Letters to the editor Letters to the editor (January 23, 2004)

Budget cuts affect everyone

Editor:

The question posed in this week's Voices About Town was "How do you think the Governor's budget will affect you?" I was disappointed, but not surprised, to read one respondent's answer as follows: "The only thing that would have bothered me was if he'd raised taxes. This won't affect me personally because I don't use any of the programs being cut."

Unfortunately, this sort of selfish, self-absorbed attitude is all too common these days. I'd like to remind the author of these remarks that while he may not be directly affected by the cuts proposed in the current budget, as a citizen of this community, he surely does and has used taxpayer-funded services.

Does he drive on publicly built and maintained roads? If he were ever, God forbid, the victim of a crime or an accident, or if his home caught fire, would he not rightly expect prompt and professional police and fire response?

Moreover, can this individual be positively assured that he or someone he cares about will never become physically or mentally disabled, will never lose his job, will never require government assistance at any time in his life, for any reason?

My point is, we are part of a community. Being part of a community means that we all need to be involved in a cooperative agreement to assist in providing the basic minimums required by the most vulnerable members of our community.

I would not argue that there can be fair, judicial cuts in taxpayer-funded services from time to time. But the current exaltation of the tax cut and the excessive elevation of individual rights at the expense of the general community's well being has gone too far, both economically and spiritually. In such a selfish environment, the individual corrodes and the community suffers.

Lisa Bail
W. Dana Street

Angry about finance director's comment

Editor:

I was incensed with the City Finance Director's (Bob Locke) comment in the Voice 's last issue which read "I think the Governor is forcing us to look at a reduction in (public) safety" due to the State's budget crisis. His statement was out of line!

I've lived in this city for over thirty years and I'm not about to turn over such important decisions regarding the life and safety of my family to a nonelected official who doesn't even live in our community! Our elected officials, who live within our community and whose issues are publicly debated before such critical decisions are reached, are those persons who should make such public statements or arrive at such conclusions.

I would ask that, in the future, Mr. Locke restrict his public comments to those which are pertinent for our elected officials in making such decisions, which may directly affect the life and safety of our Mountain View citizens.

Dale Kuersten
Redcliff Court

Remove fluoride in city water

Editor:

Regarding the City of Mountain View's budget problems, I have a suggestion for cutting costs.

Mountain View began fluoridating its water March 2001, after an "advisory" ballot measure, November 1998, approved the program. "Advisory" means that the City Council can stop the program with a majority vote.

Since that election, studies have found that any benefit from fluoride is from topical application to the tooth, not from swallowing it.

The American Dental Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have revised their recommendations for controlled-dose fluoride, which restricts a doctor from prescribing fluoride to a child of 6 months to 3 years of age to the amount found in one cup of fluoridated water. How many Mountain View parents know this?

Fourteen Nobel Prize winners oppose fluoridation. See names and photos at www.nofluoride.com

Any city that fluoridates its water is not looking out for its residents and has too much money.

Billie Barewald
Mtn. View Citizens for Safe Drinking Water
Sleeper Avenue

E-mail a friend a link to this story.