CambridgeToday received the following letter about city spending.

The Property Taxpayers Alliance is not surprised to see how many times Councillor Scott Hamilton is quoted these days in articles about the need for increased city spending and higher taxes. Scott likes to spend taxpayer money.

This time it’s about the cost to repair our supposedly aging and declining infrastructure, for which we already pay a new one per cent special surtax (with no end in sight). The article states “it is primarily emergency services, drinking water and recreation and culture assets that have the highest proportion of infrastructure considered to be in poor or very poor condition.” The article continues, “According to the draft AMP (asset management plan), the average age of fire halls in Cambridge is 71 years.”

So what? Age does not mean the facility is crumbling to the ground. In fact, most of Cambridge’s fire halls are in fine shape despite their age. Why take taxpayer money to replace them simply because they are older?

I question the analysis used to determine the need to replace infrastructure. It would be helpful for property taxpayers to understand what specific city assets are in need of repair and at what cost. Not just generalities.

Property taxpayers must ask themselves an important question. If the city keeps building out new infrastructure while property taxpayers can’t even afford to maintain the existing infrastructure at reasonable tax rates, then our city is headed for a serious future decline.

Homeowners will be crushed by ever increasing property taxes. We need to do the math and I don’t think it will be very pretty. This is what the future holds without change from the status quo. We need a new paradigm, a new model for our city, not endless, unaffordable increases in taxation.

John Waylett
Hespeler