-015 in support of the <br /> community vote and also directed the city manager to conduct a feasibility study concentrating on <br /> "equipment, training, infrastructure, and safeguards of adding fluoride to the City's water system" This <br /> information would be used to make a final determination prior to the appropriation of funds. <br /> http://history.cityofseward.net/Weblink8/DocView.aspx?id=18005&searchid=8eb294dc-85c9-427d-8e60- <br /> de04e81673d1 <br /> The feasibility study will most likely occur after improvements are made to Seward's water infrastructure, <br /> which is sound economics. <br /> ORDINANCE 2012-009 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT: This ordinance is about establishing <br /> criteria for substances added to public drinking water for purposes unrelated to potability. <br /> As Lead to the Oral Health subgroup,I ask Council to read the fine print of this proposed ordinance very <br /> carefully and conduct your own research as to the viability of this proposal as written. Dr.John French,a <br /> doctorate of toxicology,warned that the ordinance is not all that it appears to be. In addition,Resolution <br /> 2010-015's feasibility study will satisfy Ms. Casagranda's concerns regarding due diligence from a cost <br /> standpoint. From a safety standpoint,Ms.Casagranda is providing false statements with the purpose of <br /> persuading the public to her opinion(which is not factually supported)and pursue a personal agenda. <br /> I have reviewed the Ordinance in detail and have also requested assistance from experts in the field. Here <br /> are the most egregious points which are phrased in the complete paragraph in such a way to incite fear. <br /> 1st WHEREAS—the Evironmental Protection Agency gave up all enforceable oversight responsibilities <br /> for direct water additives in 1988 and there are now no federal safety standards. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.