Seattle Press on Line - Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor

Jan 24, 2001 -- School Board Member Raises Issues Concerning Marshall High

To the Editor,

I read with interest your article about Marshall High School (January 10 issue), and applaud the efforts that the staff is making to help the school's students. However, based on my experience this last year as a School Board member, I'd like to make a few observations:

* The Marshall staff's concerns about funding are not unique. The staff at all our District high schools feel that their students could benefit from additional funds. Education is under-funded in this state! Initiative 728, passed by the voters last November, is a first step to correct this problem. But that initiative represents only two percent of the district's annual budget. The district is also considering reallocating more of its budget towards secondary schools so that they can "catch up" with the substantial improvements made in elementary schools in recent years. Finally, voting for the school levies on the February 6 ballot is essential to ensure that the education and safety of our students is not forced to take a giant step backwards by necessitating future program cuts.

* It is not true that every school in the city gets $3,600 per student from the district's budget. In 1996, the district revolutionized its approach to funding schools so now students with special needs get more money. In fact, Marshall receives an average of over $5,000 per student--more than just about any other high school in the city--in recognition of the supervision and support required for its student population. It is then the responsibility of Marshall's leadership team to decide the best staffing mix and how best to serve their students.

* The School Board did not shut down Marshall's food program. Food service in our schools is governed by a combination of health regulations, a contract with food service workers that we as a district are bound to follow, and Board policy. This policy allows a student store to operate when it does not compete with the regular school lunch program. Several student stores operate effectively by using the district's school lunch program as a supplier.

Thanks to your readers for their continued interest in and support of the Seattle Schools.

Steve Brown
Seattle School Board, Director District No. 2

Listen Up, Sound Transit

To the Editor:

This is to the people on the Sound Transit board:

It is my belief that if you continue to pursue this horrible debacle called "Sound" Transit you should seriously reconsider your future position as an elected official.

Selfishly continuing with this ineffectual project grubbing up the money with no consideration to your constituents is sickening. It would be wise to consider the ramifications of your actions.

If you had any respect for the people of this area you would bite the bullet and admit that there is something dreadfully wrong and do something about it.

It is not honorable to grab onto a tarnished golden ring out of selfish pride.

I did not vote for an outdated and ridiculously over-budgeted system. It has been proven over and over again to be inconsequential to provide relief from this horrendous congestive mess that we all live with daily.

Perhaps you should swallow your pride and think Monorail.

Catherine Dampier

Monorail Safer, Better than Light Rail

To the Editor:

Never in recorded history has a monorail smashed though a house. Nor has one ever crashed into a school bus, killing children. There has never been an occurrence when a huge truck has been dragged several hundred feet down the tracks, maiming or killing the driver and causing great property damage. The death rate of the monorail systems of the world is zero. Toxic and hazardous fluids have never been dumped over the countryside, causing communities to be evacuated. Monorails never "jump the track," kill small children playing on the tracks, run over joggers or reduce automobiles to ashes and twisted metal.

In addition, no monorail has ever stopped traffic from flowing down any street or highway, because they are not on common grades.

So-called light rail (there is nothing "light" about it) will run on steel rails with steel wheels, a prescription for disaster if there ever was one. "Light rail" translates to TRAINS ON TRACKS! They are heavy, lumbering monstrosities that are not friendly to passengers, pedestrians, little children or dogs and cats, or to other forms of transportation. They are very difficult to stop in an emergency. And emergencies are to be expected, based on rail-transportation safety figures worldwide.

Certainly, monorails are not the complete solution to our congestion in the Puget Sound area, but they would be much more effective as an alternative means of transport than light rail, which Sound Transit (what's so "sound" about it?) touts. Sound Transit (when that mysterious entity was known as "RTA" in 1996) said, "The Ten-Year Regional Transit System Plan offers the region a needed package of transportation investments that add capacity to our overburdened transportation system."

Sound Transit later amended that statement when it admitted that light rail would not ease traffic congestion. Then, Ron Sims and company, in a Seattle Times editorial, implied that indeed it would ease congestion. And they wonder why we mistrust them!

Gene Buck

New Insurance Commissioner Should Cover Birth Control

To the Editor:

I want to urge Insurance Commissioner-elect Mike Kreidler to uphold Deborah Senn's rules for contraceptive drugs. A few days ago Senn announced new rules requiring health insurers to cover birth control for women if they cover other prescription drugs. The rules are to take effect in July. Senn declared that the new rules "will prevent carriers from excluding contraceptives from prescription drug benefits already included in group and individual policies."

I support the rule and urge Mike Kreidler to uphold it. Contraceptives are basic health care for women and should be covered by health plans just like any other medication prescribed by a physician. I commend the Insurance Commissioner for ending discriminatory insurance practices that deny women the basic contraceptive health services they need. Hopefully, this will become law nationwide in the near future.

Albert Kaufman

Green Lake's Swampy Origins

Dear Editor:

I applaud Washington Fish & Wildlife for creative problem solving--and the Seattle Press for keeping us informed! It is wonderful to think that the carp and muskies planted in Green Lake can help the obvious milfoil problem. However, to say that human behavior (no, I don't support over-fertilization) is the problem with Green Lake is oversimplifying.

My grandmother's family lived many years along Green Lake as she grew up and my great aunt raised her children at Green Lake's edge. They have the history firsthand. The lake area was a mucky, yucky swamp. Then it became a landfill. THEN, due to human actions, it became a lake. I imagine that without creative and ongoing intervention it will eventually revert to a yucky, mucky swamp.

It is a useful and beautiful man-made city lake (as opposed to a natural swamp). My family regularly enjoys Green Lake and hopes it receives continued thoughtful (human) efforts to make it the best neighborhood park and open space it can be. And when it means putting fish in the lake--all the better.

Gwen Kapusuzoglu

Why Vote Democrat?

To the Editor:

Give me a reason.

For weeks now, I've been suffering through the rhetoric calling for an end to partisanship. If the Democrats truly believe that the time to cooperate with the Republicans is when the Republicans are leaning toward, if not outright embracing, the conservative right, why should I continue to vote Democratic?

I vote Democrat because I believe in government, choice, strengthening our public school system, protecting our environment, affirmative action when it proves necessary, universal medical care, and protecting individual rights, to list a few. Why should I vote Democratic if the Democrats are willing to bargain away those very ideals?

Our nation has suffered a serious blow. For the first time in my life, we will be headed by a person who was not elected by the people. His [cabinet] appointments clearly indicate that his pledge to bring people together is as meaningful as was his pledge to listen to every voice and cherish states' rights. What I should be hearing from Democrats is the constant reminder that this nation was robbed of its voice and we will not and should not rally behind a president who was elected by a partisan Supreme Court.

But that's not what I'm hearing. I'm hearing that [Attorney General nominee John] Ashcroft shouldn't be confirmed, but probably will be. I'm hearing that, in the interest of bipartisanship, there will be "tough" questions, but little opposition to Gale Norton. I'm hearing little about the vote count in Florida that makes Al Gore the clear winner of the presidency. And I'm being told that I should "rally behind" a president not duly elected by the people.

So, I ask you again. If people stand to gain little ideologically by voting Democrat, why vote Democrat? Democrats: Be very careful of the message you are sending.

P. Good

Good Question

To the Editor:

A study recently published in a medical journal found that churchgoers live on average 7 years longer than non-churchgoers, which happens to be the same as the difference between nonsmokers and smokers.

As a committed nonbeliever and non-churchgoer, I have but one question: Who the $@#%&*** do I sue?

Russell B. Garrard

Where's Kirby?

To the Editor:

We sure do miss Kirby's Fremont.

Kurt and Amina

Reader Comments

Discuss this article in the forums!

No comments yet!