It’s interesting to read the various comments in the paper regarding this very controversial issue. The ministry is not interested in giving us options about Stickle Road. They wish to present a fait accompli and then proceed to browbeat us into submission, as they have already managed to do with Mayor Mund and Mr. Foster. Incidentally, I did attend a couple of sessions for all of the good it did me.
Everyone with a sane mind is aware that you don’t build a new roadway through a sensitive wetland, especially when there are alternatives that avoid such very expensive construction.
There’s a couple of issues I’d like to raise that so far appear to have gone by the wayside.
1. The ministry is claiming this light will cause rear-end collisions. Yet, they have not offered any statistics to back up this claim. So here is the challenge to the ministry. With all of these lights on the various highways around the province, for example Kelowna, Kamloops and even here in Vernon, will the ministry provide the necessary stats as evidence that installation of one of these lights will cause accidents? I’m sure ICBC could provide such numbers, yet even they support the idea of lights rather than this ill-conceived construction project.
2. I have heard various numbers quoted for the price of this project, from $7.6 to 9.7 million. Is there a guarantee that this number will be finite or will we be looking at several million dollars in overruns” I point to the running track at the college as an example. As a former commercial banker, I am familiar with the processes involved in bidding for road building contracts, particularly when they involve construction of a brand new roadbed.
The first step is to obtain the contract at any price, then negotiate the overruns towards the end of the project. The contractor can always find a reason that the original offer of contract did not quite include all relevant information, causing such an overrun.
3. That brings up the next point I’d like to raise. Why is the ministry so determined to push the construction contract (at all costs), rather than the simpler option of just installing a set of lights? Less than $1 million for a set of lights on one side, more than $7 million (probably in excess of $10 million by the time the dust settles) for an indeterminate road construction project on the other side. It’s a no brainer. Let’s follow that thought process further. Who stands to gain here? The old phrase “follow the money” appears to apply here. Perhaps the media should take a further active role here and start digging.
Remember when you were a kid and you spotted a tiny piece of loose wallpaper and you just couldn’t resist but had to pull on it, and perhaps there was something interesting underneath this wallpaper?
Maybe we should look behind the scenes here and find out who is so desperately pushing the road building option. Just wondering. Perhaps other people should start wondering as well.
George Tribes
Vernon
