Do fish, wolves get more respect than people on the Kenai?

Governor, I recognize that there are apparently no administrative regulations defining what constitutes an adequate "public meeting" when considering a health care certificate of need application, but when too many people show up for a public hearing on fish, your administration sets on an additional hearing. The same for wolf control, and Bears and sometimes apparently even for Moose and controlled burns. Why then is it that when a public hearing to discuss health care on the Central Kenai Peninsula, is set on for a facility not large enough to accommodate the people who want to participate, and just before the end of the comment period, that the comment period cannot be extended to permit an additional public meeting in a facility large enough to accommodate the public process by the very public who will be affected by either the approval or disapproval of the application, in order to extend the same respect for the human residents that is given to the fish and wildlife?

Even though apparently not required, would not the extension of at least the pretense that the government wants to hear from the local residents on a local health care issue which affects them not be appropriate?

More

Letter: China as a partner raises concerns

China as a partner raises concerns

Read more

Letter: Soldotna Creek Park, poetry, and Central Africa

Soldotna Creek Park, poetry, and Central Africa

Read more

Letter: Over-taxing graduate, doctoral students not the answer

Over-taxing graduate, doctoral students not the answer

Read more