A response to 'Unity must prevail' (May 23) 

When I served on the SLO City Council, there were various controversial projects that did not receive unanimous votes. After one such vote, I attended the annual local American Institute of Architects Christmas party where an architect who worked on that project got in my face and berated me for not supporting it.

I said, "What's the problem? You got your project."

He said, "We wanted a unanimous vote."

I said, "There are a lot of people who disapproved of it, and they deserve a voice, too. This is a democracy, goddammit, and I don't have to march in lockstep."

He backed off.

The Dana Reserve Project environmental impact report listed way more than a dozen Class 1 impacts, significant and unavoidable. Not so long ago, one Class 1 impact was regarded as important enough that the ruling body had to make a Statement of Overriding Considerations to approve a project. They were often lame, but as one county planning staffer said, "Well, we have to come up with something."

Groupthink is a dangerous demand to make of our elected officials. It denies a variety of opinions and hampers full discussions. Note the parking fiasco—a 5-0 vote brought down on San Luis Obispo recently.

This self-proclaimed pro-housing group appears to support "my way or the highway" thinking. The negative impacts of the project in Nipomo were clearly stated and apparently ignored, in spite of the work of many to try to present a better housing project with fewer negative environmental impacts.

Christine Mulholland

San Luis Obispo