I cannot emphasize enough the unfairness of the proposed 50/50 principle staff is putting forward for Council's approval.
Let me give you some background information.
The Community Charter requires that Councils provide some assistance for new growth. The magnitude of this assist factor is left up to individual Councils. Those Councils craving for growth provide higher assist factor in their policies, those not so keen on growth are less magnanimous. The point here is that if Councils provide a certain growth assistance it is extended to the whole of the community and not just selected segment of the taxpayers.
The proposal by staff singles out existing sewer users to bear the financial burden of developing new sewer additions and replacing old infrastructure. Replacement of the old infrastructure and the expansion of the service is required due to growth. Extending the sewer trunk line from McClounie to Aberdeen Road was strictly demanded by growth. Coldstream Meadows could not proceed if it did not connect to community sewer. The overwhelming majority of the other residences DID NOT connect to the new system.
When Councils expended reserves from the existing sewer utility's account ($665,000 by previous Council and $250,000 by the present Council) they actually forced current sewer customers to assist new growth to the tune of 111%. We paid more for the sewer trunk than what it actually cost!!! If someone thinks that's fair I have a bridge for sale!
If Council insists that we should have a 50% growth assist rate than they must convince all of the taxpayers in Coldstream and must collect this assist rate from all of them. Of course, they should also volunteer to pay up as five of the Councillors are presently not affected by the proposed financial burden.
As I explained in my earlier article, reserves can also be misappropriated by succeeding Councils just as it happened with the reserves we lost.
If Council rejects the 50/50 principle then our sewer rates could be reduced further and would at least partially ease the unfair removal of our sewer reserves. When time comes to replace old infrastructure then we'll borrow the necessary funds and have all those involved in the sewer system pay for the financing as we go forward. We do not need to subsidize unknown future residents with our present hard earned cash.
The Eagle.
Let me give you some background information.
The Community Charter requires that Councils provide some assistance for new growth. The magnitude of this assist factor is left up to individual Councils. Those Councils craving for growth provide higher assist factor in their policies, those not so keen on growth are less magnanimous. The point here is that if Councils provide a certain growth assistance it is extended to the whole of the community and not just selected segment of the taxpayers.
The proposal by staff singles out existing sewer users to bear the financial burden of developing new sewer additions and replacing old infrastructure. Replacement of the old infrastructure and the expansion of the service is required due to growth. Extending the sewer trunk line from McClounie to Aberdeen Road was strictly demanded by growth. Coldstream Meadows could not proceed if it did not connect to community sewer. The overwhelming majority of the other residences DID NOT connect to the new system.
When Councils expended reserves from the existing sewer utility's account ($665,000 by previous Council and $250,000 by the present Council) they actually forced current sewer customers to assist new growth to the tune of 111%. We paid more for the sewer trunk than what it actually cost!!! If someone thinks that's fair I have a bridge for sale!
If Council insists that we should have a 50% growth assist rate than they must convince all of the taxpayers in Coldstream and must collect this assist rate from all of them. Of course, they should also volunteer to pay up as five of the Councillors are presently not affected by the proposed financial burden.
As I explained in my earlier article, reserves can also be misappropriated by succeeding Councils just as it happened with the reserves we lost.
If Council rejects the 50/50 principle then our sewer rates could be reduced further and would at least partially ease the unfair removal of our sewer reserves. When time comes to replace old infrastructure then we'll borrow the necessary funds and have all those involved in the sewer system pay for the financing as we go forward. We do not need to subsidize unknown future residents with our present hard earned cash.
The Eagle.
******************************************************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment