S-W is not taking Deluxe’s side

I want to make it clear to the citizens of Sedro-Woolley that the council turned down Skagit County’s Deluxe offer to settle because we are going to follow our lawful land-use laws and not jeopardize the city with costly lawsuits. We are not taking Deluxe’s side; we believe you stick with the lawful process you have in place. Whatever the Superior Court decides, we will live with and move on. If they require an EIS, fine. Major changes, minor changes, fine. The city is not exposed if a judge decides.

I believe the county’s settlement offer was disingenuous. If the county was so sure of its offer, why didn’t it offer to indemnify the city from financial exposure? Did the county know that its own elected official and the city’s elected officials could have been exposed to personal liability lawsuits if we all agreed to the county’s offer? See Mission Springs v. City of Spokane in 1998, where elected officials short-circuited a land-use process and were sued individually for their actions.

I hear the citizens of Sedro-Woolley. My two youngest children graduated from Sedro-Woolley High School, so I have strong feeling for the school. Both got great educations. I asked Deluxe to move to other locations, but those attempts failed. I want to stand with the citizens and Annie Janicki, but I also understand that my sworn duty as mayor is to uphold the constitution and laws of the city. The hard reality of public service is that there are times when the right thing to do is not the most popular. This was the choice the county gave to the city.

I am open to a settlement with all parties involved that does not cause additional lawsuits. If not, let’s let the judge decide on Oct. 10.

Mayor Mike Anderson
Sedro-Woolley


Inside B-EHS band boosters’ strife

This is my side of the ongoing issues with the Burlington-Edison High School Band Boosters: I started as “band mom” at B-EHS in 2001. In 2002, I started as an active volunteer in the parent group, and through 2008, held various positions. I donated countless hours driving students to the University of Oregon Band Camp. I was the “saggin-waggin” at many parades, chaperoned events, fixed/cleaned uniforms, repaired instruments, etc. I spent hours listening and comforting students. I did this all because I love B-EHS.

In my opinion, “band boosters” who took legal action objected to the way I supported the band director(s); some were jealous of honors my daughters earned. I believe the core group were upset with how the director allowed my daughter (drum major) and her best friend (lead drummer) to lead the band — but the student body, school and community loved it. The performances brought down the house this past year, while the boosters constantly complained and sought the removal of the director.

I disbanded the band boosters at the request of the director because of the hostilities toward him in all areas of his leadership. I transferred all funds directly into the ASB account, according to the booster’s bylaws, where the students and the adviser would make decisions regarding program support.

The “boosters” have decided to come after me for their attorney’s fees. As a volunteer, I cannot pay. But I believe their point is to have the last word. It is my hope that the community and the school will continue to support the band and its director. My understanding is that under the current hostile climate created by the small group of parent “boosters,” the band will not accept the group’s money. What a shame.

Nancy O’Neill
Sedro-Woolley


Burn ban compounds problem

I just received notification of the permanent burn ban now in effect for our region, and I’m struggling with the logic. Instead of burning my big pile of leaves and branches in my backyard and being done with it, I have to buy very expensive gas, burn that into the air, pay to dump my leaves at the transfer station, and then burn more fossil fuels to haul my leaves somewhere else.

Has anybody looked at the unintended consequences? This well-intentioned law will wind up damaging the environment rather than helping. How about the Northwest Clean Air Agency offering free composting of yard waste? Now that makes sense.

Thomas C. Johnson
Burlington


Don’t need another Bush in office

Forget America!

“To you my fellow-Americans, I would like to say that if the call should come at 3 a.m., I am ready to take the responsibility as your commander in chief; and my friends, I know how to win wars.”

Pretty bold words from someone who lost the only war he was in and has never commanded any. If the only qualification to be the top commander is to have been in military service, there must be millions who might be even better suited for the job than John McCain.

I personally know several, and I know for a fact that neither I nor my father would be fit for the job, despite my training in the special forces of my home country and my father’s fight against the Soviet invasion of Finland in the winter of 1939-40. Having served in the military does not in itself qualify one to become commander in chief, although McCain is correct that serving overseas better qualifies one than running away here at home, like one commander in chief and his lieutenant we know.

If McCain believes that following in the footsteps of the great military leader George W. Bush would win him a glorious victory in the end — in a war that is unwinnable, since it was lost already at its beginning — then he needs a reality check. Not only is the Iraq war destroying the lives of our young soldiers, their families and communities all over the nation, it is also bankrupting our country! Who is going to pay back this money we don’t have? Where will it come from? The country is hopelessly in debt.

Finally, I am not sure Sen. Obama would be a much better commander in chief, but if John McCain intends to continue what President Bush started, he can’t be much of a leader either. My advice to whomever becomes president in the future: Do us the great favor before starting out on the next high-powered ego-trip; do your homework, make sure we can afford it and, please, make sure it is justified!

Helge Andersson
Sedro-Woolley


Are fools running country?

Sen. Maria Cantwell’s editorial in Friday’s Seattle Times brings to mind the old adage: “The world is full of educated fools,” and I might add, “and they often wind up in positions of authority, the Senate included.”

One thing is for sure though: If Obama becomes our president, it would prove beyond doubt that fools are running the country.

One day, the true Americans will stand up against all the proposed violations of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Now, could that be why Obama and others like him want to disarm the U.S.?

Matt Burns
Oak Harbor


Obama responded; McCain didn’t

John McCain claims he is a rebel, but his lifestyle proves the only thing he is rebelling against is helping poor Americans.

When I e-mailed both John McCain and Barack Obama with questions and concerns about their stand on things and the future of this country, John McCain and his campaign did not even bother to acknowledge my e-mails. Barack Obama’s campaign not only replied, but sent me complete information on his stand on the items I asked about. So am I really supposed to believe that John McCain cares about anyone who cannot contribute thousands of dollars to him? I don’t think so.

John McCain refuses to acknowledge the serious problems this country is facing economically and politically. He will not change anything that is making him richer. He will not do anything to help anyone who is not rich. Don’t be fooled by his claims. His actions tell the truth.

Roberta Smith
Mount Vernon


Fluoride won’t harm fish, cattle

Fluoride is one of the Earth’s most common elements, and it is naturally found in varying concentrations in all water. Community water fluoridation is safe for the environment, fish, wildlife and agriculture.

Under Washington’s State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA), a study was conducted in Tacoma-Pierce County to investigate any environmental consequences of adding optimal levels of fluoride to drinking water. Noting that the amount of fluoride in water does not reach levels that are harmful to plants or animals, the SEPA study concluded that there are “no probable significant adverse environmental impacts.”

In addition, the extremely low levels of fluoride used in community water fluoridation are not harmful to salmon. Salmon spend a significant portion of their lives in the ocean, which contains an average of 1.2 to 1.5 parts per million (ppm) of fluoride. Optimally fluoridated water only contains between 0.7 and 1.2 ppm of fluoride.

Nor does optimally fluoridated water impair cows’ milk production. The well-respected dairy publication Hoard’s Dairyman identified that fluoride in water was safe for dairy cattle up to 2 ppm. In Skagit County, optimally fluoridated water would be half that amount: only 1 ppm.

Optimally fluoridated water is fine for dairy cattle.

Skagit’s agricultural foundation and environment are safe with water fluoridation. Why hasn’t the PUD started fluoridating?

John Sayre
Executive director, NW Chinook Recovery
Anacortes