No headline

On Feb. 1, the Sandpoint City Council voted 5-1 to accept the contentious greater Sandpoint Greenprint report. The mantra of numerous promoters and/or supporters was that the report was only information to be used and not a plan to be followed.

Yet prior to approval, the council removed Section 5, which was a call to action (or action plan) because the city would have been required to follow it. So much for the report not having been a plan.

The City Council seemed to dismiss Councilman Bob Camp’s objection that there had been a sort of bait-and-switch (my term, not his) concerning the size of the area to be included as “greater Sandpoint.” Without that misleading (in my opinion) wording in the proposal Mr. Camp argued, the city would not have given approval back in 2014 to develop the Greenprint report. None of his peers disagreed. So much for the transparency of the process.

In addition, the city removed another very important portion because they deemed it not true. So much for the truthfulness of the report.

When you embrace the work of an entity whose trustworthiness may be far less than stellar, don’t be surprised by results that resemble the story of the foolish man who rescued a freezing rattlesnake by warming it against his chest.

The mayor and/or City Council need to swallow their pride, call an emergency meeting and reverse this harmful and overreaching decision ASAP before it badly bites us all.

JOAN SPENCER

Cocolalla