Tourism tax could pay for new beach

Dear editor: Rob Munro argued that forcing developers to pay to build South Pandosy Waterfront Park would increase the cost of housing (Daily Courier, July 11).

He is right, it would. However, this park is classified as a citywide park for the use of all city residents and visitors. As such, all residents and visitors should pay for its development, including those buying new homes in the city and those staying at local hotels. If you want to visit or move to a beach town, you have to pay for beaches.

But Kelowna councillors don’t see it that way; they don’t want tourists to pay to develop new waterfront beaches and parks.

Yet, these are the same beaches and parks the tourism industry and the city use to attract Kelowna’s 1.7 million tourists each year.

Earlier this year, city staff recommended council consider increasing the city’s hotel room tax by two per cent to raise an estimated $2 million each year from tourists to help fund a $200 million shortfall in funding for new park development. This option would not impact taxpayers and would not increase local housing costs. It would only cost tourists about one dollar each. Council rejected this option. Council chose instead to consider a two per cent infrastructure levy, which would be added on all city property owners tax bills. The levy would raise $2.66 million annually, but only 16 per cent of it — or $426,000 — would be used to fund park development.

The remaining $2.23 million is a tax grab to upgrade other city infrastructure facing budget shortfalls. The downside is that the levy will increase local housing costs.

Council wants taxpayers to build tourist playgrounds and to suffer rising housing costs.

Taxpayers like Munro should point their fingers at council and their tourist industry friends on this issue — not at a neighbourhood association that has waited 30 years to get this much needed and long overdue waterfront park developed as a swimming beach for all residents and tourists to use.

Richard Drinnan, Kelowna the playing field so all parties, politicians and voters get treated the same.

In B.C., as we embark on our third referendum in 15 years, it’s good to remember that the first two referenda were initiated by Gordon Campbell and the Liberals. Now, it happens to be the NDP and the Greens who are putting it on the ballot.

I’ve talked to lots of people and the most common complaint I hear about PR is way more about the party who promoted it, rather than the concept itself. When Campbell put PR on the ballot, the NDP were against. Now the NDP have put it on the ballot and the Liberals are against. This is nothing more than old divisive, partisan politics. And it’s not only tiresome, it’s harmful.

Parties aren’t dogs, and to be honest, we like our dogs a lot more. But we keep our dogs on a leash for good reason. The way I see it, proportional representation keeps all the parties on a leash and it puts the leash in our hands. Isn’t that what democracy is all about? Demos: the people. Kratos: to rule. The people rule, or if you prefer, the people hold the leash. Ann Remnant, Nelson