Letters 07-04-2016

July 1, 2016

Anti-Air Shows

I have spoken to many people over the last year regarding the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds. Feedback:

- Money: Various charities fundraise for new beds at Walter Reed Hospital for our wounded veterans, but the annual Blue Angels taxpayer cost is $100,000,000? How many beds would that buy?

- The noise level the Blue Angels emit is over 140 decibels, a deafening level, far exceeding Traverse City laws. Any level over 85 is considered dangerous and can cause hearing loss or damage.

- This same noise level has a well-documented negative effect in the form of fear and anxiety on infants, the aged, wildlife and domestic animals.

- When the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds perform, many veterans and immigrants from war torn countries are at risk of further trauma. Imagine for a moment the fright some feel!! Perhaps next year we can have a bombing display to draw more tourists?

- Danger: Since the Blue Angels have begun performing, the "air shows" have resulted in 27 fatalities. On June 2, 2016, a F/A-18 Blue Angel crashed in a residential area in Tennessee, killing the pilot. The same day a Thunderbird F-16 crashed following a flyover at the US Air Force Academy commencement ceremony attended by our president.

Traverse City is a city of tranquility, orchards, the bays, the peninsula, wineries, trails, etc. The crowds generated by these teams overtax first responders.

The Blue Angels and Thunderbirds are instruments of war, and are the number one recruiting tool of our young.

Shame on us for putting money and recruiting ahead of the safety of our citizens, and the fragility of our environment.

The Defense Department should not be in the entertainment business.

Tim Keenan, Traverse City

Cherryland Is Wrong

A recent decision by the Cherryland Electric Board merits the attention of all who care about our air, land and waters. The Cherryland Directors, charged with setting policy for this "member driven" cooperative, has adopted a new rate structure that is fundamentally unfriendly and unfair to new solar installations. If it stands, it will virtually kill new installations in the Cherryland service area and the jobs that work supports and may well serve as a model of regressive policy for other utilities to follow as well.

This is a tragedy on three levels.

First, in spite of the word "Cooperative" in their name, this action was taken in a manner that is in stark conflict with the definition of a cooperative. Why do the Cherryland bylaws allow the Board to conduct business in private, behind-closed-doors meetings? "Secretive" rather than "Cooperative" is a better descriptor for the process.

Second, at their public rollout of the new policy, the defense "we believe our members [insert: "want," "would appreciate," "will understand"] was used several times. The obvious response is why do we need to guess what members are thinking? Why did the Board not hold public meetings prior to making a major decision? Why did the Board not use easily available tools to survey its 34,000 members?

And third, unless they can complete their installation before November 1 when the current policy ends, this new policy is a death knell for any member considering a new residential solar system. Why, while they claim to be a forward thinking, environmentally friendly utility, would the Cherryland Board act so strongly against new solar energy installations? The bottom line is that this policy is poison to the solar energy movement and a cleaner community. It’s regressive and rooted in the past. Its implementation should be cancelled.

Joe DeFors, Northport

Thanks For Highlighting Tim Green

Many thanks for providing the space to an "outside" writer so he could tell the marvelous story of Tim Green’s fight for the civil rights of America’s largest minority. Wonderfully personal article, full of life -- like the subject. And yes, the accompanying photograph was worth another thousand words.

George Colburn, Walloon Lake

Bring The Housing

Gary Howe’s guest opinion last week is spot on! Traverse City is no longer the little Cherry/tourist town I grew up in. Today TC is a fast growing city and thus needs close, in-town housing. Ten to fifteen story condo buildings would add great property taxes and reduce auto traffic. The ideal buildings would be on the west. The first floor would be small shops, the second floor would be professional offices, and on up one and two bedroom condos. Several buildings of this type would not block the view of the bay for anyone. Traverse City is a city...not a town.

Micheal Cromley, Afton

Due Process Revisited

Reading last week’s "Allow Due Process" letter, I am concerned with the author’s conclusion as to why it’s OK to be on the "No Fly List" and not OK to be on a "No Buy List." Suggesting that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights make the "No Buy List" the same as the "No Fly List" fails to understand the issue.

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments grant a Constitutional right to each citizen to "due process," which means we are guaranteed a fair legal process when the government tries to interfere with a person’s protected interests in life, liberty, or property, and that Constitutional right will not be encroached on by either the Federal or State government.

Should the government or any of its agencies take action to interfere with a person’s protected interest, that citizen is guaranteed "due process."

The proper conclusion should be that being placed on the "No Fly List" by the TSA/ Homeland Security is unconstitutional without due process.

William Deneau, Traverse City

Ignore Campaign Financed Ads

As a registered 1st District voter, choosing an effective U.S. House district voice is a big challenge. Something is wrong when national and state outsiders try to "buy our primary."

Large outside contributions to local elections is a serious problem. You’d expect parties to wait to endorse until after the primary. Yet state and national Republicans and Democrats are already funding candidates. For example, DNC and state PACs are backing Lon Johnson in the primary.

If national party committees couldn’t officially endorse a primary presidential candidate, why is their money used to back local primary candidates?

A 60 Minutes report revealed DNC and GOP legislators have party-set campaign fund-raising goals and are "expected " to spend an about four hours/day fundraising. No wonder nothing gets done in Washington! (Side issue: How much is spent on administrative overhead?)

To positively change the legislative status quo, voters need to learn about candidates’ issue positions without the influence of ads paid for by non-district and out of state funds.

Linda Rutman, Traverse City