Dear Editor:

While Mayor Stu Wells and members of town council have created, what I believe, is an unintended consequence in their handling of the new fire hall proposal, the fact remains  they have succeeded in fractionating our community by the way they approached the project.

We now have three basic factions.

One is the group that are totally in favour of the project in its totality.

The second group is made up of those who may be in favour if they had been consulted by using a referendum for approval, and for some, with fewer dollars as their hot button.

The third group is made up of people who don’t care what council says about this issue and is adamant we shouldn’t spend that much money ($6.6 million) on a new fire hall.

There are some variations on the theme but those are the basic groups.

For whatever reason, mayor and council decided to adopt the Alternate Approval Process (AAP) and they have alienated a group of taxpayers that basically say “It’s alright for council to decide which sewer lines or roads need updating, but if you are going to spend many millions of our taxpayer dollars outside the norm, then we want a say.”

By going forward with the AAP, council shirked its responsibility and put the onus on the taxpayer to mobilize and insist on a referendum.

To add insult to injury, the town recently took out a full-page advertisement in the local paper under the guise of setting the record straight.

The implication being if you disagree with council’s position, you must not be using the facts because “we know what’s best for you and our community.”

Most of us learn at an early age that life is a series of compromises. We didn’t always get those things that we thought at the time were paramount to our well being.

While I have the greatest respect for our fire chief, I get the impression it is all or nothing in his world when it comes to this new fire hall.

While I can appreciate his position, this is not how things are done in the real world.

The mayor and chief administrative officer should provide the guidance to his council and the community to arrive at a process that is fair and equitable to everyone and especially to the taxpayer.

It is us taxpayers who pay all the bills.

As it stands now, we will see how it plays out and, who knows, when the votes are in on the probable referendum to come, the ultimate result of the majority may be full speed ahead.

I just don’t think it was advisable or necessary to pit one group against the other.

Let us hope that the lesson learned will help us through the many other challenges ahead, Desert Park included.

Thank you.

Derek Noske

Osoyoos, B.C.