Letters to the Editor 12/9
Special public projects an 'evil, creeping disease'
To the editor:
Just a few thoughts arising from the Tim Rowland Opinion Of Dec. 4 "For public works to work...."
Rowland's view of public works is interesting. He speaks of them as (1) projects that do not earn money nor should we expect them too and (2) services the government decide will positively affect enough people so as to justify spending a few tax dollars.
But why should public works be only those things that do not make a profit? Why doesn't the public have the right to expect public works to pay their own way? And in the case of skating rinks and sports stadiums, taxpayer spending is not a few dollars as he suggests, but millions of dollars over the life of the project. Seldom are these projects ever paid for.
Don't you think that it is right and necessary to differentiate between what are properly "public" projects and what are properly "private" projects. I can accept that in a town or city taxpayers may jointly pay for water, sewer, trash removal, streets, a school, a park etc. These are clearly a benefit to the whole public.