Letters to the editor: 05/01/03

Exempting pet owners no solution

To the Editor:

I was very disappointed, but not surprised, by the new proposal to exempt pets from the county noise ordinance. I am not surprised because I attended one of the earlier meetings of the noise ordinance task force appointed by the commissioners. I went as a citizen who has been involved in advocating for noise pollution laws in the county since 1990. I was concerned that the task force would not likely hear concerns from many folks in the Qualla area, because we have been fighting battles against the raceway and helicopter noise for years with little effect, and many folks have given up.

I was surprised to find 20 or more other citizens at the task force meeting, and found that they were mostly concerned about how people who have lived here all their lives and have hunting dogs might get a new neighbor from elsewhere who complains about their dogs. They felt it was unfair they could be forced into court even if the new neighbor was being unreasonable, and I thought they had a very valid point.

I was especially impressed that these self-proclaimed "good old boys" spoke of the importance of being good neighbors. They seemed to agree that dog owners had a responsibility to keep their dogs under control, but that neighbors ought to try to work out problems before going to court.

I became a little disillusioned, though, when the majority of the citizens present appeared to feel that the raceways, four-wheelers, and rifle practice ought to be exempt from that same good neighbor philosophy.

I find no fault in "good-old boy" citizens advocating their ideas, but I found it disillusioning that the majority, if not all of the members of the task force, readily identified themselves as local, long-term, good-old boys themselves. They made no effort to hide their political opinions on the issue. They repeatedly encouraged the other citizens at the meeting to organize and bring in more people who felt like they did during the meetings. That wouldn't have necessarily been inappropriate, except that they repeatedly used the pronoun "we" instead of "you."

When I mentioned that my wife and I already feared that our area was uncontrollably developing into another Pigeon Forge, and that we'll likely move away, I was openly and enthusiastically encouraged to do so by one task force member.

Several citizens suggested that the noise ordinance should be tossed out altogether, but task force members said, with apparent reluctance, that the commissioners would not accept that, and they could only recommend changes.

And so they propose a change. But exempting pet owners from the noise ordinance is clearly no solution to the problem, Of course, the task force cannot change the law, and they didn't appoint themselves, so I cannot be too rough on them. Only the commissioners can change the law. I have seen the commissioners respond very responsibly in the past, even after many of them had taken strong positions themselves, and I know they can do better than this new proposal.

There's a hearing May 8 at 7:30, that isŠ if anyone cares.

Robert Franz

Whittier

Allowing dogs to bark is not a fundamental right

To the Editor:

I am writing to express my feelings on the noise task force's current review of barking dogs. My wife and I own a home in Whittier, where we plan to retire in two years. At the present we spend as much time as possible in our quiet neighborhood.

We realize there are a good number of people who have dogs in Jackson County. We have been coming to the area for years and have owned property for many years, as well. We have been in many areas and have experienced some areas with problematic dogs.

My wife and I are career police officers in Howell, Mich. We know first-hand how annoying dogs can be when they are constantly barking, howling or running loose. In our city we have and enforce an ordinance that addresses these issues.

Please consider what may happen if it is no longer an offense to let dogs bark, howl or run loose. These issues become very heated. The poor citizens who have to listen to this may take action against the dog or the dog owner out of desperation.

If you ask any of your police officers, they will tell you that often people make threats to take things into their own hands when their government officials will not take care of a problem. As a police officer, I would rather issue a barking dog ticket than investigate an assault.

Allowing anyone or any animal to disrupt the normal peace and quiet of a neighborhood is not a fundamental right. We feel very strongly that the citizens of Jackson County deserve better.

We are not dog haters. As a matter of fact, we have three dogs, two of which are hounds and none of which are allowed to bark incessantly.

Ed Harwood

Whittier

Fowlerville, Mich.

Noise causes midnight mayhem

To the Editor:

Around midnight Thursday, April 24, I was laying in bed, drowsily reading an article in The Sylva Herald about proposed changes that would effectively gut Jackson County's noise ordinance.

Suddenly I sat bolt upright, assaulted by the crash of cymbals, the throb of a Fender bass, and the voice of Roger Daltry screaming, "That deaf, dumb, blind kid sure plays a mean pinball!!"

At first, I thought it was a garage band practicing at my next door neighbor's. But the "boom, boom" actually originated from a fraternity house sound system nearly a mile away.

After half an hour, I grew tired of The Who. I got my fill of them in 1973. If the frat boys had been rocking out to something I liked, say, Merle Haggard's Greatest Hits or Django's 1936 Hot Club sessions, maybe I would not have minded.

But they weren't, and I called the cops. Apparently I was not the only one - the dispatcher told me that officers were already at the scene "awaiting backup."

Mercifully, the noise finally stopped due to quick action by Jackson County's finest. I finished reading about why the county commissioners feel we don't really need a noise ordinance and eventually fell asleep.

Hal Herzog

Cullowhee

Stop publishing cartoons

To the Editor:

Why don't you just stop running cartoons? Last week's cartoon was absolutely disgusting. If Halliburton is promoting a war with Syria, that should be a (big) news story. If not, your cartoon is simply dishonest propaganda.

And who is it propaganda for? Its only message is anti-capitalism. I thought socialism was pretty much discredited with the fall of the Soviet Union, but I guess I was wrong. When I saw the middle-school peace protestors carrying signs provided by the "Socialist Worker," I decided maybe it isn't as dead as I thought.

This cartoon seems designed as pure socialist and anti-business propaganda. I do not expect that from my local, weekly, small-town newspaper. I would like local and state news and information, not socialist propaganda.

If you must keep running cartoons, then let someone with some taste and appreciation of our democratic institutions select them. The ones you have run recently have obviously diminished the respect many of your readers have for The Herald.

Herald Stockton

Sylva

Poll the people about moving library

To the Editor:

Considering it is the responsibilities of the county commissioner to represent the wishes of the citizens of the county, either conduct a poll around a proposed new library location or put the issue on the ballot for referendum vote in November.

May the taxpaying citizens of Jackson County have their way.

Sincerely,

Kenneth Lee

Sylva

Leave library on Main Street

To the Editor:

A public library is a vital, important part of daily life in any community, especially in a small rural community like Sylva. The public library is no less important than the police, fire, water, public works or any other municipal service department we'd never consider living without.

The recent suggestion to move the Jackson County Public Library to Southwestern Community College is just as baffling as the bizarre logic at work in "Alice in Wonderland." After all, where is the logic of moving our public library to an already existing college library? How would that benefit the citizens of Sylva who regularly utilize the services of the public library?

What's needed on Main Street, Sylva, is a fully-functioning public library such as our current one that families, children and the elderly can patronize without having to find public transportation to get to. Anything less than a fully functional public library on Main Street would leave this wonderful community sore and impoverished.

It's your public library, Sylva. Keep it on Main Street!

Frank Gray

Sylva

Parking spaces are for customers

To the Editor:

I would like to echo Lee Ewart's letter last week regarding the parking situation in downtown Sylva. Being an employee of a downtown business and a customer, I realize the lack of parking in our downtown.

As an employee, I'm not too concerned. As a customer, I am very concerned. If I am not meeting someone or have a specific need to be downtown, I'll go around the block twice; if I cannot find a space, I go elsewhere.

I believe it is unfair of any employee to park in the prime spaces allocated for customers. Each parking place has a monetary value to every business. If that parking space is filled because an employee is working their four- or eight-hour shift, an enormous amount of money is lost.

Anywhere I have ever worked - whether downtown, at the mall, in an office building, at the hospital - I was told where I could park and where I was not to park, including my job in downtown Sylva. Where I was to park was always away from the entrance to the building, which, yes, required a little bit of a walk.

Employees and business owners are there to provide services to the customer, not our employees. Customers are the reason we get to go to work and have an income; therefore, prime parking is reserved for the customer, not the employee.

I have a hard time believing that any business owner downtown does not set the rules up front regarding parking with their employees. Yet, I see on a daily basis employees using prime spaces for their work day parking.

It's time we all work together to support each other instead of just ourselves. The responsibility is on each one of us to make a decision that enhances customer relations, i.e. parking outside of the downtown area. And if that doesn't work, maybe business owners will make those choices for their employees. And if that doesn't work maybe local law enforcement can write tickets that cost us $20 instead of $5, actually ticketing people who park over two hours in a space.

When my meter has run out in downtown Asheville, I get a ticket, period. No begging, nice talk or whining will get you out of it either. Now I make sure I put enough in the meter or get back to my car in time.

It's a shame we have to rely on rules and laws to make us do things that actually support ourselves in the long run. If that's what it takes to make sure parking spaces are reserved for the customer, then I say go for it. Our downtown businesses are important to me and I want to do whatever is necessary to support the independent business owner.

I, for one, will be sticking to the two-hour limit as a customer and parking in the places my boss has told me I am allowed to park as an employee. What will you do?

Sheryl Rudd Kuhn

Sylva

County should fund domestic violence officers

To the Editor:

recently the first Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) in Western North Carolina was established.

We need to maintain our lead in fighting violence and not fall backwards by losing two of the most valuable players on the team. I urge the county commissioners to remove as much of the politics as they can from this issue and replace it with compassion for the victims of these terrible crimes. I urge the Jackson County commissioners to fund these two positions.

Sandy Frazier

Director of Development,

Housing and Community Outreach

REACH of Jackson County

Back to Archive: 05/01/03.