The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

PAGE 4. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 29, 1984, WHITBY-FRE PESS whitby Voice of the County Town I s Michael lan Burgess, Publisher - Managing Editor The only Whitby newspaper independently owned and operated by Whitby residents for Whitby residents. Published every Wednesday by M.B.M. Publishing and Photography Inc. Phone 668-6111 The Free Press Building, 131 Brock Street North, P.O. Box 206, Whitby, Ont. L MICHAEL KNELL Communlty Editor CONWAY DOBBS Advertising Manager Second Class Mail Regstration No. 5351 To the tune of $539 a month - 1 -i uo-ops: ne Elsewhere in today's edition of the Whitby Free Press, we have related the story of the Pringle Creek Co-operative. This project Is more than brick and mortar It Is the coming together of a group of like-minded people whose alm Is an ap- plaudable one - to provide affordable housing. It Is not with these people nor with their Inten- tions that we are concerned. We are concerned with the means by which their aim has been reached. Consider, If you will, the following facts: -this- development will house, at one time, 80 familles; -It will cost $5.57 million to build, all of which will be provided by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) through a most reasonable mortgage; -this development wiil cost just over $926,000 a year to operate; -it will earn a revenue of just over $534,000 a year, an average of about $556 per month per unit; -thebalance will be made up by CMHC grants of approximately $518,000 which produces an average per unit grant of $539 per month; -because CMHC is a Crown Corporation these subsidies will be funded through the use of tax- payers'money; -the average rents in this complex range bet- ween $515 and $640 per month plus utilities, which according to CMHC regulations apparently reflects their market value; -accordIng to Statistics Canada, the cost of the family home should not exceed 25 per cent of the family income; this means that ln order to qualify for membership in this co-op a family cannot earn less then $25,000 a year; -the average individual income in CanadaIs less than $15,000 a year, therefore, the average Canadian family is not eligible for membership in this subsidized housing project; -this means that the Canadian taxpayer is sub- sidlzing the housinig costs of others who are ear- ning a greater income than he or she ls; and, -that over the project's 35 year amortization period it will produce an $18 million additiqn to the federal deficit and that it is just one of eight such projects In the Region of Durham. It is amazing to us that a Crown Corporation would be placed in a position of subsidizing people who clearly do not need it. LInstead of providing subsidized housing to the elderly, the handicapped, the single parent or the low income famlly,.CMHC Is providing subsidized housing for people who wlll earn as much as twice the income of the average Canadian. This subsidy is not given to all Canadians, just to those few who are selected to become mem- bers of the co-operative. Membership is deter- mined by a small group of private individuals who are not accountable In any way to the taxpayers of Letters to the editor: P.O. Box 206 Whitby, Ont. LiN 5S1 p for those without need this country. These same people will have control of $18 million of ,public money'for which they are not ac- countable in any way. This strikes us as ludicrous. One of the justifications put forward for the construction of this development Is the lack of rental housing. There ·ls not enough rentai housing being built according to the proponents of this scheme. Yet the CMHC - the same people providing the co-op's money - says that the Town of Whitby has a 4.6 per cent vacancy rate. At best, this should be considered a conservative figure,-because the CMHC surveys only the large, professional lan- diords, not each Individual landlord, the smaller of whom usually have higher vacancy rates. • From these few facts it is not difficult to sur- mise that this project should not be built, at least not at the expense of the taxpayer. Surely the tax- payer would be better off if CMHC purchased ail of the vacant apartments in Whitby or even throughout Durham Region and then allowed these people to live in them for nothing for 35 years. After all, at $20,000 to $30,000 a unit these same- 80 families could be housed at a cost of no greater than $2.4 million and even if they paid no rent, in- curring only each unit's operating costs, the tax- payers of this country would stili have saved literally millions of dollars. Those favoring projects such as the Pringle Creek Co-operative say that they are justified because there is so little construction of rental accommodation. Well building such accom- modation Is one of the poorest Investments In Canada today. Rent controls have virtually brought this industry to a standstill. No reasonable person would expect a businessman to consider re-investment in apar- tment or home rentai construction when his revenue will climb by only six per cent a year while his costs have escalated by 10 per cent or more a year. When the government of Ontario introduced rent controls It did so in an effort to keep housing costs down. However, because they have not allowed rents to increase with inflation, they have created the current situation and the major losers. are the taxpayers. We would not be objecting to this type of project as strongly as we do If it was being con- structed for geared to income housing for senior citizens, the - handicapped or other deserving groups. But we do object to subsidizing the housing costs of those who do not need it. Or to put it another way, when you're struggling to make your monthly rent or mortgage payment, how does it make you feel to know that yourtax dollars are being used to subsidize people earning between 25 and 30 thousand dollars a year at the rate of $539 per month? d"*l