Rowing facility vote was lost opportunity

I think it’s a real shame to let this go. Especially for reasons of narrow self interest and class jealousy.

It sounds as though people are jealous of private school students or don’t want their idyllic waterfront privacy disturbed; that is, until it came time to cash in, subdivide the old farm and get out.

I am not a waterfront property owner, but I live within 100 feet of the lake, overlooking the lake, and have done so for 24 years.

I find it odd I wasn’t surveyed. I have a feeling that waterfront property owners were surveyed. Can’t blame them for not wanting to share.

There are no people out there floating around on tubes. Years go by without me seeing a sailboat, and only a handful of swimmers use the deep part of the lake. There’s maybe a half dozen tiny fishing boats on the lake on a busy day.

No one swims out in the open in the shallow part with the creepy weeds grabbing at their ankles. And fish hang around the edges of the lake, where the shelter and food is, not out where the rowing lanes would be.

Power boats aren’t allowed and it isn’t a bird sanctuary. What better place? Don’t want to use parkland? There’s lots of waterfront private property that could be redeveloped at the St. Michaels University’s expense.

The taxpayers have shelled out for a trail around the lake, fishing piers, dedicated parking, a lighted crosswalk, landscaped swimming beaches and a new $250,000 aerator. I’m shocked that Langford council, is letting a special interest group dictate the use of a community asset such as Langford Lake.

What we have here is a proposal to make rowing available to the public at no cost.

I think it’s a real shame to let this go. Especially for reasons of narrow self interest and class jealousy.

Cynthia Brossard

Langford