Editor:
The decision by Gibsons town councillor Silas White to recuse himself from all future George deliberations is almost as startling a “development” in its own right as the George development proposal itself is.
One can conceive of only four reasonable explanations, and these are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
1. Coun. White always intended to recuse himself from the George matter, even prior to the election.
2. Coun. White was somehow pressured to recuse himself.
3. Coun. White obtained some significant “new” information.
4. Coun. White, whose property, by his own admission, would be directly affected by the George, “ignored” the all too obvious potential conflict of interest in what was surely the single largest issue of the election, in order to further his own political ambitions.
One notes that Coun. White, by his own words, ran as an “independent” and not part of a slate. If Mr. White had not run, then one pro-OCP candidate would necessarily have won a seat, and given the number of votes Mr. White obtained, it is possible that perhaps two of the proclaimed pro-OCP candidates may have won seats.
Regardless of the reasons behind Coun. White’s decision, the people of Gibsons should take note of how their interests are simply not being sufficiently well served in this matter by his decision.
If Coun. White cannot participate in the decision-making process for what will certainly define the very future of Gibsons for decades to come, then he should resign. He must put Gibsons’ future before his personal interests. Unfortunately there is no other responsible course of action available.
Alan Donenfeld, Gibsons
