Dear Editor,
I am disappointed the Reader has not done a more critical analysis of BNSF’s enormous Second Bridge project. Safety and congestion issues are just a BNSF public relations ploy on its proposed second bridge across Lake Pend Oreille. Have any of you looked at their draft permit (online) which they are trying to pass off as an environmental assessment? Note the lack of numbers in their document on the following key issues. How can many MORE trains, including volatile Bakken crude oil and tar sands bitumen, ADD to safety? How can MORE trains on TWO tracks, instead of the current one, on the same major crossings in Sandpoint and other communities, add to LESS wait time for motor vehicles? What will the impacts be on Sandpoint from three to five years of construction, including two new bridges in Sandpoint itself? BNSF’s permit application is essentially an engineering plan with no numbers or analysis on any of these important issues.
Constance Albrecht
Sandpoint
While we have you ...
... if you appreciate that access to the news, opinion, humor, entertainment and cultural reporting in the Sandpoint Reader is freely available in our print newspaper as well as here on our website, we have a favor to ask. The Reader is locally owned and free of the large corporate, big-money influence that affects so much of the media today. We're supported entirely by our valued advertisers and readers. We're committed to continued free access to our paper and our website here with NO PAYWALL - period. But of course, it does cost money to produce the Reader. If you're a reader who appreciates the value of an independent, local news source, we hope you'll consider a voluntary contribution. You can help support the Reader for as little as $1.
You can contribute at either Paypal or Patreon.
Contribute at Patreon Contribute at Paypal
Coming up this week! Don’t miss out on Online Auctions, Purse Parties, Parties, Craft Fairs, and more! See the full list of events in the 
