Solar Defense To the Editor, "Sun Stroke" (April 15), regarding the Community of Civano, bemused me because the reporter never took the time to obtain the facts or speak with anyone from my company. Civano is the first step in a complex and important trend in developing more sustainably; connecting people to one another and the natural environment. It requires accounting for the economic, social and environmental impact of every decision. While these three variables are considered simultaneously, depending on the issue, they are not always given equal weight. For instance, sometimes compelling environmental considerations outweigh market-driven factors. Other times, concerns for affordability or economic feasibility dominate the decision-making matrix. Sustainable thinking is not linear in nature. It requires a more comprehensive approach to problem solving. The White House, Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Mayor George Miller and Gov. Jane Dee Hull, along with great environmental thinkers such as William McDonough (dean of the School of Architecture, University of Virginia), Bill Browning (Rocky Mountain Institute) and Paul Hawkins (environmental-economist author) have encouraged the development of Civano. Also, thousands and thousands of Tucson residents have joined in celebrating Civano for its healthier approach to community building. While Civano is not perfect, it is a great first step. There is tremendous value in having an advocating community paper in any city. The Tucson Weekly fulfills an important role in our society. However, the paper would serve an even greater public good if it took the time to research more of the facts about Civano. After all, it's easy to simply be a critic. It requires very little energy or risk-taking and offers very little hope. --Kevin M. Kelly President Civano Development Company Border Beat To the Editor, Regarding "Killer Shots" (May 27): I would like to challenge the Tucson Weekly to acknowledge the fact that not every government agency is inherently evil. I am referring to writer David Holthouse's condemnation of the Pima County authorities for not allowing Scott Stanley to publish Border Patrol photos of dead, illegal Mexican immigrants. While taking legal action against Stanley is a bit harsh, the Pima County Coroner's Office is under no obligation to accommodate him either. Everyone in Southern Arizona is acutely aware that there is a crisis along the border, and we don't need to see pictures of immigrants' dead bodies to suddenly wake us from supposed comas of ignorance. Why not also publish pictures of drowned, bloated, half-eaten Cuban immigrants whose boats didn't quite make it to shore? While you're at it, blame the Coast Guard for their plight. The article would seem to indicate that the Border Patrol is solely responsible for the carnage along the border. The Border Patrol is, by no means, beyond reproach, but they have been assigned the unenviable and thankless task of policing this mess and not everyone crossing the border is a simple, law-abiding "peasant" seeking a better way of life. What is happening along the border is profoundly tragic. These people died without dignity, and I'm not sure a public display of their horrific demise is any less exploitive. Besides, crossing a hot, dry, desolate desert for hundreds of miles with no food or water will kill you. It's that simple. Legally entering this country may not guarantee you the American Dream, but you'll probably survive the trip. --Alan Williams To the Editor, Regarding Jeff Smith's "Crossing The Line" (May 27): I recently escaped the invasion going on along our southern border by moving to this area from Bisbee and the Naco area. My neighbors have experienced head bashing by border bandits from across the border. Others, who are U.S. citizens, have their homes burglarized by non-citizens streaming across the border to get a piece of the American pie. And still others have their property trashed by these people. Yes, Jeff Smith, we can feel sorry for the illegal immigrants coming across the border. But, at the expense of taxpaying citizens who want their property protected? They are so frustrated that they scream out to their country for help. For some reason you and others of like ilk want to stop the effort to stop the flow. Don't you think our citizens have rights, or do you believe non-citizens have more rights than our citizens? Come on, Jeff Smith, where do you come from? Get a life. You sit on your safe behind while you criticize the help being furnished to your citizen neighbors to the south. If this was going on in your home and the homes of others like you, I am sure you and others would scream like stuck pigs. You too would be screaming for help. --Marion Stults Pious Pose To the Editor, You know, I'm pretty tolerant. I've been a public defender here in Pima County for over 15 years. But County Attorney Barbara LaWall's recent attempt to analogize herself to Mother Teresa ("Santa Barbara," Mailbag, June 3) just about cost me a laundry bill for lunch in my lap. The Pima County Attorney's Office past and present has brought us some of the most hateful anti-child legislation in the nation, has prosecuted various cases that any honest person would know cannot be sustained by the facts or fairness, and has served as the primary engine for this state's becoming an embodiment of Big Brother and an embarrassment in the national legal community. Love? Good? Honesty and frankness? Build? Help? Give? No, Barbara, to every Arizonan you and your office have hurt and will hurt, Mother Teresa you are not. --Rägi Case Savage Response To the Editor, Regarding the Savage Love column: I have been an avid reader of the Tucson Weekly for many years. As a psychiatric technician for 23 years on an in-patient psyche unit, I used to bring it in the community. We used The Weekly as a resource for the patients to locate mostly free community activities, as most SMI (Seriously Mentally Ill) people have limited incomes. Jeff Smith, the letters to the editor and the Chow section have always been my favorites. This week I was leafing through the rest of The Weekly and noticed a headline in bold type which said "Taster's Choice," so I thought it was a second restaurant review and started to read it. To say I was astonished would be an understatement! I am a 66-year-old woman who has lived a full life, and I am not a prude. However, I feel the content of that article is something that does not belong in The Weekly. This is a publication that is picked up by thousands of families, many of whom have pre-teen and teen children. The subject matter of that article is something to be discussed between intimate partners, not to be left on the coffee table for young children to accidentally discover. I am certain articles of that nature are published in other magazines which feature nude photographs or couples in sexual positions. However, I doubt that most families would pick up magazines of that sort at the bookstore or newsstands and then leave them on the family coffee table. I will continue to read The Weekly, but I urge you to use some sense of good taste (no pun intended) and leave that material to rags/papers/books/magazines who have no compunctions about putting "smut" on their pages. --Cathy Boushey Water Woes To the Editor, When is Beaudry Motor and the Citizens' Alliance for Water Security going to reveal to us their brilliant, reality-based alternative to drinking Central Arizona Project water blended with groundwater? Their full-page ads tell us that the voters have already stated twice that they want to drink pure groundwater. This is not Disneyland, and wishing doesn't make it so. Have you ever heard of earth fissures caused by excessive groundwater pumping? Do you know earth fissures can and have caused expensive damage to infrastructure? Do you think Tucson Water is lying when they say that the groundwater level has dropped over 200 feet since 1945? Is Tucson Water lying when they say the water table continues to drop 3 feet per year, and as the water table gets deeper, the water quality declines, and the cost of pumping the water increases? If they are lying, where is CAWS' evidence that there is an abundant, economically extractable supply of drinking water under our fair city? I doubt you will print this, as CAWS contributes so heavily to your advertising budget. However, Tucsonans need to wake up to the fact that we are living in an overpopulated desert, and the water that is under the city is not enough to support us. Distasteful as it is to the uninformed idealists, we need to either import water or export people. Eliminating unnecessary, wasteful, subsidized farming would also improve our chances of having enough water to survive a few more years here in paradise. --Donna Moulton To the Editor, There's an old proverb that applies to "The Ambassador Program" of blending CAP water and groundwater to serve to Tucson Water customers: Q: What do you get when you put a drop of water in a bucket of piss? A: A bucket of sewage. Q: What do you get when you put a drop of piss in a bucket of water? A: A bucket of sewage. In other words, dilution may be the solution to pollution, but not if you drink the wash water. --Mark Tibbitts Ingressive Behavior To the Editor, After reading "Andy of Nayberry" (June 10), I am rushing off a check to Andy Roaché's defense fund not because I know that the officers in this situation behaved in a racist or illegal manner. Nor do I know that Roaché behaved in the wisest manner. I want to help in his defense because I believe that Roaché behaved in a way that protects the rights of all people, and for this he deserves support. Police toe a shifting line when it comes to public safety versus individual rights. When officers failed to intervene in the Jeffrey Dahmer case, they were criticized as being homophobic. When officers fail to intervene in domestic violence issues, they are called misogynistic at worst, or uninformed at best. On the other hand, there are officers who violate human rights as grotesquely as in the Abner Louima and Rodney King cases. Quite obviously police are human and their decisions imperfect, sometimes criminal. This is why it is important for individuals to challenge their authority. Roaché did what any honest person would have done, he protested what he thought was illegal entry into his home. In doing so, he challenged the ever-increasing authority of a police state. He also did what any dishonest person would have done, which is what makes the case so challenging. Is Andy Roaché being harrassed because of his race or religion? Did someone coach the neighbor to call in a 911 thereby giving the police an excuse for a warrantless entry? Do the police have a legitimate reason to be interested in Roaché? We don't know. But this I do know: Roaché has the right to know that his rights will be protected. That justice is color-blind. That if he is being harrassed, he will win justice in court. Human rights are not won by good ol' boys toting AKA's at Confederate rallies, they are won every minute of every day, by scared, unarmed individuals staring down the barrel of a gun of an armed state agent. --Sherry Luna We Want Letters! Thrilled by our brilliant insights? Sick of our mean-spirited attacks? Need to make something perfectly clear? Write: tucsonweekly@tucsonweekly.com

Home | Currents | City Week | Music | Review | Books | Cinema | Back Page | Archives

		© 1995-99 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth