Editor:
There are ominous shadows lurking over Gibsons' horizon: the possible incinerator location(s) nearby; the SCRD tax increases; the imagined effects of the proposed George hotel complex; and the subversion of proper behaviour at council meetings.
As reported in the media, the single item on the agenda at the March 25 committee of the whole passed 3-2, with CKAY referring to it as "becoming a common pattern." However, one could also characterize this common pattern as being 2-3 against; against anything that council and staff wish to properly process.
Councillors Johnson and Bouman cast these negative votes. Yet, at previous meetings, they insisted on these additional reports, contracted by the Town and funded by the developer, in order to clarify possible effects upon the aquifer, economic effects upon the Town, and amenities to be accrued by the Town.
There are many thoughtful residents of Gibsons who anticipate these subsequent reports, in order to put the George project into accurate perspective. These citizens do not want to continually be subject to the barrage of unofficial misinformation generated by various naysayers.
These two councillors have direct links to the naysayers, observed in public by various residents.
Nor can their reinforcement of the naysayers at public meetings of council be ignored. Why would Bouman, a non-resident of the Town, continue to carry on with his various homilies which alternately presume to act as mayor in welcoming spectators, presume to castigate selected staff members, and invent incorrect and unsolicited data critical of the George? Concurrently, he tries to defeat the acquisition of properly solicited reports.
He has also invented the term "divisiveness" within the Town, mentioning it at every opportunity and, Tuesday, labelled it as 50/50 amongst residents. Incorrect, I say; the consensus is that the residents are closer to 75/25, in favour of the George, while awaiting the further reports that Bouman and Johnson tried to defeat.
Brian K. Sadler, Gibsons
