Dear Editor,
Re: “Councillor has nothing to apologize for,” Letters, July 7 and “Richmond councillor apologizes for suggestion of ‘preferential treatment,” News, June 28.
Yes, Carol Rennie, Coun. Day must apologize for her comments on June 27, as must you now, if either of you has any sense of integrity.
For too long, those flying the banner of “activist” have enjoyed the protection of other misinformed believers, and sympathetic editors, to say whatever they feel like without the burden of proof.
What specific evidence of conflict is there with that development application? However inconvenient for you, facts do matter.
To the mayor, thank you for calling out Coun. Day’s behaviour, but you didn’t go nearly far enough. Allowing a mock apology “if anyone misunderstood her comments” offends those accused.
Serious sanctions for such childish remarks must be implemented, or a proper apology received, or our manner of discourse and governance has become a farce.
To Coun. Day, your accusation of preferential treatment towards the applicant has denigrated city staff, a respected councillor and a major community developer.
They all followed the rules and importantly — received no favours, and requested no variance in the application — the latter being obvious if one would bother to read the report.
If you find such reports complicated, as you claimed, perhaps you should recuse yourself from the business of making important decisions and step down. I’ll take educated action vs activist nonsense any day.
Roy Oostergo
RICHMOND
