On the pool, again
To the Editor,
The taxpayer base already pays for facilities that a small portion of the population use, i.e., the arena. And is destined to pay more. Apparently, from the arena survey, 50 per cent of respondents never use the arena, but all options are for variations on the same. Fifty per cent of the respondents were most interested in a pool, but it wasn’t included in any of the options. How is that good planning?
Chad editorializes that an aquatic centre would costs millions but a pool wasn’t included in the costed options. How is that good reporting?
Why does the municipality ask for input (re a pool) if they’ve already excluded it from their consideration. How is that respectful?