Letters, 5/6: Vote Yes on Amendment 1

 8 comment(s)  
 E-mail Story
 Print Story
  Share

 digg it!
 Facebook
 del.icio.us
Seed Newsvine
Fark It
Reddit

Text Size: 

Tools Sponsor

We want to thank David Patrick, while misinformed, for pointing out the importance of voting Yes for Amendment 1.

Amendment 1 ensures that investments held by our cities in Nebraska would not be totally invested in those “worthless CDOs” that Patrick referenced in his letter May 2. The important point is that today this in fact could happen with city endowment investments, because CDOs may contain bonds, which can be invested in under current state law.

Amendment 1 is designed to protect and safeguard the assets of the residents of Nebraska.

Amendment 1 is simple and straightforward, and we again want to thank Patrick for reinforcing the importance of voting Yes for Amendment 1. We need to protect our investments from too much risk.

Vote Yes for Amendment 1 if you want to protect the assets of Nebraska.

William W. Lester, treasurer — Yes on 1

Hard to prioritize funding

On April 22, I attended the mayor’s town hall meeting to discuss city budget priorities.

We were given a list of eight outcome priorities and asked to pick our top three and bottom two priorities. In my small group, we struggled with that prioritization. Several of us saw these eight outcome areas not in a straight vertical line but rather in a circle. Not only do they overlap, but they are inter-reliant on each other for their success or failure.

Better “Economic Opportunity” leads to better “Healthy & Productive People” leads to better “Livable Neighborhoods” leads to better “Safety & Security” and so on. They are not distinct things.

Saying we have to prioritize funding in these areas in a vertical hierarchy is self-defeating. The city needs all of these areas to be strong and fully funded in order to grow and be the sort of city we can be proud of. The circular chain of city services is only as strong as its weakest link.

Kathy Disney, Lincoln

Johanns quit on farm bill

Regarding the May 1 Lincoln Journal Star opinion page headline, “Don’t give up fight for farm bill reform”:

Someone already did. Former U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns gave up his position rather than staying the course and working for the passage of a decent farm bill.

Instead, he wants to be a senator representing Nebraska in the United States Senate. If elected, will he decide to quit in the middle of that term, too?

Alice A. Ulch, Beaver Crossing

Reveal partisan information

Deena Winter’s April 22 column called the John Spatz contract proposal “an essentially Republican proposal.” She pointed out that the split for and against the charter amendment was along Democratic vs. Republican lines. Then on Wednesday she never once mentioned party affiliation because members of both parties were in agreement on the issues mentioned.

On April 24, she mentioned the Charter Revision Commission appointed by the mayor and repeated how the Republican majority killed the proposal. The commission consisted of 13 Democrats, one Republican and one nonpartisan. There was only one businessperson in that group. That partisan information isn’t revealed!

I would expect any commission to be representative of the community — by my calculations based on the Election Commission Web site, we should have had 42.5 percent Republicans, 38.5 percent Democrats and 18.1 percent nonpartisan. (The Green and Nebraska parties represent about 1.1 percent of the registered voters, so I didn’t include them.)

One of the issues in the mayoral election was how difficult it is to do business in this city. I would expect a larger number than one of businesspeople on the commission. I want people on City Council who know what is happening and have personal experience of dealing with the bureaucracy.

The editorial in April 25th’s paper said the tradition of nonpartisanship should be respected. Shouldn’t reporters respect that nonpartisanship, too? On April 28, Winter declared the ordinance was “less stringent” when in fact it is stronger regarding ethical issues than the ban is.

Faith A. White, Lincoln

Keep Elmwood unique, dry

Have you ever told a child, a friend or even yourself that it is OK to be different?

On May 13, registered voters in the Elmwood community (population 680) will decide whether to allow the sale of alcohol or not. Elmwood has been a dry town since 1886. That makes Elmwood somewhat different or special, you might say.

For a small town, Elmwood has Author Bess Streeter Aldrich House and Museum, Flying Wheels Roller Skating and Fun Center, computer store, sign shop, flooring store, Neel’s Trailer Outlet, Dan’s Body Shop, a wellness clinic, three churches, access to the MoPac Trail and Grandpa’s Woods Golf Course and many more points of interest.

We educate our children through the DARE program about drugs and alcohol. After-prom parties are held to keep our children safe.

The availability for purchasing alcohol is as close as 3½, 5 and 7 miles away.

Elmwood may be one of the last dry towns in Nebraska, and it is OK to be different.

You could also say it is unique!

Linda Blunt, Elmwood