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

FOR THE FINER THINGS IN WOOD es â€" e 182 Weber St. N. Waterloo (Just south of University Ave.) 885â€"5850 Where there‘s a will, there‘s a way s I go out and about, 1 hear a lot of talk about the City A:f Waterloo property taxes for 2001. Apart from being little peeved at receiving interim tax bills that were illegal, many are asking why should the city benefit from holding their cash for six months? A good question and one that is not answered by city. There is a rumour that our taxes could increase by up to five per cent. 1t is a rumour that I hope is wrong. Any tax increase will hurt our lack of affordable housing and rental properties, as higher taxes mean higher rents. â€" A point the nTayor's newly formed strategic task force on affordable housing should bear in mind when council debates the 2001 budget. _ â€" 0_ As past chair of the city‘s finance committee, I feel 1 can comment on such large rumoured increase. Although [ am not in possession of the operating budget, I am upâ€"toâ€"date to the beginning of November. L know there is a need for staff pay increases, increases for O THE CHRONICL culture, grants, information services and seniors _ The &oposed new/extended library and the new fire sta tion will not affect taxes as they are funded out of capita budget. o For the Millennium Recreation Park, the previous council agreed to add in $400,000 to the years 2000, 2001 and 2002 budget base, so that after 2002 the Millennium Recreation Park running costs will not result in any tax increase. Looking at the base start line, (one per cent property tax increase = $270,000) councii has in funds, before it has to look at any increase of taxes, the following: 1) Increase in tax base 2000â€"2001 3% $828,000 2) Put to reserve from Winshare 2.5% $690,000 3) Projected 2000 year end surplus 1.4% $400,000 Total 6.9% _ $1,918,000 Increased Budget spending requirements for 2001: 1) Inflation 2.5% $690,000 2) Millennium Park (second $400,000 of threeâ€"year plan) 1.4% _ $400,000 3) Additional estimated staff pay, grants, LS. etc. 3% $828,000 Total 6.9% $1,918,000 From the figures above, if council uses the reserves noted they can spend an extra 6.9 per cent (nearly $2 million) more on the 2001 budget without any increase in taxes. That is a real increase to services of $828,000 or three per cent. ~ol afi!sc]rry I shall not be here for the public budget debates as the family and I will be on holiday. I wish the council the best of luck. Remember "where there is a will, there is a way." 1 hope council has the will. 1 know budget time is not easy, but it would be prudent to use the previous year‘s surplus especially as there is a minor downturn in the economy. The carbon monoxide threat is not a myth ver the last few years, O\he issue of carbon monoxide poisoning in the home has become much more of a public safeâ€" ty issue. This is partly because domestic carbon monoxide detectors first came onto the market in the early 1990s, partly because more and more _ homeowners _ are choosing natural gas as their preferred heating source, and partly because medical science has been better able to pinpoint CO as the probaâ€" ble cause of death in what used to be suspected cases of flu, or even "natural causâ€" CS But in my experience as a fire chief, there are still a lot of Canadians who are someâ€" what skeptical of the danger of carbon monoxide. They suspect that it‘s all a bunch of hype being promoted by CO detector manufacturers, and even by fire departâ€" ments trying to justify their municipal budgets. Well, I can assure you that CO is not a bunch of hype. â€" â€" It‘s true that there are fewer and fewer injuries or deaths each year in Canada that are the cause of carbon monoxide poisoning. Why? Because approximately 35 per cent of Canadian homeâ€" owners have done the right thing and equipped their homes with CO detectors. But CO detectors have not made the problem of CO contamination go away. They can‘t stop CO from leaking, but they do provide a warning that may save you or a loved one from serious injury or death. CO is not the same as natural gas. You can‘t see it, taste it, or smell it. You won‘t know it‘s there unless you have the presence of mind to recognize the symptoms â€" headache, nausea, dizziâ€" ness, fatigue, but no fever. Or, unless you have a CO detector. How does CO contami nation occur? The actual causes of CO are relatively complex, but there are many things that can cause a CO leak. The three main causes in domesâ€" tic situations are: * malfunctioning fuelâ€" burning appliances such as furnace. waterâ€"heater, gas stove; * improper venting. of gases into outside air â€" blocked chimney or furnace flue; How serious is CO poiâ€" soning? The stronger the CO leak, and the longer the exposure, the greater the danger. For example, a perâ€" son â€" breathing â€" relatively moderate contamination of 200 parts per million over three hours â€" watching a hockey game on a Saturday night, for example â€" would be feeling quite sick. Over six hours that situation could be lifeâ€"threatening. * vehicles left running in attached or nearby garage. So do yourself, your famâ€" ily, your neighbours â€" and your local fire department â€" a big favour. Get your fuelâ€"burning _ appliances checked regularly. And get yourself a carbon monoxide detector. It‘s not a myth to say it could save your life. _ Don Warden, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs president M.J. Connolly, Waterloo