LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
- October 28, 2008
Editor;
I would like to acknowledge the very generous sentiments I have received from many of the residents of BC Southern Interior regarding the results of the election on October 14th.
While the results were not what we were anticipating, I felt that it was a positive campaign.
Many issues of importance to this riding were discussed with residents during the campaign and I look forward to working with various groups to get action on them.
In closing, I would like to express my gratitude to those who volunteered not only on my campaign, but on the other candidate's as well.
The right to vote has been hard won, a memory we will once again celebrate on November 11, and those that get involved should be commended for their volunteerism.
- Rob Zandee,
Candidate of Record,
Conservative Party of Canada
BC Southern Interior
To The Editor;
It's time to vote for a new Town Council in Princeton and there's more than a dozen Candidates plus the Incumbents to choose from so we need to look at what was accomplished in the past three years. The Recreational Administrator, Lyle Thomas who acts as the Town Planner, says we need to make change. I, for one taxpayer, don't like the changes the Council members have chosen, therefore the most needed change is a change of Council and take a chance on what some new blood will do for Princeton.
Firstly, I was alarmed at what I heard from Council at the October 20, 2008 meeting. I sensed Mayor Randy McLean was speaking with a forked tongue in his response to the speaker for senior citizens in their request for low cost rental housing. In reference to the sale of the OAP Branch 185 property in the centre of town which was to be given third reading for the two lots to be rezoned for multiple family dwelling Maria Sadegur had indicated she would be in favour of it being developed for low income families.
Ideally, I thought the property would be purchased by the Town of Princeton for that purpose.
In the Mayor's spiel he said Council has to serve two masters when making a decision. Now The Bible says we can't serve two masters for we will love the one and hate the other. With that in mind, the obvious conclusion for me was that Council chose to love the new private owner and developer of that property and hate those in need of low cost rental housing. That was apparent also in Council's decision to permit the change from affordable housing in Princeton Manor and the Riverside Motel units for the benefit of private enterprise which literally put people on a fixed income out on the street.
Now Ray Jarvis' assessment of the request for Town Council to provide a solution to the problems the needy are facing, he stated they would have to come up with a business plan to start with. Did Council have a business plan for the development of the airport? Now Randy had said he didn't want to provide housing for people who might come from across the country to take advantage of the affordable housing that Princeton offered, yet it's regarded as a good investment to provide the facility at the airport for people to fly in from across the country and enjoy the luxury of relaxing in a 30' by 50' building, plus a 10' by 50' covered verandah. Having heard there are about 18 homeless people here that are sleeping in the bush does Council think it would be a loving gesture to provide some bunk beds and heat in that vacant building for those less fortunate?
What about the Mason's Hall that was purchased by a former Town Council but the recent Council chose to lease it back to them to use for their meetings? Why would this Council choose to receive no revenue for that choice location where there is plenty of parking when it would have made an ideal facility for the Library? Why would this Council buy a condemned Goldion Restaurant for use as a Library which could cost taxpayers upwards of a million dollars when completely renovated yet without parking?
This brings me to my objection as a Veteran of the million dollar change being made to the Cenotaph Park. This is an absolute waste of money being spent to attract tourists while the former arts and culture building owned by the Town of Princeton is to be utilized for washrooms. Maybe some of the homeless could find comfort there also.
What about the loss of about a dozen parking spaces in the heart of town which adversely affects the established businesses on Vermilion Avenue? If this is progress I fail to see it.
Secondly, Council takes great pride in erecting a million dollar catwalk over the Similkameen River to complete the Kettle Valley trail, mainly for passers by.
Why aren't there referendums on these hefty expenses? Which Master are these Council members serving? Is making change merely for their own fame and glory?
Lastly, what happened to the enormous financial surplus left by the former Council and Town Manager?
The greatest need is for a new slate for Council that will consider what's in the best interests of the tax paying residents of Princeton. Taxes were increased this year and with the water project for the expansion of the town boundaries we need a Council that will put a business plan in place to be voted on by taxpayers.
Why should these types of major decisions be left to a half dozen selected people?
With only 18% of voters electing the Council three years ago, I hope the readers will all cast their ballots and encourage others to do likewise while putting the needy ahead of the greedy.
- Kay Hardy, Princeton
Dear Editor:
I Just want to say a few things here about what the upcoming election is all about it's YOUR (everyone's!) future here in beautiful Princeton!
There is plenty of proof (20 candidates) that Princeton wants a change in November. And I just want to say that (unfortunately) it can't be done without hurting a few people.
Never mind what the previous Town Council did or has not done I find it irritating that there is a remote chance that we have the same Mayor again...to be honest I have zero problems with the current one personally - but - Mayor is NOT a lifetime job it should be the lone wish to bring this town or any town to better heights if elected.
A half year ago I was hoping for Pam to run for Mayor because the few times I heard her talking about issues I could hear passion and that is what we need! I hear she is leaving town so I wish her all the best!
There is a reason why a President can be re-elected only once there is only SO MUCH a person can give to improve a country, or in our case town, and what hasn't been done in 12 to 20 years is not going to happen next year or the year after.
I would rather see the current Mayor support one of the new guys who is running for that position and leaving the Mayor's seat on a good note.
After reading the paper last week with 4 candidates I can see passion only in ONE. That would be Esther in case someone is wondering.
I really DON'T want to see a close race this time...just imagine Jim 25%, Maria 25%, Esther 24% and Randy 26%...
- Stefan Dietz, Princeton
