We got the glossy "Recreation Referendum" brochure in the mail. (Nice pictures, but "restaurant/lounge"? "private suites?" That makes one think!)
So the proponents want us to borrow $20 million. That's about $650 for every man, woman, and child in Campbell River, by my very rough calculation. And that's before the inevitable cost over-runs. (I refer you to the projections and the present estimated cost of the BC Convention Center!)
Don't these people read the local newspapers at all? Don't they understand the spin-off effects of massive layoffs?
Well, according to the brochure, "these are changing economic times" and we have "the highest number of building permits in recent history". So maybe an obvious economic downturn doesn't count this time.
Really? What kind of economic analysis is that? We know for sure that the people buying those houses aren't bringing their kids, because there are no squads of new kids showing up at school. This probably means they're either retired or buying something to retire to. And the thing about retired people is they, for the most part, live on investment income. Those are the very same investments that are being beaten up in the markets at rates unrivalled since the Great Depression. A major tax hike is the last thing those people need at present!
Anyways where, in the entire plan, are the improved recreational opportunities for retired people? I'm a fit and active 64, and I saw nothing that could apply to me at all.
Where's the completed Sea Walk, for example?
No, this is a plan for the geniuses who brought us the Cruise Ship Terminal that has no cruise ships, for the business consortium that wants to bring in a Junior A hockey team, for the business people who think they can maybe bring in trade shows and conventions. I don't mind paying taxes, and I do support an improved sports infrastructure, particularly for our kids. If the Robron complex were the only thing on offer, I'd probably vote for it.
But I'm not supporting a plan that "could see Campbell River become the next major centre, a hub for tourism, industry and services" on the back of my property taxes.
Furthermore, I won't vote for anyone who does.
1 comment:
Postscript:
The referendum failed spectacularly (33% to 66%) in spite of a City investment of over $38,000 in pro-referendum publicity.
My letter was among the first published on the topic, and resulted in many supporting comments, including one totally unsolicited phonecall from someone I don't know, thanking me for writing it! That just doesn't happen.
Post a Comment