Letters to the Editor (4): Thursday, Sept. 14, 2023

[ad_1]

Development concerns for Naramata Bench

Dear Editor:

I have questions to the Council regarding their strategy to develop Penticton and Naramata Bench.

The proposed Reservoir Road rezoning is to reduce the currently rural lot size to the urban by 2.5 times.

Are we seeing attempts by developer interests to ruin our ecosystem, our agriculture and the thriving tourism on the Naramata Bench?

Here are further questions to the Council:

Why are we discussing the aggressive and expensive new growth up in remote areas that will affect a lot of traffic and businesses on the Bench, instead of focusing on what the majority of the locals agree on: affordable urban construction close to all existing amenities?

Does this city need to become another Kelowna? Does this city have the large-scale infrastructure required to support a lot of growth? Or do we have several months wait for some vital exams at our hospital, four-year-plus wait to get a family physician, no government daycares, not enough schools and no room to expand our inner city roads?

What is the calculated growth that the existing city infrastructure can support?

Is this council listening to what the tourism-creating businesses on the Bench, the environmental experts and the rural community are telling them: that new urban growth will destroy them? Are we about to begin slaughtering the hen that lays golden eggs?

What is wrong with the city planning to grow in other spots that do not include destructive effects on the local tourism and agriculture?

Is the council aware of the cost of remediating soil erosion, annual water runoff, repairs of exposed utilities and property damage caused by mudslides in Naramata Vista; expensive wildfire-fighting on the slopes of West Kelowna? Loss of business for everyone locally during a local wildfire? Is our council aware that this all is caused by building on mountain slopes?

Are we about to destroy the fragile environmental balance on Naramata Bench?

The developers are in the business of building.

Is Penticton council in the business of protecting the interests of pentictonites? Did the council review the documented results of the lengthy and extensive public opinion polls done lately on the Spiller Rd project – which put on record that the majority of the polled citizens are against building urban on Naramata Bench?

Is this Council willing to fight its own electorate over what the majority of the tourists and the locals view is the beginning of the destruction of the iconic Naramata Bench?

Olga Magyar

Penticton

Poor wording in recent online survey question

Dear Editor:

A recent opinion question elicited a strong response, about 80%, in favour of building a second Penticton-Kelowna highway.

Interestingly, the phrasing of the question, probably unintentionally, parroted the government obfuscation model for Friday afternoon announcements of past or planned expenditures.

The question simply asked if the reader favoured an obviously substantial “investment” in new highway construction. One must wonder what the favourable percentage would have been had the question had been more accurately framed as an “expenditure.”

Jean Thomas

Okanagan Falls

Burning hydrocarbons tipped climate balance

Dear Editor:

Politicians and several of your correspondents are misrepresenting the carbon tax by suggesting it’s virtue signalling and a cash grab.

We are in the early, but still devastating stages of climate change. What’s tipped the climate balance is burning hydrocarbons. The purpose of the carbon tax is simple, it’s to change our carbon habits by putting pricing signals on fuels.

It does not offer immediate remediation to our problems that have built up over decades. Rather, it focuses on the first law of holes… if you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

We are in the hole of an untenable climate situation and we need to stop digging making the situation worse, we need to stop burning, or achieve carbon neutrality globally.

The “cash grab” claim can be looked at federally and provincially. In either case, there’s no large pool of dollars waiting to be spent on paving logging roads or buying fleets of water bombers. (Both good suggestions that need to be seriously examined). Rather the carbon tax revenues are returned to households and taxpayers. The federal rebates are clearer: the Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that 80% of households (50% in Nova Scotia) will receive more in rebates than they pay in carbon tax and related GST. Those who do not have a net benefit are high carbon users.

In B.C. the carbon tax revenues have offset other taxes. The current offsets include:

• Personal Income Tax rate cut. This benefits all tax payers.

• Small Business Tax Cut. This shelters small business owners who must use vehicles from the impact of the tax.

• Low income tax credit.

• Targeted personal tax credits such as the Clean Buildings Tax Credit, and the Climate Action Tax Credits.

• Greenhouse Grower tax exemption.

• Targeted corporate tax credits. This gets a bit fuzzy, but thank Christy Clark, film and television tax credits.

In the confines of a balanced budget, there are two additional large offsets to carbon tax revenues:

• Electricity sales tax elimination.

• Healthcare premium elimination.

As a side note, Gasbuddy Dan McTeague indicated that average gasoline prices were $.30/litre higher Sept. 1 in 2023 than they were in 2022. The carbon tax only rose $.04. Perhaps increased oil and gas profits are one of the major“fuels” to our inflation.

David Flater

Okanagan Falls

Inflation putting big squeeze on residents

Dear Editor:

I recently attended Penticton’s utility rate review open house and met a young couple who are struggling to make ends meet, pay rent and buy food.

They were outraged that the City is proposing an increase in electrical rates of 10% this year and 7% annually over the next four years.

Inflation is putting a big squeeze on many of our citizens, however, information

provided by City officials, supporting increased rates, points to a plan for topping up the electric surplus account which stood at $22.9 million as of Dec. 31, 2022 (four times larger than what’s recommended in municipal policy).

A note on our August electric bill indicates council approved borrowing $4.7 million from the electric fund for bike lanes on South Main, Point intersection, and Fire Hall No. 2 upgrade, as well as $3.7 million to subsidize the City’s tax requirements for 2023. Clearly, the City has been overcharging for electricity in order to create and maintain a huge surplus, allowing for spending that has absolutely nothing to do with operating our electric utility.

City officials will be presenting proposals for rate increases at the Oct. 3 council meeting. Dear reader, if you feel that council should deny the Chief Financial Officer’s recommendation to increase rates, I urge you to email our elected officials (council@penticton.ca) as they need to hear from you.

Gerry Gilligan

Penticton

[ad_2]

Source link