Vote No on Prop 1
By Peter Bolling
August 04, 2005
I appreciate M.L. Dahl's clarification of the bonding issue.
However, when a municipality bonds for projects such as the docks,
it has an impact on its overall rating. Since the city might
be forced to bond approximately $30 million to address a serious
problem with our water system, we should expect that the cost
of borrowing that money will increase the greater our indebtedness.
Bonding for the docks will have an effect on any bonding (be
it for schools, recreation, fire department equipment, whatever)
we either need to do or that we choose to do in the future. To
state with absolute certainty, as those who favor Prop 1 have
done, that the dock extension will not cost the community members
anything is misleading at best.
I will vote no on Prop 1 for
a number of reasons including the choice of a northend extension,
the additional costs for upland development, the poor guest in
our home that the cruise industry has been, and the additional
loss of our control over Ketchikan.
Ketchikan, AK - USA
On the Web:
Port of Ketchikan Expansion
Note: Comments published
on Viewpoints are the opinions of the writer
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Sitnews.
Write a Letter -------Read Letters
E-mail the Editor
Stories In The News