To the editor:

I am confused why former vice mayor and co-chair of Citizens for an Alternative Waterfront Plan Andrew Macdonald was in the hall and not in the City Council chambers earlier this month listening as the planning department showed alternatives to the waterfront plan. And why, in his June 23 commentary in the Times (Waterfront signs speak to deeper concern over riverside development) is he talking about citizens making an alternative plan over the summer?

    
If the goal is an appropriate alternative plan then we seem to be close, so why this continued duplication of effort when the city now has alternatives on the table?
    
In the beginning, CAWP made good sense as there was no significant alternative to the Planning Departments roadmap. But now with several planning alternatives on the table, the group is becoming a sideshow that only casts attention on Mr. Macdonalds crusade against the city. Is this the formation of Mr. Macdonalds political platform to run for mayor?
    
For the sake of the citizens and the pursuit of an appropriate alternative waterfront plan, he should be honest with the citizens about his intentions and declare whether he intends to run for mayor. If he does intend to run there is a conflict of interest as his anti-incumbent position will trump the pursuit for an appropriate alternative waterfront plan. 
    
If he does not plan to run then I suggest he look at the alternative plans and hybrids already on the table by the planning department and work with the city to tweak them, so that we may arrive at something agreeable and excellent for the citizens.