Commissioner makes puzzling point

Re: Gas tax hike will fuel road projects, Oct. 12.

Commissioner Stewart makes some interesting points in his column. But I noticed one in particular. He writes, "Our population and therefore fuel consumption do not increase much. Unfortunately, our transportation needs do."

I am curious. If our population and fuel consumption are not increasing, why are our transportation needs increasing? It would seem intuitive that a fixed population, consuming a fixed fuel amount, would have a relatively fixed set of transportation needs. The occasional maintenance project would suffice.

In fact, if the recent proliferation of SUVs is not a mirage, the lower gas mileage of SUVs, consuming a fixed fuel amount, would suggest that our mileage per capita is decreasing, and therefore our transportation needs as well.

I think there are reasons to raise the tax on gasoline, as well as reasons not to. I am certain that if the tax is increased, the County Commission will be able to find a way to spend the additional money.

I am also certain that if the projects they are discussing were things the county really needs (rather than just things that the county wants), they would adjust their budget priorities to pay for them without any revenue increase.

I am bothered by the fact that the County Commission is framing the question as: "Should we raise the gas tax?" In my mind, the question should be: "Do the residents of the county want these projects? If so, should we pay for them by raising more revenue, or by giving up some other set of budget items? If the decision is to raise more revenue, is a gas tax increase the best way to raise the money?"

But first, perhaps, we should learn why our transportation needs are increasing when our population and fuel consumption are not.

Helmet laws should apply to all bikers

Re: An expensive lesson for kids: Bicyclists not buckled in at the chin get tickets, Oct. 1.

Why is it that children can get a ticket riding their bikes to school but their parents can ride a motorcycle without a helmet?

Why is it anyone riding in a car without a seat belt on will get a ticket but you can ride a motorcycle without a helmet?

Does this make sense? Not to me. Don't children learn by example?

Now, these children are receiving tickets and a $26 fine. What happened to a first-time warning? Surely, counties don't need revenue that badly, taking it from our children, do they?

My family members are motorcycle riders, and we promote motorcycle safety. A person can never learn too much or wear too much. Yes, riding without a helmet is a personal choice, but should it be? I think it should be put back on the law books. That's my personal choice. Helmets do make a difference. Ask anyone who has ever been in a motorcycle accident and lived to talk about it. They will tell the truth; the rest of the helmet protesters are fooling themselves.

If our children are going to be ticketed for not wearing a helmet, so should their motorcycling parents and friends. Makes sense, doesn't it?

Airport expansion has huge benefits

Re: Proposed runway expansion at St. Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport.

For the past several months, I have listened to and read the discussion that is ongoing by those who oppose the lengthening of the main runway at St. Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport.

It has caused me to wonder why they oppose such an important and vital expansion for this facility. If noise is the real issue, then they might become better informed regarding noise abatement procedures that have been initiated and are being phased in over a period of years by the Federal Aviation Administration.

The main beneficiary of this expansion would be tourism, because it allows larger aircraft to make the longer flights from Europe. Tourism brings a clean industry with dollars that turn over many times in our community. It also affords an opportunity to develop a large air freight business that could benefit many existing businesses and attract other new industries. It eliminates another reason for businesses not to locate in Pinellas County.

The expansion would allow the airport to be more competitive with other international airports in Florida. Can you imagine how nice it would be if you did not have to go out of Pinellas County to fly? How nice would it be to go to our airport to pick up loved ones and friends? The possibilities that this expansion affords the airport are endless.

For the past 34 years, our company has been located at the airport, where we train aircraft maintenance technicians. The noise is not a problem.

I often marvel at how quiet the engines are now as opposed to even five years ago. If an aircraft operator has not made the transition to the new fuel-efficient and quiet engines available today, the company is not competitive in the marketplace.

To deny the people of Pinellas County this vital competitive tool will place us at a considerable disadvantage as we seek to attract better industries with higher-paying jobs for our citizens. If this expansion is completed, it will send a message that Pinellas County intends to lead the economic growth of the west coast of Florida.

I ask those of you who are opposed to the expansion to reconsider your position and support something that is good for all. And the next time you order Chilean sea bass at your favorite local restaurant, remember how it got there.

Smoking ban only hurts businesses

I read your cute article on smokers at bowling alleys in the Neighborhood Times (Smokers' shoes take the wrap, Sept. 28). This is the latest in a series of smokescreen articles - pun intended - that your paper has run touting the supposed success of the smoking ban.

But even your best spinmeisters can't blow enough smoke to cover up the truth, and that is that the smoking ban has been a dismal failure.

If you doubt me, just take a drive along any number of streets and see how many bars announce they allow smoking, i.e.: smoking bar, smokers wanted, smokers welcome, smoke 'em if you got 'em, etc. Notice how many restaurants say they have outdoor smoking sections? Where is this 70 percent that voted for the thing, anyway?

Smokers didn't make their feelings known at the polls, and this is regrettable. However, they are making their displeasure known now, and businesses are feeling the pinch. This is only going to get worse when the snowbirds arrive.

You stated in the article that business owners appreciate the fresh air that the ban has brought about. That's good. They also have fresh air in bankruptcy court, which is where a lot of these people are going to end up, if this farce is allowed to continue.

Click here for the Neighborhood Times Social Calendar

© 2006 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times 490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 Contact the Times | Privacy Policy Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright