Editor:
In his Jan. 31 letter, “Mr. Janyk deserved better,” Michael Maser writes that the apology issued by the Town of Gibsons to former mayor Barry Janyk was inadequate and that Mr. Janyk “deserved better.”
Certainly, to the extent that Mr. Machado’s “rant” against Mr. Janyk was found to be untrue, unreasonable, or malicious, that rant was unjustified and undeserved (by Mr. Janyk).
Mr. Maser goes on to state that the town incurred legal expenses in the matter, suggesting that the apology was the outcome of a settlement between the parties. Apologies can have legal consequences, and in a negotiated apology no one would be stating anything more or less than their legal counsel has instructed them to. One imagines that Mr. Janyk received the apology he negotiated, and if that apology did not precipitate a community healing moment or serve as an opportunity for the town council “to take
a high moral road,” then it is very likely it was not intended to accomplish those things. To paraphrase Chester Karrass: “In legal affairs, you don’t get the apology you deserve, you get the apology you negotiate.”
Ultimately, for those who found the apology lacking, perhaps it was they who did not receive the satisfaction they felt they deserved?
Alan Donenfeld, Gibsons
