The proposed project would make all this too dangerous to continue …

Dec 292011
 

The proponent claims they have attempted to compromise (for example, in their advertisement in the October 19, 2011 Gravenhurst Banner), and somehow, even the media believes this (here, and here, for example).

The fact is, the  proponent has not offered anything in compromise.

For example, the community has always been very concerned about the flow of water over Bala’s north and south falls. To receive public input, the proponent proposed a flow distribution committee. For this, the proponent insisted on, and received complete control over “membership, mandate, agenda, and presentation material for this group and inviting guest speaker(s)”, and yet the proponent chose to completely ignore the work done by this committee. The proponent has never offered to reduce the 94% of the water they would take year-round – leaving only a trickle which would not provide any tourist draw.

The proponent is only greedy, inisisting on wringing most every drop out of the falls for themselves, with no care about the area’s economy or tourist draw.

The community has been asking the same questions about public safety, barbed-wire fencing, warning sirens, aesthetics, noise, economic impact, and traffic congestion for years, yet the proponent continues to refuse to actually answer the questions asked.

The proponent won’t work with or listen to the community. The proponent doesn’t answer questions or provide information. There have not been any offers of compromise. The proponent’s “take it or leave it” and “my way or the highway” stance has resulted in the delays and costs they are encountering.

The proponent apparently believes that compromise simply means “give me what I want”.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>