‘Silent majority’ says something else
I’d like to clarify a few points regarding the story New Hope For Band Sawmill (Aug. 30).
In the first paragraph it states: “a vote of confidence by a majority of band members,” yet in the third paragraph it states a vote of 57-21 in favor to proceed, and in the last line of the story it states there are about 250 band members. Twenty-three per cent is not a majority; if anything it is a minority.
The mandate for voting was changed from 50 +1 per cent of all members, to 50 + 1 per cent of votes received.
As for Sand Point Chief Laura Airns recognizing the silent majority of members who clearly want development — if those silent majority members clearly wanted development they would have voted and voted Yes.
Also in the third paragraph it states the reason for the vote was to proceed with a sawmill, but the reason for the vote was to see if members agreed with the proposed lot set aside for the sawmill and to authorize council to approve all leases on the proposed lot. Chief and council saw this vote as a de facto mandate for the development of the sawmill.
Chief Airns points out: “There will always be a small number of members who will find any reason to oppose any initiative or project that we pursue.” That is not true.
I’m one of the not so “small group of members,” and if they were to pursue projects or initiatives that benefited the band as a whole and not just a handful of members, I’d back them 100 per cent.
In the many years that this sawmill has been on the table, nothing was done with it. And when the deal almost fell through in the last two years, the chief has put the blame of the sawmill failure on the heads of us, the “small group of members.”