Yes, the Stampede should go on. During the flood of 2013, the City and the Stampede did a great job of moving forward, as we must.
The huge financial and other benefits the City of Calgary receives from this world-class event are numerous. We also know the financial benefit from the Stampede will help to cover the major costs associated with the repairs to the water line.
The citizens of Calgary and surrounding communities have already shown that we can rise to the challenge, work together, and move forward through this state of emergency.
Hats off to the Stampede Board, for working with others to come up with solutions to help minimize the effects of this event. The Stampede is a signature event of the City of Calgary and it would be a shame if it didn’t proceed.
Come Hell or No Water, the Stampede should go on.
Charles Middleton, Calgary
Small inconvenience, not life-threatening
If the June 20 Letter to the Editor is any indication of Calgarians’ grit and determination, we are in big trouble.
One writer was severely inconvenienced by having to reuse his pasta water for plants, and yet another was traumatized because he received a glass of cold water, without asking apparently, at a restaurant. I hate to think what these folks would do in a real crisis.
People relax: no bombs are falling on us and we still have Netflix. It will be fine – just get a grip.
Rob Butler, Calgary
Can’t catch a break
Re: Front photo June 20
Poor Chestermere. After all the woes they have experienced with their dysfunctional town council, now they are running into the consequences of a substandard education. The sign that asked their residents to “Restrict Water to Esential” is cringe-worthy. And I doubt the worker who posted that sign would have had better luck with “Necessary.”
There’s money in the vault
What is wrong with our city councillors? In discussing the cost of repairs to the water main, Councillor Chabot says it is worrisome because there is “not a lot of money left in the fiscal stability reserve.”
At the end of 2023, the city’s fiscal stability reserve was over $876 million. The city had over $6.8 billion in cash and marketable securities on hand at the end of last year. That was $2.8 billion in excess of various reserves of one sort or another of over $4 billion.
By any measure, that city has very large financial reserves in place. It should not be worrisome, despite what Councillor Chabot might think.
Jim Williams, Calgary
Use electricity fees to cover water costs
City councillors Chabot and Sharp seem to suggest that if funding from the provincial and federal governments is not forthcoming, then water users will be stuck with an additional fee to pay for the repairs.
The city already has hundreds of millions of unearned dollars from over-collected electricity access fees. Water customers and electricity customers are the same people. If the city is not planning on returning the over-collected fees to those customers, then an appropriate use would be to pay for these repairs without raiding the customer wallets once again.
Scrap other projects to pay for infrastructure repairs
Our mayor and several councillors have lost their way. We just got hit with a huge property tax bill. Maybe, it’s time they look in the mirror. Get the water turned on!
Pat Achtemichuk, Calgary
Politicians, put your health where your mouth is
90-year-old an advocate for vaccines
Re: Health specialists urge awareness around COVID conspiracies, Opinion, June 18
Wrong takeaway
Re: Emissions cap not possible without oil, gas production cuts: Deloitte, June 19
Once again, the fossil fuel industry has been caught in a lie.
For decades, they claimed their pollution played no role in the overheating of our planet. As we began experiencing the extreme storms, crushing heat, and severe droughts arising from their gaslighting, they changed tactics. “Instead of legislation, culpability, or change,” they said, “Why not let oil and gas technology fix the problems oil and gas have created?”
Thus, the hot air of carbon capture tech leaked out into the atmosphere of general discourse.
While the fossil fuel companies have enjoyed many more years of heightening pollution throughout this period of confusion, they have finally let it slip: Carbon capture is too expensive for them to ever seriously pursue. The message is loud and clear. Keeping our lives safe and healthy is too expensive for their bottom line.
The question is, does that excuse ring true for you?
Mark Taylor, Calgary