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

PAGE 4, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 12, 1986 WHITBY FREE PRESS Published every Wednesday whitbY' ILMOA F- 1 by M.H.M. Publishing Co Ior and Photography Inc. f 11 .1 PIhone 668-6111VALERIECOWEN w v1.1 J u ! ~ The Free Press Building, Advortlslng Manager 111 Brock Street North, Second Cass Mai Volce of the County Town Michael Ian Burgess, Publisher - Managing I 1.O. Box 206, Whitby, Ont. Regisration No. 5351 The on ly Whitby nwspa per independently owned and opera ted byWhitby residents for Whitby resideCts. Drumm, Bugelli,.Batten and Emm write: On Monday, Feb. 24, the council of the Town of Whitby defeated, on a recorded vote of 4 to 3, a motion to provide a $6.2 million expansion to the Iroquois Park Recreational Complex. The rationale for that decision was based on our responsibility to consider the opinions, input and future of the entire municipality and utilizing solid fiscal management as part af aur decision process. The dominant reason for defeating the motion was the fact that Iroquois Park is not located in a central location easily accessible to all residents of this municipality and the fact that all of the financial responsibilities of this municipality had not been taken into consideration. It is not our intent, or never has been our intent to ignore the fact that this municipality is growing rapidly and recreational facilities must be provided now to accommodate that growth. It should be noted that the $6.2 million proposai represented an approximate $2 million increase to a proposai adopted by this council in December 1984, did not provide the financial flexibility of the original proposai, was introduced to council with an urgency to make a decision and provided no designed alternatives. Letters to the editor To The Editor: An open letter to Whitby Council regar- ding the Iroquois Park expansion: I am sending this let- ter to you, and making it available to the local press, as I am very con- cerned that emotions are being used to pressure you into rever- sing a perfectly sound decision reached in a democratic manner. If and only if it is the will of the majority of citizens of Whitby to ex- pand Iroquois Park at a cost of alnost $6.2 million then go ahead and do it but the "silent majority" must be fully aware of the consequen- ces. The Joint report of the Administrator, Director of Recreation, Director of Planning and Treasurer dated Feb. 17, 1986 contains facts which emotional arguments a'void and even some of the press choose to ignore by presenting partisan and biased opinions and playing down the realities of the situation. The Jean Monteith & Associates study, much quoted by the "special interest groups" (all words in quotes are direct from the report) was based on input from these same groups and a "random" sampling of Whitby's taxpayers. "61 percent ... agreed that there is a need ... for an additional community complex ... 88 percent ... agreed that any new facility ... should be multipurpose ... frequently mentioned ... arena, indoor racquet sports facilities, an out- door pool, a fitness cen- tre and outdoor ice rinks." I would cer- tainly be included in the 61 percent that says there is a need for ad- ditional facilities but the report. does not say spend all the money on Iroquois Park - it says spend money on ad- ditional facilities. Financially the plan is dependant on "...con- tinued growth of the Town" and "...it may be necessary ... to reestablish priorities for Capital ... or deben- tures". Between the lines this means we; the taxpayers, would be spending all our money plus borrowing maybe half of the cost and would have nothing left for much needed projec- ts. Housing for our Senior Citizens is bur- sting at the seams; our Bus system is a joke; half the time Dundas St. is nearer to a Parking Lot than a road and alternate routes are desperately needed; our Library needs not only additional buildings but has few useful reference books for High School and College students; Go Transit trains will arrive in Whitby in 1988 (we hope) which is fine except there is very limited road access to the area (These com- muters will be com- peting with Iroquois Park users so be prepared for some won- derful traffic holdups); Downtown development needs additional funds; the list goes on - not nearly as exotic as ex- panding Iroquois Park but surely these are necessities and isn't it usual for thinking people to provide The ensuing -media criticism whIch has been launched by a few Irresponsible individuals and partisan special Interest groups, armed with very few facts and very little integrity, as a result of this council decision has accomplished only one thing. The response we have recelved from the public in both telephone and face to faceconversations has been overwhelmingly in favour of our position. We have .not participated in the strong-arm, media politics of the past two weeks but have in- stead taken the responsibility of the- mandate given to us in the past election seriously and utilized our time and energies productively in the pursuit of an alternative that is responsible and beneficial to the majority of the taxpayers of our community. To this end we have introduced a motion to council which would provide: a) an additional Ice pad, pool repairs and minor alterations at Iroquois Park immediately. b) a directive to staff to consolidate a parcel of land and prepare a concentual design for a multi- phase, multi-purpose facility, including provision for a pool and fitness area, library branch, senior citizens centre, ball diamonds, soccer fields, etc., necessities before luxuries? Just for fun let's compare the Capital cost per square foot for the defeated proposal to the cost of buying a 2200 sq. ft. house in Whitby for, say $140,000. If the home buyer was -faced with the same purchase price as the deluxe version of Iroquois Park the house would now cost between $220,000 añd $230,000 - an increase between 57 percent and 64 percent. Simple arithmetic says this proposal was to build something more palacious (certainly grossly more expen- sive) than the homes of the people who have to foot the bill. That is just not fair. Operating costs in the report have been presented in a creative way as being an in- crease of about "$5 per year, per household" or an operating subsidy level reduced from 46.6 percent to 34.8 percent of revenue. Translated to plain English this means that the com- ponent we taxpayers pay today for recreation will increase by 14 per- cent - which could be over 20 percent if deben- ture financing is used. Some other sentences in the report also der- serve comment: "a glance to the south brings ... Whitby Habour into view". There's another use for a few dollars for which the funds - would no longer be available. "Public changerooms" and "members changerooms", what is this ail about? - the tax- payers are expected to pay for it and then be relegated to second class when it comes to changerooms and would not have access to the "whirlpool and sauna"! I do applaud the atten- tion to the handicapped user. Having had ex- perience, happily briefly, with the problems of manipulating wheel- chairs I give Whitby high marks in this regard (witness the Council Chambers and the Library today). Well done for this. Any citizen with the interests of Whitby at heart should not just criticize the proposals he or she opposes, nor pressure for proposals which benefit just the few. With that in mind I would be remiss if I did not make some positive suggestions. Firstly, as a Business Manager and in the Rossland Road area. c) a provision for phase i to be constructed within the term of this council and, d) a directive to initiate a public fund raising campaign to provide the construction of phase Il as soon as possible. We are confident this motion makes provision for the immediate and future recreational requirements of the municipality, provides for the major recreational facility of the municipality to be centrally located and accessible to all residen- ts of the community, displays good fiscal management and provides financial flexibility for other capital projects within the municipality. Ross Batten Joe Drumm Joe Bugelli Gerry Emm EDITOR'S NOTE: In the Interests of respon- sible, non-partisan, factual Journalism we decided to present thîs submission by councillors Drumm, Bugelli, Batten and Emm In place of this week's editorial. The Whitby Free Press and many, many others have had their say on the now defunct $6.2 million expansion of Iroquois Park but, despite several years of discussion and debate, both in council and behind closed doors, the good coun- cillors feel they have been shortchanged. This Is to set the record straight. Financial Consultant I do not believe any organization should consider large expen- ditures without looking at the other demands for the scarcest of resour- ces - money. The items I mentioned above, plus several others I probably missed, are not minor commitments but without the, politically dull and boring, infrastructure no developer or in- dustrialist is going to recommend Whitby as a place to grow even if we had the finest recreation complex in Ontario. The town, no differently than every individual, must prioritize and use the available funds in the way that benefits all taxpayers. I don't think this is a lengthy exer- cise, even allowing for SEE PG. 15