Letters To The Editor

Idaho viewpoints

We’re not making environmental sense

It seems that there is a concerted effort to turn the Rathdrum Prairie into a potential Superfund site. Within our small prairie, we still have grass burning; BNSF wants to haul, store and dispense millions of gallons of diesel fuel over our prairie and our aquifer; and now, Cogentrix wants to build a natural gas turbine facility, built to minimum standards allowed by Idaho Department of Environmental Quality.

This project involves hauling, storing and emitting into our air ammonia, nitrogen and carbon monoxide. All of these would occur within three miles of each other. There has been nothing submitted by Cogentrix to explain how they will get rid of the toxic sludge from the waste water evaporation ponds, either.

Why is it that because Idaho’s environmental laws are so weak, that companies insist on building projects that threaten the quality of life of the residents - just because the law allows it?

In other states, Cogentrix would be required to build its plant with sconox technology, which it is not doing here. In other states, Burlington Northern Santa Fe would never be allowed to threaten a single-source aquifer the way it proposes to here.

We have required our local grass growers to cut their emissions and alter their way of farming. Then, we turn around and allow large corporations to come together on our prairie and over our water with projects that threatens the essence of our lives - air and water.

Please show up at Lakeland Junior High in Rathdrum on Oct. 12 at 7 p.m. You deserve to be informed. Kristy Johnson Post Falls

Vote for CDA community center

The controversy over the proposed community center is puzzling. Of course we ought to provide this needed facility. Arguments opposing the center appear to come from private health club owners or those who have no personal “need.”

It’s the same old story. All of us, as a community, share the need and responsibility of raising children in a healthy, safe and active environment. Coeur d’Alene is in critical need of programs and services for its residents, particularly those not served through private health clubs.

I support the Coeur d’Alene Community Center for the following reasons:

Availability of year-round swimming instruction.

Pool facilities for our dedicated young swim team.

Space for parks and recreation offices, a thriving part of our town.

Increased after-school programs.

Room for arts, crafts, dance, community meetings and more.

There has been concern raised about the cost of the proposed center. Shouldn’t a community known for its “world class’ resort, golf course and shopping also be known to offer world class services for people who live and work here? This is for us, our children and our grandchildren.

The cost? Come on; we’re talking about less than you spend on one latte or glass of favorite microbrew per month!

Vote yes. It’s the right thing to do. Sarah A. McLain Coeur d’Alene

New center a sound investment

Let’s look at the big picture regarding the proposed community center, instead of our own narrow lives.

A community center will provide recreation for youth under 14 who cannot be alone in local health clubs without adult supervision. Health clubs serve a specific population that will not be affected by a community center.

Our population is increasing. Statistics indicate there is an increasing number of children from working families, kids whose parents don’t come home until 6 p.m. or later.

These children very often go unsupervised between 2:30 and 6 p.m., - when most juvenile crimes are committed - and often for hours on weekends.

We’ve been given an opportunity to find a solution to a problem that affects us all. Supporting the community center on Nov. 2 will make a terrific difference. Unsupervised children from every income level will have a place to go after school for recreation and art classes. Youth and adult organizations can hold meetings there. Community organizations like Art on the Edge will have a place to hold their classes.

The biggest advantage will be the long-term benefits of not having to pay taxes supporting juvenile correction centers later because we support a grass roots community center now. I urge our community to support the center as an investment for a safer and happier place to live. Judith C. Lea Coeur d’Alene

Spokane matters

Vote to preserve justice for all

Hate groups abound all around us and it is easy to point our fingers at skinheads, Aryan Nations people and others who would like to make the world just like them, while we sit back and righteously wish they would go away. Civil rights are deeply embedded in our Constitution, and the Bible is full of teachings that should lead us to value each human being - even those that may be different from us.

The upcoming election brings a referendum that suggests we remove a minority group from a well-thought-out human rights ordinance. We, as elders of Covenant Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), urge you to not complacently allow yourself to act as one of those dreaded hate groups, but rather have the courage to speak out for justice for all of God’s people. Margie and Les Harder Spokane

Initiative 99-2 deserves a no vote

Initiative 99-2, which would withdraw the protection of our laws from discriminating against a certain group of our citizens, if passed, would represent a frightening precedent. Freedom from fear of attack by anyone is an important guarantee of government. Equal protection under the law is one of our cherished concepts. So any effort to dilute the enforcement of that concept must be challenged.

Any dilution of the equal rights component of our laws puts everyone of us is at risk. If any group can be denied equal protection, none of us can live without fear of a similar attack. In good conscience, we must vote no on I-99-2. Burton R. Brown Spokane

Washington state

I-695 would kill funds leveraging

Passing Initiative 695 wil cost the state’s transportation system $750 million in federal matching funds - just for transportation-related projects that include highways and ferries that have already been approved and slated for construction! This is based on an average of a three-to-one match.

For every $100 a taxpayer pays for motor vehicle excise tax revenues allocated to transportation projects, our state will receive $300 in federal matching funds. So $100 becomes $400. What’s better? For Connecticut to get the $750 million and accompanying new roads and improvements? Washington state’s one-third share is tax dollars working triple-time for this state’s license tab buyers.

What investment scheme can one think of that has that kind of return?

Also, if I-695 passes, STA will lose 40 percent of its operating budget immediately. STA’s reserves will enable it to drop services only 20 percent the first year, then up to 40 percent the second without a solution. STA reserves are primarily for bus replacement when the old ones wear out, not for operations. What’s better? For STA not to have reserves, and when the buses become decrepit have someone say, “Omigosh, we need some new buses. Where will we get the money?” And then critics chime in with, “Why didn’t you plan ahead for it? Don’t you know that buses don’t last forever?”

Any voter unfazed about using up the STA reserves shouldn’t mind the federal government spending Social Security money for things other than retirements. John R. Downes Spokane

I-695 no way to improve government

“Rural counties fret over I-695” (Oct. 3) highlighted how money collected from the motor vehicle excise tax is distributed. The list reveals an impressive array of worthy endeavors. Mass transit is becoming more critical for society with each passing day. Referendum 49 was passed last year as a tool to improve our roads and highways.

Public health receives $48 million. Public health agencies around the state are caring for more citizens. Cutting funding for this service would be senseless. Proponents suggest funding for these programs could come from other parts of the budget. However, they never say exactly from where the money will appear. They ignore the realities of a complex society.

The reality is that government is generally very cautious with taxpayer money. When money is not spent properly, it is only in hindsight that we discover it, and it’s usually the result of poor management. I-695 will not solve this problem.

We can all look at “government” and find fault. I-695 will not improve government at any level. It will not improve our communities. It will not give us better roads. It will not improve public health. It will not make our neighborhoods safer.

It is easy to sit in a chair, like a bowl of Jell-O, and rant and rave about poor government. If we want better government, we need to become better citizens. We need to elect intelligent, responsible leaders who take pride in their credibility. I-695 will not make us better citizens and it wil not give us better leaders. Thomas L. McArthur Spokane

Lakeland could ease crunch, but …

Regarding Eastern State Hospital being overcrowded: There are about 40-60 clients at Eastern that could be sent to Lakeland Village but the politicians in Olympia will not allow it. These clients could have their needs met if they could be placed in the right programs. Lakeland has the room and these clients deserve the right type of help. But unfortunately, common sense is missing in Olympia. Will Ash Medical Lake

Other topics

Terms of enrichment confused

Editor Chris Peck is confused about stocks and flows.

In his Oct. 3 column, after dividing Bill Gates’ net worth of $60 billion by 6 million Washington residents, he claims that Bill “owes each of us about $10,000.”

Net worth is a stock; income is the flow of earnings from that stock. Peck does not calculate his annual income by adding the value of his house to his salary. In fact, Bill Gates has added to the wealth of Washington. If we draw income from that wealth as employees of Microsoft or from taxes Microsoft paid, then we really owe him.

Further, Peck confuses persons and households. Persons live in households. Washington personal income is about $26,718 (1998 Statistical Abstract of U.S., p.460) while household income is $46,339. This means that about 1.7 persons live in each household. He also failed to indicate that although people with gross adjusted incomes over $100,000 represented less that 5 percent of all taxpayers, these people paid about 47 percent of all federal personal income taxes (1998 Statistical Abstract of U.S., p.349).

The distribution of wealth, income and taxes is a serious issue that touches us all. It is unfortunate when figures relating to this issue are tossed around to make a few editorial “gee whizes.” David Bunting professor of economics, Eastern Washington University, Cheney

Extraction industries must change

Re: “Environmentalists make things worse” by James R. Thomas (Letters, Oct. 6). The issue is not whether mining (or logging) be allowed, rather how it’s conducted. Our society is very dependent on mining and logging products. Even environmentalists understand that. The problem is that the resource extractors are often shortsighted in their tireless pursuit of profits.

Because mining or logging in an environmentally responsible way often requires expenditures that cut into profits, few will do so unless required to by law. Sustainability of resources and the industries that deliver them to us will benefit from a long-view approach that allows for environmental protection. Companies that spend the money now will benefit in the future. Ultimately, they will outlast their competitors. The environment and our society will benefit and industry’s added costs, doubtlessly passed to consumers, will be a small price to pay for a clean environment.

Continued rhetoric and argument of moot points, as exemplified in Thomas’ letter, only serve to delay the shift in attitudes and resource extraction practices that must occur to achieve environmentally responsible sustainability of our resources and industries. Charles A. Mortensen Sandpoint