To the editor:
Re: Letter of the Week Market Vendors Not Split: Just Have Different Opinions on Move, by M. Houde, March 28 Capital News.
Column: City Has Made Strides, But Pedestrians Out of Luck, by Kathy Michaels, March 28 Capital News.
M. Houde, in his letter, stated: “This talk of a split in the market does not come from the 62 per cent (of the vendors) who disagreed with this move—it comes from the media” and the board.
Many of the press include this line of the 50-50 split as being fact, which according to M. Houde this is not true.
I also refer to an article written in favour of the move by your own reporter Kathy Michaels published just below this letter. (City has made strides…) I thought journalists were suppose to be non-partisan?
There are obviously some factions who are behind this move and appear to be using the media to change the publics’ perception, despite the fact that this vote by the vendors was fair and democratic.
Ms. Michaels starts her article benignly in favour of “pedestrians” and then ends with promoting the plan of “A Kelowna developer (who) has bought the three-hectare site…” near Clements Ave. Most people would drive to this location anyway, despite her prediction about it being so walkable.
There was a plan for the permanent market being situated on the corner of Benvoulin and Springfield. This plan was discussed a few years ago by Kelowna city council. It would solve a number of issues, walkability, amenities and plenty of space for permanent structures and parking. I would think the vendors would be in favour of this location. Is this land owned by the city or is it no longer available?
[Editor’s Note: Kathy Michaels’ comments were made in her weekly column, not in a news report. Columns are the format newspapers use where writers can express their own opinion on a topic.]