Letters: Change plan to suit situations?

Conflicts of interest on Sooke's financial plan obvious

om here?

Ok, council defeated the “on the table” motion for a five-year financial plan for Sooke. What, are you kidding me? A plan is of the utmost importance, don’t you think? All those not in favour of this motion, please take one giant step backwards.

Those who fail to plan, are doomed to repeat history.  “I don’t think the outlook is sustainable,” said Maja Tait… Shouldn’t that have been brought up during discussions, in camera, prior to vote and more specifically, definitions on what are the non-sustainable possibilities, so that mayor and council can come to some sort of an agreed plan, prior to the final vote? Did one person write this plan?  I doubt it.

Were Kerrie Reay and Bev Berger involved in helping write this plan while in a conflict of interest?

Maybe. Hopefully not.

I like what CAO Gord Howie said, “the District can go ahead and prepare the bylaw as it is now and council can then amend it.” So, is he saying that this is not written, with blood on stone, but rather a solid plan that can be amended (at some point) down the road, if need be?

What a concept, a plan that can be changed to suit ongoing situational requirements, based on needs and economy.

It would be a plan with options on Sooke’s future… Our future, all of Sooke.

Kel Phair

Sooke