City Leaders Need to Stop Digging

Dear Editor,

The wise old person advised “when you’re in a deep hole and need to get out, the first thing to do is to stop digging.”

A few weeks back our Morgan Hill’s city administration told all of us that we were in a serious budget shortfall and needed to take action to move forward. In a series of “conversations” the citizenry was involved, informed, and queried as to what we thought should be done. Most of us didn’t like the choices on the table (raise taxes or cut services or a combination thereof), but we did respond. We first grimaced then gritted our teeth and finally with a weak smile said that we’d consider some special taxes, cut back on a few services and would hold strong hopes for an improving economy and higher revenues.

Now, in the Sept. 22 weekend edition of the Morgan Hill times comes news that the city fathers have made a $2.8 million down payment on yet another recreation facility. This will require an annual operating cost of $100,000, not currently budgeted, and thus make the hole deeper. This facility will, it was said, be a huge benefit for out-of-town soccer players. In giving voice to the view that city services do not always pay their own way, one of our city council members said, ” we need to break out of this box that everything needs to be cost recovery,” while making a nonsensical comparison to the Fire Department.

My response is stop digging!

Where is the cost/benefit analysis, which we taxpayers deserve to see? Does this proposal promise hidden tourist dollar benefits? Is there a magic Nike Corporation grant or subsidy that we don’t know about? Is some philanthropist going to sponsor league play on our fields, and pay for city services?

If none of the above, I cannot support moving forward on this or any other like proposition, until and unless the city budget is setting aside positive reserves, as we once used to do. And neither should the current (or future to-be-elected) council members.

Carl D. McCann, Morgan Hill

Absolute Truth or Not?

Dear Editor,

Although not shocked or surprised by John Quick’s article on fundamentalism, as a “fundamentalist Christian,” it did send a shudder or two down my spine. The article begs an answer as to whether or not absolute truth exists-that is, a truth that exists outside ourselves, one that is true for all people, for all times, and for all places. Osama bin Laden asserted one truth claim: God (Allah) was on his side and the terrorist acts were justified. Most Americans, including the president of the United States, asserted another truth claim: God was on America’s side, and the terrorists were “evildoers.” Bin Laden thanked God for terror, death, and destruction brought on America. Yet America condemned the terrorists as evil, and “God Bless America” was practically proclaimed the new national anthem.

How do we know whose claims about truth are right? We can all have deepened convictions and still be tragically wrong if the things we believe with conviction are wrong beliefs. In other words, fundamentalism can be an enemy if the fundamental beliefs are deceptive.

When faced with truth claims, the only way to arrive at a meaningful conclusion is by investigation. I personally have found Christianity to be a uniquely factual truth based on indisputable facts. Of course, no matter how thoroughly convincing evidences are, we still must exercise faith. However, the faith Jesus called for was not a blind faith, but an informed, intelligent faith, one that is supported by evidence. Jesus claimed that he is “the way, the truth and the life.”

Whose fundamental claims are right? After thoughtful consideration, I choose the claims of Jesus Christ. It would to each of us well to objectively investigate the “truth” claims of various faiths, and make a considered decision as to whom we are going to follow. No decision, or the wrong decision, will have eternal consequences.

Ken Fels, Morgan Hill

America’s Safety

Dear Editor,

Another load of bull from the White House. “The safety of America depends on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad,” says President George W. Bush.

The safety of America depends on making it to 2009 and a new commander in chief. President Bush has put us in harm’s way at every turn. He first allowed the 9/11 disaster despite many opportunities to prevent it. January 2001 to 9/11 no actions were taken by the president to attack Al Qaida. It is still a puzzle why Bush did not order the hijacked planes shot down before they reached the Trade Center.

Perhaps to gain leverage to attack Iraq or some other classified reason never to be revealed. Current evidence is, his war of choice, Iraq, has been more help to terrorists than to the United States. The

only benefit from the battle in the streets of Baghdad is to Bush buddies with lucrative contracts in Iraq.

Frank Crosby, Morgan Hill

Previous articleMario Roberto Castro III
Next articleLillian M. (Cookie) Vasquez

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here