As chairperson of the Wayland Planning Commission I see it as my responsibility to defend the Planning Commission when it is wrongly portrayed in the media. The editorial made some over-generalizations that do not reflect accurately on what transpired at the meeting. The planning commission did not “parrot” opposition. In fact the planning commission made the prudent step of not expressing an official opinion at all and opted to wait until the city council, who has yet to be briefed on recent marijuana legislation, to give us direction to even consider drafting any ordinance change or weigh in on the matter in general.

It is true that two members did express personal opinions. One did voice some opposition. Yet one member spoke very favorably in support of the idea, particularly in terms of bringing money into “local coffers.” But the editorial chose NOT to report on that. That would have shown the planning commission as potentially balanced on the issue and not serve the reporters intent to lambaste the planning commission and group them into other governing bodies that he sees as non-progressive on this issue. In addition, it should be noted that two of our members were not even present. And of the three other members present, none rendered an opinion either for or against potentially allowing marijuana facilities to operate in the city of Wayland. That makes it even less credible for the article to stereotyped the planning commission as a cohesive bunch of good for nothing old-fashion officials who are “ignorant and fearful.” That quite frankly is downright insulting.

As always, I encourage Wayland citizens to attend planning commission meetings (second Tuesday of each month at 7 p.m. at city hall) when they can both to stay engaged with issues as well as to know firsthand what actual transpires.

J.D. Gonzales, Wayland