Friday March 12, 2010


QUESTION OF THE WEEK



Letters
Citizens should step up and assert power

The City is spending citizens’ tax dollars advertising against citizen taxpayers who dare question the Mayor’s push to have a second city. Great way to bring a community together.

The Mayor at Council meetings pontificates about democracy, as if all there is to it is marching out to vote every so often. Democracy requires a lot more: A free press, fair and unfettered elections including the Alternative Approval Process and referendum. The Mayor bucked and offered to intervene in the Alternative Approval Process that he chose in the summer, a process that leads to a referendum when citizens are fed up and gather signatures.

The Mayor now condemns the referendum he fathered. Speaking to the Chamber of Commerce on September 16, he said: “The Alternative Approval Process was democratic.” In the middle of the summer? The Mayor concluded: “We cannot govern by referendum. There is a proper place for referendum. This is not it.”

On September 25 the Yes campaign held its first rally, and co-chair Brian Sims said a ”referendum is not needed.” (Advertiser, p. 2) Numerous letters to the editor by the Yessers repeat the refrain of wasting money on a referendum. Wasting money on direct democracy where real estate developers have to convince more than six people.

A referendum is a legislative proposition referred to the voting population for approval or rejection. Even Premier Campbell on the STV referendum in May kept the government out of the people’s business. For fairness, Campbell’s government gave $500,000 to each side, the yes and the no, for information and education. To fund one side as the City is doing speaks volumes about Mayor Manjak’s “democracy.”

The City can’t even put out an intelligent ad. One ad states: “If East Hill expansion comes in, our library is likely to see more people. And our schools are likely to see more children, and it is our hope . . .” (Townsman, Oct. 28, p. 5). Two “likelies” and a “hope,” and this is our opportunity of a lifetime? This is a medieval speculative philosophy that aims to turn land into gold.

Citizens need to step up and assert their power. Citizens can see the realities more clearly and honestly than do our governing elites or the developers.

William G. Hills


Comments

Edward Reay says...

The citizens of Cranbrook hooped themselves by voting no in the referendum. This development will go ahead in the regional district and all these residents will put additional pressure on City of Cranbrook services. The problem is now that they will not be in the city boundaries they will not be paying for these services. It was a dumb short sighted idea to vote no.

Posted on December 9, 2009 @ 6:48 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3000350 

Gary Babcock says...

Its history now, the No vote spoke louder but what is with this petition to overturn the No vote? To those people I say our taxes paid for the referendum and it was not cheap, with all the advertising. So when does "NO" not mean "NO"? Our mayor has said its over, so get over it and lets get on with fixing up our city.

Posted on December 4, 2009 @ 2:23 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 2982412 

Post a comment

You must be Registered and logged in to post a comment.

Register or

The Daily Townsman welcomes your opinions and comments. We reserve the right to edit comments for length, style, legality and taste and reproduce them in print, electronic or otherwise. For further information, please contact the editor or publisher.




About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Sitemap / RSS   Glacier Interactive Media: Information and Other Glacier Websites    © Copyright 2009 Glacier Interactive Media | User Agreement & Privacy Policy

LOG IN



Lost your password?