Dear Editor,

I am writing to raise a serious concern about a recent decision by the City of 91Ô­´´ that has deeply troubled many residents in our community.

At a recent public hearing concerning an amendment to the Official Community Plan (OCP), approximately 150 residents attended – all of whom expressed clear opposition to the proposed changes. In addition to this strong public presence, a petition was submitted voicing collective concern from local homeowners. Despite this overwhelming resistance, Mayor Nathan Pachal and the City council voted to approve the amendment.

As a resident who chose to make Canada my home because of its strong democratic values and high standards of public engagement, I find this decision both shocking and disappointing. Many of us feel that our voices – and our rights as stakeholders and taxpayers – were dismissed without genuine consideration.

This incident raises serious questions:

• What is the purpose of a public hearing if resident input is ultimately ignored?

• How can trust be maintained in local government when decisions appear predetermined?

• Are long-term planning documents, such as the OCP, now open to change at the will of developers despite community consensus?

The City of 91Ô­´´ promotes transparency and public consultation as part of its vision. We are asking that these values be honoured – not bypassed.

I hope the 91Ô­´´ Advance Times will consider investigating this matter further and giving space for affected residents to be heard. We are not simply opposed to a building – we are concerned about the integrity of our democratic processes.

I'm a former high-school headmaster and a current B.C. certified teacher.

Jivan Kumar, 91Ô­´´ City