Dear Eric,

Thank you for your comments. Although they are well intentioned, I don't believe it to quite be that simple. The bylaws apply to the Radburn Association which is not the entire citizenry and only accounts for two of the nine board members.

To accomplish what you suggest would require a radical change in the organization, eliminating the association and the distinction between it and the citizens. I am not prejudging this approach - it may well be what everyone decides - but it would of necessity change almost everything (not the restrictions necessarily).

All I have been saying is that those who put this exact system in place were some of the best minds in planning in the 20th century. Their system of governance which has served us well for the most part over 75 years should not be changed lightly. If we are to undertake to do so, it requires minds comparable to theirs to weigh the implications of what we do and advise us as we go along.

I would like to remind everyone that changes in the Radburn governance structure are akin to US constitutional changes. These are made difficult for a reason. We perhaps should make changes,but only as a result of a deliberative process and not in response to the emotions of the moment.

With kind regards,

Mark Wall