The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

rk 6 -- PORT PERRY STAR -- Tuesday, March 19, 1991 The Port Perry Star 188 MARY STREET - PORT PERRY, ONTARIO PHONE 985-7383 FAX 985-3708 The Port Perry Star is authorized as second class mail by the Post Office Department, Ottawa, for cash payment of postage Second Class Mail Registration Number 0265 | "Elsewhere $74.90peryear. *Single Copy 65¢ Subscription Rate: In*Canada $26.75 per year EDITORIAL Publisher - J. Peter Hvidsten Editor - John B. McClelland News/Features - Julia Dempsey Billing Department - Louise Hope News/Features - Kelly Lown Retail Sales - Kathy Dudley, Lynda Ruhl, Tracy O'Neill PRODUCTION Annabell Harrison Trudy Empringham Darlene Hlozan BUSINESS OFFICE Office Manager - Gayle Stapley Accounting - Judy Ashby ADVERTISING Advertising Co-ordinator - Valene Ellis Advertising Sales Representative - Anna Gouldburn Rl + CNA | 5 Member of the Canadian Community Newspaper Association Ontario Community Newspaper Association Published every Tuesday by the Port Perry Star Co. Ltd. Port Perry, Ontario *GSTincludedin price Ny me ETN A " Editorial Comment SEATON, AGAIN A consultants study prepared for Durham Region says quite clearly that the development of the city known as Seaton in north Pickering could have serious negative financial impli- cations for the Region. The study, by Clayton Research Associates was unveiled for members of Durham council last week. By way of background, the Seaton project is hardly new news. It's been around for nearly two decades, ever since the provincial government began land-banking some 7,000 acres south of Highway 7 and west of the Brock Road. On this land was supposed to spring up the city, the in- dustry and the commerce around the proposed international airport at Pickering. Well, some two decades later, one could look high and low through this area and not find a single airport runway. But airport or no, the Seaton project has bubbled off the back burner, with the release of the consultants report. Planners say it makes good sense to indulge in a little long-range planning, to get ready for the future, and to be able to have some idea what long range plans might cost, should they ever get off the drawing board. Seaton is supposed to become a city of 90,000 over the next 50 years, a city made up mostly of high density (that's apartment) housing. Some 2,000 acres of the Seaton lands are ear-marked for industrial development. The consultants report unveiled last week is a bit un- nerving for several reasons. First of all, for what is states: if Seaton goes ahead, the Region of Durham could incur huge costs for such things as water and sewer services, unless Seaton's developer agrees to "up-front" these costs. The re- port says $192 million (in 1989 dollars) for sewer and water pipes, treatment plants and so on. What the report does not address (and was not asked to address) are the costs for all the other things that a city of 90,000 would need: new schools, hospitals, recreation facili- ties, police and fire protection, social services, public transit and so on. And the report makes no mention of where Seaton will get rid of the garbage it generates. Somebody has to pay for these costs somewhere. And whether it is the province or the region, the source of the funds is the same: the tax-payers of this Region and this prov- ince. Last time we checked, Durham Region and the eight mu- nicipalities that make up the Region were all groaning under a huge financial burden just to provide services for the people who are already here. But it's not the "up-front" costs for hard services (roads, sewer, water) that are scarey. Most if not all can eventually be recovered with the development. It is the later costs once the people have arrived and nice- ly settled in to the high rise or row housing. There are no on- going developer contributions for these costs. They are paid from the levy and that comes from property taxes. Without substantial industrial development, there is just no way that 90,000 people are going to generate enough prop- erty tax revenue to pay for the services they require. There is mention of some 800 hectares of industrial land. Filling that is a pipe dream. Canada, as we are seeing is mov- ing into a post-industrial society, away from the large factories to smaller (in size, anyway) service oriented commerce using high tech skills, rather than the brute strength of a large labour force. The province of Onrtario should do one of three things with the Seaton land: convince the feds to put a new airport there and let the industry grow around it; let the area develop naturally as the market demands; or turn the entire 7,000 acres into a permanent green belt for future generations. But a new city of 90,000 souls by the year 2040? Let's hope not. Just because somebody errred 20 years in gobbling up all that land, we don't have to err again. Jottings DISCRIMINATION There are now three things in this life that are inevitable: death, taxes & price increases. Price increases hurt everyone to some de- gree and whether it's a cup of coffee going from 65¢ to 75¢, or gas up at the pump by 10¢ per li- tre (that's about 45¢ per gal. for those who grew up with imperial and haven't quite figured out metric, yet) the end result is, more money out of our collective pockets and purses. As consumers, we've become quite accus- tomed to increases. Clothing, food, taxes, insu- rance, fuel, electricity, are just some of the things we continually see rise in cost, but unless it's a significant amount, Canadians seem to take it all in stride, barely blinking an eye. Oh, we might curse a little under our breath if we forget to fill up the car on the way home and find the price of gas has gone up overnight, but that's about the extent of the outcry. Mind you most of the price increases we. experience as consumers are relatively small. There's 5% here and 10% there, but it's very un- usual for us to experience huge increases in the price of everyday products or services. Such is not the case in the corporate world. We've been getting warning for the past few months, that effective March 1, 1991, Canada Post would assess enormous increases to the cost of mailing community newspapers. Well, March 1 has come and gone, and community newspapers (such as the Port Perry Star), are now faced with increases in their post- al rates for distributing newspapers to their sub- scribers, ranging from 100% to 1000%, depend- ing on the weight, volume and destination of the paper. We anticipate an increase of over 500% in the cost of mailing the Star to subscribers. It's all part of our government's efforts to re- duce transfer payments from the Department of Communications to Canada Post, to offset the subsidized rates for readers. While no one can argue with the intent of the government, it is the way in which it has been implemented which has upset community newspaper publishers and associations across Canada. While community newspapers were given three months notice of the momentous increas- es (and some have received a further 90 day moratorium), newspaper in rate codes 2 and 3 (of which the Star is classified) did not receive the same consideration. In addition to the short notice given about rate hikes, (no time for papers to assess their costs and restructure their subscription prices) Canada Post appears to be taking dead aim at the community newspapers. We feel part of the reason, although hard to prove, is the fact that community newspapers compete directly with Canada Post in the lucra- tive advertising flyer business. If advertisers find it too costly to place flyers in local newspapers (because of high postal costs), then they will turn to the Post Office to distribute their product. Alas, the community newspaper takes it in the butt two ways. First they lose the revenues generated from insertion of advertising flyers in the paper and 2. they lose many subscribers due to the high subscription costs caused by the new, highly unfair postal rates. Everyone is a loser, except Canada Post, who will brag a year from now about their mil- lions of dollars in profits for the year 1991. Here are some examples of the price dis- crepancies between community newspapers, daily newspapers and magazines. 1. Daily newspaper (over 5% mailed) 14.9¢ Community newspaper 41.0¢ (both based on 150 gram weight) 2. Paid magazine (eg. McLean's) 6.4¢ Community newspaper 51.0¢ (both based on 200 gram weight) 3. Non-subscriber magazine 38.4¢ Community newspaper 51.0¢ (both based on 200 gram weight) To give a better example of how the new price structure will effect your local newspaper let's try and simplify the above information. Under the former method of postal delivery, it cost approximately 9.5¢ a copy to mail the Star. Multiply this figure times our 2500 sub- scribers and the end result is about $230.00. The new rates will change this dramatically, putting the cost (for the same size newspaper) up from 9.5¢ per copy to a whopping 51¢ per copy on every paper delivered outside of the lo- cal post office. That's an increase of over 500%, or about $1,250.00 to mail the Star to its loyal (Turn to page 10)