Why would Brookline choose to spend $1.4 million on a decrepit, fabricated metal footbridge (“Is bridge solution afoot?’’ Globe West, Nov. 1) that was never intended by Frederick Law Olmsted as part of his Emerald Necklace, particularly when there are five other nearby entrances to the park - from the Riverway (a truly grand entrance), Park Drive, Netherlands Road, Longwood Avenue, and the MBTA’s newly renovated Longwood Station?
Why is the state and its secretary of environmental affairs threatening to hold up a $91 million much-needed flood control project for an insignificant footbridge? A footbridge that hundreds of neighbors say they do not want and that has been closed for over 30 years?
Does the secretary have any idea what an Olmsted bridge looks like? (They’re all made of stone.) Has he ever been in Riverway Park?
Why haven’t Brookline selectmen demanded answers to these questions? Why are our town officials putting themselves and the taxpayers in this position? Why isn’t Brookline, at the very least, demanding that the entire Muddy River cleanup be completed before acquiescing to demands to spend $1.4 million on a bridge that few will benefit from?
Aren’t there far more pressing townwide needs during this time of steeply rising deficits and massive unfunded town debts - our school buildings, teachers, public health and safety, our streets and sidewalks, social services?
If yes, why is Brookline yielding to the state’s offensive and nonsensical threats?
Melvin E. Clouse
Brookline 
