Majority voice? No

Matt Westerhold's column titled "Tuesday's Turning Point" contained some fa
Sandusky Register Staff
May 24, 2010


Matt Westerhold's column titled "Tuesday's Turning Point" contained some factual errors. He asserted "A majority of the residents in Sandusky and Port Clinton said yes to waterfront re-development, but the self- proclaimed 'watchdogs' likely will continue their fight to stop progress."

Sandusky still has about 30,000 residents. There were a total of about 3500 votes cast in favor of the Marina District. Two thirds of the impact of the Marina District is outside of the city limits in "Greater Sandusky" and those 40,000 people beyond the city limits didn't even have a chance to vote. Westerhold's math may make this a "majority of the residents", but mine does not.

Those who voted against the issue were not "fighting to stop progress" -- they simply thought the irreversible sale of the city's public waterfront is wrong. After all, most waterfront cities attempt to increase their public waterfront areas. By selling its waterfront holdings, Sandusky is eating the region's seed corn.

One thing is certain. If the Commission proceeds with the Marina District as planned, the loss of public waterfront will be irreversible. The Commissioners are all born and raised in Sandusky, and they will create their permanent legacy with their actions. Good or bad. If the Marina District succeeds, they will be local heroes. If it tanks, they will be bums. In either case, it is now their visionary decision to make. It was not made by "a majority of the residents" as Westerhold asserts.

Scot Duncan