LETTERS: Principal’s demotion exposes school district’s problematic pay scale

To the editor:

I think one important issue was glossed over in the article about the middle school principal who was demoted to the purchasing department glossed (“Principal gone after arrests,” Feb. 22 Review-Journal). It was reported that the principal will now earn a salary of $87,087. A look at the base salary schedule at ccsd.net shows that a teacher with an advanced degree and 14 years of experience will make about $66,000 in base salary.

Why are teachers — the ones on the frontlines actually educating the students, and the whole reason for a school district — making $20,000 less than an employee in the purchasing department? Don’t those priorities seem a little lopsided?



Metro leadership

To the editor:

I believe the Metro Police Department’s decision to stop responding to noninjury traffic accidents is a result of incompetent management. In addition to whining because Metro was denied desired but unnecessary funding, the police department’s leadership is trying to gain support by punishing the innocent. Such behavior warrants replacement of all responsible leadership, in addition to Sheriff Doug Gillespie.

What a great reputation Metro is gaining: trigger-happy cops who won’t respond when they are needed.



County parks spending

To the editor:

Regarding Sunday’s letters to the editor from Bill Edwards and Bruce Alitt, who suggest that Clark County has more pressing needs than additional parks (“Clark County earmarking $33 million for parks projects,” Feb. 17 Review-Journal), I call your attention to the recently completed city of Henderson Special Budget Ad Hoc Committee Report. In that report, the committee, of which I was a member, recommended unanimously that the city of Henderson “explore the feasibility of delaying the build-out of the next five new parks and implement a pilot project that uses external resources to maintain the next five new parks.”

Like Clark County, the city of Henderson has pressing and immediate infrastructure maintenance needs for items it already owns. This begs the question: Do we really need to spend more money to build and maintain more parks while our streets and buildings fall apart? And what message does building more parks send about our intentions to seriously address the impending water crisis?



Equestrian facilities

To the editor:

Clark County is now pursuing the development of equestrian facilities at a time when local governments are stressed to the financial breaking point (“Clark County earmarking $33 million for parks projects,” Feb. 17 Review-Journal). Where will the maintenance funding come from for the long haul? The equestrian facilities will be utilized by the elite and supported by those taxpayers who can barely keep their own properties afloat. The end users of the equestrian facilities are those affluent urban cowboys who live on ranch estates of multiple acreage, drive $60,000 dually pickups, pulling a $30,000 multiple horse trailer with two $20,000 horses on board.

Since these facilities are user-specific, they should be self-supporting out of user fees, a simple matter of a gate-key fee for access. Such facilities are also regional in nature due to the mobility of the end user, so it would seem more logical for Clark County and the city of Las Vegas to do a joint venture and build out the already dedicated equestrian site on North Jones at Tule Springs Park. This site could produce revenue via competitive events, horse shows, etc. In fact, the whole area would be a great opportunity for national and international Olympic-type events, unlike Sunset Park, which could best be described as a $70 million preserve for endangered gophers. The city of Las Vegas charges a gate fee for Tule Springs to assist in offsetting maintenance costs.

Clark County should have its parks and recreation department ride off into the sunset. Fire the department director and place those functions under the public works department. Form an open-space consortium and contract out the maintenance. Save on employee fringe benefits that are no longer affordable.



Political oppression

To the editor:

It was with some amusement that I read Sherman Frederick’s Feb. 16 commentary (“Using the IRS for political oppression”). I distinctly remember a certain Republican president, Richard Nixon, who used the same methods to punish his political enemies. President Nixon did not limit his retaliatory practices to just the IRS; he enlisted the CIA and the FBI.

On his enemies list, President Nixon was notorious for including those who disagreed with his policies and practices. Mr. Frederick needs to learn a bit of history to understand that political retaliation is a long-standing practice in both parties.



News Headlines
Add Event
Home Front Page Footer Listing
You May Like

You May Like