Letters To The Editor

SPOKANE MATTERS

Keep city hands off `Grand Lady’

Having spent 55 of my 80 years as a builder in Spokane, I find in inconceivable to even consider Councilman Steve Eugster’s proposal that a public entity take over renovation of the Davenport Hotel.

Only outside interests have endeavored to redevelop the once Grand Lady. Harlow Tucker’s disastrous effort to refurbish the hotel led to hundreds of large and small investors losing millions of dollars. Some lost their life savings.

The present owner is facing Herculean problems to make this a financially feasible investment. The structure has been ravaged by time and neglect. Eugster’s estimate of $35 million to $40 million for restoration is unrealistic. Add to that the cost of acquisition for the hotel, land and building costs of a parking structure, and you are closer to $50 million. One could construct a modern concrete and steel building, including parking, for a like amount.

Unlike European structures, most Spokane buildings constructed during the early 1900s, including the Davenport, weren’t designed to last over 100 years. Their brick shell and wooden interiors are now obsolete. It’s foolhardy to think that public ownership is the answer. How would it pay back its investors?

Give the private sector a chance. Give the current owner the opportunity to pursue his dreams. If he can’t find a solution, remember this: The Grand Lady has had her day. Robert B. Goebel Spokane

Helpful folks banish grinch

Thanks to a moving story by staff writer Kelly McBride and the good people of Spokane, the grinch who stole Barbara Foster’s Christmas has been banished to infinity and beyond.

Since the first story appeared on Dec. 28, our Spokane Easter Seals office has received almost 100 calls and contacts offering new and used computer equipment, software, volunteer labor and local business support to help people with disabilities open the doors to education, employment and communication with needed computer hardware, software and helpful devices.

Foster has her special computer and her Christmas spirit back, and Easter Seals has enlisted a small army of new friends in the mission of dignity and independence for people with disabilities.

Thank you, Spokane! Garry Wyckoff, president Easter Seals Washington

New Year’s event was grand

Kudos to the Spokane Symphony and the Spokane Jazz Society for hosting a gala and fun-filled New Year’s Eve celebration in the Convention Center . The decorations were wonderful, the hors d’ouvres delicious and the free transportation from the SIRTI parking lot was greatly appreciated.

Everyone appeared to be in a festive mood and the music was fabulous. A first class event!

Our friends and we were joined at the eight-person table by two extremely nice young couples, one living in Japan, the other in Portland. They were very cordial and easy to talk to, and if they are any indication of what the New Year holds in store, the United States will be A-OK!

Thanks to everyone who made this wonderful event possible. Jon C. and Judy Gardner Spokane

WASHINGTON STATE

Good intentions not enough

Steve Dennis takes us on a “Search for whom to blame” (Opinion, Dec. 26), an Andy Rooney-style trip to Olympia to find those “evil, wily politicians” who caused the simple, deluded populace to rise up in rebellion with the passage of Initiative 695. And all he can find are “well-intentioned, hard-working, principled, conscientious, concerned and devoted” bureaucrats populating both houses, sitting bemused and wondering what hit them and how are they going to fund all those programs that we, the ignorant masses, are demanding.

Don’t we know that this is “representative government” and that is “how it works”? Don’t we know that there is no fat in the budget to be cut - no, none, none at all? Don’t we know what is good for us?

Well, maybe we know that if a program is worth funding, our well-intentioned representatives can present it to the taxpayers and pass the needed bills to fund it directly. Maybe they know that it is, after all, our money, that the well-intended bureaucrats are spending. Maybe they know that good intentions are not enough.

Daniel Webster said it this way: “Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”

Sometimes the only thing politicians understand is no. Reese Larson Spokane

Just voting in change is not enough

Re: “I-695 episode confirms that government is out of hand” (Your Turn, Dec. 15).

Is government out of hand? Perhaps so. According to Ed Easley, he and others voted for I-695 to send a message to the lords of the castle. Whose castle is it? In this democracy it’s ours and the lords are us.

The vague allusion to undefined personalities is useful in assaulting the castle and perhaps even for tearing it down. Left unasked is, who will rebuild our castle?

How many who voted for I-695 are now sitting down to determine how to reapportion the city, county and state budgets? How many who voted for a strong mayor and council representation by district are now helping make it happen? In each case, some hard decisions will have to be made. Those who make the decisions and do the hard work will be criticized by those who didn’t do the work.

Truly, even in this democratic republic, voting is only the first step. My students will tell you that my first lesson on governance is that it’s not a spectator sport. Cheering and booing from the stands is not enough. You gotta play if you want to win.

Voting for change without a commitment to share in the burden of making it happen is shortsighted. At worst, it amounts to making troubles for us all, without being willing to help overcome the very real problems created by the passing of I-695 and this new form of city government. Michael A. Page Spokane

DISABILITY ISSUES

Impairment not always apparent

Cameron Wylie’s perception of misuse of a disabled parking permit (Letters, Jan. 1) calls for clarification. He may not have seen any visible symptom of disability in the person(s) using the permit but that does not preclude the legitimacy of a valid disability. I have a friend who is 72 years old, yet looks 15 years younger. He holds himself as erect today as he did when in the Marines and neither limps nor uses a walker. Yet he is more disabled than many with visible symptoms. His heart is 98 percent gone! For the past two years, he has been on UCLA’s “older donor” program waiting for a new heart. Although he lives here in Spokane, the cardiac people here in Spokane refuse to give hearts to those over 65 years old, no matter how vital or physically fit in every other way the person might be.

Should Wylie ever be privileged to meet this very wonderful and saintly man, I shudder to think of what righteous indignation would spew from Wylie’s mouth as he protested the “misuse” of a disabled parking permit by a man with only 2 percent of his heart left to live on. Elaine V. Bartlett Spokane

Strive for a little deference

Cameron E. Wylie (Letters, Jan. 1, “Misuse of permit frustrating”) expresses his anger at two individuals who had parked their car in a handicapped parking spot (while displaying a valid disabled parking permit). What apparently upsets Wylie is that “neither of them displayed any visible symptom of being disabled, such as limping, walking slowly or using an oxygen tank.”

I am disabled and retired from the Army. I have lost feeling in a large portion of my ankle, which is fused by rods and pins. My disability is not openly visible. I have learned to walk without limping or the assistance of a cane. I also possess, and appreciate the use of, a disabled parking permit.

I am certain that many people who possess and use disabled parking permits as a result of physical limitations would gladly trade places with Wylie.

It is this attitude that Wylie so openly expresses that further creates an obstacle for those who are already confronted with limitations. Those individuals who find it necessary to use disabled parking permits should not be subjected to disdain, but are deserving of human understanding. Thomas P. Hansen Moscow, Idaho

Some problems aren’t visible

Cameron E. Wylie (Letters, Jan.1) is upset because people without “any visible symptom of being disabled, such as limping, walking slowly or using an oxygen tank” had parked in a disabled parking zone with a valid disabled permit.

Both my youngest sister and my mother have disabled parking permits, and most days neither of them would fit Wylie’s “disability” criteria. My sister has a rare bone disease in her ankles she is in constant pain and must have operations yearly to remove bone spurs. It is likely that within in the next five years she will have to have her ankles fused. No one meeting her on the street would realize any of this because she puts on a determined front of “normalcy.”

My dear mother suffers from congestive heart failure and several other respiratory ailments. She does walk slowly, but probably no more slowly than many folks in their seventies. However, especially in windy or otherwise inclement weather, it would be deadly for her to be outside long. On some days, she can not walk at all.

I hope that Wylie and others who make unfounded assumptions about who does and does not deserve a disabled parking permit will consider this information before jumping to conclusions in the future. Cheri A. Moore Spokane

Try checking permit regulations

Re: Cameron Wylie’s frustration (Letters, Jan. 1) when observing two persons at the Fairchild Air Force Base commissary using a disabled parking permit.

I suggest that he check the requirements for a disability permit. One does not have to be crippled to have one. A person who has a respiratory problem qualifies if walking more than a few yards incapacitates him or her. The same applies to those who have circulatory problems such as phlebitis or any other disease which presents of danger of blood clotting. A person who is disabled for any reason qualifies for the permit. Do you know that you can get one to use on a motorcycle? The disability does not have to be visible to be disabling.

I suggest a little more charity and a lot more investigation before becoming righteously indignant. Mack D. Stanhope Marcus, Wash.

THE ENVIRONMENT

President’s efforts laudable

A lot has been said about roadless wild forests lately. A few people see their protection as a threat. Others, like myself, see it as a blessing that benefits economically and socially any community lucky enough to be near one.

I support President Clinton’s efforts to protect wild forests. Not since the time of Theodore Roosevelt has such a visionary effort been waged to conserve our nations wilderness heritage.

Let’s face it. The world as we know it has changed dramatically in the last few decades. To a great extent these changes have both separated from, and brought us closer to, our wilderness heritage.

What remains clear is that pressure will continue to mount to develop the wilderness. Corporate interests whose bottom line is big profits want access to these forests. In order to sway public opinion they’ll use fear tactics saying the forest is sick and will be destroyed by fire, insects and disease.

But I ask, if this were true, why weren’t these forests all dead when humans first came to this region? Why after 12,000 years of Native American settlement were such grand ancient forests to be found by the European immigrants?

Wilderness is a place to hunt, fish, hike, ski, ride a horse, camp, observe wildlife - relax and get back to reality. The fate of future generations rests in our hands. It’s time to be conservative. Tim Coleman Republic, Wash.

Compromise needed, possible

Forest Service hearings addressing proposed roadless status for parcels of our national forests have been instructive. Multiple use advocates appear to need road access to every last acre of forest for “management” purposes. Environmentalists seem to want to close off every last acre to let nature manage. Both groups feel theirs is the way.

Economically, Idaho can’t afford the nine million acres of wilderness environmentalists want to have protected. Conversely, the environment and taxpayers can’t afford the road access to every corner of Idaho’s forests that industry wants to “manage.” Can there be compromises? Oh yes!

One shining example, selective logging by helicopter, can thin timber stands to provide wood products, to improve elk habitat or to prevent diseases, bug infestations and catastrophic fires outside of designated wilderness. This question however remains; is selective logging a better management tool than natural means, such as diseases, bugs and fires? Natural means have been thinning forests for thousands of years. The answer may come down to the environmental impact selective logging turns out to be.

Many land and resource uses can be accomplished with minimal environmental damage and without more roads. There are already some 380,000 miles of taxpayer subsidized roads in our national forests. The Forest Service has only about 20 percent of the budget necessary to maintain these roads. There is an $8.4 billion backlog of road maintenance and y’all want to build more roads? As a taxpayer I say; enough already! Dan Semler Colton, Wash.

Make protecting Reach job 1

What better way to ring in the new century than to finally protect the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River as America’s next wild and scenic river?

The Hanford Reach contains the last major Chinook salmon spawning grounds in the entire Columbia River system. Protecting it as a recreational wild and scenic river is the most immediate and cost-effective action we can take to preserve salmon. At the same time, designating the Hanford Reach as wild and scenic involves no dam breaching, includes no private property and costs the American taxpayer nothing beyond our normal tax bill.

The year 2000 will see difficult decisions about salmon and what we must do to save them. If we fail to take even the simple step of designating the Hanford Reach as wild and scenic, what hope is there of addressing the far more contentious salmon issues coming up? What does that say about our current crop of political leadership?

Call your U.S. senators and representatives. Tell them to quit stalling and save Hanford Reach as America’s next wild and scenic river. It’s no longer acceptable to simply say what they won’t do for salmon. It’s time to show what they will do. Bob Wilson Richland

PARTING SHOT

Roosevelt gets my vote

I have noted the general omission of the name of Franklin D. Roosevelt as the man of the century. Surely, Winston Churchill and Albert Einstein were great contributors. But the latter’s contribution regardiing theories of relativity or atomic energy are mixed blessings and depend on later interpretations and uses. As for the former, Churchill himself acknowledged that a successful conclusion to the struggle against Hitler’s barbarism would depend on the intervention of the New World. Roosevelt was the leader of that New World.

Roosevelt also deserves much credit for his own moderation in the struggle against the worldwide Depression, for, at a time when much of the industrialized world was turning to radical, collectivist solutions, either fascist or socialist, Roosevelt saved enough of the American free enterprise system to preserve the dynamism of the American system which, though perhaps unequal in bestowing its benefits, nevertheless has provided those benefits more liberally than any the world has yet seen.

My vote for man of the century unhesitatingly is cast for Roosevelt. Don Barnes Spokane