Majority should rule on underpass lease

Easier access to the foreshore? I’d love that... but a $9 million underpass?

Easier access to the foreshore?

I’d love that… but a $9 million underpass?

Did you know that the city is moving ahead with it right now? My mom has lived on the foreshore for almost 20 years so I know the problem with the trains. But guess what?

The problem waits are a lot less now with the double tracking (a recent study proves this).

I would like better access to the foreshore but not if it means spending $9 million dollars that might be better spent elsewhere. And having participated in the last two official community plans and heard what are priorities for locals it is obvious an underpass is not a priority.

The $9 million should not be spent without more public input and education. Wasn’t there an underpass study in the last budget? What were the results? What are the long- term benefits of an underpass? Is the proposed location the best place? Is it all local tax dollars paying for this?

If the majority want this: then let’s go for it, but to forge ahead ignoring the traffic study, years of public input that does not prioritize this, and to do it in this duplicitous way (pushing it through in a vaguely worded document and timed at Christmas) is an affront to democracy.

Please, let’s have adequate, transparent, informed debate before we spend $9 millions that we will likely be paying for for 20 years.

If this makes sense to you: go to city hall  and sign the elector response form by Jan. 10. You may also sign it, up until Christmas, at Gondwana Gallery on Lakeshore Drive.

Signing it will ensure that this $9 million idea will go to referendum (where it just might pass. But at least it will be the will of the people).

Vivian Morris