At what point will ITD admit byway is flawed?

I cannot help but comment on the amusing final statement from Barbara Babic, spokesperson for the ITD, in the Bee article on the Corps of Engineers' 12 pages of concerns and questions regarding the Highway in Sand Creek (March 21). She says that NICAN and "Pierre" (Why Barb, I was not aware that we were on such close first-name basis!) "inundated the Corps with paperwork" and that is the reason that the Corps had such extensive requests to them.

The facts are: the application was so convoluted as to result in every single agency having a different understanding of the amount of fills in Sand Creek; the application has huge information gaps that are critical to decision making; the applicant still has not obtained the property needed to build the project. So, let's get this one straight, it is just a matter of pesky "paperwork" by opponents that is directing the Corps, but the lack of adequate "paperwork" by the applicant has nothing to do with 12 pages of detailed concerns and questions. Hmmmmm.

We have been told no less that nine times in the last 2.5 years that "there are just a few more insignificant and normal process details to work out" and the "done deal" project will begin "next fall/winter/spring." So at what point will the "Houston we have a problem" light bulb finally go on? At what point will we realize that there are Solutions For Sandpoint, and the larger ITD highway goals, that do not need to cost $100 million and do not require over 10 acres of fills in Sand Creek and the loss of the entire eastern shoreline and skyline of Sandpoint?

PIERRE BORDENAVE

Spokesperson

Association of Concerned

Sandpoint Businesses

Sandpoint