Letters - Tucson Local Media: Letters To Editor


Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 4:00 am

OV Police study information

Since the surprise results of the primary election in Oro Valley, there has been an abundance of misinformation about the new Council make-up and the Police Management Study.

Hopefully I can put these rumors to rest and put a faction of the community at ease. None of the newly-elected councilmen have ever mentioned that they want to outsource the police department, that want to rid the Department of the School Resource Officers, or desire to cut the police department by 10 percent or that we want to replace the current chief.

Everybody understands that the Police Dept. is very labor orientated and will always account for the highest expenditure taken from the General Fund. The question is: Is Oro Valley getting the most bang for the dollars we are spending for police?

Nobody on the Council understands the unique culture of the police department. The police are a 24/7 operation, with unique characteristics and needs. A Management Study, contracted to an independent, reputable company is the tool the Council needs to answer the above question. This Study must be contracted with no predetermined results.

Oro Valley has already conducted similar studies of their Legal, IT, and Planning and Zoning Departments. Why not study the one department that costs us over 46 percent of our General Fund? The study is not an anti-police move, but it is the fiscally responsible thing to do.

(Editor’s Note: Mike Zinkin will be sworn in as a member of the Oro Valley Town Council on June 6.)

Mike Zinkin, Oro Valley

Kelly should be considered for Congress

Candidate Jesse Kelly supports Medicare and Social Security benefits for seniors who are currently in the program. As a business man, he supports creating jobs in the private sector to give people the opportunity to achieve success in their lives.

If undue restrictions imposed by the Federal government are lifted, more businesses can hire, more people will be employed, more money will be paid into Medicare and Social Security funding, and more taxes will be paid by all involved in such job creation. That includes entities such as department stores, restaurants, gas stations. and grocery stores. Jesse Kelly’s support of private enterprise and limited Federal government regulations will rebound in benefits to all citizens of Congressional District 8, including those who need Medicaid, because more monies will be made available as there will be more tax revenue.

Programs that support all citizens, as would those Jesse Kelly advocates, would benefit the general welfare of all of his constituents equitably.

Therefore, voters should carefully consider what values his election would bring to all of us.

Doris Clatanoff, Tucson

Response to Baird’s opinion on contraception

In response to Boris Baird’s comments to Thelma Grimes’ column regarding the responsibility of lawmakers to take on birth control issues: As a woman (a married, monogamous one taking birth control pills, I might add), I take offense to Mr. Baird’s remarks. He asks, “When did it become the responsibility of lawmakers, taxpayers, to pay for a woman’s birth control?’ I ask,”Would you rather we pay for the children a woman has because her monogamous partner’s condom broke?”

Advocating abstinence is noble, but so is protecting oneself from unintended pregnancy. Baird states that other than abstinence there are “any number of other methods” a woman can use. Many of these other methods have higher failure rate than the birth control pill. Other “methods” might include surgical implantation of a birth control device, or even tubal ligation. Surely, he is not suggesting that a women’s employer/insurance company have a woman pay out-of-pocket for a surgery that would cost thousands? Also, I would like to point out that preventing pregnancy is equally the responsibility of the male involved. If taxpayers/lawmakers have no place in what a woman does for birth control, is he also willing to say that a man should pay out-of-pocket if he decides to have a vasectomy? I applaud women who choose to make smart decisions if they decide to be sexually active. A women’s sexual health is part of her overall health. This is hardly an issue of “freebies”, as Baird states.

I also want to add, in response to Mr. Baird, that while many women take birth control pills only for the intended use of preventing pregnancy, many also take the pill for other reasons. For example, if a woman has irregular cycles, the pill can help regulate this. Other pills are known for making menstruation shorter and less painful. Why a woman chooses to take birth control is none of her employer’s business. Also, some pills can be extremely expensive, even with insurance. For example, the one I take costs close to $50 per month with excellent insurance coverage. Paying without employer provided insurance, such as Mr. Baird suggests I do, would cost me more than twice that amount. I can think of many “freebies” that we as a society can do without. However, access to affordable birth control is not one of them.

Laura Seifert, Tucson

© 2017 Tucson Local Media. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

More about

More about

Welcome to the discussion.

PGA Tour Superstore Grand Opening

More Featured Videos


Follow us on Facebook