 by Chris J. Herby April 07, 2005
After over two years and over $2,000,000.00 alternative "C" which is a two ship pier south of Thomas Basin surfaced as clearly the best choice for economic reasons as well as upland development reasons. There are widespread misconceptions in the community about the impact of a ship pier to the nearby cannery. Consultants hired by the city studied the potential impacts of a pier to the cannery. They determined that impacts if any would be minimal. The consultants and city staff have negotiated with the cannery in good faith to try to buy their blessing. However, for reasons mentioned by Mr. Bolling, the cannery has so far been unwilling to give their blessing. I fail to understand why our city needs the permission of an out of state owned cannery to build a pier on city owned property that will save the citizens of Ketchikan over $15,000,000.00 and won't hurt the cannery. We try to elect council members that are willing to do their homework and make decisions that are in the best interest of the majority of Ketchikan residents. I am disheartened that it appears some of the council members are willing to buckle under the pressure of what appears to be scare tactics by an out of state seafood company. I don't fault the cannery for their opposition. Why would they want to draw attention to what is possibly questionable waste disposal? This is not a popularity contest. Our council members need to weigh the facts and form their own opinion as to the potential impacts on the cannery. This is about our economy. We want additional ship berthing to help our economy. We don't want to spend $15,000,000.00 more than we need to. I have been told that this cannery employs six local people. Why can they force our city to spend an additional $15,000,000.00? Chris J. Herby
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Sitnews.
|
