Seattle Press on Line - Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor

Jun 22, 2001 -- The Future of Fremont

To the Editor:

I am deeply saddened by your article describing the impact that Fremont's development may have on the Fremont Sunday Market ["Sunday Market, Boaters Quarrel Over Parking, " May 30]. The market's precarious future, together with the pettiness of the few who feel inconvenienced by it, should be a wake-up call to those who care about Fremont's unique character. Instead, this situation joins a ever-growing list of decisions in which business interests outweigh those of our community.

Events such as the Fremont Sunday Market, the annual Solstice Parade and outdoor cinemas form the foundation of this beloved neighborhood. As anyone who has been touched by its charm surely knows, Fremont is home to a faithful and eclectic assortment of residents and merchants who are deeply connected to the neighborhood and to one another. Each shares and contributes to Fremont's funkiness. This community spirit in turn has attracted the attention of developers that wish to profit from Fremont's appeal.

Development can enhance a neighborhood, provided that it is done with care. Had the current lot of developers thought to incorporate Fremont's community activities into their contracts and planning--for example, by requiring tenants to allow the market in their vacant parking lots--Fremont's character would have been ensured a place alongside other neighborhood expansions. But short-sightedness and greed have severely damaged the prospects for our community's integrity. The neighborhood's residents already feel the loss. In the long-term, however, so will the developers and corporations, as they realize that the very elements that drew them to Fremont in the first place are the ones that they are destroying.

Thank you so much, Seattle Press, for including the petition in support of the market in your current issue. Let's not allow corporate interests and a few persnickety boat owners to create a black hole in this "Center of the Universe."

Michele Burns
Fremont
To the Editor:

I can't believe that some spoiled rich kids are threatening the long-established Fremont Sunday Market. Poor babies have to park and walk a few blocks to get to their toys. Give me a break! The community wants the market, the owner of the parking structure is willing to Just Say No to spoiled boaters, so what's the big deal? And [market manager] Mr. Hegeman should stop feeling so bad about these people. I appreciate that he is trying to make everyone happy, but you can't make these people happy without caving in to their whims. He has done all kinds of things to accommodate. Enough is enough. Get back to the craft tables and pretzels and relax.

If the market goes because of the pressure of a few affluent boat owners, then Seattle will send a powerful message to the nation: Come to Seattle, where the rich are welcomed and everybody else can go to hell. That is a message that I personally do not want to hear. And as a result, Fremont will certainly no longer be the Center of the Universe, but just another city who sold out to the wealthy.

Jackie Alan Giuliano, Ph.D.
Associate Faculty, Cascadia Community College
Schools Teach Subservience, Don't Educate

To the Editor:

The whole debate about teachers' salaries is being clouded by a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of government schools.

Having been deliberately misled, a large majority of people (including many naive teachers) have come to blindly and mistakenly believe that government schools have the same objectives as high-quality private academies: to educate people. But this is simply not true.

The promise of an education is a pretense used solely for the purpose of persuading parents to confine their children in the part-time penitentiary commonly called "public schools." To the extent education actually occurs in government schools it is merely accidental.

Let's take off the blinders and stop pretending about the nature and purpose of government schools. The sole purpose of every government school is to teach children to be subservient to the government. Its purpose is to turn out legions of compliant semi-literate sheep-like individuals who will obediently pay taxes, gullibly believe propaganda, subordinate their personalities to the mythical beasts named "community" and "society," obey authority unquestioningly and submit to military slavery upon demand.

Government schools in our state, and especially in Seattle, have always performed this task well. There has been no degradation in their performance in recent decades. In fact, I think abundant evidence exists that their performance of this odious task has improved.

Government schools do NOT need highly compensated "teachers" to perform their primary task. Like obedience schools for dogs, they merely need stern taskmasters who tolerate no disobedience. They already have plenty of these, and every one of them is adequately compensated (if not, they would quit).

I fully support the Legislature's refusal to give these obedience trainers any more money than they currently receive. In fact, I would praise the Legislature if it fired all of them and eliminated the State's obedience schools entirely.

Tom Serf
It's Been Seven Months, People!

To The Editor:

I am writing to respond to Mike Rizzi's letter [May 16], wherein he objects to my statement that "Al Gore lost the 2000 election because the majority of voters did not believe that he would make a demonstrably better president than George Bush." Although Al Gore garnered more votes than George Bush,they both ended up with only 48 percent of the popular vote, which qualifies as a plurality, not a majority as Mr. Rizzi claimed.

The point of my letter was that more than 50 percent of the electorate voted against Al Gore, and blaming the Green Party for his defeat only serves to obscure the simple lesson that the Democratic party needs to nominate a more compelling candidate if they wish to reclaim the White House in 2004.

Andrew Wilson
North Seattle
The Old Stomping Grounds

To the Editor:

Been having some great fun looking up old stomping grounds of years ago--and I checked on Ballard Avenue.... When I fished aboard the seiner Elaine B, she used to tie on the Ballard side of Lake Union (in space rented from Ballard Oil). Used to spend a couple weeks in late June painting the vessel and getting ready for southeast Alaska--we are talking about 1977 to '86 seasons.

I am sure Ballard Avenue has changed--I spent many afternoons and evenings in the bars. Preferred the Sunset and Pete's (on the corner--gone now?), but I hit every damned one. Often. Right across (if memory serves) from the Sunset (down one block?) was a Chinese restaurant called the Hoh. And this is my question and reason for writing--is the Hoh still there? Great Chinese food, and after about the second time I ate there the whole damned family recognized me and greeted me. I generally ate there once or twice before leaving, and again in mid-September when I returned, before heading home to Astoria.

Long Live Ballard Avenue!

Will Ritter
Astoria, Oregon
Don't Delay Water Pollution Testing!

To the Editor:

As a concerned citizen of Washington state, I am writing to inform you of the degradation of our waterways. I am sure you are all aware that the state of Washington, especially the Seattle area, is home to some of the best water resources in the nation. From Lake Washington to Lake Union to the Puget Sound, Seattle residents have access to a plethora of great waterways.

Unfortunately, according to EPA standards, over half of Washington's waterways are too polluted for either fishing or swimming. In fact, the Port of Seattle alone is overflowing with enough toxic waste to fill 3,500 dump trucks! Too many big industries are taking advantage of our waterways and polluting them. Each day when I make my commute from my Ballard home, I am greeted by the sparkling beauty of Green Lake. I always enjoy this section of my trip, and perhaps it is my favorite part. However, I cannot keep myself from wondering what evil toxins lie behind this false facade of purity: dioxin ... formaldehyde ... mercury ... pentachlorophenal ... known carcinogens!

By the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972, the Department of Ecology is required to test water quality standards every three years. However, these tests have not occurred in over eight years. A review is scheduled for this fall, but if the state's biggest polluters have their way these tests will be delayed even further. This absolutely can not happen!

Ignorance may be bliss, but nothing is worse than the fear of the unknown. The Department of Ecology must perform the water quality review this fall. I urge all Seattle residents to call their legislators and make sure this happens. It is our right to KNOW!

Cammie Croft
Ballard
To the Editor:

Every day citizens of Washington swim, fish and drink from contaminated sources. Over half of our waterways are too polluted because big industries have been using them as dumping grounds for highly toxic chemicals.

According to the EPA, industries have been pouring mercury, formaldehyde, pentachlorophenol and dioxins into our water. Between 1995 and 1999, 42 percent of the population drew their drinking water from a poisonous site at one time or another.

The Department of Ecology is the authority that is required by the Clean Water Act of 1972 to review our water quality every three years. It has been almost nine years since they have performed their last review. Due to the pressure from big industry, the Department of Ecology has voluntarily delayed this review, and will continue to do so until the people take a stand against this absurdity.

It is imperative that the Department of Ecology perform the water quality review scheduled for the fall so that the people's safety can be secured. Therefore, it is urgent that the people take action now.

Jessica Miller
U District

Reader Comments

Discuss this article in the forums!

No comments yet!