In “Rail-yard move will benefit all” by Ronald T. Bailey, the author introduces himself “as a member of the board of directors of the Hourglass Foundation” and concludes “This project improves transportation and will be a catalyst for revitalization. Done properly, it will benefit all Lancastrians.”
WATCHDOG: Is Bailey speaking on behalf of himself or for Hourglass Foundation? This is but the first of his obfuscations.
Aopparently unbeknown to Bailey, his conclusion is consistent with the position of TRRAAC: a new rail yard is desirable. Bailey’s article is irrelevant to the real issue of dispute: Is the site proposed the best of three alternatives?
So we can’t tell for whom Bailey is speaking. Moreover, he apparently doesn’t understand what the controversy is all about.
