Missoula a draw for panhandlers
I know this letter is going to sound terribly un-PC, but as usual when I’m being un-PC, I don’t care.
I know that Missoula prides itself on being a community with a very big heart. Yet, every year we are inundated with transients from other parts of the country, who enjoy spending their summers in our lovely and generous city. We do our best to care for them, despite the problems they often present. Every year the downtown business association whines about the panhandlers intimidating their customers; every year the panhandlers are driven out of the city center. Where do they go?
And now the Poverello Center wants to put a day care center for drunks in my neighborhood. I’m sure glad the boutiques downtown have enough clout to get the city to do something about the transients; what is the city doing to make sure I’m safe? How is it OK that transients may come to my front door to panhandle and scare me, but they’re just too frightening and intimidating to be tolerated downtown?
I suspect the bottom line is that I don’t live in a fancy-enough neighborhood.
Tammy Cady, Missoula
Support mixed-use zoning
In light of the recent increases in gas prices, it may be time to consider a new approach to urban development.
Since the middle part of the 20th century, American housing has taken us outside of the city. While living in the suburbs has given suburban inhabitants lawns and gardens, it has also made us dependent on our cars so walking to stores is rarely possible.
Contemporary thought in urban planning calls for a quarter-mile “magic circle” or 10-minute walk, after which fewer people are willing to walk from their home to go shopping or to other needed urban services.
We should support Missoula County Planners and officials when they consider proposals for mixed-use zoning. This would reduce the carbon footprint of Missoula, reduce the amount of driving needed, reduce traffic congestion, save money otherwise spent on fuel and auto repairs and improve our health.
Don Sims, Missoula
GOP not at fault for rise in costs
Commentators, including some letter-writers to this paper, who blame the current price of gasoline on Bush and the Republicans seem to have amnesia.
On Jan. 1, 2007, when the Democrats took control of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, the average price of gasoline was $2.38 per gallon. Just 18 months later, it is now at $4.03 per gallon, approximately
70 percent higher, or 40.5 percent average annual increase. Over the period when the Republicans controlled Congress, from January 1995 to January 2007, the average annual increase in gasoline prices was 4.5 percent (from $1.13 to $2.38).
So who is at fault? I think we know. The siren song is beginning again for November. Remember the Lorelei.
Joe Vinso, Missoula
Protect principles of Constitution
On the Fourth of July, all across America, we celebrate our Declaration of Independence. This document, and our Constitution, express some of the highest ideals in human thought and experience. We are right to proudly celebrate them. But, we must do more than celebrate; we must renew our commitment to protect the principles contained therein. We must be ever vigilant that these principles are not treated as 18th century thoughts discussed only in classrooms.
Last week, a nationally prominent clergyman attacked what he alleged one presidential candidate’s religious beliefs to be. The clergyman claimed the candidate’s interpretations of certain Biblical passages were deficient and in error. The clergyman obviously voiced his denouncements with the intent to affect our upcoming presidential election.
How bizarre that this deliberate attempt to promote one acceptable national religious belief system should happen so close to our celebrating our founding documents, which clearly and unequivocally denounce such promotion.
The principles in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution dovetail beautifully with the beliefs of many religions, including some that do not even use the Bible. However, our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution clearly and unequivocally ban the establishment of a state-sponsored set of religious beliefs. My Constitutional protection to believe as my conscience dictates is preserved only if I protect that right for all others. Any attempts to establish nationally “acceptable” belief systems is unconscionable, unconstitutional and detrimental to the fabric of our society.
P.S. If I were Queen, I’d yank such clergymen’s tax-exempt status so fast their heads would spin.
Claire L. Kelly, Stevensville
Process needs to be simplified
The guest column by Chris Dahl (June 30) regarding Montana’s hunting regulations was right on the mark.
I grew up hunting the West, including Arizona, New Mexico, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho and Colorado. When my wife and I moved to Montana, one of the main reasons was for the hunting and fishing opportunities.
Well, I just went through my first application year here in Montana and I found the regulations and hunt structure very complicated. In fact, it was so confusing I only applied for antelope. My wife is an avid hunter and she was so upset with the situation that she just gave up and decided to wait until next year.
Montana is no different than other Western state and should take a hard look at its regulations to see how it can simplify the process.
I also just reviewed the fishing regulations and found that they are even more complicated than the hunting regs, if that is even possible. If this state, which depends a great deal on hunting and fishing revenue, is not careful, it will drive outdoorsman to other states. Maybe the state could put together a work group made up of both state representative and the public to solve this issue.
Rick L. Cherington, Huson
Only $139,000 to welcome gang?
Who are the lucky duckies who get to pay “the $139,000 in additional funding” (Missoulian, “Meeting to focus on Hells Angels visit, city seeking advice from local citizens,” June 26) for the privilege of welcoming a gang of freedom and liberty proponents?
It’s so nice this gang doesn’t have to pick up its responsibility for the “additional funding.” We wouldn’t be neighborly if we charged that cost to the gang. Gee, we ought to invite them every year.
John H. Schultz, Missoula
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)