Editor:
I watched the proceedings of District of Sechelt committee of the whole Sept. 20 on YouTube. I will get back to that.
My wife and I received a letter from a cell company indicating the proposed placement of a tower on a property adjacent to a property we owned and asked us to contact them with any concerns. We examined the location. The site was not a concern. It did not affect the value of our property. We called the company to ask why they took such action, as the tower was not on our property. The company felt obligated that any decision on their part must not prevent a party from making an informed decision to take action to protect the value of their property. And any reasonable person would expect them to provide all information that could affect that decision.
Now to the proceedings. Presentations made by the residents of Seawatch cite reports stating there are problems that have not been addressed and in fact ignored. As to the position of the council, the mayor said, “I’ll state categorically that I do think the reports do not say what you’re claiming.” Well, mayor, what does your council think they say? Apparently, some of those reports were not made available in a timely manner or at all. So how can residents possibly know why council thinks what they think? Manipulating information to affect the decisions of others could be viewed as deception. The actions of council are preventing residents from making informed decisions.
The law and justice are not the same thing. What is being done in this case should not be justifiable in the mind of any reasonable person.
This whole matter is a one-sided conversation in which one side appears to be completely deaf.
Lou Janke, Sandy Hook
