Letters To The Editor

Idaho viewpoints

Keep hill in natural state

I have serious reservations about the Tubbs Hill plan. In the first place, I object to any paving of trails on Tubbs. I believe it is important to preserve the natural state of the hill. I admit the trails need some attention, but they can be repaired with natural materials, using hand tools - no heavy equipment.

I used to walk on Tubbs Hill. I am no longer physically able to do it, but I do not consider it necessary to put in handicapped access.There are other fine views of the area available from the lakefront. I would gladly give up walking on the hill for the assurance that it would not be environmentally degraded in order for it to be “politically correct.” Also, let this be a matter of local pride. We really don’t need any more interference from big brother. Peggy Faust Hayden, Idaho

Character City Program deserves look

Lately I’ve been reading in The Spokesman-Review about the Character City Program that the city of Hayden has considered and that Rathdrum and Worley are considering. Apparently Councilwoman Nancy Taylor thinks that Rathdrum and Worley are on the road to evil. After all, “evil” is her description of the program.

In fact, many cities and businesses are using this program with stunning results. Tom Hill, the COO of Kimray Corp. in Oklahoma City, says that “after only the second year, they were amazed to see a substantial increase in morale, and decrease of 80 percent in workers’ compensation costs. And a 25 percent increase in profits, even though the market was depressed.” The city of Baton Rouge, La., has been using the program since 1998 with excellent results. Witness this statement from the Baton Rouge Business Report by Rolfe McCollister Jr. “I commend Mayor McHugh for embracing this program (which was discovered by local builder Gyp Olsen) and getting the ball rolling in Baton Rouge. I can only see positive results coming from this effort.”

Frankly after reading the remarks of people like Taylor and Chris Copstead, I understand how Richard Butler felt at home in Hayden. Intolerance like his and Taylor’s is apparently OK if directed against the “right” people. Were Butler to use Taylor’s words against any minority he would have been rightly remonstrated.

I urge the Hayden Council to really look at this program and reserve personal prejudices. Cornel Rasor Sandpoint

Washington govermnemt

Roskelley reply insulting

Re: “Sterk letter outrages Roskelley” (Oct. 5).

It seems rather silly that County Commissioner John Roskelley now wants the public to believe that the county sheriff (someone the public recognizes as a modern-day hero) is yet another pawn of the development community, simply because Sheriff Mark Sterk does not feel Roskelley supports public safety, and a few developers happened to contribute to Sterk’s campaign for sheriff back in 1998. Next he will be claiming evil developers control the labor unions and the County Health District. After all, they, too, have endorsed Karl Wilkinson for county commissioner.

While we are a bit concerned by Roskelley’s caustic barrage on the housing industry, we also recognize he is hoping the public will buy into his single-issue campaign - pillaging developers vs. the mountain-climbing savior of the planet. Frankly, we find it an insult to the public that Roskelley thinks they would be so naive. Mark J. Richard, government affairs director Spokane Home Builders Association/ Spokane Association of Realtors

Sheriff won’t get their votes again

What a shocking disappointment to find the article on our front page (Oct. 5) with the heading, “Sterk letter outrages Roskelley.” It outrages us, too!

As lifetime Democrats who rarely vote Republican, we voted for Sterk because we thought he was man of integrity who was above the GOP dirty-tricks political games.

To label Commissioner Roskelley as “an obstacle to public safety” and one who “puts children in danger” is to engage in the lowest kind of expedient politics - especially since both Kate McCaslin and Phil Harris voted with Roskelley to deny Sterk’s request for an additional $105,000. Were they, by their vote, “obstacles to public safety or putting children in danger” or were they, like Roskelley, doing their job in pointing out that the county didn’t have the money?

Sterk accusing others of doing what is politically expedient sure does a bang-up job of that himself. His circulated newsletter is expediently trying to convince voters to vote against Roskelley.

Sterk is evidently trying to convince voters that his shoes are clean and that certain heavy contributions in his campaign were not politically motivated You got our vote last election but it won’t happen again, sheriff. Shame on you. “I just wonder how a straight-arrow lady like Kate McCaslin will feel about your politically expedient support? Pat and Fred Wilson Mead

Poll tactic may backfire

As a retired political science educator, was very shocked when a member of my household told me about the political survey call that she received from a telemarketer concerning our strong mayor race. At the time, she did not know that it is one of the most negative campaigning tactics that has ever been used in an election in the U.S. It probably has never been used in a nonpartisan mayoral election in a city the size of Spokane.

It is called a push/poll survey and its sole purpose is to try to destroy the opponent’s character. She knew immediately that there was something very wrong with the survey when she was asked several soft questions about John Talbott, then asked very disturbing questions about John Powers. In my opinion these statements about Powers seemed to be either taken completely out of context or are not true.

There is absolutely no need of a push/poll survey campaign tactic in a non-partisan election. Only a candidate (or his supporters) in a state of panic would stoop to this level to influence an election.

Since most push/poll surveys backfire, I would encourage Talbott and his supporters to end this survey immediately. Jim Wagner Spokane

Washington state matters

Trapping valuable tool for WDFW

Washington’s wildlife resources are being threatened by initiatives that cripple the ability of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) to scientifically manage wildlife. Initiative 713 will effectively eliminate trapping. The WDFW uses trapping to effectively manage wildlife, monitor infectious diseases and reduce property damage. Equipment and seasons are carefully regulated and all trappers receive special training in order to purchase a license.

After a trapping ban in 1996, beaver populations in Massachusetts jumped from 18,000 to over 70,000. Beaver dams flooded roads, septic tanks, wells and property. What will be the cost to agriculture when beavers damage thousands of fruit trees? What about highway repair costs?

I-713 has no provision for extra funds for nuisance animal complaints. Why should the public pay for something if trappers will do it for free? What wildlife program will be cut to compensate for the costs of I-713? Initiative sponsors ultimately want to ban hunting, fishing, ranching and even ownership of pets.

Wildlife professionals need every tool at their disposal to manage wildlife resources. Introduced species, limited habitat and environmental alteration dictate the need for active management of wildlife. Trapping is a vital part of that.

You would never consider legislating that a doctor couldn’t use a scalpel during surgery. So why would you consider eliminating tools that wildlife professionals need to do their job?

I-713 is bad for wildlife. It will negatively impact wildlife, public health, agriculture and the financial resources of the WDFW. Vote no on I-713. Roger Peffer Wenatchee

Vote no on charter public schools

Please consider a few facts about Initiative 729, Charter Public Schools:

The boards of directors of charter schools will not be publicly elected but rather are appointed. Got a beef? Tough. You as the tax-paying supporter of these schools have absolutely no recourse. Even the rules and regulations that you, through your legislators, have demanded to ensure public schools are operated fairly, are discarded as being too burdensome.

Even though the initiative requires the appointed boards to be nonprofit in name, it specifically allows them to contract with for-profit companies for virtually everything, including educational instructional services. Not surprisingly, Paul Allen, whose deep pockets are financing this initiative, is waiting in the wings to sell these instructional services via his Edison Schools which operate private charter schools. Now you can watch your tax dollars increase Allen’s private bank account without so much as a whisper of public accountability.

Charter schools frequently score well below public schools academically. In George W. Bush’s Texas for instance, charter school students failed that state’s academic tests in much greater numbers than did regular school students, in spite of using $115 million in public funds.

In Massachusetts, charters were accused by several newspaper articles of actively discouraging enrollment of special needs (i.e. expensive to serve) students.

New Zealand, which developed the charter school concept, has reversed its approval, having found them to exacerbate the differences between rich and poor.

Please vote no on I-729! Andy James Colville

Government and politics

Use votes to aid Bush

Dennis Sinned (Letters, Sept. 30).states that he is enthusiastic about voting for George W. Bush and returning the White House to the Republicans, then says he is voting for Tom Keefe for Congress.

It is imperative that all of us who are voting for Bush be consistent. We must also vote to re-elect Slade Gorton and George Nethercutt.

The balance of power in the House and Senate may be very close and we do not want to hobble Bush with a Democrat controlled House or Senate. We must give him a chance to change the direction of our country and give him a House and Senate that will be controlled by the Republicans. Dale Dvergsdal Spokane

Candidates show future plans

The choice is clear concerning the two major presidential candidates in regards to the direction America will be heading.

Al Gore has stated, “We cannot afford to pay for George Bush’s tax cut plan concerning the surplus.” Does anyone besides me regard “surplus” as overtaxation and “afford to pay” as the taking away of revenue from Gore’s federal government expansion plans?

It stands to reason that if all Americans received a significant - say, 15-20 percent tax cut - a husband or wife would be able to quit their job and actually stay at home and be a full-time parent for their children, and provide the services that our taxes pay for by the federal government. Child-care, caring for an elderly parent, etc., would not have to be subsidized due to the fact that more money would be in everyone’s pocket, with the choice left to the family.

As it stands now, parents need to work two jobs just to sustain a decent standard of living due to the 40 percent tax burden placed on us by our wonderful “we are much smarter with your money than you can ever be” politicians in Congress.

Will this country ever return to the basic premise our forefathers founded this country on - liberty, the ability to makes personal choices with as little government interference as possible?

Sadly, I think the majority of Americans, through Gore and his kind, have convinced the electorate that accepting handouts based on the hard work of others is what makes America great. Steve Hintyesz Spokane