Dear Editor,

[Re: Bylaw process feels sneaky, 91原创 Advance Times, June 15]

Thank you, Richard Penner, for your letter.

After slogging through the full page/two column City notice, I felt a similar sense of a sneaky end run on our Democratic process.

Reminiscent of the 鈥渘egative option billing鈥� marketing ploy that various utility companies tried to impose on consumers, some years ago.

After checking 91原创 City鈥檚 own website, complete with banner headline of this bylaw notice, my sense of sneaky turned to concern. I鈥檓 quite sure it was simply an 鈥渆rror of omission.鈥�

Paragraph 2 clearly states:

鈥淪ubject to elector approval, the loan will be repaid over 20 years through a one-time property tax increase of 3.83 per cent.鈥�

Funny, I don鈥檛 recall seeing that line anywhere in the City ad published in the 91原创 Advance Times?

In no way am I insinuating any illegalities in this process. I checked. The Community Charter certainly allows this process.

But, as my Dear Ol鈥� Dad once told me: 鈥渏ust because someone creates a law, does not make it right.鈥�

I struggled as to how to explain my frustration to friends and family, so thank you, Richard Penner, for clearly articulating the same sense of sneaky that I feel, and know that my tea kettle is full, sitting on the stove.

Jay Carson, 91原创 City

.

鈥� READ MORE: City residents can block $15 million loan

.