Editor:
Re: “Rowe ‘disappointed’ as Town faces more court challenges,” Oct. 27.
So, Wayne Rowe thinks the 2014 municipal election was “largely a referendum on the George Hotel.” Really? Then how come we weren’t allowed to ask questions about the George project at the all-candidates meeting back in 2014? The impression Mr. Rowe gave the public at that time was that the election must be kept so separate from the hotel issue that it was inappropriate to talk about it during the campaign. His seeing the election as the equivalent of a referendum must mean that he also saw the public hearings that followed as a mere formality, since the election/“referendum” had allegedly decided the question. How dumb does he think we are?
I know there were people, back in 2014, who weren’t following the issue closely, and didn’t realize that the councillors they voted for – because having younger people on the council seemed like a nice idea – were all pro-George. Then the public was lied to about how the height “would be negotiated.”
As for Joan Beck’s letter (“Too much focus on fringe”) – a certain pro-George party was shamelessly instructing people on Facebook as to how they could vote more than once. That, not the municipal election results, is what produced the result in the Question of the Week.
Anne Miles, Gibsons
