PA(,L 4. WVLDN1 SI)Y. JLU LY -"),1I '>s 1. W11 ITBY 1:UR[F I ýPRI SS w h itb y Published ever. Wed"esdaÀ SH.M.Publishing and Photograph Inc. 7' i"Phone 6SH.6111 The Free Press Buildin Voice of the County Town Michael Ian Burgess, Publisher - Managing Editor 131 Brock Street North. Ibe only Whitby newspaper independentl' owned and operated b. Whithy residents for Whithy residents. P.). Box 206, Whitby. Or g. nt. MICHAEL J. KNELL Community Editor MARJORIE A. BURGESS Advertising Manager Maîling Permit No 480 Member ofI.he Whitby Chamber of Commerce Corridor ratepayers should support buses not try to have service eut back The Corridor Area Ratepayers Association is again trying to persuade Whitby Town Council to cut back services provided by the still-infant Whitby Transit System in their area so that school bus service for high school students can be re- instated. At last week's meeting of Whitby Town Council (July 20), the association requested that plans for the cut-backs be made and implemented before July 30 to allow the Durham Board of Education to re-instate this service at the beginning of the school year in September. The July 30 deadline was requested because it is at that time that the board will award contracts for its transportation service. As our readers are well aware, the Whitby Free Press totally supports the concept of a public transit service for this community. We have also opposed any move by the Corridor Area Ratepayers Association to have this service reduced or eliminated in the East Ward so that they can have school bus service back. And, we do so now. It is interesting to note that the Corridor Area Ratepayers Association is the only such organiza- tion in this municipality that has publically op- posed the transit service. To the best of our knowledge, other ratepayers' associations have not sought to have transporta- tion for high school students re-instated or to have public transit service reduced in their area. Therefore, the question must be asked, why does the association want to sabotage the Whitby Transit Service? They claim that the municipally run transit ser- vice means that they have to pay twice for a ser- vice that they used to pay for only once. Within certain limits, this is a correct observa- tion for not only do the taxpayers support the transit service through their property taxes, but must pay what must be considered to be a nominal fare to use the service. When the Durham Board of Education provides the service, the taxpayer assumes the total burden with no contribution coming in from the fare box. The taxpayer, who is usually an adult, cannot make use of the service provided by the board, but has the right to use the service provided by the Town of Whitby. It seems to us that if the taxpayer has to pay for a service, he or she should at least have the right to use it at his or her option. The proposai from the Corridor Area Ratepayers Association would not specifically injure this right, but would make it much more difficult to exercise. Another argument put forward by the associa- tion is that the school bus service is safer because the driver can exercise greater super- vision over his passengers. Does this mean that the association believes that high school students, whose average age is 14 and up, are not mature enough to use a public transit service with some degree of common sen- se? Our contention is that young people in this age group should be mature enough to use a public transit system and if they are not it is a sad reflec- tion on their upbringing. The association is also advocating that those reductions be made only in their area and only for their children. They made that clear when their spokesman told v*'htby Town Council that they "cannot and will not speak for any other organization." It is obvious to us that the Corridor Area Rate- payers Association is seeking special privileges and that they are not concerned with an issue that concerns all residents of the Town of Whitby. It also seems to us that if this special privilege is granted to the Corridor Area then it must also be granted to other areas of town, for example, to Ot- ter Creek and West Lynde. They also do not seem to be concerned with the fact that the Durham Board of Education tax- payers in other municipalities, most notably Oshawa and Ajax, do not receive transportation for their high school aged children. Their children must make use of the municipally run transit systems in their respective communities. It is also interesting to note that those parents are not protesting what is essentially the same situation. Should the Corridor Area Ratepayers Association be successful in its bid to have high school transportation re-instated, it will set an un- fair and costly precedent that will have to be bor- ne by all regional taxpayers, not just those living within the Town of Whitby. Logic would also seem to indicate. that the association is not supportive of the bus service despite a statement by the spokesman that they "do not advocate the discontinuance of the public transit service." We seem to recall that some members of the association bemoaned the fact that the bus ser- vice does not provide transportation to the Oshawa Shopping Centre at a meeting they held last year. And the Whitby Transit Service should not provide transportation to a commercial facility in another community. The Oshawa Transit System certainly doesn't, nor does any other local system. The local service is supported by local tax dollars, the majority of which are paid by local businesses, which in turn have the right to expect the transit system to provide service for their customers. In this matter, it seems to this publication that the Corridor Area Ratepayers Association is behaving much like a "special interest group." They do not seem to be concerned with how their particular demands will affect the rest of the community. In fact, they seem only to be concer- ned with how something that Involves the entire community affects them. The association does not want to participate in a service that will benefit, and does benefit, the entire community. They are seeking special privileges, and do not seem to care whether or not the rest of the tax- payers can avail themselves of them. It is time for the Corridor Area Ratepayers Association to stop criticizing the Whitby Transit Service for what must be considered to be a view that is not held by the majority of residents of the Town of Whitby, and we're doubtful is even held by a majority of 'Corridor' area residents. They should, instead, be seeking ways to lm- prove the service so that it can be better utilized by all members of our community. Perhaps even more important it should be poin- ted out that the educational system is being sub- sidized by ALL taxpayers to the tune of OVER 50 per cent of our tax dollars...and this fantastic bill for education is being paid NOT just by the families with children, but by childless families, single people, retired people, senior citizens, etc. etc. Nobody FORCES anybody to have children, and certainly nobody FORCES people to have even more children. It would seem that considering the extent to which we're already subsidizing families with children (don't forget about 'baby bonus', tax deductions, O.H.I.P. etc.) it would appear that asking people to pay a portion of their own children's transportation to and from school would be a small thing to ask. We don't believe the majority of Whitby resi- dents need, or even want, handouts from other residents, but when you digress from the 'user pay' system it's not a lot different from social wel- fare. -Ã