City doing its duty by fighting right turn

To the editor:

Erin Neff’s April 24 column and other recent published reports about the “right turn” flight procedure missed the mark on several fronts.

The city of Las Vegas prides itself on being fiscally responsible, and it’s one of the priorities adopted by the council to “manage cost and revenue resources to achieve efficient operations.” At the same time, we must balance the priority of fiscal conservatism with the needs of our citizens.

Since the Federal Aviation Administration implemented its right-hand turn, the city has heard from hundreds of constituents who overwhelmingly urged the city to proceed with a legal challenge.

While this legal challenge will cost additional dollars, ignoring the outcry from the residents of Las Vegas would have been irresponsible. It’s not just a few dozen, but hundreds if not thousands of people who are affected by the right turn.

The city’s outside counsel boosted the chances of winning after reviewing briefing documents that were not available at the time she made her initial analysis. After listening to the residents and the consultant’s new assessment, the council felt it was imperative to move forward.

The legal challenge and the press releases that are required to communicate with the public wouldn’t be necessary if officials from the FAA and the Clark County Department of Aviation would simply listen to the taxpayers. Instead, these agencies have spent their time and energy trying to make it more difficult for residents to leave their comments; either by redirecting them to the wrong telephone numbers or by emphasizing that the public comment period has been closed.

It is the responsibility of government to listen to constituents, not dismiss their concerns. This confusion among the constituents made it imperative that the city let the public know how to make their concerns known.

As it relates to a new City Hall, the city isn’t looking to build a palace, it’s looking to build a facility that will make it easier for constituents to do business with the city. The current City Hall building is nearly 40 years old and — as the city continues to grow and the demand from citizens increases — we must continue to meet their needs and plan for the future.

Oscar B. Goodman



Crystal ball

To the editor:

I read your April 24 editorial, “Licensing psychics,” with some amusement. For eight years, I was in charge of the Las Vegas police section responsible for investigating regulated businesses. I always found it ironic that the police were required by county and city ordinances to investigate psychics and were specifically charged with looking for indications of fraud.

Let me get this straight: We were supposed to establish that there was no record of fraud, so that psychics could be licensed to perform … fraud.

My concern was that a police background check and the issuance of a regulated licenses gave the psychics an imprimatur from authorities and the appearance of legitimacy.

Quite frankly, the gullible will spend their money on psychics with or without a regulated license, and licensing authorities do not have the resources to continuously police the myriad spiritual scams that exist solely to fleece those who feel compelled to “believe.” Why should those involved in the regulatory process appear to certify the legitimacy of an inherently fraudulent business?

There are two words which should apply to the psychic business: caveat emptor.




War opponents

To the editor:

After reading Saturday’s letter from Indianapolis resident Dan Harding, in which he said he won’t spend money in places that “support defeat” — Nevada falls into that category because of Harry Reid’s stance on the Iraq war — it made me wonder where Mr. Harding could spend his money.

It can’t be California, because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is against the war.

He can’t spend it in New York because Sen. Hillary Clinton represents that state.

He won’t be able to spend his money in Florida because Sen. Bill Nelson wants America out of Iraq, also.

Looks like his only option is to stay at home and help Indiana’s economy. Oh wait, Sen. Evan Bayh represents that state — and he’s against the war, too.

Andrew Semprazik


Veggie burger

To the editor:

I was quite disturbed by Valerie Haley-Dunne’s Friday letter to the editor on vegetarianism and veganism. She mentions going out to eat with friends and having to eat a dry dinner salad with crackers on the side.

But I was appalled to hear that her veggie burger might have been cooked next to my 100 percent beef burger.

God forbid I should have a taste of veggie burger mixed in with my beef.

What is this world coming to?

T. Ambelang


News Headlines
Home Front Page Footer Listing