Letter to the editor:
This February 2017 one-shot townhall meeting is nothing short of a knee-jerk reaction and an attempt to influence and change the minds of individuals who have already informed council they are not in favour of the Main Street bridge option.
The residents have heard what council has to say. When is council going to hear and accept what the taxpayers are saying, instead of spending tax dollars on a sales campaign to bolster their stated preferred option?
Residents were given an opportunity to meet with, talk to and view what MOTI has to offer! They were given a choice of three options at a well-attended public open house, and the ministry has been and continues to be open to communication.
Informed residents continue to provide the ministry with their choice of the options presented. These private, informed decisions are based on all three options, not simply the current councils “preferred option.”
The public input is now set to end Jan. 15, 2017. Local governments have until March 2017 to formulate and submit their feedback.
Councillors stated at their Dec.13 meeting they have received a multitude of emails, letters, telephone calls, etc. Holding townhall meetings or spending tax dollars on a website is a total waste of time and money. They are obviously well aware, through these various communications they are receiving, that most folks do not agree with their “vision,” “goals” or ideas of “planned opportunities.”
Residents simply do not wish to have something shoved down their throats, lose their small town ambiance, nor end up having their Main Street becoming a major arterial route directing all traffic to and from the west side of the channel, through the middle of their town!
Residents also do not want the added taxation such a bridge will put on the taxpayer base of this small community, devaluation of properties on both sides of the channel, massive negative environmental impacts on the provincially protected channel waterway, the multitude of congestion and safety issues it will create on our Main Street and within the already stressed Sicamous Narrows.
There are simply better options that will not negatively impact the taxpayers of the District of Sicamous, surrounding areas or travelling public or the environment.
If the elected officials do not accept this, then they should be holding a referendum and taking a vote of the electorate, not holding a sales campaign townhall meeting.
They made their preferred option well known to the Ministry back in May 2016. They still have an opportunity to change this.