Letters to the Editor: Oct. 28

Demolition of eyesore building; On mobility scooters

Demolition of eyesore building

I think everyone agrees the building has to go, the question is ‘when?’ McRae says we have the money do it now. McCormick says council’s understanding was that the demolition would be financed by the sale of four Chapman Camp lots. Only one lot has sold so far so McCormick says we should delay until the lots sell.

According to the Bulletin’s information on the reserve fund, McRae is correct: the money is there, but when the demolition costs are taken from the fund, the fund will be almost empty (perhaps enough left to pave the lot).

McRae says McCormick doesn’t understand the reserve fund. What’s to understand if the reserve fund is just the title of an empty account?

From $434,897.34 to almost empty and two and one-half months to go before years end tells a story of very little reserve dealing with the reserve fund.

John Clark/Kimberley

Mobility scooters

Regarding Mr. Warner’s remarks about mobility scooter for handicapped people:

Had Mr. Warner taken the time to pay attention to these devices he would notice that they all come equipped with brakes, horn, signal lights, brake lights, and lights.

They are mandated — I believe federally — as an assistance mobility device. And yes, they are capable of going 15 or so kilometres an hour. This is because some of those handicapped people have no other means of getting around.

They fall in the same category as motorized wheelchairs.

So Mr. Warner appears to have something against handicapped people, and quite a few of them are seniors. So how many voters has he just insulted and lost votes from?

I for one was of the mind, at the start of this election, leaning towards Mr. Warner, but being senior and handicapped, now must reconsider that. After all who wants a city councillor who is against handicapped people? And that is ALL I read in his views and comments.

Tom Haverko/Cranbrook