Jewel of a calling card
Powell River’s calling card has been and still is the west-facing view over the ocean.
Since my arrival in Powell River 54 years ago, I am still in awe of the view and it takes my breath away.
To my knowlege, few areas even come close to the waterfront beauty we enjoy here in Powell River. No where is the view and space more accessible than the old arena site at Willingdon Beach. In fact, I know of no place on BC’s west coast which compares to our site.
Hundreds of locals and visitors alike enjoyed that gorgeous setting when two recent events took place—the BC Bike Race and the Midway at Sea Fair.
Powell River needs that big space for just such events as where could we put them which would be so handy for so many taxpaying citizens and businesses?
Any building erected on that site will not equal the smiling faces, squeals of delight, laughter and fun, and especially the chi-ching, chi-ching, chi-ching of the Powell River merchants’ cash registers (of the hotels, restaurants, stores, et cetera that benefitted from the events mentioned above).
Powell River was chockablock full those weekends.
So, Powell River, please vote no to any buildings on that site [“Library board prompts council to ask question,” July 16]. Keep it for us, the public, and for big events. Keep the dollars to help boost Powell River’s economy instead of a library to drain the residents’ pockets.
May we always have this Willingdon Beach site for all visitors, bike races, midways and more, so all can enjoy with awe.
Fran Hart
Marine Avenue
Geese at Mowat Bay
Perhaps at Mowat Bay the presence of border collies and other tractable dogs would be preferable to wall to wall goose excrement [“City cries foul over geese,” July 30]. Most dog owners here are responsible and there is really no reason to ban family dogs from a visit to the beach on a hot day, as long as their masters are vigilant.
A restrictive bylaw mentality sends the message that citizens can’t be trusted to look after their community.
Ted Crossley
Hammond Street
Pipeline of billions
MP John Weston says that not having the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline project will result in an annual loss of $27 billion [“Pipeline project faces hurdles,” June 20]. To whom? Multinational oil interests like Suncor? CEOs? Some of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s other friends? The federal Conservative Party?
Should insanity prevail and the project goes through you won’t see any of those billions, nor will I. For decades now, in the midst of plenty, various right wing governments have increasingly been underfunding vital services like education, health care, help for the mentally ill and handicapped, scientific research, seniors’ programs, public broadcasting and so on. With Harper’s Canada awash in billions of northern gateway dollars, that trend should continue and we’ll see more food bans and children living in poverty than ever before.
And when (not if) the first major bitumen spill occurs in the Douglas Channel, we’ll get to pay for the cleanup out of our new-found billions. Major corporations never carry that kind of insurance. It is bad for their bottom line.
Weston’s comparison between the building of our first national railroad (Canadian Pacific Railway) and northern gateway is laughable. One was built, initially, to carry people while the latter will transport nothing but pollutants, billions of them.
Ron MacDougall
Westview Avenue
Courage and conviction
I appreciate CaroleAnn Leishman for having the courage and conviction to tell voters where she stands on the library issue [“Library as part of sharing economy,” July 23].
The dodging and weaving to avoid a decision is flabbergasting. An elected representative is not simply a puppet doing only what the electorate wishes, but must also use their own judgment and decide to do what they feel is best (apologies to Edmund Burke).
Leishman has set a benchmark of decisive leadership that I hope others will follow. She will certainly have my vote in November.
Lanny Marentette
Manson Avenue
Committee report validates petition
A report commissioned by the new Powell River Public Library committee “Campaign Feasibility Study” by a third-party professional consulting firm Pharos Fundraising Strategy + Communication, validates the Save Willingdon petition [“Study documents opposition to library,” September 18, 2013].
The July 16, 2014, letter to the editor “Petition invalid,” went on at great length to discredit the Save Willingdon Petition of 5,000-plus petitioners. As with all petitions there are some anomalies, as there would have been with the recent open house meeting reviewing site location options. The selection/comment sheets did not require name or signature.
Ironically, the study/report commissioned by the new library committee validates the petition.
The study conducted a survey with accuracy stated as +/- 4.5 per cent points 19 out of 20 times. The following is an excerpt from page 92, the question which reads as follows:
I support a new library regardless of site, 33.1 per cent
I support a new library, but not at the old arena site at Willingdon South, 43.2 per cent
I oppose a new library regardless of site, 20.0 per cent
I have no opinion on a new library, 3.8 per cent.
Thus, there is correlation that validates the Save Willingdon Petition of 5,000-plus signatures.
There are only two significant expressions of public opinion with volume or scientific survey application and both indicate no to Willingdon. Why do you think the new library committee and City of Powell River council have been running around for the last 10 months looking at other options?
The referendum wording should be similar to:
Do you want to preserve the Willingdon South lot for parkland use only, in perpetuity: Yes, No?
Leave the library issue out of the referendum question. The issue is public/private development versus parkland use only. First it was condos, now the library, what will be next to be built on non-renewable waterfront park land?
Cleve Hamilton
Stittle Road
