News » Whistler

Letters to the editor


Page 3 of 6

4. The best answer is to do away with both the Home Owner Grant and the school taxes on real property. Failing that, you must, at the least, extend the Home Owner Grant to any resident, regardless of assessment value. And then, you must do something about the killer school taxes.

Unless you take positive action, Whistler will become a virtual ghost town by 2010 with mainly non-resident Trophy Home owners and service people commuting from Squamish, Lions Bay, Pemberton and D’Arcy. That would not be good for this community and it would be a disaster for major events such as the Olympics.

Clive V. Nylander



I would like to thank you for a well balanced article about the library/museum project. We appreciate the help in communicating to the community the struggle we are having in realizing this facility.

The library is desperate for a new home as was reinforced over the weekend when once again the roof leaked and we almost lost thousands of dollars worth of books. The trailers are well past their time.

Anne Fenwick



Over the past two years I have had to deal directly with numerous micro-hydro proponents and with the provincial and federal regulatory agencies in an effort have the needs of recreational and tourism users heard, and to look toward preserving some of our local waterways.

I applaud the SLRD for their efforts at planning for these micro-hydro power projects in this area. However, if the municipal governments in this area wish to be leaders, let us not simply construct more "green" projects here, but rather let us lead in a program of conservation and wise use of the energy that is currently produced in this area, and beyond that, of a reduction in energy consumption. This will ensure the efforts of Whistler, in a bid to be a green community, are truly a model for the other municipalities, and for others world wide. This negates the need for current or future impacts to our local streams and rivers, no matter how "green" those impacts might be.

I also ask, where is BC Hydro’s social responsibility that is touted in their promotion of micro-hydro as green energy? Recreational instream users have asked to have input on the criteria that BC Hydro uses to define "green energy." BC Hydro has declined to consider that input. BC Hydro has also declined to meet with recreational users to discuss these issues – not face to face, not at meetings with the regulatory agencies, and not as part of the Land Resource Management Planning process in the SLRD. In the absence of an overall plan by the province, and at least currently by the SLRD, it is BC Hydro’s Energy Purchase Agreements that are driving the project proposals in this area. While doing so, BC Hydro’s business-model process remains outside the realm of public input. When will community, recreation, and tourism needs be heard in BC Hydro’s process for evaluating project proposals?