What does Committee of 1 have in mind on byway?

The entertainment value of "The California Citizen — Phantom Committee of One," is worth every precious minute.

I look forward to Richard Creed's reaction. In the meantime, to answer points raised by the Phantom Tunnel Committee: Section 404, I presume of the Clean Water Act; a person just has to use their eyes now and again in about four months or so to see that the aquatic environment is artificially manipulated twice a year by the Army Corps of Engineers.

As it is now, Sand Creek is a fraction of its summer level. No fish, no hunting birds, and migratory geese hang out at the beach.

Next, if the Phantom Committee ever talked to anyone besides himself and the folks from NICAN, he would know that if approval of the byway project is forthcoming from the Department of Lands and the Army Corps of Engineers. BNSF has agreed to automatically deed the required property to the state.

As for safety, no one ever claimed that this or any of the hundreds of thousands of miles of two, three or four lane highways are ever 100 percent safe. Working to its advantage, though, is the fact that it will be straight and the speed will be no more than 45 miles per hour.

The question continues to come to my mind and many others: What is the motive of a newly-minted resident, using his time, effort and money in this manner?

Only one can logically assume it is for some financial gain.

LAWRENCE FURY

Sandpoint