|
|
Post by mellotron on Sept 18, 2004 4:22:24 GMT -5
Several letters of outrage have been published in The Capital News as of late. Local residents are wondering why so much money is being wasted on the rebuilding of the tressells. There are so many other immediate uses for the money that would appear to be more beneficial to residents.
If they want to rebuild with donated money or private financial contributions and labour, fine.
But to spend millions of tax dollars rebuilding these things?
I also think it's a waste of money and a gross mis-management of funds. You can go all over Kelowna and find better things to spend the dollars on that would help far more than the minority of people who use the tressells.
one more example of an idiotic government sqaundering money on crap.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Sept 18, 2004 18:56:01 GMT -5
Just another look at the twisted priorities that frame our government and society. Why was the money there? Why, the Heritage Fund of course. $15mil sitting doing nothing!
|
|
|
|
Post by nohairleft on Sept 18, 2004 20:35:03 GMT -5
Yes I agree it's a waste of money. A couple of weeks ago I went out to Myra Canyon yo see for myself. It looks to me that they could build a trail by taking it up to the very top of the ridge and go around the canyon along it's edge. Now if trains were going to use it that would be differant because of the grade but for people who are out for excersize then peddle away. The view would be the same maybe better because your higher up. Yes the tressles were cool but it's way to much money and it will never be the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by caffeine on Sept 18, 2004 20:53:48 GMT -5
Good suggestion. The trestles were really cool, but it would be difficult and too expensive to restore them to their original state, especially considering there are several worthy causes that money would be useful for.
It's too bad they are gone, but sometimes, poo happens.
|
|
|
|
Post by diogenes on Sept 18, 2004 22:24:20 GMT -5
mellotron, This subject has come up before and is somewhere in the archives. It was ponted out , as i recall to be federal $$ going towards the re-building of the tressles. I realise that has no bearing on the main thrust of your arguement in terms of how wisely the $ is being spent and is worth consideration to the subject in general.
Personally, I don't see it as an either / or situation.
the tressles are are part of BC history and in our heritage.
Prudent spending for other issues may not be factored into this particular equasion in this case. So I have to fence sit this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by mellotron on Sept 18, 2004 22:39:10 GMT -5
federal, provincial or alien -- there's a lot more constructive ways to spend the 15 million dollars in Kelowna than worrying about the tressells. A total waste of money that has a million better uses staring the funding as well as us, right in the face.
|
|
|
|
Post by diogenes on Sept 18, 2004 22:41:42 GMT -5
Should we ever decide to get our collective heads out of our collective asses, and apply some creative thinking too this and othe social prblems we just might be able to create a model country. For exampleThe prison population costs megabucks to do the some total of sweet screw all!
Put that man , and woman power to work brebuilding the tressels!
Teach them some self respect
and how to earn a living that has more qualities then being a convict,
OOPS ! Did I just post an original thought?
WELL NO!
but certainlt one that has more merrit that any thing poo-poo has contributed here since his arrival.
If, repete IF money is an issue or rather spending money is an issue perhaps it is high time we looked at the law court bussiness top heavy with corrupt and drunken judges, lawers and other members of the Bar
|
|
|
|
Post by Cearenius on Sept 19, 2004 1:06:31 GMT -5
The Trestles are not a waste of money. If anything they are a money maker. Because every year tourists come from all around to cimb up and around and walk on them and the surrounding countryside where they would be situated, if we spent the designated money on them, as was planned initially.
Sure health care could use some more funding, as could our sports programs. But in due time all will be taken care of, in large from the revenue collected from the tourists.
|
|
|
|
Post by caffeine on Sept 19, 2004 1:37:37 GMT -5
The figures I have read indicate revenue from the trestles would be approx 5 mill per year, that's being generous. Rebuilding to original state would be 30 mill at least. That's six years to recoup the investment.
I even question the validity of the 5 mill. figure. (50 000 tourists). My guess is a significant portion of those 50 000 people who visited the trestles would have come here anyways for other reasons, and happened to visit the trestles as well. So, many would have brought their money anyways. (ie, the trestles were not the sole revenue generating factor).
So, the trestles were great while they lasted, but sometimes you just have to cut your losses and move on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cearenius on Sept 19, 2004 1:56:56 GMT -5
But they are a historical Landmark, and have been since my gramma was a girl.
I personally have never been there, but when they burned down, my mom gave me this look as if to say that a part of her had burned down as well.
They are/were a major part of many peoples lives, to let them go without a second thought, would crush so many people.
|
|
|
|
Post by nohairleft on Sept 19, 2004 11:41:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by diogenes on Sept 19, 2004 12:01:01 GMT -5
Thanks NHL
|
|
|
|
Post by mellotron on Sept 19, 2004 12:24:31 GMT -5
the floating bridge is also a historical landmark as well, actually attended to by the Queen herself, but we dont have a problem tearing that down.....true the tressells may be historical, but rebuilding them wont make them 'historical' -
like it's already been pointed out, the tourists coming here and visiting the tressells would have been coming here anyway, it's not as if the tressells are the main selling point for tourism within the okanagan valley....far from it.
this is a question of dollars and cents, and to me it's waste of 15 million dollars to rebuild something most locals have never even bothered with, and most tourists aren't citing as the main reason for visiting the valley to begin with.
|
|
|
|
Post by diogenes on Sept 19, 2004 21:44:37 GMT -5
On becomming a man of value,
Well that can open a can of worms depending on ones definition of value.
can a man be a man of value by becoming a success and creating success in others as well?
What the hell does this have to do with the tressles ? of a bit of a streach perhaps and lets give it a go anyway.
Lets put a coinslot on the tressles, metaphorically speakin, by escorting bicycle tours through the burnt out area to explain what happened and how nature is making a recovery.
The complaint is the expense and that may be an appropriate call if viewed from a narrow perspective, on the other hand should one expand their vision to include a strategy to make a profit on a venture the added taxed revenue can then go back into the system
, Hell put starbucks expresso bars on the site
in a capitalistic systen every thing must show profit, ( Or is that Frengi?)
|
|
|
|
Post by nohairleft on Sept 19, 2004 23:00:28 GMT -5
Lets put a coinslot on the tressles, metaphorically speakin, by escorting bicycle tours through the burnt out area to explain what happened and how nature is making a recovery.
The complaint is the expense and that may be an appropriate call if viewed from a narrow perspective, on the other hand should one expand their vision to include a strategy to make a profit on a venture the added taxed revenue can then go back into the system
All of this could be done without the tressels being rebuilt. Lets face it, it's all about the election in May and were not going to be fooled I hope.
|
|
