2013-08-30 / Letters

Reader clarifies position

To the editor:

The Sentry’s Aug. 23 story about the South Portland City Council meeting on tar sands misstated my position. I was quoted as saying that I had signed the petition based on a belief that tar sands is a terrible energy option, but that after doing research, I had changed my mind.

As I made clear in my statement before the council, I carefully read the proposed ordinance only after signing the petition, and I'm now convinced that the ordinance violates the comprehensive plan and suffers from language that is far too broad for the intended target (tar sands) and would have a negative impact on the working waterfront that is as far-reaching as it is unintended. That is the only part of my opinion that has changed.

I continue to believe that tar sands is one of the worst energy options for us as a society and I believe the residents of South Portland should fight hard to prevent tar sands from coming into our community. However, I also believe it is important to defeat the current proposal so that a more narrowly tailored ordinance can be drafted and approved by the voters. Otherwise, I fear that the city will waste time and scarce dollars defending lawsuits against this flawed ordinance.

John Howard
South Portland

Return to top