Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
© St. Petersburg Times, published December 11, 2001
Editor: A hate crime was committed in Pasco County last week. It was a vile act of hate and terrorism designed to generate fear, send a threatening message, and to exact a destructive and devastating impact not only on those of us targeted but the community. It targeted women, women in need and women helping women, women of color and white women.
Hate/bias crimes are defined as: "Any criminal offense committed against a person or property which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic/national origin groups or sexual orientation group."
Hate crimes demand a priority response due to the severe emotional and psychological impact on both the victims and the community. It is imperative that communities, citizens and especially government and law enforcement take a stand against hate and intolerance and act decisively. Positive signals must be sent that violence and intimidation will not be tolerated and those who are targeted by hate crimes will not be alone. Hate must be exposed and denounced, for it is an attack on the health of the community.
At this time, there has yet to be comment from elected officials or from law enforcement denouncing this act, or taking an active role in speaking out against such terrorism. Do they assume everything is all right? The silence sends a signal to the perpetrator(s) that if the community doesn't respond, then the community accepts the act. Hate and violence thrive on silence. The message must be that hatred, violence, terrorism will not be tolerated, not in our community, not in our country.
The words are given to them; do they have the resolve to speak them?
-- Joann Ross, New Port Richey
Editor: If America is still the land of the free, people can live wherever they want, even in a flood-prone area. If they choose to live wherever they want, even in a flood-prone area, then they have to accept the risk of flooding damage.
They might reduce the risk of flood damage by buying flood insurance. Not all flood-prone areas will be damaged, or damaged equally. Those properties that are damaged should see premium increases, perhaps to the point where the owners will prefer to self-insure.
Then we come to the problem that mortgage lenders, by government decree, are not allowed to provide mortgages to self-insured owners of potentially flood-prone properties.
This brings us to FEMA, which is a government flood insurance company. It got its foot in the door by selling very low-priced flood insurance. This meant that owners of high and dry properties were paying most of the actual costs of flood insurance without getting any of the benefits.
-- Charles Derer, Hudson
Editor: Regarding rerouting construction traffic destined for Meadow Oaks -- an item on the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners agenda on Nov. 27 and Dec. 4 -- rather than eliminating the problem, our commission seems to be intent on moving the safety concerns and maintenance problems to another neighborhood. This is a significant cost to Pasco County taxpayers.
The original allocation of $30,000 is only the beginning of what it will cost to keep up with the damage done by the construction traffic.
This construction traffic was supposed to have been rerouted when the number of planned units in Meadow Oaks reached 334. The developer would have borne the cost of creating a construction traffic road into the development. For some reason, the county agreed to change that number to approximately 550.
So, for the past five years or more, the residents along Sugar Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street have been putting up with safety concerns and roadway maintenance problems that should have gone away long ago.
The residents of Meadow Oaks suggested to the commissioners, last year, that the problem be eliminated by completing the connection of Maxfli Road north to Hudson Avenue (approximately 1,000 feet). This solution would leave Meadow Oaks construction traffic affecting only Meadow Oaks and would bring the traffic directly to the building sites without affecting other neighborhoods. It would also be a developer cost instead of a cost to the taxpayers.
The residents of Meadow Oaks, the Meadow Oaks Golf Course, the builders and the developer were all in favor of this solution. However, the county passed a plan to move the safety and road maintenance problems to the Fairwinds Road residents and let the taxpayers pay.
Why does the county insist on spending taxpayer dollars to move the safety concerns and maintenance problems to another neighborhood instead of eliminating the problem?
-- Merle Blank, Hudson
The Pasco Times welcomes letters from readers for publication.
Because of space limitations, letters should be of reasonable length (250-300 words maximum as a rule).
Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.
All letters must be signed and must contain the writer's address and telephone number. Addresses and telephone numbers will not be printed. Anonymous letters or letters with initials only will not be printed.
Send your letter to Pasco Times, 11321 U.S. 19, Port Richey, FL 34668.