[GREN-Exec] LRT position

[Susan Koswan]

Since we already know the project is shortchanged, should we say something
like this:

 

5. Due to the reduced anticipated funding commitment from the Province,
alternative funding sources be explored such as seeking approval for a
Waterloo Region "penny a litre" type gas tax  to make up the shortfall and
provide ongoing funding for future expansion. 

 

Susan K

 

From: executive-bounces at gren.ca [mailto:executive-bounces at gren.ca] On Behalf
Of John Jackson
Sent: January-16-11 1:05 PM
To: GREN Executive
Subject: [GREN-Exec] LRT position

 

In preparation for Tuesday's meeting, I am reviewing our position on LRT. I
have attached our existing position. I'll also bring a few with me Tuesday
night.

Do we need to have our membership change anything in this position Tuesday
evening to make it valid for us to proceed? It is the 5 points on the first
page that are the position that we have to have agreement on. 

The one that I am wondering about is number 5: "NOT be built without the
written commitment of both the provincial and federal governments to cover
the pledged 2/3 of the cost, with every effort made to not exceed the
projected cost of $790 million for the 11 km of LRT and 13 km of adapted BRT
(Bus Rapid Transit - no separate bus lanes)." Do we need to have this
changed by the membership on Tuesday night?

Please let me know what you think.

John


-- 
John Jackson
17 Major Street
Kitchener, Ontario N2H 4R1
519-744-7503

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/executive_gren.ca/attachments/20110116/9454c798/attachment.html>