Re: “A tale of two cities,” Frank Bucholtz, The Leader, Sept. 4.

It would appear that city council views South Surrey as class “A” citizens and North Surrey as class “B” citizens. How does the writer make this determination?

South: The Douglas project is a seniors’ care facility.

According to the city report, extensive efforts to reach an agreement favourable to the community and developer have been unsuccessful.

Council has decided more work is required to work things out with area residents who are concerned about density, tree preservation and land values. This has been in discussions for about three years.

North: City council, without notice or consultation, offered land for a 52-unit complex to house the homeless.

Eventually residents were notified and at the public hearing that 250-plus people attended, 90 per cent of whom spoke opposed the project. Contrary to city council beliefs there is massive opposition to this project because:

• A large part of forest in the city core will be destroyed;

• The complex will house people with mental illness, drug or alcohol addiction or criminal records. The project is in the middle of multiple residential buildings, schools and daycare centres;

• The complex will be staffed by one person to deal with 52 people with social and mental problems far below the accepted ratio of one staff member to eight residents, and staff will have no jurisdiction over activities outside the complex (drugs, sexual activity, etc.).

Conclusion: While residents’ concerns are almost identical, city council’s response is very different.

The North Surrey project is being crammed through without regard for the neighbourhood or residents while the South Surrey project continues to be “discussed.”

It’s time to elect a city council that serves equally all the people of Surrey.

Gary MacKinnon

Surrey