Regarding “Disturbed by some details” letter to the Editor, August 10, 2011.
Dear Editor; This kind of situation is exactly why I have been opposed from the beginning to borrowing 6 million dollars and having a parcel tax.
As I have stated many times before on the Pool for Princeton facebook page, I am not against a swimming pool for Princeton, however I cannot see myself able to enjoy using such an extravagant facility when I know that there are people in the community that cannot afford the Parcel Tax and may be forced off their land, or have a lien put on their property. I have talked to many people that are in this situation.
This is one of the reasons why 833 Area H residents signed a petition, presented on August 4 to the RDOS board, to have heir vote counted separately from Princeton.
Enough of the taxpayers’ money has been spent. A referendum is not cheap, neither is a mail in ballot and the mailing of brochures to every home owner. Let’s not waste more money and stop the referendum.
We could then start a fundrasing campaign. This may also be a way to heal angry and/or hurt feelings that people have, and it may help to unite the community by working towards one goal, instead of the division and bitter feelings that are now present. We can apply for grants/matching grants, donations, set a goal of a certain amount of money and build a swimming pool based on money we have. I believe that is a much more prudent way than putting the taxpayer in debt for 20 years and having a yearly operating deficit of $600.000.
I am of the opinion that there should be a user fee. There are people who are now willing to pay $360 or more for a parcel tax. We could find out how many of those are willing to pay the same amount through a user fee, so we will know exactly how much money will come in and consequently the burden won’t be on people who live as far away as East Gate or Missezula Lake and will never use the pool, or people who have a cabin at the lake for the summer and prefer to do their swimming there.