Reader’s Forum
Volunteers are key to government operation
To the editor: I feel compelled to counter the comments from Frank Gradilone that appeared in the October 2001 Readers’ Forum. Mr. Gradilone bemoans the fact that governments are not providing necessary infrastructure and that “volunteers” are doing work they should not be doing.
The writer’s viewpoint is typical of the opinion or many citizens today. They want everything, right now, right where they want it, or they don’t want it at all. And don’t even think of raising their taxes.
Governments everywhere are struggling to meet growth and provide and maintain infrastructure with less funding than ever before. Community volunteers are able to expedite the process to achieve amenities they desire, such as parks. In addition to their devotion to their communities, these volunteers buy in and feel pride of ownership in those facilities. This ownership is a very healthy outcome because it increases community pride, reduces vandalism and gives the volunteers themselves a great feeling of self-worth.
We are facing a similar situation in our county. Growth has outpaced funding for the construction and operation of new parks to serve the exploding population. The majority of the new growth is made up of young families with children who need a place to play. When parks are lacking in a community, kids get bored and start down the wrong path of vandalism and delinquency.
Parks are not just a “nice-to-have” item; they are a necessity that improves the quality of life for everyone, not just the people who use them on a regular basis. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Mr. Gradilones in our county, which has a large retiree population. A great many of them are adamant that their taxes not be increased in any way. Yet, they make the most noise when a youth violates their space through vandalism, theft or other unacceptable behavior.
Mr. Gradilone’s comments do a great disservice to the millions of volunteers who help clean up the roads, build playgrounds, coach Little League, teach classes, serve as Big Brothers or Big Sisters, mentor children, etc. Our county enjoyed more than $1 million in in-kind volunteer service last year alone. These people are the heart and soul of the community and make the place where we live better.
— Jim Slaughter
Parks and Recreation Director
Pasco County, Fla.
To the editor: Regarding Frank Gradilone’s letter, I must take exception to his view of government’s role. Having been an assistant city manager and city manager for more than 12 years, I have a good handle on this issue.
For years, government has been perceived as the provider of all infrastructure services. The citizens demanded nothing less for their tax dollars.
However, as the cost of doing business has gone up, there is an ominous cry of “no new taxes.” Thus, municipal governments have had to develop ingenious ways to maintain or improve the expected level of service with decreasing resources.
I applaud the governments that have found ways to stretch their limited resources — both fiscal and material — while providing their citizenry with opportunities to express their appreciation for and civic pride in their communities.
Who is to say what government “should be doing as a normal matter of course?” In a democracy, it is government by the people. Municipal governments do not take volunteer efforts for granted. On the contrary, they are very much appreciated. Maybe Mr. Gradilone should lend a hand. It might make him feel better about his government and himself. With government and the citizens, both corporate and private, working together, civic pride will go a long way and our communities will thrive.
— William Emmerich
Green Cove Springs, Fla.
To the editor: I just read your Editorial Viewpoint. It was great until the last sentence, and then you blew it big time. The evil, which came to a head on Sept. 11, did not diminish us as Americans. In spite of the great loss, we have become united as never before. God bless America.
— Lloyd Robinson
Birmingham, Ala.
To the editor: Your editorial was absolutely perfect. We all lost someone or know someone who lost someone.
One young fireman, Tony Rodriguez from Brooklyn, was lost on Sept. 11, and his young wife gave birth to a girl named Hope (Esperanza) a week later. This is only one story out of many yet to be told. Your line, “when we see the bee-striped uniforms of the firefighters, our eyes process FDNY even as our minds read HERO,” brought tears to my eyes.
Tony was one of the heroes who died at [what Cardinal Egan called] “Ground Hero.” The term “Ground Zero” does not do justice to New York City.
— Esteban Taracido
Westchester Business Development Organization/Las Americas
Financial
New Rochelle, N.Y.
To the editor: I have enjoyed reading American City & County for years. But I was shocked and disappointed by a term you chose to use in your editorial, “They hit New York because it is us,” (October 2001). While I understand the point you were trying to convey, I believe that the article was hastily written. Using the term “dorkface” was inappropriate for a professional trade journal.
You may not understand that the word is another word for [the male sexual organ]. I question that any true member of a family would refer to another as “a big, fat dorkface.”
Before you start thinking that I am some prude, I have been in public service for more than 27 years. I have been on active duty in the Navy and the Reserves for more than 21 years. I have seen much in my life, and I know how to speak to professionals.
— Ernest Nelson
Transportation Operations Chief
Tampa, Fla.
Two views: You blew it, you brought tears to my eyes
[Hey, I can stand it if you think I’m wrong. But I am the oldest of nine children in a very close family, and, believe me, “big fat dorkface” is one of the milder terms of endearment my sisters and brothers and I use for each other. Whatever its origins, the word now simply means “dweeb.” For further enlightenment, visit the Official Dork Web Site at www.angelfire.com/mi/dorknet/index.html. You can even determine if you are a dork by taking the quiz at www.csua.berkeley.edu/~sarahfsk/dork.html.
— JW]
To the editor: Regarding the editorial, “Utah town’s ordinance is U.N.believable” (September 2001), you missed the point(s). While it’s apparent LaVerkin’s ordinance contains unconstitutional provisions, it’s the message that counts.
Why should I, or the people of LaVerkin, pay taxes to fund an organization that we don’t believe in or agree with? Let those who want “a new world order” pay for it. As for Virgin, Utah, their thinking is on the right track as well. The bad guys sure would have a harder time of it if everyone were armed.
— Randy Kunkle
Manager
Economy Borough, Pa.
To the editor: I read with interest your column, “Small towns, Chicago at odds over sweet deal” (August 2001). Contrary to your suggestion, I do sympathize with the plight of the residents of Sebewaing, Mich., and all other small towns that benefit from U.S. sugar subsidies. Nevertheless, I continue to believe that U.S. sugar subsidies are a bad bargain for Sebewaing, for Chicago and for the nation.
Here in Chicago, our candy industry has seen a 35 percent decline in employment over the last eight years. The loss of these jobs is directly related to U.S. sugar prices that are two to three times that of the rest of the world. And it’s not just Chicago businesses that suffer. All consumers in America pay these inflated prices every time they go to the grocery store.
I support sound policies that offer appropriate assistance to sugar producers that is not at the expense of consumers. However, paying subsidies based on the volume of sugar grown benefits the largest growers the most. Volume-based subsidies are also a recipe for surpluses, as evidenced by the fact that domestic sugar production has surged since 1996. America now has more sugar than we know what to do with.
On Oct. 4, the House of Representatives voted in favor of a new 10-year, $171 billion farm bill that not only kept all existing agricultural subsidies in place, but also expanded them to new areas. This battle is not over, and I am encouraged that both the secretary of agriculture and the Senate Agricultural Committee leaders have [said] they want significant reform on how and to whom the subsidies are paid. They will have my support.
LaVerkin and Virgin ordinances are right
While I have advocated an end to the U.S. sugar subsidies program, I also have consistently supported reasonable policies to aid small family farmers. The federal government should provide assistance, but it should do so in such a manner that consumers and manufacturers are not penalized. I believe these programs need to focus direct support to those farmers in need and should not be blanket entitlements for all farm owners irrespective of size. Programs such as these will help towns like Sebewaing, while freeing the rest of us from the negative effects of sugar subsidies.
— Richard Daley
Mayor, Chicago
Sugar subsidies: No benefit to consumers, small farms
To the editor: Your editorials are always thought-provoking and frequently entertaining. I am much less amused, however, by the factual errors in the story, “Mixed reviews for HOV lanes,” (October 2001).
The following statements are factually incorrect, and there may be others as well:
-
“the surge in HOV lanes in California really began in the early 1990s when residents voted for a sales tax to help finance their construction.”
-
Fourteen percent of Los Angeles residents use the county’s 369 miles of HOV lanes every day.”
-
“…vehicle delays on California’s urban freeways more than doubled between 1997 and 1998.”
-
In my opinion, HOV lanes can be a valuable tool when properly applied under the right circumstances. It should be recognized, however, that public relations efforts by agencies that have made enormous investments in this or any other form of mass transportation require thoughtful review and testing for reasonableness.
— Harry Parker
Harry Parker Consulting Traffic Engineer
Venice, Calif.[Mr. Parker is correctm but the fault was ours not CalTrans’. The article should have said that vehicle delays doubled between 1987 and 1998.
— JW]Letters may be mailed to 6151 Powers Ferry Road, N.W., Atlanta GA 30339; faxed to (770) 618-0349; or e-mailed to [email protected]. Letters may be edited for purposes of style, clarity and length.