Richard Peddie, in his RTT letter to the editor, promoting the “What Makes Amherstburg Great” initiative, states, “Sure there are the small group of people who complain about its weaknesses and think it was far better years past; but how about we ignore them?”

Sounds like the toxic positivity that’s so prevalent in Amherstburg – focus on the positive and ignore any perceived negativity, even when it exists.

Positivity only becomes problematic when it functions to reject negative emotions—if someone responded to a disclosure of distress, for example, with “It’s all for the best, “Just try to be positive,” or “Good vibes only!”
– Psychology Today

Let’s not confuse complaints with constructive criticism, which good leaders welcome and incorporate to make improvements.

Also, one should avoid generalizations, for example, that if people complain they think it was far better in years past. People complain for any number of reasons.

I think those celebrating the town’s heritage must think it was far better in years past. Why else would historic buildings be restored to their ‘former glory’?

Richard Peddie explained during an am800 interview the River Bookshop is an 1887 building and they weren’t accessible in those days.

Too often heritage takes precedence over accessibility; sometimes accessibility is not even incorporated in the initial planning stages, all of which is contrary to the human rights code. Not everyone is aware that heritage buildings can be made accessible.

The River Bookshop, for example, wasn’t renovated to make the entrance level with the sidewalk, no elevator was installed to the second floor, and no automatic door was installed.

Sometimes it takes complaints, like human rights complaints, to effect change.

The Peddies, as the River Bookshop owners, are Respondents to a human rights complaint – not because it was far better in the past, but because we’re now in 2026 where a rights-based approach to disability inclusion is the best model of disability.