How long?

How long before the Grand Old Party will understand that they are supporting a president who is not serving the welfare of our nation? How long before they realize that he will not change who he is? How long before those conservative Christian families will acknowledge that who he is and what he does is generally attacking what Christian faith teaches us? How long before economic conservatives will admit that decisions he is making generally benefits those who do not need more money? How long will they fail to speak about the national debt as crippling what is needed to support FEMA, to provide for safety and sanity on our borders, to support healthcare to make it work?

How long before the party accepts the fact that his not telling the truth erodes public and international trust and is a real threat to leadership, at home and abroad. How long before conservative voices cease to give their justification in support of whatever the president does? He is a narcissist! How long before the party realizes our country and the GOP cannot afford four more years of Donald Trump?

Robert McQuilkin


Funding story missed the mark

I was pleased to see the Record-Eagle tackle a story on public school funding. However, your efforts to explain the inequities in that funding fell far short and the comments from one of your sources were ridiculous, defeatist and naive. Tim Quinn was the “lone representative” from northern Michigan on the School Finance Research Collaborative. He made the ridiculous comment suggesting lower funded districts favor “taking money from the highest-funding districts.” No one is suggesting that, but how about we just quit giving them more money than the lowest funded?

He says that equitable funding is “just not going happen” no matter who “howls” or “screams.” That is not the voice of an advocate and does that mean we should all take a vow silence like he apparently did as our lone representative on the collaborative? In politics the loudest voices do get heard. Make yours heard today.

Jeff Leonhardt

Traverse City

DDA should scale back

The Downtown Development Authority (DDA) is not an elected body, yet wields incredible power and has access to large quantities of money. Why would the City Commission allow it to lengthen its reach and tax base beyond the downtown area? Why should downtown have its own representative government at the expense of the rest of the residents who pick up the tab for most of the city’s expenditures outside of downtown? Why are residents paying half of the salary for a beat cop downtown when an inordinate amount of city police coverage is already downtown? The DDA generously agreed to pay half the cost for five years. What happens after five years?

Why don’t neighborhoods have a specific board to represent them, access to money, and control of expenditures from their tax base? Our neighborhood associations have no actual power and no ability to spend the taxes we pay, unlike the DDA (Downtown “Developers” Authority).

The DDA should be scaled back, not provided more influence, territory, funds and authority. Most residents do not want our city to be another overly developed metropolis losing the charm people come here to experience. The DDA has a different/developers agenda.

John McDonald

Traverse City

Electrical costs and Enbridge

Let’s really reduce electricity bills in the U.P.

Once again, some of the politicians in the U.P. are eager to claim the sky will fall if Line 5 is shut down. The latest version is that electrical rates in the U.P. will increase if Enbridge ceases to run Line 5.

We heard a similar claim earlier regarding propane and refuted it by showing that alternatives exist. Like propane, alternatives for electricity exist — alternatives that will actually reduce the cost of U.P. electricity.

It is true that U.P. power costs are among the highest in the nation. But keeping Line 5 operating merely maintains the status quo. It does not reduce the rates.

Renewable energy - solar and wind - has arrived.

Considering the geographical proximity to the winds of Lake Superior and Lake Michigan, the U.P. would be an ideal fit for wind turbines. And considering the population of the U.P., wind energy, along with solar energy, could supply a large portion of its electrical needs.

Why then aren’t the politicians advocating for a real solution to the price of electricity in the U.P., rather than using the residents of the U.P. as pawns to keep Line 5 running?

Gary Street, M.S., P.E.

Brutus, Michigan

No on the 'Farmland and Open Space Proposal'

Before one votes for the Farmland and Open Space Proposal, one should consider the financial impact that this proposal will have on property owners. The proposal is for 1 mil for a period of 10 years. One mil equates to $1 per $1,000 of taxable value of a home.

Therefore the impact is as follows:

Taxable value yearly tax 10 year cost

$100,000 $100 $1,000

$200,000 $200 $2,000

$300,000 $300 $3,000

$500,000 $500 $5,000

The government has no business in attempting to control development through the use of tax payers’ dollars. The development of private property is not the governments to control by taxing and spending taxpayers’ money. Should the government want to control development, there are zoning laws that facilitate that along with a process that includes public input. Development should be controlled by free-market forces. This is a principal upon which this country was founded.

I therefore suggest that one consider voting NO on the “Farmland and Open Space Proposal.”

Salvatore Castronovo

Elk Rapids

Recommended for you