From today’s Times-News letters to the editor:
Regardless of one’s views about the North Highland Lake Road project, two facts are central to the dispute: The road does not meet NCDOT’s metrics to justify the expenditure of taxpayer dollars, and the voters of Flat Rock expressed their will at the ballot box in November.
The significance of the first fact is that the merit of other justifications offered for the project (e.g., a bike path, etc.) rely solely on the judgment of a majority of the previous Village Council members as worth overriding the state’s own yardsticks.
The significance of the second fact is that with their votes, residents roundly disagreed with the logic of those previous elected officials.
Now Hendersonville City Council has weighed in, which raises important questions. When does action by a jurisdiction that contravenes the will of the electorate in another jurisdiction constitute hegemony? What are the potential ramifications of that? What would be the position of the contravening jurisdiction if the shoe were on the other foot?
Before other governing bodies insert themselves into this controversy, they might want to consider matters more consequential to the future of our community as a whole than the hopes and dreams of a vocal minority.
Ron Redmon, Flat Rock