THE FREE PRESS
MAIL BAG
Page A9
THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 1999
 PHONE 564-0005
Mall dilemma simply dollars and nonsense
    Editor:
    The fact that discussions over the development of the area known as Ruby Park have reached such a fever pitch indicates that, from top civic officials on down, there is no fundamental understanding of the basic tenets of real estate management in a civic setting. Here are three points that are being totally ignored.
    1)      Keep land inventory at a manageable level. Prince George’s civic land prices, specifically those of commercial real estate, have foundered for years, and will
continue to do so, largely because of a high inventory level.
   2)     Look after your revenue-producing zones. Add new ones at your peril. We’ve seen this in other major centres, Edmonton for example.
   The development of West Edmonton Mall, while a boon for tourism and taxation at first, became an economic nightmare. With no major draw to the downtown, Edmonton became what Mordecai Richler called “a used-building lot” with record numbers
of full-building vacancies. Look at Victoria and George streets now.
   In Prince George, we have no bylaws that would force landholders to develop prime land. Large tracts of downtown property that should be generating income for the city in the form of taxes, are weed farms. There is no incentive to locate to or develop the downtown which is why we have to struggle so hard to breathe life in to it.
   3)      Keep revenue-producing property producing revenue. Pop
                           STREETWISDOM
 What do you think of the proposed methadone clinic for Prince
 George?
 Jill Morris
 “I’m undecided. I haven’t got that much information on it yet.”
 Andrea
 Sampson
 “It’s a good idea to help people get off heroin.”
 Dan Charlie
 “We need a methadone clinic here. It can be hard for addicts to get on methadone (otherwise).”
 Garrett
 Campbell
 “People on methadone are on the road to recovery and that’s a good thing. I think a clinic is a good idea overall.”
 Headline misleading
     Editor:
     We take strong exception to your headline “DFO looks to supply natives with meals on wheels"(f>cc Press. July 29). It does not reflect the story that follows.
     Our nation is not looking for a fisheries handout from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
     The DFO has a constitutional duty to ensure our people have access to early Stuart sockeye, it being only one of two sockeye runs into our territory. We are
  quite capable of catching the fish ourselves and we prefer it that way.
     But, if there is a conservation issue or a mismanagement of the fishery, which we say exists, then the DFO also has a legal obligations to ensure we have an alternative access to the fishery.
     Please take a hard look at the facts before you insinuate a handout from DFO.
     Chief Danny Alexis Grand Chief Edward John Tl’azt’en Nation
       The Prince George Free Press welcomes letters to the editor but reserves the right to edit for brevity, clarity and legality. Unsigned letters won’t be printed.
    How you can reach us
    ► Mail
    200-1515 2nd Ave. Prince
    George, B.C.
    V2L 3B8
    ► Fax
    562-0025
    ► Email
    editor@pgfreepress.com
quiz: Who will generate more revenue in the form of taxes for the city, the Simon Fraser Hotel or the Art Gallery?
   If you said the Art Gallery, you should be on city council. If you said the Simon Fraser, you’d be right.
   Why is there no money to plow city streets in the winter? Why is there no money to give the downtown core a facelift?
   Because prime property that should be generating income isn’t, and the fault lies squarely with council.
 ▼ Firearms Act
   So what happens if we develop Ruby Park? We can kiss any further development of the downtown, already in a distressed state, goodbye. Watch rental prices in Pine Centre drop like a Russian space station. As for the Hart and Vanway, everything we’ve put in to development over the years will be set back yet another 10 to 20 years.
   And the major intersection for city access will become just another congested bottleneck, all in the name of short-term dollars,
   Ray Tracy
Problem is mass of inconsistencies
     Editor:
     One of our members faxed us a copy of the August 5 editorial: “What clause was it, again?”
     Canada’s new Firearms Act (formerly Bill C-68), is 137 pages long. The March 1998 regulations are 142 pages long, and the police are provided with a desk manual of over 1,300 pages to help the police to interpret the law. The legislation itself is poorly written and is often contradicted by both the regulations and the desk manual.
     This confusion has lead many Canadians to question the bill. Some, such as Mr. Bruce Hutton and his organization, are planning open defiance.
     The National Firearms Association is not surprised that Canadians are concerned, confused, or upset by this legislation. The reality here is that this legislation was drafted to solve a problem with street gangs in a few of Canada’s major urban centres.               The
  “Ottawashed” politicians and bureaucrats who drafted this bill, have yet to explain how register-
  ing the moose hunting rifle of a hunter in Prince George will solve that problem.
     The NFA has drafted a complete replacement for the fatally flawed “C-68 Titanic”, the Practical Firearms Control System.
     Under our program, based on over 30 years of international studies on what will reduce crime, the criminal use of firearms is severely punished, while the rights of law-abiding Canadians to own, and use responsibly, their firearms is protected.
     Federal Justice Minister Anne McLellan has repeatedly stated she would like to see a culture of safety around firearms. Why then, when offered a sensible, proven, cost effective system, does she remain focused on failure?
     That is the real issue here - that the federal government is driving honest Canadians toward open defiance of the law, is a symptom of the problem.
     Jim Hinter
     Coordinator,           National
  Firearms Association
 Columnist should be Jtred for insensitive comments
  More letters, A12
     Editor:
     Re:    Jack   Bleiler’s column
  “Thank God I’m a country boy” (Free Press, August 12).
     I was never a big John Denver fan. I’ll be the first to admit that. But despite how one feels about his music, the man was a humanitarian who fought for environmental
  causes and does not deserve to be disparaged after his death by a two bit hack claiming to he a writer. Dying in a plane crash is not getting “what he deserved.” Show some compassion, buddy. I sincerely hope you lose your job for that comment. That’s what you deserve.
     Jennifer Arrance