I’d like to question an assumption in Margaret Stacey’s column on February 8, “The Great Budget Juggling Act.”
She wrote, “And we want to hold on to what makes Nelson inviting, vibrant, safe and business-friendly, so we can attract more residents and spread the tax burden around, right?”
I certainly agree that we want to hold on to those qualities in Nelson, but I question whether increasing the number of residents in the town will in fact cause a lowered tax burden.
Growth also causes rising demand for city services. More vehicles wear out the roads faster. More city employees may be needed to respond to questions. Already we have to ration water in the summer. With more people consuming more water, won’t we see increased expenses to provide a greater water supply?
How do we know that growth will pay for itself and that it will not just cause more expenses that keep pace with or outstrip increased tax revenues?
With a rising population on a finite planet — including finite water, soil and natural resources right here in our own region — we can’t grow our way out of all problems.
Carolee Colter, Nelson