Letters-Oct. 14, 1004

Kerry can make

America great again
To the editor:
   I am a New Hope resident; a current stay at home mom in a lovely new neighborhood.
   My husband earns a competitive income (into the six figures).
   We were both extremely impressed with John Kerry’s performance last Thursday night. Before the debate, I was concerned that a senator’s performance would pale in comparison to that of an experienced president.
   Although I already was an advocate of Senator Kerry’s policies and principles, I felt a sense of a relief when I saw him speak so articulately; he had the facts at his fingertips, he was able to respond quickly and confidently to spur of the moment questions. He made his views clear. He made me feel hopeful about making America, once again, what it truly is — the greatest country in the world.
   Kerry will most certainly be a stronger and more intelligent U.S. representative to the rest of the world. While I am fortunate and live quite comfortably, I am aware of so many others right here, in one of the richest nations in the world, who are barely making a living or lack the health care that they truly need.
   I believe that John Kerry and John Edwards will try to bridge the gaps between the privileged and the unprivileged, the successful and the not-so-fortunate. My husband and I could choose to be callused and only care about our own pocketbook, but we believe in something greater. I believe in a God who intends for this to be so, who teaches us to care for each other and not just for ourselves.
   I believe that John Kerry and his running mate have the brains as well as the big hearts that are needed to change this country and this world for the better.

Fourth-graders

seek postcards
To the editor:
   Our fourth-grade class is studying the regions of the United States.
   We are learning about each state and their landforms, environment and special places of interest.
   We are asking for your help. We would like people to send us postcards that show us what your state is like. This would help us get a firsthand look at your state. If you would like to write a note on back, it would be appreciated.
   We want to take this opportunity in advance to thank you for helping us make learning a fun and rewarding experience. We appreciate your help.

Parking fines

too expensive
To the editor:
   To the city of Lambertville, forgive me for not writing to you sooner about my $25 ticket for overtime parking, but I’ve been terribly busy walking around town counting the number of empty storefronts, businesses going out of business or leaving Lambertville, houses for sale or rent and talking to people.
   As a result, I just got all caught up in my own shock and awe. Business owners are no longer saying, "People come to town, but aren’t buying." Now they’re telling me, "People aren’t coming to Lambertville."
   Last week, a local storeowner told me a woman was in the middle of buying something in her shop when she turned, ran out of the store and raced to her car, just in time to get an overtime parking meter ticket. She looked at the ticket, saw the monstrous fine of $25 for her transgression, returned to the store and told the owner, "I’m angry. Forget about the sale, and I’m not coming back to Lambertville to shop."
   Availability of parking spaces, expensive, quarters-only parking meters and exorbitant fines have become punishing to tourists and residents alike. Little did that customer, unhappy with her $25 fine, know about Lambertville’s whopping fine for a sweeper ticket.
   As more and more homes are constructed in Lambertville, as the city does nothing to limit the amount of vehicles per dwelling unit, as residents scramble to find parking on sweeper days, as parking becomes even more of a problem, the tickets and their concomitant exorbitant fines continue to fly.
   It’s time to cut all of us a break. The fines are excessive and do not engender good feelings, good public relations or good business. Lower the fines and find other, less Draconian methods of adding funds to our city coffers.

Open questions

for open spaces
To the editor:
   For the record, I’m a snail dartin’, tree-huggin’, save the rainforest environmentalist who has voted for every Green Acres or open space bond referendum over the past 30 years.
   Why, then, do I find myself wondering why the citizens of Lambertville should pay $2.3 million for property that is assessed in the tax office at $178,000?
   The property in question is made up of four parcels of land, two of which form the face of the hill behind Lambertville Public School and Ely Field. The other two are attached but on top of the hill. This is a pretty area where I have walked my dog and hiked many times. If it is available for the city to acquire and retain as public land, I think it bears consideration.
   Part of that consideration should be how much is it worth and what are the alternatives?
   When I asked the chairperson of the Zoning Board to account for the difference between the assessed tax value and the proposed purchase price, I was informed that if a local government is going to condemn a property, it has to value it as if it were fully developed, in this case, somewhere between $1.4 and 1.8 million or $2.3 million with financing interest.
   No one has been able to explain to me why we would condemn this property rather than negotiate a reasonable selling price. In order for this property to be worth the $1.4 million, significant amounts of money would need to be invested. Planning Board approval alone could cost several hundred thousand, not to mention the actual costs of building. The profit realized by the current owner would be nowhere near the purchase price amount.
   I am told most of this property falls under the "steep slope" ordinance. I’m not well versed in this area, but I am fairly certain that we will not see the clear cutting of trees and condos hanging off the side of the hill as those on the City Council who advocate this measure would have us fear.
   There are a number of houses along the crest of the hill that are barely noticeable from Main Street or Ely Field. It seems to me a reasonable plan could be developed that would allow some housing to be built while retaining the "public use" of the remaining property.
   This would generate tax-paying properties and bring money into the city coffers rather than city residents paying huge amounts of money for land that is of questionable commercial value.
   As I stated in the beginning, I love nature and trees, but I do not think the City Council has done its homework in justifying this expenditure or looking at alternatives. The premium we are being asked to pay to eliminate the "threat" of building bears further scrutiny before I can vote for it.