Stop Unfair Taxation of Nanoose Bay Property Owners!

This proposal to tax is is unfair. There is no good rationalization for proceeding.

This is the most undemocratic process of taxing people for something they were NEVER consulted about or involved with. It is a complete tax grab for something people in Nanoose Bay do not use, with minimal exception!!!

We have a pool at Fairwinds——-why would we go else where. Besides I would never use a swimming pool at any location.

Don’t use it, never have, don’t ever plan to

Taxation despite Representation. From history.

Please rescind bylaw899.02. With this bylaw Nanoose Bay property owners would pay a disproportionate tax to support Ravensong Pool. This looks like someone’s bright idea to raise money for the pool from wealthy homeowners , even though they do not use the pool. Shame!

This is an unfair money grab. I didn't see Qualicum helping to pay for our new firehall!

It is complete nonsense that we are expected to support Ravensong due to the distance and minimal usage. Put the user fees up if you want to raise more money for it.

I have never used the Ravensong Pool and I have no intentions of ever using it,

The pool is very underutilizes and does not need to be expanded. We in Beachcomber don’t go to the pool as it’s too far away. We do not support expanding the present pool structure in Qualicum Beach and do not support its expansion by using tax dollars from Nanoose Bay Area.

NEVER use this facility! Would support a recreation center in Parksville

Bylaw 899.02 should be rescinded. The inclusion of Electoral Area E to fund Ravening makes no sense. A User pays system is the only sensible basis for the few individuals in this area who might use the pool. Our taxes are already ridiculously high without adding Ravening.

As a resident within Electoral Area E, I am against RDN Bylaw amendment 899.02. We already have a full fitness and pool facility within our electoral area. So why should I, and this area be expected to pay taxes and the vehicle costs to drive to Qualicum to use a pool which I have never, and will never use. Clearly these improvement costs should be covered by the Electoral Area where this facility is located, and by those who use the amenities offered.

We would not use the pool in any case. It is too far away. Unfair tax grab. Rescind bylaw 899.02

Remind Bylaw 899.02. It’s a cash grab and undemocratic. We wouldn’t drive that far and pollute to use the pool.

A cash grab by Electorial Area that cannot afford to fund their own projects. Like the last time, the capital costs will be extremely over budget and the user revenue will overstated

Forced participation without allowing our voice is undemocratic. Paying 2.5 - 3.0 times usage is absolutely inequitable. Area E referendum need!

32 years here and never would drive that far when Nanaimo rec is closer

Recind Bylaw 899.02

Users should pay; not faraway taxpayers.