Agenda must be circulated

Dear Editor:

I would like to ask that Council ensure that the agenda for any meeting is circulated prior to the meeting.

Perhaps the proposed agenda could be displayed on the screens. Also, in the case of a meeting dealing with significant documents, it might be helpful to have copies of those documents available. I arrived at 6:30 p.m. for the Dec. 1 meeting and saw no resources.

The truth can be obscured by the use of words and by the absence of words. In my opinion, there has been too much of both in the Trio affair.

At what looked to me like a well-scripted meeting on Thursday, just prior to my disruptive departure, Coun. Helena Konanz stated that she had visited the Save Skaha Park Society website and read (many of) the letters to the editor regarding the Skaha Lake Park. I’m certain I heard her say that the deal that was being proposed met the concerns expressed there.

Coun. Konanz mentioned green space, and the preservation of trees. I don’t recall hearing her mention a significant concern: Trio is being handed the option to be first in line for any future developments on the lakeshore. I also note in the SSPS archive other concerns that were, in my opinion, dismissed too quickly by council at the Nov. 24 meeting including land valuation, First Nations concerns, Trio’s business plans and their absence, the viability of more berth space in the marina, and others. The length of concession license has been an issue for many in the public, and I don’t believe it has been addressed.

I would like to ask one more question. Have any of the Trio deals, including the latest, granted Trio any special rates on public utilities —water, sewer, electricity?

At the Nov. 24 meeting, I could have sworn I heard repeated assurances from several parties on stage that “Trio is only renting the marina.” As far as I am concerned, that statement was a lie. The discussion focused mainly on the marina. However, Trio was at that time, also being granted a 29-year license on the concession and other entitlements that were lightly touched on by those on stage. In the new deal, those entitlements are somewhat restricted, but Trio is still very much at the front of the line, whether or not they are the best business for the undertaking.

If one has read each of the proposed contracts, one would note little change from one to another. How much has changed in the latest contract?

Is Trio still exempt from profit sharing for several years in parts of their undertakings?

Ron Smuin

Penticton