Editor:
Re: Mayors target residents for ‘yes’ vote, Feb. 5.
So Mayor Linda Hepner thinks that seniors don’t “get” the need for increased public transit south of the Fraser? She thinks more work needs to be done to convince them to vote for the 0.5-per-cent increase in the sales tax.
As a senior, living in Surrey, I can assure her that we “get” the need for better transit all right – just ask the residents of Crescent Gardens in South Surrey whose area has recently experienced a sharp decrease in bus service to White Rock Centre.
However, we have lived a little longer than the mayor has and our experience tells us that tax dollars do not always end up where we were told they would. The mayor needs to convince us that every cent of this proposed tax increase will be spent on improving transit to all areas south of the Fraser. Show us the plan: Which areas will see increased service? When will this occur? What kind of service, bus or light rail or…? What is the proposed cost for the buses vis-à-vis light rail or sky train?
These are a few of the questions I will need to have answered before I can vote “yes” to a tax increase.
Hopefully, this information will be available at the open house to be held on Feb. 19 at the White Rock Community Centre.
Margaret Mornan, Surrey
•••
The current ‘Yes’/‘No’ vote debate surrounding the proposed 0.5 per cent PST increase being sought to fund TransLink needs to focus some discussion on what will happen if the ‘No’ side wins. It seems the ‘No’ side is focused on “sending a message” to TransLink, without considering the consequences.
While no one, myself included, wants to pay more taxes, when we see such blatant waste of current tax dollars over and over again, the reality is that Translink will get its money to throw into its seemingly bottomless pit one way or another.
Keep in mind the past ideas floated by them to raise more funds, such as an annual $100-plus vehicle levy, or an increase on the levy that Translink already adds to your property taxes, or a tax on the number of miles you drive each year, or more road and bridge tolling and, of course, an increase on the gasoline tax.
While I, and most others, would love to see this bureaucratic money pit that is TransLink abolished and replaced by a leaner, community planner-trained board of professionals, that is not likely to happen anytime soon and some, or all, of those previous money-grab ideas will need to be revisited, if the ‘No’ side wins.
So is a 0.5-per-cent PST increase better or worse than the other options for the average homeowner’s wallet?
For those who don’t spend like there’s no tomorrow, a ‘Yes’ vote makes sense.
Dealing with overhauling TransLink has to be considered as a battle for another day, preferably at election time, when those responsible for creating this monster can be held accountable.
Forest McCready, Surrey
•••
Transit referendum issue’s ‘No’ side has a valid point that the B.C. government and TransLink could have much more accountability for taxpayer’s money.
However, since they are not going to change their ways in my lifetime, and I want to improve lives and environment for this fast-growing Lower Mainland, I am going to swallow the bitter pill and vote ‘Yes.’
The substantial benefits include: reducing emissions, improving our air quality; fewer smoggy days; an effective transit system leading to fewer traffic accidents; time saved on commutes; and better health for residents as they reach daily fitness goals by walking to transit or cycling.
The pioneers that came before endured hardship for our sake, so I think the 35 cents a day is something I can endure for the health and welfare of our future generation.
Diane Matier, Surrey
