While it is encouraging to see students getting involved in their communities, and writing letters expressing their opinions, I would have liked to see more fact-based assertions in Mr. Trelford’s letter (Follow Your Peers’ Example on Council, Nov. 2, 2012.)
I don’t believe that residents are upset because of the proposed developments themselves, but because the proposed developments are departures from the OCP, the Regional Growth Strategy and the Regional Context Statement.
And yet the residents in the District of North Saanich are not being adequately consulted.
Mr. Trelford is absolutely right that the councillors were elected to represent the residents.
Yet the councillors whom Mr. Trelford terms “pro-future” decline to do so, instead representing, as they put it, “the people who voted for me.”
Furthermore, Mr. Trelford and others who think we need to broaden the tax base are operating under the illusion that more development equals lower taxes, the so-called logic being that more people would be shouldering the burden.
In fact, the opposite is true. In all cases where development is pursued, taxes go up, not down, due mostly to the required infrastructure needed to support the development.
North Saanich has the lowest mil-rate in the CRD for exactly that reason.
And lastly, Mr. Trelford urges the councillors to “make North Saanich a better place.”
Obviously, that’s highly subjective.
I believe the majority of North Saanich residents already think North Saanich is a great place.
It’s for that reason that we expect to be consulted and our feedback respected and listened to before sweeping changes are made, especially ones that go against the OCP that we participated in creating.
The so-called “pro-future” councillors are avoiding any kind of meaningful public consultation.
Could it be that they know that North Saanich residents are going to tell them something they and the developers don’t want to hear?