Dear Editor:
I confess that I don’t feel very strongly about the proposed iCasa development as long as it is guaranteed not to impact the aquifer below and the trout hatchery.
However I read Mary Sampson’s letter to the editor with some dismay. She characterizes Summerland as being in a state of urban decay.
I strongly object to that statement.
Summerland has a recreation centre, a library, a police station, schools, two grocery stores, a hardware store, three drug stores, a building supply store, some good restaurants and coffee shops, a bakery, a weekly newspaper and on and on. Where is the decay?
Ms.Sampson also states that if we are not growing, we are dying.
That also is wrongheaded.
At what point would a community decide that enough growth has been achieved? When would there ever be enough tax base to do everything?
Like a family which decides not to expand but chooses to live within a budget, a community can do that as well.
Staying within budget would probably not include widening winding roads and improving infrastructure to suit a developer.
It could be said that more housing for seniors in a community that has very little housing for younger people could actually lead to urban decay.
Good jobs are not found in private facilities where profit is the bottom line, where wages and staffing therefore must be kept to a minimum.
Finally, it could also be said that debate for and against every proposed project is a sign of a healthy community that cares .
Whew, it is looking like I do care about the folly in the gully after all.
Thank you, Ms. Sampson, for waking me up.
Susanne Cooper
Summerland