Letters To The Editor
(From Letters to the editor, Thursday, November 2, 1995): A letter to the editor Wednesday may have misled readers about the qualifications of Republican Spokane County Commission candidate Martin Burnette. While Burnette is not currently registered by the federal government to sell securities, he has been in the past. He voluntarily terminated a prior investment agreement with one firm and is in the process of having it transferred to another company. By the end of the month, Burnette again will be registered with the National Association of Securities Dealers, a self-regulatory agency that derives its rules from the Securities and Exchange Commission, said Carol Bonham of Interpacific Investors Services Inc. in Seattle. Calvin Cooney, author of the letter critical of Burnette, is a former campaign manager for Burnette’s Democratic opponent, John Roskelley. But Roskelley said his relationship with Cooney was severed several weeks ago and that Cooney submitted the letter without the candidate’s authorization.
Correction from Letters to the Editor (Saturday, November 4, 1995): A typographical error changed the message in Robert D. Panther’s Wednesday letter about Washington state Referendum 45. In actuality, he wrote the morale issues erupted after former Gov. Booth Gardner “bought the right to appoint the director” of the fish and wildlife department.
SPOKANE MATTERS
Burnette not what he claims to be
Republican Spokane County commissioner candidate Martin Burnette has established his campaign platform on the notion that, as a financial planner/adviser, he will wave his magic calculator and resolve county government’s financial woes.
When you look behind the facade, however, you’ll find that his campaign rhetoric is on shaky ground, supported by misinformation.
Burnette is not a personal financial adviser but rather a life insurance salesman. This can be verified by calling the Washington State Insurance Commissioner’s office, licensing division.
Burnette is not a member of the esteemed professional organization that governs and certifies personal financial advisers, referred to as the National Association of Personal Financial Advisers.
Finally, Burnette is not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the federal agency that oversees the securities market and protects investors from securities fraud.
Now that you have all the facts, it’s up to the voters to decide whether Burnette has the professional qualifications and integrity to run a multimillion-dollar county budget. Calvin Cooney Spokane
Shame on you, Sweetser
Spokane County Prosecutor Jim Sweetser, how do you face yourself in the mirror every morning? You lied to every organized worker in Spokane County who donated, collectively, thousands of dollars to your campaign and worked days, nights and weekends to get you elected. (I can personally attest to that.)
All these honest people ask is that you treat the prosecutor’s office employees like human beings, with respect, and the right to organize if they so wish.
You had better hope that the voters buy your act when election time rolls around. Ed Ellenz Spokane
City needs Greene on council
It’s indeed fortunate that Spokane has someone as qualified as Roberta Greene aspiring to serve on the City Council. It takes courage to do this.
I’ve worked with Greene as a member of the Community Colleges of Spokane Board of Trustees for the past four years. She has worked hard for the colleges from the very first day she was appointed. She is a fast learner, digs into the background of problems, makes decisions based on a thorough understanding of the facts and cuts through to the heart of a problem. She is extremely tactful, doesn’t lose perspective, has a great sense of humor (which has saved many difficult moments) and is held in high regard by fellow board members. She is a goal-oriented person and dedicated to achieving the goals set forth.
Most importantly, Greene cares about the people who are affected by her decisions - the students, faculty and administrators. This trait of hers will be most valuable as she serves on the City Council.
Greene is well-liked and respected by all who have worked with and for her at the colleges. She sets high standards and lives by them.
She is enjoyable to work with and is a lady of the highest order. She will bring credibility to the city council. Dorothy M. Knechtel Spokane
JUDICIARY
Vote for Rielly a vote for justice
In a free society we have the opportunity to express ourselves best through the ballot box. I’m voting for Neal Rielly for Superior Court as I feel he brings needed common-sense judgment to the bench.
Rielly has been personally tested in the fires of adversity and like fine steel only became better because of his experience. He recently handled two cases involving juveniles that show how he respects the law and the needs of society. One involved a brutal double homicide. He ruled that the 15-year-old be tried as an adult, based upon the facts of the case.
In another case he sentenced one of three youths who attacked an 81-year-old man downtown to 65 months in jail - two-and-one-half times the normal range.
Neither defendant appeared to want to accept personal responsibility, and this is the cornerstone of Rielly’s view of justice. If you commit a crime and are before Judge Rielly, he will show you courtesy but will demand justice for our community.
We need proven jurists who will apply the law and work to protect society. Vote for Rielly and keep justice on the bench. Ronda Cahill Spokane
Rielly best person for job
If there is any legitimate question as to whether Judge Rielly should be replaced by challenger Dennis Dellwo, the issue is easy to answer. Anyone can observe this sitting judge on the bench and come to the same conclusion that is widely accepted by the people who have been before him. Judge Neal Rielly is the best man for the job and he should be retained. Steven Reich Mead
Opponent-bashing just shabby
There is almost nothing mentioned about a person’s credibility in American politics today.
It’s a pity that supporters of Neal Rielly have to bash his opponent to try to get votes. Why can’t a candidate like Neal Rielly pitch his own merits and capabilities to win an election - unless they are few and far between. Karin Lounsbury Mead
REFERENDUM 48
The tables have turned
I am a Native American and I have been reading about your Referendum 48.
I don’t care one way or the other how it goes, but I’ve been reading about the people who are for it because without it the government has more power and you have diminished control over your land.
Well, all I’ve got to say is, how does it feel to be the Indian for once? Terry Sutton Spokane
Send a message to regulators
For two centuries government has taken land for public good. Property owners, however, had a constitutional guarantee of due process and adequate compensation.
This protection is one important difference between America and totalitarian states. It gives our economic system stability, allowing average citizens to invest in property, knowing the government won’t take it without compensation.
Yet activist judges, environmentalists and, worse, unelected regulators have attempted to remake the Constitution in their own image. They want the convenience of taking certain ownership rights without compensation. Our state Legislature correctly passed a law overruling court decisions that have put property ownership on shaky ground.
Opponents of Referendum 48 unwittingly undermine their own position. Their objection to the cost should be interpreted as “we intend to harm property owners. If you pass the law, we’ll do the same damage but you’ll have to pay.”
The point is restraint. If government can take value from property owners without paying, why show restraint? What message will we send regulators if voters reject R-48?
Vote to approve R-48. If state regulators still don’t get the message, we’ll remove them next. Brad Benson Spokane
Opponents misuse bad study
The opposition to Referendum 48 has been misleading the public by basing its campaign on a faulty study.
Opponents have deliberately mislabeled it as a work by the University of Washington. I have copies of letters dated as early as Sept. 6, however, that were sent by Associate Vice President Norman G. Arkans, that informed the No on 48 group that it is not authorized to include the university’s name in its advertising. Eight weeks later, with this request still ignored, another letter was sent which noted that the opposition’s wording is misleading and reasserted that the study was “paid for with Washington funds… and does not represent any official position of the University of Washington.”
Moreover, the study is not nearly as decisive as they have advertised it to be. One of the actual authors stated in his notes that his cost estimates were “clearly speculative.”
The study only guessed the cost of an economic impact study for the government, but never examined the current cost of an environmental impact study on individual property owners. It never distinguished between one-time land use actions and recurring actions, nor did it reflect the expected change in government behavior if R-48 is approved.
Most importantly, it failed to take into account the public nuisance exception which would limit compensation costs.
For these reasons the Washington Research Council has described the study as “methodologically flawed and unsatisfactory as a guide to policy makers and voters.” Michele Roban Malinak Spokane
Vote yes; You can’t fight city hall
Why do we need Referendum 48? The average landowner whose property is desired by the general public or local government needs R-48.
After years of attending City Plan Commission meetings, we have good reason to be concerned about the taking of private property for public use. The Fifth and Fourteenth amendments are supposed to protect everyone, but can’t when local government bodies seek to override the Constitution.
At one of the meetings we attended, we voiced our protest against a plan. We were told that the takings clause does not apply unless the city takes all of the property, implying it could take part of the property and it would be legal. That would be legalized thievery, in our opinion. The average person cannot afford a long court fight with city hall to protect or keep their property.
This initiative will help many poor people, people whose home and property may be all they have. We strongly support R-48. Robert and Marie Scamahorn Spokane
INITIATIVE 640
See through lobbyists’ tactics
Unfortunately, the politics and financing behind Initiative 640 are not about saving salmon.
This issue is a subtle example of a sinister trend in American politics, one in which lobbying forces misrepresent themselves and muddle issues to confuse the public and manipulate democratic process.
Subsidized industrial river users who lobby as the Columbia River Alliance have consistently opposed all effective salmon restoration. That same lobby now backs this initiative. What are the CRA’s motives?
The strongest voice speaking on behalf of salmon is a fragile coalition of sports and commercial fishermen as well as concerned conservationists. Clearly, the CRA recognize that this ill-timed measure has split well-intentioned sports and commercial fishing interests and forced conservationists to choose sides. Their strategy is a poorly disguised attempt to divide and conquer.
The fight over I-640 has deflected scarce resources and public attention from the real cause of the salmon crisis: overdevelopment of hydroelectric and navigation systems on the Columbia and Snake rivers and habitat degradation.
Commercial fishing in Washington waters has been dramatically curtailed for the last two years and, undoubtedly, will be indefinitely into the future.
Perhaps there was a time when this initiative would have been appropriate. Clearly, commercial fishing will require new restrictions once salmon runs are restored. But this is not the right time or the right measure. Harvey Morrison Spokane
PLAYING BALL
Stadium for them, nothing for us
Our entire family enjoyed watching the Mariners in their quest for the league title, and then the right to possibly play in the World Series. They did a great job and made everyone proud. So proud that Gov. Mike Lowry is willing to go against the people and push through a new stadium for a privately owned business concern.
Those of us on the east side of Washington will get very little from a new stadium. However, our concerns seem to have been overlooked. We sure haven’t seen our governor step up to help the students at Phillips Junior College like he has the big-money concerns.
Be sure to remember Gov. Lowry at the next election. Bob Kerns Colville, Wash.
Well, there goes the ballgame
Growing up a Chicago Cubs fan, I can certainly understand the excitement generated recently by the Mariners. However, this does not justify giving the Mariners a new stadium.
King County voters made it clear they don’t want to pay for a new stadium. The plans also fail to address the problems of the Kingdome. Will taxpayers be expected to finance a new stadium for the Seahawks next year?
Who will benefit from this new Mariners stadium? Certainly not the average resident of Washington. How many people can afford the $150-plus cost of tickets, travel and food for a family day at the ballpark? Certainly not the 12,000 people served monthly by the Spokane Food Bank. Not the impoverished residents of downtown Spokane.
The state’s general fund loses, too, when lottery proceeds go to the Mariners instead of to programs that help meet the basic needs of people.
The truant youth of Washington also lose. Rather than spending money to develop alternative educational programs, youths who don’t buy into the current school system will continue to be locked up. And let’s not forget schools, libraries, roads, bridges, etc., that are either in need of great repairs or grossly overcrowded and which lack proper resources.
Maybe the Mariners are more important than all this. After all, they brought a lot of excitement to us all this fall. Just wait until next year, when they win the big one. Just ask any Cubs fan about next year. Tony Kliment Spokane
REFERENDUM 45
Take politics out of wildlife
The passage of Referendum 45 is essential if the fish and wildlife resources of our state are to hold their own, let alone recover. I enjoy our resources as a hunter, angler and as one who loves the outdoors. The quality of my experience in these areas is very important to me and to so many others I know.
As our state deals with the pressures of development and population growth, it’s critical that the Department of Fish and Wildlife perform with the best professional management possible - for the long term, not just the term of an elected governor.
Prior to 1987 and going back to 1933, the commission selected the director of the department, seeking professional skills rather than rewarding or acknowledging political alliances. When Gov. Booth Gardner bought the right to appoint the director in exchange for some general fund dollars in the department budget, controversy and moral issues erupted. They’ve not been resolved.
Gov. Mike Lowry tells us R-45 will be bad for public policy and harmful for our fish and wildlife. Thirty-two other states are finding that an independent commission - composed of members with diverse backgrounds and experiences who’ve demonstrated a dedication to keeping the resources healthy, rather than reacting to what is politically best - is the right way to go.
We must restore the authority and responsibility of the commission to select the director of the department for the future of our fish and wildlife resources. Robert D. Panther, executive director Inland Northwest Wildlife Council, Spokane
R-45 puts power where it belongs
A Washington resident all my life, I have fished and hunted for more that 50 years. Referendum 45 is the most important legislation for the sportsman of all time.
It will give the power to appoint the director of Fish and Wildlife back to the game commission, as it was from 1933 to 1987, and keep the Fish and Wildlife Commission out of the hands of politicians.
During 1977, I was president of the Inland Empire Big Game Council and attended every game commission meeting. I observed the public, the commission and the game department all working together without any interference from politicians.
I urge everyone to vote for R-45. The good news is, it won’t cost anyone a cent. Larry R. Carey Spokane
OTHER ELECTION ISSUES
Liberty schools need bond support
Please vote yes on Proposition S, the school bond for Liberty schools.
The Liberty School District has a proven commitment to academics. This year, Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores for Liberty students were the best in Spokane County. On the latest statewide tests of the basics, Liberty students ranked second in English and science, third in social studies and sixth in math, out of 296 school districts.
Liberty enrollment has grown by 28 students per year for the past four years, and this growth is expected to continue. So there is a urgent need for more classroom space. This proposal provides funding for 24 new remodeled teaching areas, a total of 72,651 square feet.
Please, show your support for rural education by voting yes on Proposition S. Rep. Larry Sheahan 9th District, Rosalia, Wash.
Don’t believe the fairy tale
The “Big Boys” in Spokane are pumping mega-bucks into the Unified Charter campaign. They’re pushing hard for a mega-government we’re supposed to believe will be a fix-all for local problems. Well, us “Little Guys” all know that a mega-government is sure not going to cater to our interests and needs.
We also are asked to believe that the clouds will magically open and 13 intelligent, conscientious politicians will suddenly appear to represent us in this mega-government.
I’ve been around way too long to believe that far-out fairy tale. Sally Jackson Spokane