Editor:
I am sorry.
I understand and appreciate with what environmentalist David Suzuki and his foundation’s members point to regarding TransLink; and I am so grateful to the citizens who support his view.
I appreciate – and agree – with the voice of our youth who ask that the older generations consider the present circumstances and future needs of a growing population.
I want to say ‘yes’ in the transit plebescite; the benefit to the environment and societal needs is, for me, my guiding principle to responsible action.
But – with great apologies to all individuals dependent upon TransLink – I will be declaring a ‘no’. Enough is enough. Being asked to trust that which has proven itself to be distrustful makes my spine shiver.
TransLink’s upper-management created this mistrust with mismanagement of funds at every level of responsibility. And to find myself in a position to be accountable to my friends and neighbours in a manner that has been denied by TransLink and B.C. community leaders leaves me speechless.
So, to each person dependent upon our public transit, I am sorry for any inconvenience you may experience. I just cannot in good faith entrust another momentary benefit to TransLink. Until an honest restructure of revenue and assets are administered, and an actual referendum is presented, I will then vote ‘yes’.
Charon Hunniford, White Rock
• • •
I rely on TransLink for my commute and voted ‘no’ on the Transit Referendum. Why?
Proponents of this initiative ask rhetorically, “How does Metro Vancouver grow by one million and still remain livable?”
The answer is it doesn’t, whether this proposition passes or not.
Missing from either side of the debate is any serious discussion about the root cause of our region’s congestion problem: unfettered development. Even if the referendum passes, it represents a zero-sum game whereby transit improvements struggle to keep pace with growth. Commute times will, at best, remain the same.
We’re already putting the brakes on our buses and cars. We need to put the brakes on development, too. Address the underlying problem first, then let’s talk about transit. Vote ‘no’.
Anthony Manning, White Rock
