After reading Ms. Sylvest’s letter to the editor several times, I felt compelled to respond to a few of her statements.
Regarding her statement that, “Many of us waterfront property owners support public consultation, community planning, etc. and respect for private property.” I would say all property owners, with very few exceptions, support these processes and conditions. These are not divisive issues, and so should not be stated in an “us and them” scenario.
“Fear-mongering on the construction side of the ‘our banks will cave in’ ilk is silly.” This statement, in my opinion, is quite arrogant. Any property owner who has dealt with erosion/subsidence would tell you that it is not silly. It is serious stuff, possible property damage and substantial cost to the property owner, not something to be flippant about.
“Equally as silly are the expenditure fears.” Land expropriation, Ms. Sylvest, would not be the only cost that the taxpayers would have to shoulder. Engineering studies, construction and maintenance costs will be substantial. No matter what resources are available, the taxpayers (fixed income, low income, and the rest) will bear a substantial portion of the cost.
Conflicting statements made by an elected city official,” I know nothing about this, that’s why I’m at this meeting” and a city staff member saying, “It’s a done deal”, have done nothing but add confusion and distrust.
I will conclude with a slight modification of the last sentence in your letter. I am thankful for the checks and balances available in our democratic system that ensure that one subset of resident doesn’t get to railroad public policy and process as it unfolds.
James Cook
Castlegar