Out-of-towners paying more in Penticton?

[twobits]

All Penticton taxpayers contribute to our services whether they use them or not, someone who never goes to the pool or the SOEC will still help cover the cost of building/maintaining these facilities. User fees at the door count for "extra" charges, I say leave it at that. Fostering an "us and them" attitude is a very bad idea, we've already got enough of that going on between Penticton residents without bringing surrounding factions into the fray.

OK, that sounds logical. But how are we to feel about that when the population 20 yrs from now within legal City boundary's is 50k and the surrounding regional district withing a 15 min drive is 150k? Are the 50k still gonna be neighborly for paying for the pool, gym, parks, yada yada for the other 150k?
I would agree that Slump is a bit of a cantankerous soul but on this issue, the old girl does have a valid point about equity of shared expenses.
Personally, I have no problem with subsidized community assets that all pay for with a modest user fee that does not come close to the actual cost of use. I am just agreeing with Slump that their is an increasing number of people taking advantage of that taxpayer subsidy who could easily pay the actual cost of their use despite their address being technically outside of Penticton City's tax jurisdiction. And I don't think it's a tourist deterrent either. If I were in Timbuktoo and going to their Community pool as a tourist and I faced a sign that Said "Timbuk residents 1 Bat, everyone else 2 Bat"....I would get it completely cuz I didn't pay for the building or it's continuing operating costs.