Editor:
It seems we have heard this all before, as our mayor continues his hobby as a revisionist historian ("Council posts productive first year," Coast Reporter, Nov. 20).
It was not the Supreme Court petition that did "damage to the community," it was the mayor who decided to contest the petition.
The final judgement totally surprised everyone, including occupants of the Town hall. Read it and judge for yourselves; here is a link to the court archives: www.courts.gov.bc.ca//jdb-txt/SC/09/01/2009BCSC0138.htm.
Nor was there any significant "time deficit" from which "to recover." The four citizens who signed the petition, and the four others who swore affidavits, agreed to an offer - from the Town - to not pursue us for their legal costs, if we agreed not to appeal the decision. Despite legal advice that we had excellent grounds for an appeal, such an appeal would have tied the Town's hands for up to nine months, and the financial costs for each side would have been staggering.
Since the petition asked for either a new election of councillors or a by-election for the fourth, disputed seat, the mayor could have simply arranged for the latter, thereby saving everyone both financial costs and much agony.
I offer to publicly debate him on any matters in the newspaper article.
Brian K. Sadler
Gibsons