Re: Resident Housing Task Force
I am glad to see us searching for ways to encourage new rental suites (and to preserve existing ones). Please keep in mind however that not all of us are interested in expanding our homes or adding a garage. There is one option however that would be certain to get all homeowners attention – offer a property tax break. Given the enormous rise in taxes we have experienced (and with much more to come in the next fiscal year with the run up in property values recently) this is one tool that could achieve the additional housing, and quickly.
I know that this would reduce revenues to the municipality, but surely this would be less expensive in the long run than building more WHA housing stock.
Ross Baillie
Via e-mail
Stéphane Perron's letter in the paper about the proliferation of overhead powerlines paints an interesting picture of the future for corridor residents.
It was not that long ago that the drive to Pemberton was free of roadside overhead pollution. That changed when the first of the "river killers" was constructed on the Soo. I know these power projects are considered "Green," but the only green I see is the carcinogenic preservative used to treat the poles.
Since that project went in many more are to follow. The Miller Creek. project has been very controversial since the first public hearing on its proposed construction. At that time the project was soundly turned down by those in attendance. Only after a few strategic promises of money to cash-strapped local governments did this project gain approvals. The history of false claims made by project developers, from the Pemberton Meadow power poles to the size of dams, holding ponds and roads in the alpine, should make people very skeptical.
In Whistler the town council signed off on the "killer" for the Brandywine. I suppose because Whistler isn't cash strapped there were no political pay-offs.
As you read this the Rutherford is succumbing to the same fate. And these are just the beggining. At present there are approx. 200 applications for river killers in our area. As stated in last week’s paper the provincial government is even doling out free money to build more!
Just how is it going to look if half of these things are built? An overhead spider web? Maybe future tourists will come here to see the Monuments to the Stupidity of Man.
And why are these projects so popular? Other than the obvious answer, that those behind them make lots of money, there are other reasons.
Under the Kyoto Accord there will be penalties for those who, for example, produce power by burning fossil fuels. Should you produce power by so called "Green" methods you will earn points. These points can be traded to offset the penalty against your oil/gas burning plant.
Since B.C. Hydro has reached the end of the line with building large scale hydroelectric dams, what is left is gas fired turbines. To offset the penalty, "Green" points are of value. At the end of the day we have who knows how many "river killers" and gas-fired plants like Sumas 2.
Considering the fact that growth is part of the equation, and consumption of power is part of it, my wish is that we could conserve power better than we do now. The need for future power production could come from the depths of the earth, in the form of Geo-Thermal generation, of which we have plenty surrounding us in this area. It may not be perfect, but at least it’s not as primitive as what's taking place.
Steve Anderson
Whistler
Cloudworks energy, most recently known to Pemberton Valley residents as the Miller Creek Power Company, is at it again. Let us learn from Mr. Nick Andrews’ trail of incomplete details and hidden agendas. May I remind you of the recent sale of the Miller Creek Project to Alberta’s Epcor with numerous details that were misrepresented to the public in their initial proposal.
One detail in particular comes to mind, the distribution line. The Pemberton Meadows is now littered with a power line that will be with us for generations to come. This eyesore was a detail that Nick’s associates overlooked when selling the project to the community.
These watersheds provide access to some vital and sensitive areas in the Pemberton area. Pemberton has recently been granted Gateway Status to the backcountry, and these small hydro projects, producing marginal amounts of power, with enormous costs to local environments, are not the answer.
Robbie Stevens
Pemberton Meadows
Re: "Preparing For War" by Andrew Mitchell
I would like to express my support for our local council to adopt a position against a pre-emptive U.S. led war on Iraq. The argument that this is a federal matter too controversial for Whistler to take a stand on absolves our responsibility as global citizens. The time to act and speak up is now. Why?
1
. A war on Iraq will not decrease terrorism . Quite the contrary, many foreign policy experts and NGOs argue that it will increase terrorist response. Military solutions to political, economic and social problems generally perpetuate a cycle of violence and revenge. Iraq is a secular state, which by definition is contrary to the doctrines of fundamentalist Islamic groups like Al Qaeda. Links between Saddam and Bin Laden’s organization were the weakest component of Powell’s presentation of evidence to the Security Council last week.2
. A war on Iraq right now would be illegal . The UN Charter includes specific prohibition against the use of military force to effect regime change, which is exactly what the Bush administration has in mind. It is against international law to wage aggressive war, and only the Security Council has the prerogative to authorize a military response to violations of its resolutions. Any use of force must be in response to a proven threat, when any and all peaceful means have failed.3. The Bush administration does not want peace in the Middle East, it wants regional control
. Who is a bigger threat to regional security, the U.S. or Iraq? The U.S. supplies 80 per cent of the arms to the various autocratic regimes in the Middle East. It picks and chooses which human rights-violating state is conducive to its own military and oil interests. Is it a coincidence that Iraq sits on 11 per cent of the world’s known oil reserves? (If all the SUVs in the U.S. got 3 miles per gallon better fuel efficiency, the U.S. would no longer need to import any oil from the Middle East.) Why have U.S. arms transfers to the region topped $60 billion since the Gulf War, with $3 billion a year in military aid directly to Israel? It is this cycle of violence and consumption that American weapons manufacturers and oil corporations profit from. Powell and Rumsfeld argue that Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons are a threat to regional security, but fail to mention that it was the U.S. and the UK that traded anthrax and smallpox, helicopters and jets, for Iraqi oil in the 1980s. The Bush administration has continually rejected international peace efforts such as treaties to control biological and chemical weapons, anti-torture proposals, the International World Court, and Nuclear Arms agreements. Who then, should the world fear most?4. A war on Iraq is contrary to human dignity and the collective principles of our world
. No less then 62 million civilians died in the wars of the 20 th century. Another 43 million military personal perished on top of that. For what? For more death? I should hope not. The UN is a collective achievement for all human kind where we can resolve our conflicts in peace. If the U.S. acts alone without UN approval, who will truly suffer in Iraq? Certainly not Saddam and his 80,000 loyal Republican guards, well defended in their bunkers. An attack on Iraq is an attack on an already impoverished and oppressed nation where 46 per cent of its population are under the age of 16. The UN estimates that over 500,000 children have died from preventable disease and malnutrition as a result of the economic sanctions and continued bombings led by the U.S. against Iraq during the 1990s. In an interview on 60 Minutes, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright responded "We think the price is worth it." Do you?Think about it Whistler.
Sean Richmond
Whistler
(Sources: articles by Stephen Zunes, Thom Hartmann, and Lewis Lapham)
This letter is to clarify any misconceptions about Victory Christian Church’s upcoming rental, and use of the name MY Church for Sunday evening services to be held at Maurice Young Millennium Place (MY Place).
We are extremely pleased to have yet another progressive religious group utilize our facility. However any relationship drawn between their group’s Whistler name (MY Church) and ours is a little misleading. Church services, brochures, and any other marketing will now bear the name "Victory Christian Center Whistler."
Thank you for the opportunity to clear up any possible misunderstandings.
Rob Schwartz
General Manager, MY Place
