Letters 07-27-2015

July 24, 2015

Our simple rules: Keep your letter to 300 words or less, send no more than one per month, include your name/address/phone number, and agree to allow us to edit. That’s it. Email info@northernexpress.com and hit send!

Next For Brownfields

In regard to your recent piece on brownfield redevelopment in TC, the Randolph Street project appears to be proceeding without receiving its requested $600k in brownfield funding from the county. In response to this, the mayor is quoted as saying that the developer bought the property prior to performing an environmental assessment and had little choice but to now build it.

The mayor’s statement is misleading. The recorded meetings of the Brownfield Redevelopment Authority (BRA) show that the developer learned the property was contaminated through an environmental assessment done prior to closing. And the BRA was aware that the developer had knowingly bought the contaminated property, and voted in favor of giving the developer the money anyways. Members of the BRA queried the developer’s consultant as to why the developer didn’t negotiate a better deal for the land, given that he knew it was contaminated. It’s unclear from the consultant’s answers if the developer didn’t seek a lower price or the seller wouldn’t lower their price. Disturbingly, the consultant also stated that in his experience sellers of contaminated property in TC generally don’t lower their prices based on contaminated.

Members of the BRA also raised the issue of whether or not the Randolph Street development really needed brownfield funding to proceed. Recent events would suggest that it perhaps did not. It is unfortunate for the developer that the county changed its funding criteria after he had already bought the property. Hopefully now that the county has refused brownfield funding for this project, in the future, developers and owners of contaminated properties in TC will work out between themselves what those properties are really worth given their contamination instead of assuming the public will automatically pay for any cleanup.

Mike Grant, Traverse City

Defending Our Freedom

This is in response to Sally MacFarlane Neal’s recent letter, "War Machines for Family Entertainment."

Wake Up! Make no mistake about it, we are at war! Even though the idiot we have for a president won’t accept the fact because he believes we can negotiate with Iran, etc., ISIS and their like make it very clear they intend to destroy the free world as we know it. If you take notice of the way are constantly destroying their own people, is that living?

As for the "War Machines" at the air show, these planes represent our freedom that has been fought for many times. We also have a love of speed, loud noise, and the skill these pilots display with these fantastic planes.

Why don’t you imagine the horror of the thousands of innocent people killed by the terrorists of the world? These planes represent our military, and we better take notice of the way Obama is depleting what was once the most powerful military in the world. Our enemies are watching and now are not afraid to push us!

Seems like about 500,000 people in attendance thought the "war machines" were awesome! We must have more respect for our military and our "war machines" or we are doomed. The $25,000 per hour to fly these F-16s is nothing compared to what Michelle Obama spends as the Queen of Washington.

Ben Ryon, Traverse City

What Is Far Left?

Columnist Steve Tuttle, who so many lambaste as a liberal, considers Sen. Sanders a far out liberal "nearly invisible from the middle." Has the middle really shifted that far right? Sanders has opposed endless war and the Patriot Act. Does Mr. Tuttle believe most of our citizens praise our wars and the positive results we have achieved from them? Is supporting endless war or giving up our civil liberties middle of the road?

It’s interesting to note Sen. Sanders voted to support funding for our troops, obviously a "far left" idea. He would like to propose a "whopping 90 percent" income tax on the wealthy, same as the country had in the 1950’s under Eisenhower, when our country’s economy was booming with the largest middle class in the free world. Sanders would also like to rebuild the infrastructure Eisenhower originally built.

Mr. Tuttle, I presume, believes Ike, a Republican, was really a closet lefty. Does Sanders hate rich people? No, he hates the destruction of the middle class. Sanders believes in free college education to strengthen the economic standing of our country, much like many public colleges were free in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Did people think this was a "far left" stance back then, or an investment in the future of our country? Comprehensive immigration reform is so "far left" that Congress won’t even address it.

Senator Sanders supports universal health care, a single payer system that most all other developed nations in the world have. Is putting people before profit really a "far left" idea?

Mr. Tuttle, today Barry Goldwater would be left of center. Just how far right has the center moved to call ideas supported by the majority "far left?"

Russ Rising, Beulah

Parking Corrected

Stephen Tuttle commented on parking in the July 13 Northern Express. As Director of the Traverse City Downtown Development Authority, I feel compelled to address a couple key issues. But first, I acknowledge that there is some consternation about parking downtown. As more people come downtown served by less parking, the pressure on what parking we have increases. Downtown serves a county with a population of 90,000 and plays host to over three million visitors annually. The city’s population of 15,000 more than doubles in the daytime according to the US Census. There are four to five thousand employees in the DDA District alone. And all these employees, visitors, shoppers, and downtown residents are served by only 4,700 parking spaces public and private. The DDA manages parking to balance all of these users’ needs.

There are a number of inaccuracies in Mr. Tuttle’s piece but I will focus on two. First is the assertion that parkers until only recently have had to adhere to time limits and can no longer "run back to your parked car and feed the meter." City ordinance has required compliance with time limits and this has been enforced since 1977. The whole point of meters is to attach a price to parking in premium spots so parkers make efficient decisions about where and how long they park.

Second is the comment that the City Commission approved a fee increase "without so much as a single bit of data to support the expense." Data, including graphs and charts, were presented to the Commission on April 27 and can be viewed online. Mr. Tuttle states that "approving budget increases without documentation is just bad policy." Agreed! And the City Commission did not do that.

Rob Bacigalupi

Executive Director Traverse City DDA