I read and re-read the front-page headline article about the Raft Island bridge replacement project (Gateway, Jan. 9).
I must be missing something because I cannot understand how the reporting of one person criticizing how the bridge replacement is being handled turns into the headline of “Bridge replacement splitting Raft Island.”
An overwhelming majority (80 percent) of us Raft Island residents voted “yes” to replace the bridge. What was the purpose of the article in the first place?
It is mildly interesting but mostly seems to serve as a debate platform for Tim Whitmore to make his grievances public, and then it allows Richard Swenson the opportunity to defend the process.
The sensationalized headline was not deserving.
Raft Island is a gem of a community, and our residents (at least 80 percent, anyway) are united and looking forward to the new bridge.
letters to the editor
The Peninsula Gateway accepts letters to the editor up to 250 words long. Priority consideration is given to those who live on the Gig Harbor or Key peninsulas. Letters should be submitted by 5 p.m. on the Friday prior to the next publication. They may be edited for length or potentially libelous content. To submit a letter, e-mail gatewayeditor@ gateline.com (perferred), or mail it to Letters to the Editor, 3555 Erickson St., Gig Harbor, WA 98335.
JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.