Speculation tax good for most

Dear editor: Bad news from the city regarding our shoreline between the bridge and Mission Creek.

Kelowna is refusing to repair any damage to parks from last year’s flood or to build any new parks or trails along our shoreline. Apparently, the only work planned for 2018 is the re-configuration at Gyro Park to co-ordinate with a large adjoining real estate development.

We citizens already own several parcels of land along this part of the lake, but city council claims we don’t have enough money to develop the parks and linking trails that were planned for this publically owned land. If we don’t have money now, in the middle of a building boom, will we ever?

The province has also claimed that it doesn’t have enough money to hire sufficient staff to enforce the foreshore laws that are often disregarded here in Kelowna. This law-breaking severely restricts public use of lake-front land that we all own.

Nobody likes paying additional taxes. However, our mayor and some city councillors seem to be showing more concern for real estate developers and the very wealthy than their own citizens.

They claim that B.C.’s proposed new speculation tax would be “disastrous”.

This poorly-named tax would add money to provincial, and by extension, city coffers for widely-desired services which are not currently being delivered. This would be done by taxing people who are not from B.C., who are wealthy enough to afford to leave a second house here unoccupied for much of the year.

What are the likely effects of the speculation tax?

Probably more houses being rented — good. Some houses being sold by non-residents, which would add to the buyable inventory; moderating price increases — good. More money in the budget for neglected services — good.

Less speculative building, in an overheated market — bad for some developers.

Al Janusas Kelowna