Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Evictions show St. Petersburg not ready for big emergencies

Re: Despite hazards, it was home, May 4.

The immediate eviction of 40 families at the Chinook Apartments raises questions as to St. Petersburg's ability to manage emergencies. It appears there was little forethought given to the hardship imposed upon the tenants, some of whom are pregnant, elderly and infirm.

The outcry and television coverage brought minimal relief in the form of rent vouchers. However, the problem of St. Petersburg's citizens in need of affordable, safe and adequate housing remains unresolved. St. Petersburg has failed to adequately address the human requirements of a populace faced with escalating housing costs and stagnant wages. The children, babies and the elderly demand safe and healthy living conditions for survival. Initiative is required to deal with the serious need for affordable, safe housing.

Reasonably priced housing is created with tax credits, by conditioning rezoning requests for new developments on including mixed-price housing, by subsidized housing throughout the community, and by strong statutory and codes enforcement.

Thought and planning now will ready the city for emergencies in natural disasters. The non-driving, ill, disabled and lower-income residents, and children and the homeless require community solutions to avoid death in disasters. The Chinook eviction demonstrates how unprepared the city is to deal with large-scale disasters such as flooding, tidal surges and hurricanes.

Geneva Forrester, St. Petersburg

A shameful way to treat people

Re: City removes 40 families, May 3.

I find it appalling that some of the residents of the Chinook Apartments paid their rent for the month of May the day before the city - not the landlord - knew it would likely be evicting them all.

I certainly approve of the city's efforts to protect residents from grave hazards, but who can easily recover from being bilked of almost $600, especially when they'll be needing money for rental deposits and other expenses?

Something needs to change in the ordinances responsible for people incurring such loss at the same time that they're being wrenched abruptly from their homes. These tenants were treated like items in a warehouse - not notified, not cautioned that they should withhold rent for another day or two, not given an inkling that they were about to be homeless. This is a shameful way to treat people.

I'd appreciate the Times keeping us updated on the displaced tenants and the landlord (who ought to do some time), as well as what the city does to ensure no one else ever gets such treatment.

Eileen O'Sullivan, St. Petersburg

Tenants deserve blame

Re: Despite hazards it was home, May 4.

After reading your article about the poor, poor people who had to live in such horrible conditions and seeing the news coverage on TV, I am amazed but not shocked. The main reason for roach infestation comes from the fact that roaches have to eat too, and from what I saw the apartments in this complex have more food on the floor than in the refrigerator.

Every violation shown on TV was caused by the tenants or people who were allowed on the premises. The smashed exit sign didn't happen by itself. The garbage on the floors didn't just magically appear. It is the responsibility of the people who live there to see that their apartment is clean.

Instead of blaming the owner. The county should give him a medal for having to live with a situation he apparently could not control. If any blame is dished out, it should be to the people who lived there.

In the future, developers will probably stay away from building these kinds of complexes because they realize the problems they will encounter.

David Robinson, Brooksville

Encourage fuel efficiency

Please think about doing what I did and go to the nonprofit and nonpartisan http://www.40mpg.org to learn more about how Americans can benefit greatly by encouraging automakers to use as widely as possible the best available fuel-efficiency technology.

Sandra Holt, Casselberry

Gouged from both sides

I spent many frustrating hours researching and dealing with area Toyota dealerships trying to purchase a new Prius. Toyota has just affixed a $2,500 "addendum" above the suggested retail price.

Gouged by the oil industry. Gouged by the auto industry. It's a no-win for the average person.

Judy Prescott, Palm Harbor

An accommodation too far

Re: Immigration flip-flop, editorial, April 26.

How much further do you intend to go on this? We've already paid for the high school education of illegal immigrant children. Now you want us to pay for their college education as well. Your excuse that these illegals pay enough taxes when they buy gas and clothes is ridiculous.

Since many of these illegal families have been in Florida a long time before the recent mass influx, however, perhaps we will be forced to extend citizenship to some. In that case, their children will be eligible for in-state tuition, but not before that occurs.

W.H. Riddell, Tampa

Courtroom science has strict rules

Re: Getting rich on junk science, May 3.

Sebastian Mallaby's column criticizes the Vioxx lawsuits, stating they are based on junk science. Mallaby urges politicians to restrict consumers' rights to their day in court against large pharmaceutical corporations. Interestingly, the only "science" mentioned in Mallaby's column concerns the heart attack victim who had taken Merck's Vioxx for less than the "18 months identified as dangerous."

Had Mallaby really investigated the science, he would have discovered that the clinical study upon which Merck relied to identify 18 months' usage as the threshold for injury was not designed to evaluate cardiac risk, much less the length of exposure for cardiac risk. The study was designed to evaluate the risk of gastrointestinal bleeds. You cannot reject a hypothesis - in this case, Vioxx increases the cardiovascular risk even with short-term use - when the clinical study was neither designed nor powered to test that hypothesis. In other words, the study did not include adequate numbers of subjects or controls to address cardiovascular risk with short-term ingestion.

Our federal and state court systems have strict rules regulating the admission of scientific evidence in court and our judges are able and conscientious in enforcing these rules. Mallaby does not offer a fair analysis of the use of science in our court system.

Joseph H. Saunders, board certified civil lawyer, Pinellas Park

The power of an anthem

In the 1960s, we were a U.S. Air Force family stationed in France. As a volunteer mom, I went on outings with the base school's fourth-grade class. One bus trip visited an ancient village and church. An elderly local gentleman gave the group a guided tour. When he had finished, the teacher asked if the children might thank him with a song. He smiled and said he would be most pleased.

As the teacher keyed them, the children broke into French, singing the national anthem of France, La Marseillaise. The gentleman stood at attention with great pride, and a tear slowly rolled down his cheek.

As they finished and started boarding the bus, he shook each child's hand and thanked them all for their tribute to his country.

Jessie O'Mara, St. Petersburg

[Last modified May 8, 2006, 06:02:19]