Fee System Won’t Recognize Citizen Foresight
There may be unanswered questions regarding the City’s plans to deal with storm water runoff, but the basis for financing it is a sound one. Properties are charged according to their contribution to the problem, defined by the area of impervious surface. Any reservations I have concern the extent to which the fee system will not sufficiently credit those who saw this problem long ago and were proactive regarding their property’s impact. That will not encourage others to do the same. We want successful businesses in our city and value the role of the churches in our community, but just look at the water that runs off these properties during the next downpour, heading straight for the homes of our neighbors in the floodplains and eventually helping to choke the Chesapeake. As with other issues, storm water cannot be something that should be treated as “out of sight, out of mind.” It was that mentality decades ago that left us with the problem we have today. Let’s not pass it further, to our own great grandchildren. Everyone needs to take responsibility for their contribution to the problem. Efforts to spread the cost otherwise are simply unfair.
Debt Problem Due to Borrowers, Not Lenders
I agree with part of the News-Press’ April 25 editorial — cultural “sophormorism” in sports and entertainment keeps people dumb. But regarding the larger point, most debtors (except for those truly scammed) dig their own holes, aren’t victims of anything but their own folly. Debts don’t “besiege 93 percent of us”; they’re taken on willingly. Usury can’t be imposed on someone who won’t sign a loan agreement. So rather than griping that people owe what they’ve borrowed, how about advocating personal responsibility?
Letters to the Editor may be submitted to firstname.lastname@example.org or via our online form here. Letters should be limited to 350 words and may be edited for content, clarity and length. To view the FCNP’s letter and submission policy, please click here.