Dear editor:

Looking back over the last four years, more than half of the current council members decided that they didn’t have to vote in compliance with the town’s bylaws and that they could vote against the existing zoning of land in the Old Town.

The Parliament Oak school site was zoned institutional or Greenbelt, or could be zoned the same as the surrounding properties, which are single-detached family residential on all four sides.

More than half of the current council members decided to approve a hotel building that is much higher than the zoning bylaws allow, about twice as high as the surrounding houses and which is located on improperly zoned land. This was done without any justification, as there were many hotels already approved on properly zoned land.

These elected people are voted into office with the clear obligation to make decisions in the best interest of the residents who they represent. Judging from the three years of turmoil and of the residents arguing against council’s approval of the hotel, obviously they made decisions against the public interest and contrary to the municipal bylaws.

The current council members, if elected, will probably continue to make decisions which will benefit private commercial interests instead of the community’s best interests or the best use the land, which is defined, as it should be, in the town’s zoning bylaws.

Wayne Murray
NOTL