To the Editor,
I was extremely pleased to read the December 16th Editorial, “Remote Participation Must Be Allowed”.
I have been asking for many months for resumption of Zoom …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
|
To the Editor,
I was extremely pleased to read the December 16th Editorial, “Remote Participation Must Be Allowed”.
I have been asking for many months for resumption of Zoom participation in City Council and other city meetings.
I have been told it is too expensive but have never been given a cost estimate, so, is it ‘too expensive’? What is the cost for citizen participation in our government?
The Beacon reported on December 16 that $16 million in ARPA funds have still not yet been designated. These funds should be used for citywide purposes. Newport is using some of their ARPA funds for this purpose - why doesn’t our city? Why should the disabled, seniors, working individuals, parents, etc, who cannot attend in person, be denied participation in Council,
Planning Board, School Committee, and other governmental meetings when the technology exists to provide it?
Barbara Walsh
Warwick
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here