To the editor:
So here we are again, looking to spend public tax dollars on a private sports team venture. We attended a meeting that was devoted to explaining the benefits of such a deal. When officials were asked why private investors weren’t tripping over each other — since this is such a great deal — one reply was, “The numbers just don’t make sense.”
So the numbers make sense when it’s taxpayers’ money? Sounds about right.
When asked about attendance projections for a Major League Soccer team, we were told the league average is 20,000 per game (the MLS website states 18,700), and that 5,700 locals expressed interest in season tickets. First, I’m interested in owning a Lamborghini, but that doesn’t mean it’ll happen. Second, the fact that these numbers are provided by Facebook and Twitter fans only means they have a lot of followers willing to support their view.
The subject of parking came up, and the answer as to where all these people would park was the World Market Center (3,600 spaces) and the Molasky Corporate Center (1,400 spaces). While the World Market Center is mostly empty except for two weeks, twice a year (between set-up and an actual event), that still leaves the venue short by 3,000 spaces. Not to mention that Project Neon will be starting as early as 2015, just in time to make traffic even worse.
Another point brought up at the meeting was that the city would divert $3 million a year in hotel taxes, which apply $6.5 million a year toward parks and recreation. So how does the parks and recreation department recover that $3 million? You guessed it, by raising taxes.
Government is horrible at business dealings, except to line its own pockets. We’re sorry to disappoint Mayor Carolyn Goodman, who questions anyone who disagrees with her. We have a voice, and we voice our opposition to you and your husband putting this city in more financial peril to feed your never-satisfied egos.
We have news for Mayor Goodman and every other politician out there: You were privileged to be in a room with us and every other citizen for whom you work. Stop forming policy around your legacy. Do your job to represent the people.
CCSD sex education
To the editor:
Regarding the article on sex education in the Clark County School District (“Secret sex education talks fuel suspicion,” Sunday Review-Journal), even though I have no skin in the game, it seems obvious that the district is approaching the subject of sex education backwards.
First of all, reporter Trevon Milliard cites district spokeswoman Kirsten Searer as saying that input meetings were for staff, not board members, to gain input. Decisions on sex education policy, however, will ultimately be up to the board, not district staff. Wouldn’t it be wise to have the decision-making board members take part in the input meetings?
I went online to read the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States’ 109-page guidelines. While I admit to a quick-skimming overview, I was struck by the sensitive, common-sense approach. The beginning of the text reads, “Sex education is a lifelong process of acquiring and forming attitudes, beliefs and values about such important topics as identity, relationships and intimacy.” The guidelines go further, stating, “While parents are — and ought to be — their children’s primary sexuality educators, they often need help and encouragement.”
It seems to me that the school district should start by offering sex education to the parents first. I don’t want pornography to be the primary form of sex education for our children, nor our adults.
Staring at the Sun
To the editor:
I read with great amusement Michael Barr’s critique of the Review-Journal in his letter to the editor, in which he contends the newspaper and its editorial staff lack the ability to be unbiased (“R-J biased, heartless, lacking integrity,” Tuesday Review-Journal).
I suppose Mr. Barr thinks the little insert offered with the Review-Journal, known as the Las Vegas Sun, is a bastion of honest, sincere and unbiased reportage. Within the pages of that “integrity-minded” paper are the most left-leaning, biased op-ed pieces he will ever read: reprints of almost every ilk of liberal newspaper are published daily in its pages.
Most of the letters to the Sun espouse liberal biases, and even the editor’s column is a narrative of bias and left-leaning ideals.
As much as I regret that the Review-Journal does not seem to satisfy Mr. Barr’s liberal preferences, I would recommend he relegate his newspaper perusing to the Sun, wherein his particular brand of politics and idealism are published ad nauseam daily. He can then leave the Review-Journal editorial and op-ed pages unopened and unread.
To the editor:
I can’t believe President Barack Obama hasn’t woken up yet and figured out that an air war against ISIS isn’t going to win anything. I don’t care how many other countries join in, you can’t win this conflict from the air. You will destroy a lot of infrastructure, while killing a few hundred or so ISIS forces, along with a lot of innocent civilians.
The president has said no boots on the ground. Unfortunately, having boots on the ground is the only way you will hurt ISIS, and even that is not the end of the problem. You can’t destroy a religion, no matter how evil or misaligned it is.