Colwood should include Amalgamation Yes question on November 15 ballot
Goldstream News Gazette Letters
October 21, 2014
Sometimes one has to wonder if members of Colwood council live in La La Land permanently or only at certain times of the year.
Perhaps that’s harsh, but when their reason for not including the non binding question regarding amalgamation on the November ballot is because not enough people were interested in being part of a “working group” to figure out the question...well, I’d say the shoe fits.
Why would anyone be interested in being part of a working group to figure out a question that has already been clearly articulated?? No one is interested in deliberately wasting their time. Council members should give their collective heads a shake.
The question proposed by the Amalgamation group is simple and clear, why not use it? People just want to have a say in the matter and not be part of yet another study group.
What adds insult to injury is Councillor Luken’s absurd statement: “It’s important Colwood knows we were proactive.” Really?? Being proactive implies action; not hiding behind political bafflegarb.
Barry Bennett
Colwood
Goldstream News Gazette Letters
October 21, 2014
Sometimes one has to wonder if members of Colwood council live in La La Land permanently or only at certain times of the year.
Perhaps that’s harsh, but when their reason for not including the non binding question regarding amalgamation on the November ballot is because not enough people were interested in being part of a “working group” to figure out the question...well, I’d say the shoe fits.
Why would anyone be interested in being part of a working group to figure out a question that has already been clearly articulated?? No one is interested in deliberately wasting their time. Council members should give their collective heads a shake.
The question proposed by the Amalgamation group is simple and clear, why not use it? People just want to have a say in the matter and not be part of yet another study group.
What adds insult to injury is Councillor Luken’s absurd statement: “It’s important Colwood knows we were proactive.” Really?? Being proactive implies action; not hiding behind political bafflegarb.
Barry Bennett
Colwood