This letter is in response to “Yes, but where are the jobs?,” a letter published in the March 19 edition of the Observer.
Dear Editor:
I agree with Martin Sparkes that the District of Kent “has made no attempt to make room for attracting businesses that employ skilled trades and professionals beyond the construction of the houses themselves.” And I also agree that we certainly don’t need any more congestion on our little two-lane bridge.
It must be a developer’s dream to get access to a nice little piece of flat land like the Teacup properties. But I’ve noticed that every other jurisdiction in the Fraser Valley is building on their mountains or hills. So it begs the question “why doesn’t the District of Kent require that before allowing building on prime agricultural land?”
Might it be because the potential developers are offering a $3 million bribe to the District of Kent? Granted, “bribe” is a very strong word, but to make it even worse, the District of Kent comment sheet circulating around town asks residents what they would like to do with the money! This is, at worst, a bribe and, at best, disingenuous.
Min Wendel
Agassiz
adam.louis@ahobserver.comLike us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter
