[
{
"name": "Newsletter Promo",
"id": "NewsletterPromo",
"class": "inlineCenter",
"insertPoint": "4",
"component": "15264767",
"requiredCountToDisplay": "0"
},
{
"name": "Ad - Medium Rectangle CC01 - 300x250 - Inline Content",
"class": "inlineCenter",
"insertPoint": "8",
"component": "15582119",
"requiredCountToDisplay": "12"
},{
"name": "Ad - Medium Rectangle LC01 - 300x250 - Inline Content",
"class": "inlineCenter",
"insertPoint": "18",
"component": "15582122",
"requiredCountToDisplay": "22"
},{
"name": "Ad - Medium Rectangle 9 - 300x250 - Inline Content",
"class": "inlineCenter",
"insertPoint": "28",
"component": "15582121",
"requiredCountToDisplay": "32"
}]
I am writing in response to your piece in last week’s edition titled “Morro council bows to Cerrito property owner” (Dec. 15). I was one of the appellants in the case and need to comment on Councilmember Nancy Johnson’s quote here, stating “… many in the audience think we can just order [an EIR], but it just doesn’t work that way”.
The fact is, however, that the initial studies conducted by the city left so many unanswered questions and glossed over so many “potential significant impacts” of the development, including harm to neighboring properties and destruction of a Native American archaeological site, that, had questions been answered honestly and objectively, instead of rubber stamping a forgone conclusion to benefit the developer, an EIR would have automatically been triggered as required by California state law.
-- Nicole Dorfman - Morro Bay
-- Nicole Dorfman - Morro Bay
What's the best thing about going to the movies?
Latest in Letters
Readers also liked…
-
Be careful what you wish for when it comes to Diablo
Feb 16, 2023 -
Donegan's opinion is harmful to SLO's LGBTQ community
Mar 23, 2023 -
An opportunity that's now lost forever
Nov 16, 2023
