STADIUM BUILT ON LIES
The Seahawks Stadium story was disturbing ["After Further Review," Feb. 12]. I voted no on the stadium. It seemed ridiculous to destroy a multiuse facility and then spend several hundred million dollars for a new building that would host little more than 10 football games and Seahawks fanfest.
However, what's really disturbing is that our region faces critical decisions about how to prioritize future infrastructure spending. School and university buildings, roads, rail, monorail, runway and other airport facilities, sewage plants, and more are competing for our dollars. Are the analyses used to justify these projects also based on erroneous data? In five years, will taxpayers be paying several more citizen watchdogs $500K to find the truth?
Every time an infrastructure project is justified by lies, it makes it harder to get the things done that really are needed. I call on Sims, Locke, and our other representatives to leave a legacy of cost-effective governments, not just of building projects. I implore them to let truth reign, not leave a legacy of basements full of documents outlining ways to waste our resources.
PENALTIES FOR PARTNERSHIPS
We got hosed again; that is what too much money and power can do ["After Further Review," Feb. 12]. Gary Locke, Olympia, and King County are for sale to the highest bidder. (What's new?) We need to pass a law that stops or at least restricts the so-called government-private business partnerships that we have seen in the past.
Michael A. Russo
THANK YOU, PAUL
I am tired of stadium bashing in this town ["After Further Review," Feb. 12]. I was proud of the way the Legislature got creative to finance Safeco Field. I wish they could get creative about other stuff with as much zeal. I would have been in favor of 100 percent taxpayer-financed stadiums for the Seahawks and Mariners. Professional sports is as important to a city as parks, pothole-free roads, and a thriving arts community. Please wake me when the Benaroya expos頩s making the front pages. If the smoking gun here is that the fans are paying for much of the stadium, well, what's the problem with that? If the county was diverting funds that would have gone to schools and low-income housing, there might be a story, but we know that's not the way it is. As for the whole "not as promised" angle, that's a bunch of bunk. First off, anyone who ever thought there was going to be a Super Bowl outdoors in Seattle was on crack. As for the "missing" 5,000 seats, I'm delighted they aren't there. The easier it is to get the games on TV, the better. I'm quite confident that should the Seahawks start selling out on a consistent basis, those seats will show up real quick. I'm also tired of hearing how Paul Allen screwed everyone by putting in FieldTurf. It's more durable than grass, allowing many more events to be played in Seahawks Stadium with lower maintenance costs. The placement of grass over the Turf for World Cup soccer (um, that would be once every how often?) is not a problem; there is already a soccer match scheduled this year where they will be doing just that.
If the deep pockets of Allen can facilitate the construction of a stadium like the one we got, I consider that a positive. The growth that both stadium projects are creating in the SoDo neighborhood is another positive. The bottom line is that through creative financing and rather painless taxes and justifiable user fees, Seattle now has clean, well-maintained sports and exhibition facilities.
IN KNUTE'S BACKYARD
Staining a blue dress is not impeachable; lying under oath is (why can't Clinton lovers ever get that straight?) [Mossback, "How Should We Impeach Thee?" Feb. 12]. Thank God our president cares enough about my future grandchildren to rid the world of the evil trying to do us in. It is idiots like Knute Berger who scare me, and I worry daily that their ignorance will influence our government. So far it has not, thank goodness; we have a true leader, not a poll taker. I hope the next attack is in Berger's backyard; we are tired of it here in N.Y. Go to hell.
New York, NY
Right after the Ramsey Clark draft for impeachment hit the Web, I printed out two copies [Mossback, "How Should We Impeach Thee?" Feb. 12]. Forty-five minutes after I started to collect signatures (in Ballard), the sheets were full and I had to stop. Had I had more copies with me, I could probably have filled several more (at 50 signatures a sheet). I had not imagined that the response would be so overwhelming. People were standing in line to sign this petition. People are really disgusted with what is going on in Washington, much more than meets the media eye and ear.
Dorli T. Rainey
Laura Cassidy states that her forced attempt to feel something while listening to "Turn On the Bright Lights" under florescent bulbs in her office cubicle failed, while the opening drumbeat of a Joy Division track puts her in a sweat ["Atrocity Exhibition," Feb. 12]. I'd like her to recall how she felt when she first heard JD in 1980 (if she had even heard of them). She probably wasn't overwhelmed by an immediate visceral conviction of their brilliance. How one feels while listening to "She's Lost Control" now cannot be compared to a reluctant first listen to Interpol in an office cubicle. I agree the Joy Division comparisons are weak, but no weaker than her feeble attempt at refuting the analogy.
Until Interpol, I hadn't found a recent recording that left me feeling emotions that previously I could only experience by digging out old '80s post-punk bands. They're dark, melodic, desperate, instrumental, melancholy, full of energy, and they rock.
With references to Nordstrom Rack, Eddie Bauer, and IKEA, Cassidy's comments may best be served in a Suzy Shopper column.
Thanks to Laura Cassidy for deflating the Interpol mystique ["Atrocity Exhibition," Feb. 12]. I've tried to understand why this band has garnered so much hype, and it just doesn't make sense. When I'm in the mood for retro-indie rock, I much prefer the recent releases by Spoon and Hot Hot Heat.
Can she take on the Walkmen next?
In Eric Scigliano's article on the Seattle Public Library's review of magazines and newspapers ["Unsubscribe," Feb. 5], some points should be clarified. While Scigliano specifically listed many titles as being "targeted" for cancellation, most of these were either print versions of titles available through our subscription databases or duplicate microfiche copies of these items, meaning that the print copies were secure.
It should also be said that the majority of the Central Library reference staff has been supportive of the review of our periodicals collection and has contributed much hard work to it. At the heart of this review was the desire to provide resources that our users want and need, spending our budget offering the best service possible to our communities. To suggest the review was done for any arbitrary reason is unfortunate and misleading.
The periodical collection in its entiretyprint, microfiche, and onlineincludes esoteric, technical, and scholarly titles. And we still have the premier journals in their fields available in their print form, such as Nature, New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, and BioScience (and Slow Food).
Jill Bourne, on behalf of the Periodicals Review Committee, Seattle Public Library
Appear in print. Write to Seattle Weekly, 1008 Western, Ste. 300, Seattle, WA 98104; fax to 206-467-4377; or e-mail to email@example.com. By submission of a letter, you agree that we may edit the letter and publish and/or license the publication of it in print, electronically, and for archival purposes. Please include name, location, and phone number.