In the article, “Feds to attend ‘closed meeting’ on Calais bridge” (BDN, Nov. 16), I read that Calais City Manager Linda Pagels was questioning my understanding of the “process” under which the Maine Department of Transportation selected Calais as the location for a third international bridge along with my understanding of the continuing process under which the DOT is attempting to develop the Calais bridge site.

I understand the entire process perfectly, but this “process” or any “process,” if and when compromised by untruthful information, withheld information, lack of information, conflicts of interest or violations of the law becomes a “bogus process.”

It is therefore that all and any permits, authorizations or entitlements obtained as the result of such a bogus process could only be bogus as well, as evidenced by the recent diatribe in the press from Pagels and others from the “select few” who apparently have something of sorts to gain from the building of a third international bridge in Calais. But this is not a done deal because Maine DOT has not received the necessary and needed permits from the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers required before a third bridge can be constructed whether in Calais or anywhere.

Pagels and the select few should know that it is the message they should be overly concerned with rather than the messenger. The messenger may come and go but the message remains the same. If Pagels and others continue having a problem with my understanding of the process, I would be happy to sit down with them and discuss that issue.

William Szirbik Sr.

Friends of

Magurrewock

Baileyville