Editor:
Re: Seaside city’s odds of success deemed unlikely, Nov. 11.
It is both unfortunate and inaccurate for the City of White Rock to decline to join Surrey and New Westminster as interveners in the Ecojustice Canada Society suit, representing Communities and Coal and Voters Taking Action on Climate Change.
Unfortunate because, this was an opportunity for White Rock to stand up for its residents, the beach and the whole U.S.-Fraser Surrey Docks corridor, in concern for the decision by Port Metro Vancouver to approve the Fraser Surrey Docks coal-handling application.
Inaccurate because, far from this issue being about location of the Fraser Surrey Docks, the main issues the suit is based upon – bias inherent in Port Metro Van’s decision and failure to adhere to an assessment that took into account climate change – are both issues fundamental to not only Surrey and New West, but White Rock, as the first ‘line of defence’ against the onslaught of coal dust, diesel particulates and such ancillary issues as emergency access to homes in Crescent Beach.
White Rock’s decision makes it easier for the pro-coal advocates to claim this has been a NIMBY issue for White Rock all along.
Nothing could be further from the truth, as the issues in the suit, issues fundamental to approximately seven communities adjacent to the U.S. border to Fraser Surrey Docks rail-water corridor, clearly delineate.
Steven Faraher-Amidon, Surrey
