Recreation district doesn't make sense
All the lovely letters supporting the wreck, hu, recreation district on Feb. 7. Two even mention me by name. I'm touched.
First off, Mr. White. I'm so glad this floats your boat, but it might sink a number of our dinghies. You mention a possible fee. What fee is that for a tax supported facility? We already have a fee based facility called SWAC, where Dr. Pierce can go by the way to smell pool water.
According to a recent article in the Spokesman Review, the recreation district is only a possibility. The commission that decides how to spend this new tax siphon could opt for a snowmobile facility, (whatever that is), a golf course or even public transportation. The best part was mention that if the recreation center is built, it may be open only during the winter months.
To Mr. Johnson of Bonners Ferry, putting it bluntly, please keep your nose out of something that doesn't "tax" you.
Ms. Bendickson, know what I find appalling? Your apparent disregard for those already reaching tax exhaustion. We don't want to see our property taxes or rents go up again to pay for your special interest luxury.
Most have a time in outlying areas affording gas to get to work let alone coming often enough to Kootenai to make it worth their financial while. At least the schools have multiple facilities and daily bus service.
Maybe all of you should have considered the drawbacks to small towns in snow states before moving here. Some advice, quite buying all those video games and maybe you'll have enough to get junior a temporary winter pass to SWAC or 2nd Nature Skate that your tax-supported facility would directly compete with and which wouldn't cost anymore than our increased taxes.
With the speed this is being pushed, you must have taken a page from Ray Miller's URD/URA playbook. I even heard of a comment made at City Hall that if you can't afford to live here anymore, maybe your should move.
I had a couple of sources for my first letter and stand by every word..
LAWRENCE FURY
Sandpoint