January 26, 2008 01:21 am
—
Woods resident defends developer
I am responding to the article in Jan. 20, 2008, “Woods of Lafayette residents want answers.”
I am a resident at the Woods of Lafayette, and I am tired of three or four people speaking for the entire community. I fail to see the neglect of the subdivision. I don’t see the overgrown lakes that aren’t maintained. Actually, Mr. Oakes, those are “wet lands.” Our environmentally conscious homeowners stand up and celebrate when developers don’t destroy such pristine areas. Anyone who actually drives through the subdivision can see the grounds are maintained. The clubhouse is kept up, and actually just received new carpet. The entrance is landscaped, maintained, and even decorated for Christmas.
The article also states, according to Mr. Oakes, that there were about 150 residents in the subdivision in 2004. That is ridiculous. Does anyone ever check facts before they make such statements? The number was dramatically lower than this. If you were to check the actual number of residents in the subdivision in 2004, make a third grade math problem out of it, you would find the development was probably operating on a deficit. The fact is that the $500 association fee was put in front of everyone who built a house in the neighborhood. Mr. Oakes agreed to pay the $500 fee when he bought the house, but now doesn’t agree with it. How convenient!
I felt compelled to respond to Mr. Oakes slander, not because of the remarks he made about the development, but rather due to the personal attacks he made toward Richard Libs and Elmer Knable. I am not only a resident of the Woods of Lafayette, but the son of one of the developers. I would never respond to such childish antics; however, it has gone on too long. These men are the finest with which you could associate. Their commitment to the community, the pride they take in what they do, and the honesty they do it with, is unparalleled.
I have seen these men donate time and equipment to those hit by tornadoes and other disasters. They donate time and money to local churches and schools. They have voluntarily driven medical personnel to hospitals and medical facilities when staff was stranded in their homes due to poor weather conditions. These “greedy” men built a house, sold it, and donated all of the profits to Kosair Charities. The list goes on. They did these things because they are good men, who always give back to their community with unselfish acts of kindness. I am now taking a moment to recognize them, not because they require this, but because of the slanderous accusations made against them by a few people that speak without facts. If Mr. Oakes knew these two men personally, he would not be questioning their honesty or their integrity.
— Michael Libs, Floyds Knobs
Harl defends door decision
In a recent letter to the editor, retired police officer Rick Sowders stated that he didn’t want to see the doors locked at the New Albany police station, and he would prefer to see an actual police officer at the front desk. He cited the recent shooting at Scribner Drive and Spring Street that involved a railroad officer and individual who took his own life. During the incident, a witness ran to the police station but found the doors locked. What Mr. Sowders failed to point out was that individual would have found the doors locked regardless if an officer was at the desk or not.
When I decided to take supervisors off the front desk and put them on the street to beef up our patrol and assist their subordinates, I first weighed the pros and cons.
The doors to the station automatically lock at 4 p.m. each day, so anyone attempting to gain entry must pick up the lobby telephone which rings the desk. In the past, after speaking with the civilian, the officer on the desk then would make a decision on whether to allow them into the station by electronically releasing the lock on the front door.
I discovered this process could be conducted just as effectively by routing the lobby phone through the dispatch center. Now, the dispatcher answers the phone, and can make the decision whether to allow access or not. Additionally, if the person needed to speak with an officer, one could be dispatched or a phone number could be taken and a supervisor could phone the individual while patrolling with a department-issued mobile phone.
What did we have to gain through this decision? It’s simple: another police officer patrolling New Albany’s streets instead of sitting at the front desk reading a book, drinking coffee or watching television.
I have always respected Sowders, but I must differ with his opinion on this matter. I believe it is a waste of both time and taxpayer money to have a police officer working the front desk after the door locks.
It is good to remember past times like when Sowders referred to officers walking particular beats. However, my belief is that we must live in the present and to plan for the future.
When we plan for the future, we must be willing to take calculated risks and make changes. I also took a chance when I allowed trained volunteers to work the front desk during the work day, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. I was told that decision, too, would not work, and that many problems would arise. But I believe the doubters have been proven wrong.
We live in an ever-changing world, and we must be willing to make changes; otherwise, our department — and our city — will be left behind.
— Merle Harl, Borden
Gambling is costing too much
When are all of our local and state-elected officials throughout the United States whom are pie-in-the-sky proponents of legalized gambling going to get it?
They don’t seem to be able to look beyond their noses, other than look at all the grandeur around the small areas in which these gambling establishments are located. They look and salivate! They are supposedly elected for their wisdom, but don’t pay any attention to any of the national studies that tell us that it’s a costly venture, nor do they attempt to educate the public. I would defy any elected official in the state of Indiana to show me in which areas we are more financially stable than we were before legalized gambling.
Now, forgive me for a moment while I indulge in a little plagiarizing.
There are at least two existing national studies on cost-benefit analysis that was funded by neither proponents or opponents of legalized gambling. One is a National Gambling Impact Study Group commissioned by the Clinton Administration in June 1999.
They recommended a moratorium on expansion of gambling until further study on the impact of gambling was concluded. Their preliminary findings were an increase in gambling addictions among adults and youth, financial and credit problems, reduced worker productivity, employee theft, suicide, divorce, and homelessness, among others. The commission goes on to say that, “More than half of these cost are being paid for by taxpayers through various government programs.”
The most comprehensive cost-benefit analysis was written in 2004 by Dr. Earl Grinols, an economist at Baylor University, who has studied gambling for 15 years and also served as a member of Ronald Reagan’s economic advisory council. His conclusion in his book “Gambling In America” is that the cost outweighs the benefit by a 3-to-1 ratio.
Now, if some of our elected financial wizards could help keep us from subsidizing our gambling industry and transfer some of this money to property tax relief the citizenry would be better served.
Now, I am not so naive as to believe this is going to happen. The cat is out of the box and I believe the only way we are going to get him back in is when the gambling market becomes so saturated and when the cost becomes so great that our elected officials will have no choice but to put him back in the box.
— Charlie Gregory, Charlestown
Oak Park resident cites expenditures
I am one of those homeowners who live in the Oak Park conservancy district who are opposed to being annexed into the city. If any of you do not understand why we are opposed then you only have to read in The Evening News about the councilman who pushed for the annexation proposing that he be hired for over $50,000 a year plus a list of benefits. This job does not presently exist. I almost forgot, he wants to be furnished a cell phone in this job too.
The next day I read that he had already been hired by the mayor for a job in the sewer department and the mayor’s explanation was why not.
I have a question for all of you who are living in the city now and have been paying city taxes. Are your taxes being used as big piggy bank for the benefit of a few politicians who are playing the game of, you scratch my back and I will scratch yours?
He was also the councilman who pushed for the raises in pay for the mayor and city council members.
— Dewey Jenks, Jeffersonville
Reader: Hap loved the airport
This is a short story about “Hap” Happell and his airport near Potter Lane. Hap taught many young people to fly because “Hap” grew up with a desire to own a plane or two and teach people to fly and he did. Soon he had an airport field built on his father-in-law’s farm. My uncle, Roy Slaughter, he either gave Hap the land or sold it to him. Anyway, Hap was on his way to build an airport and he did for many, many years. And, many young and older people learned to fly by Hap’s guiding hand. What a thrill for those people and Hap.
This new airport at the time was named Hap’s Airport for people to enjoy and learn to fly. This made Hap very happy that he was doing something for somebody to enjoy. Then all of of a sudden, the wolves came out of their hiding place and snowballed Hap to sell his small airport to them and they would give him the manager job of the new airport. They did for awhile. They also cut back on Hap’s grass cutting of the airport, didn’t realize how knowledgeable Hap was in the aircraft business. I think they made a big mistake in not letting Hap finish his days managing the airport since Hap had more knowledge of aircrafts and as a pilot as all you dieharts put together. I had to write this for my friend “Hap.”
— Deb Snelling, New Albany
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.