Advertisement

Sweetwater's Refusal

May 03, 1987

I was very pleased to see your story "Reservoir Is First, Resort Plans Second at Sweetwater" (April 13). Thank you for making the effort to research the story accurately and thoroughly.

Only one point in this controversy was overlooked: The Sweetwater Authority Board of Directors' flagrant refusal to listen to its constituents.

I have been to several meetings of the board in which the Pointe's proposal was on the agenda. Invariably, there has been a good showing of area residents who wish to share their opinions with our elected officials. In every case, the meetings were called short, the speaker was cut off or the public was not acknowledged at all!

We cannot express the frustration and disappointment we have felt regarding the management of our water district and the lack of checks and balances in the system of government surrounding the water authority.

It is my hope that you continue to cover this story as it progresses so that the Sweetwater Authority and each of its directors will be held accountable for their decisions. A simple "NO" is not good enough. Not when our current quality of water is so bad and the quantity of water an ever-increasing problem.

In addition, the board is ready to spend $9 million on a pollution run-off protection system plus the cost of environmental studies for such a system--the same system the Pointe has offered to give the water authority at no cost. To spend such money without even researching the Pointe's proposal just makes no sense!

WILLIAM C. TUCHSCHER II

Bonita

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|