So let me get this straight — Nolan Crouse and company actually complain about a loss of revenues due to the reduction of traffic offences?
The opponents of photo radar have expressed the same opinion, only they have the decency to say it like it is — we don’t care about safety, we only want your money. The idea of fining poor driving habits is to induce motorists to be safer drivers. If council wasn’t completely out of their depth, they'd manage to generate other sources of income while reducing expenses.
Oh yeah, that’s right. They're truly making an effort in that direction. They “predicted/forecast” a loss of $1 million for Servus Credit Union Place but managed to only lose $750,000. These people actually think this is a good thing.
I have a great idea. Why not predict a loss of, oh, I don't know, let’s say $3 million for next year. Then when the shortfall is "only" $1 million, wow! According to their misguided accounting philosophies that would mean a gain of $2 million. The boys at Enron would be proud.
Expect a nice increase in property taxes again, but don't be fooled into believing that the cause is anything other than the completely ineffectual management style inherent to this group of "leaders. "
Joe Obermeyer, St. Albert
