The Coastal Point encourages the exchange of ideas. Letters to the editor must be signed by the author with phone number included for purposes of verification. Please send your letters to P.O. Box 1324, Ocean View, DE 19970.

Darin J. McCann

Through new technology obtained by the Coastal Point, we were able to obtain recordings of the discussions by the International Olympic Committee prior to the final vote that led to the organization’s decision to select London as the site for the 2012 Summer Olympic Games. Individuals’ names have not been revealed to protect the sanctity of the decision-making process.

“Look, New York is a great place, but the open hostility a big part of the world holds right now to the U.S. makes the security there a nightmare. What do you think about Paris?”

“Paris is great. I mean, that steamy videotape of her and her boyfriend was a little over the top, but you have to admire her ...”

“Not Paris Hilton, nimrod. Paris, France. They sent us that cool video with President Jacques Chirac telling us that we can all trust the French ... Hey, what are you laughing at over there?”

“Trust the French? To do what, be rude to us and tell us how we’re all selfish, while all along they treat showers like ...”

“Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let’s get away from stereotypes here. You never know where that sneaky reporter Sam Harvey is lurking with that fancy new recorder of his. Besides, we’re still facing all that heat for taking bribes in our previous awardings of Olympic sites. Let’s just be rational and adult here. What do you guys think of Moscow?”

<silence>

“Come on guys, talk this out. Moscow is a city that could really use a worldwide lift, and they’ve been the only ones really pushing how much they’d also like to host the Paralympic Games. They need this, and they’ve become a huge melting pot for different cultures.”

<silence>

“That’s not funny. You guys can blow it out your ...”

“Hey, what about Madrid? That’s a beautiful city, and they really had to face a lot of adversity in that city after the bombing ...”

“Security risk.”

“Let me finish. It’s a romantic old city of scenery and Hemingway prose ...”

“Security risk.”

“I’ve about had it with you and your ‘security risk’ talk. It’s the Olympics. Security will be at an all-time high, plus they have the beautiful venues for competition and ...”

“Security risk.”

“Look, you two, cut it out. All conversation should focus on New York. Those people had to overcome a ridiculous amount of heartache in 2001 and nobody does anything bigger than New York.”

“Fine, let’s consider New York again. Who was in the fancy video they sent us to pitch their case?”

“Let’s see. Well, there was Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Dan Doctoroff, Sen. Hillary Clint...”

“Security risk.”

“Nobody will do security better than New York. They have all the police anybody could ask for, and more money than anyone. How is New York such a security risk?”

“Hillary Clinton.”

“Fair enough.”

“Guys, I think we’re missing the big picture here. Every televised Olympics has basically turned into a giant commercial for the host city. These wussy, over-the-hill announcers get dusted off from where they’ve been shelved for four years and spend weeks doing people stories on the city. The Games get lost. We need a place that won’t steal away from the Games.”

“London.”

“You bet. What are these doofuses going to say? ‘London ... it sure is rainy today. And ... well, that guy with the spiked green hair is kind of neato.’ The attention will all be on the athletes and the Games.”

“You might be onto something there. There’s only so much you can say about pasty people with bad teeth ...”

“I warned you about that stereotyping stuff. Knock it off. London might not be so bad. It has ‘old,’ it has ‘new.’ There’s water and giant stadiums. This might be the ticket.”

“Hey, guys, remember that time we were in Salt Lake City and were collecting all those gifts and ...”

“Yeah, yeah, yeah. We know where you’re going with this — ‘But I digress.’ Why don’t you get your own material?”

“I love that guy.”

“You’re a moron. But back to the matter at hand, are we set on London? We’ll divide up a couple of our votes to make it look like it was a really tough decision, then we’ll make our announcement. Hey, did you hear that?”

“It’s Sam Harvey, hiding in the air ducts with that recorder of his! How did he get in here?”

“Security risk.”

Let's have our voters vote

At it’s most fundamental level, a democracy is simply a form of government that calls for a voting process when new legislation is adopted. In effect, a democracy runs under the simple notion that each person is a vote, plain and simple, with no regards to individual wealth, race, creed, gender or religion.

One person, one vote.

Because of the logistics and costs, a democracy obviously can not hold a general election for every item that comes up for review, therefore, we as a people hold general elections to vote for various governing bodies that we feel will vote in our best interests. We do this on municipal, county, state and federal levels.

To be elementary, we vote for our voters.

However, that concept is not always realized. Let’s take, for example, SB 100, the bill regarding the way Sussex County Council members are elected, and a bill that never was put in front of the State Senate for vote.

We are not here to argue the merits of the bill or if it should or should not be passed by the Senate. We are here, however, to argue that the bill should have been released from committee so the people we vote for to vote in our best interests could, well, vote.

Let’s state this again, more clearly. We vote for representatives to vote in our interests, not to censor what does or does not get voted on in the first place. We realize legislators are busy, and their time needs to be best spent on what effects the most people, but this is not a bill calling for careful scientific review of water quality numbers or philosophical and medical research sensitivities such as stem cell research.

It is about our rights as voters, and the responsibilities we entrust in our legislators to vote in our best interests.

Stop blocking these votes.

Community just wants the right to stay put
Editor:

I (my family — Fitzgerald) have lived in a house in the midst of Lynn Lee Village since 1961. It was one of the original Steele family houses, an old farmhouse about 200 years old. The trailers (mobile homes) started coming in about the mid 1960s.

The first row was the one nearest the canal, then followed by the center row and the last row of homes being filled in the following years through the late 1960s.

When the Steeles started Lynn Lee Village it was originally part of a “planned community” of sorts.

Mr. Steele passed on in 1966 and the park as well of the care of their two children was left to Mrs. Virginia Steele. She would regularly drive through the park as well as go by our house on her almost daily rounds of making sure “everything was in order.” Trash, noise, etc. kept under control. It was a very well-run park with cute little homes and their boats docked right out back.

After Mrs. Steele sold the park in the late 1980s, the park went into decline. Many of the original owners had moved on, bought houses or died.

I understand that the park is not what it once was, but there have been years of unresolved problems and conflicts, leaving many that have homes there uncertain of their place at Lynn Lee Village.

And sorry to say that some of the owners are older and don’t want to put up the fight that is required to stand up to the “big developers,” whether they go by the name of Dan and Mark McGreevy, a.k.a. Caldera Properties, Canal Place LLC, or then turn it over to Toll Brothers as they have the other properties in the area.

It is the big guy getting what he wants (now the Supreme Court is also on the side of development). Please consider that 87 mobile homes do not have the same impact as 87 condos, multi-family dwellings or whatever they call them. There has been more than enough development put onto the ground at White’s Creek (pronounced “crick”).

May I remind you that the “recommended” 127 units for the Old Mill property was upsized to 166 and there are 88 houses in Bethany Lakes and 48 more being built by the water company (which is essentially the same property).

This is all about greed and money. The county seems to have enough money (a surplus, in fact) and maybe once all the building that has already been approved up and down Cedar Neck Road is built and finished, then perhaps they can bring this back for review, but now is not the time. It is all about class and status. And it’s not very nice or necessary.

Let the owners of Lynn Lee Village stay where they planned (and paid) to be for the rest of their lives on “99-year leases.” If a few of the principals in the park now want out and into a new home, why not buy one. There are more than enough homes for sale in the papers and plenty more a-comin’! That’s even if County Council extends their break from two weeks to two years.

Faith A. Fitzgerald
Ocean View

Editor’s Note: The public hearings on the Canal Place LLC application are closed, but Sussex County Planning and Zoning will again consider the application under old business at the Thursday, July 14, meeting at 7 p.m. in the County Administration Building, 2 The Circle in Georgetown.

Thanks to reps for doing their jobs
Editor:

They deserve our heartfelt thanks, those 34 Delaware House Representatives who ignored special interests’ pressure to pass HB 170.

Because of their bi-partisan support, the citizens of Sussex County are that much closer to realizing their goal of adding two additional “at-large” members to the county council — members that are desperately needed in order to bring more representative government to the largest county east of the Mississippi River.

A special thanks is due our own local representatives, without whose committed backing of the bill it would have been impossible to gain the necessary support of the other state representatives.

So, thanks Joe Booth (the bill’s sponsor), Pete Schwartzkopf, Gerald Hocker, George Carey and John Atkins. You did what the voters elected you to do. You stepped up and represented the majority of your constituents in a manner that makes us proud of you.

However, the job is not yet complete, because Sen. Thurman Adams refused to let the Senate companion bill, SB 100, out of committee for an up or down vote. Ironically, he thwarted his fellow senators’ rights to express their wishes much the same as the current Sussex County Council has thwarted its citizens’ rights to properly express their wishes.

But, because 2005 is only the first year of a two-year legislative session, the bill can still become law in 2006 if SB 100 passes the senate next year.

We need to consider the job half complete and in the next 12 months redouble our resolve and effort to convince Sen. Adams and the Senate to step up and do what they need to do — that is, to release and to pass HB 100.

Allen Ide
Millsboro

You don’t need to own waterfront property
Editor:

My wife was told by a South Bethany police dispatcher on June 30, that there is no law that you can’t park your boat on township bulkheads on end of canals.

So the people that called me from Middlesex can park their boats on township bulkhead. Also, if you live in Cat Hill, east side of Route 1 and anyone who wants to have a place to park your boat.

There are some ends of canals that are not owned by the town, so call the town to find out which ones they are.

Don’t forget, if you fall getting in and out of your boat and get hurt, get a good lawyer.

Michael Matera
South Bethany