Editor, The News:
Re: Mayor’s family home preserved (The News, March 7).
After reading the proposed historic designation requested for the Daykin house and renovation plan, you have to give your head a shake. The house is old, but not historic – well, maybe to the mayor’s family.
But the current owner is proposing to split, lift, turn and double the size of the structure and wants a five-year tax holiday to pay for it. When it is finished, what historic value will it have? None.
If the property didn’t have a connection to the current council, I bet it wouldn’t make the agenda. Now add the mayor’s photo op with the story and tell me municipal hall is not biased when it comes to a vote?
As for Coun. Al Hogarth’s complaint of losing $90,000 in income by sitting on council, well, he knew the salary terms when he stood for election. So what’s changed?
There must be other benefits while being on council, otherwise why would he stand for re-election for several terms when suffering financial losses each year greater than the average resident’s income?
The council pay structure needs a review. To peg counsel’s pay at the 65 percentile of 10 Lower Mainland cities is too high. Being among the smaller towns, we shouldn’t be only 35 per cent below the highest paid.
All levels of elected officials need to be reminded that our pockets are not bottomless and they need to tighten their belts during tough economic times and reject some of their legacy projects.
Bill Goring
Maple Ridge