Bonilla’s recast of history and more

The facts are straightforward. At the time of the 4 W. Santa Inez Ave. controversy, Bonilla was mayor.

Residents did what residents are supposed to do in a democracy: They spoke up, organized and asked questions about a project affecting their neighborhood and quality of life.

The final decisions, however, were made by elected officials led by then-Mayor Bonilla.

If those decisions ultimately resulted in litigation and significant taxpayer expense, responsibility rests with Bonilla and those he led in public office, not with residents who exercised their right to participate in the public process.

Attempting to shift blame years later may be politically convenient, but it does not change the historical record.

As for the proposed Horizon facility, Bonilla is again misguided and way off track. No one is arguing that individuals struggling with substance abuse do not deserve treatment. They absolutely do.

Residents have questions about transparency, location, scale, cost, alternative site evaluations and whether taxpayers have sufficient information to determine whether this is the right project, in the right location, at the right cost.

Those are reasonable questions regardless of attempts to dismiss them.

Public debate should be grounded in facts, accountability and transparency; not selective memory.

Blaming residents for participating in the democratic process is not leadership.

Spinning a story to rewrite history is not accountability.

Taso Zografos

San Mateo