LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

1ST SAMPLE

Re “Tiny Town Asks: Who Pays to Fight Rising Sea?” (front page, March 15):

Barrier islands, such as the one on which Avon, N.C., resides on the Outer Banks, are historically
one of the most hazardous of coastal environments in which to live. People who choose to build
on the oceanfront of a barrier island are knowingly risking the repeated damage or destruction of
their homes by severe winter storms and hurricanes.

Tax dollars should not be wasted on temporary fixes like sand replenishment that nationwide have
been shown to be ineffective after a few years, often less than one.

The article notes the alarming rate at which beaches are shrinking along the Outer Banks. There is
a misconception expressed by one of the homeowners that protecting their homes also protects the
beach. Not true. The beaches are reduced in volume because of waves reflecting off seawalls,
sandbags and other structures. Without these features in place, a beach does not disappear; it
rebuilds and, with rising sea levels, simply shifts upward and landward over time.

Over the coming decades the problem will only get worse and more frequent with climate change
inducing more and stronger storms and hurricanes. Now is the time to set the proper precedent and
retreat from the shore by not allowing repairs or reconstruction of homes after they are severely
damaged or destroyed.

Martin Ross
Boston
The writer is professor emeritus of geology at Northeastern University.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/28

2ND SAMPLE

Gun safety: ‘Inaction is intolerable’

March 31, 2021 at 6:37 pm

By
Letters editor
The Seattle Times

Re: “Legislature, enact sensible gun control now” [March 26, Opinion]”

Kudos to the editorial board for urging the Washington Legislature to act this session to reduce
gun violence and save lives.

Grandmothers Against Gun Violence has been working since 2013 to accomplish this goal. There
have been giant steps forward through mandating background checks for gun purchases and
establishing red flag laws. These advances were made through the initiative process, and the
people of Washington state have shown that they overwhelmingly favor gun-safety measures.
There are some committed gun-sense champions in the Legislature, yet, with respect to banning
assault weapons and limiting high capacity-magazines, the Legislature has been unwilling to act
— despite state Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s proposal of these measures three years in a row.
Whether this absence of political will is to keep a slim legislative majority or to avoid getting
vulnerable legislators on the record with their votes, the inaction is intolerable.

How many lives have been lost over the last three years because of this political calculus? And
how many more lives will be lost if you don’t act now?

Judy McBroom, Seattle, past co-chair, Grandmothers Against Gun Violence

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/gun-safety-inaction-is-intolerable/

3RD SAMPLE

Marc Jalbert: Not thrilled with Golden’s COVID plan vote

Am I the only one having trouble understanding Jared Golden’s statement and action on the
currently-passed COVID plan, that this plan needed to be more targeted, extending unemployment
benefits, funding vaccine distribution and increasing investment in public health infrastructure?

Within this plan unemployment benefits are extended; public health infrastructure is addressed
with aid to state and local governments and the Provider Relief Fund.

Parts of this plan also include stimulus checks, an infrastructure program allowing local
governments to continue crucial capital projects, the FEMA Emergency Food and Shelter
Program, an Employee Retention Tax Credit, a COBRA health insurance program increase from
85% to 100%, student loan relief, Amtrak relief funding, after-school programs and education
technology.

I question his having read the plan, and its provisions. I question his motives on taking such an
obvious conflicting slant on such a positive overall plan. He certainly has called attention to
himself, or is/was that the plan? Mission accomplished.

Jared may be in the wrong party or job. I would simply ask that he readdress his priorities and
remember that he is there for us, first and foremost. All his current ranting is only distancing him
from us, the people he’s there to serve. He’s alienating us in the process, and I suspect a majority
aren’t too thrilled with him right now.

Fortunately for us the plan passed, and the country will get the assistance needed in spite of his
negative action, this time. I would ask that he pay more attention in the future.

Marc Jalbert, Lewiston

https://www.sunjournal.com/2021/03/17/marc-jalbert-not-thrilled-with-goldens-covid-plan-
vote/#

4TH SAMPLE
Letter: Neighbors’ requests are reasonable

By Judith A. Gill, Vancouver

Published: March 31, 2021, 6:00am

I reside in the Evergreen Highlands Neighborhood. Recently there have been some letters
indicating that the residents in this neighborhood are opposed to the Heights Development Plan.
Even though I am not a part of the coalition, I have been welcomed to attend their virtual meetings
and have done so.

All meetings have talked about how great the plan is and how it will improve the look of the area
as a whole. Several people, myself included, have noted that it would be nice to have a place
nearby if we ever need to downsize. The only thing anyone in the neighborhood has asked for is
less density and more parking.

There have also been numerous meetings between the city planning commission and two
neighborhoods in this area and the same two things mentioned above have been requested with
rational reasons to back up the requests.

Knowing of the above information firsthand, I would like to know why some recent letters to the
editor indicate that the neighborhoods involved in the Heights Development Plan are against it.
The people I listen to are for the plan and are only asking for a little less density and more parking.

https://www.columbian.com/news/2021/mar/31/letter-neighbors-requests-are-reasonable/

5TH SAMPLE

Forum, April 1: How we got safe, effective vaccines so quickly

Published: 3/31/2021 10:00:18 PM

Modified: 3/31/2021 10:00:14 PM
How we got safe, effective vaccines so quickly

As the COVID-19 vaccine becomes more available, younger Americans are asking whether
vaccination is the right way to go. Forum contributor Kate Eastman stated her determination to
refuse the vaccine, questioned their safety and “celebrated” her “right” of refusal. Forum
contributors Stephen Dycus and David Allen addressed the ethical issues, refuting the idea that to
vax or not to vax is simply a matter of personal health.

I will focus on the questions about safety that naturally arise because of the remarkable speed with
which the vaccines became available and uncertainty about the significance of “emergency use
authorization” vs. the longer process of licensing approval.

Congress approved large sums of financing for researchers with promise, allowing them to
proceed at a pace that otherwise would have been inconceivable. Increased funding was also
allocated to the FDA for trained personnel to do real-time data analysis and evaluation, thus
expediting a process that often suffers from delays that we could not, in this crisis, afford.

Researchers were not starting from scratch. Decades of work had been devoted to studying mRNA
and developing technologies for harnessing its disease-fighting potential. More on mRNA can be
found at STAT (statnews.com). Separately, research on coronaviruses had been ongoing for even
longer. Researchers put these two areas of study together.

Regarding methods: The exact same randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-stage

process for human testing required for licensing approval was done for testing the COVID-19
vaccines available in the U.S. All standards were met or exceeded. The New England Journal of
Medicine (NEJM.org) has full reports on both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine trials. Efficiencies
in other areas, and elimination of wait times related to lack of staffing at the FDA, were what
allowed the vaccines to be available for distribution so expeditiously. For an excellent, easy to
read comparison graphic, see vaccine.unchealthcare.org.

Dr. Anthony Fauci has said we need a vaccination rate of 70%-80% for “herd immunity.” If the
virus continues to replicate, it will continue to mutate. Don’t let the virus be smarter than us!

VIRGINIA HAMBURG

Windsor

https://www.vnews.com/Forum-April-1-39752803

6TH SAMPLE

Calgary’s many kinds of housing fit many kinds of lives

Re: City’s new ‘Guidebook’ is doublespeak for big changes to neighbourhoods, Opinion,
March 16

Mounting debt 'worrying' as Canadians stretch to chase rising home prices, says Bank of…

I read this article with both hope and dismay. To me, it smacked both of elitism and lack of
knowledge of the city.

There are many older and even newer neighbourhoods that have multiple types of housing.
Collingwood, North Haven, Brentwood, Varsity, Woodlands, Woodbine, McKenzie Towne (built
and planned on a multi-use premise), and many other neighbourhoods all incorporate single-
family and multi-family developments. And yes, traffic and parking and greenspace must all be
considered very carefully. But look around you – it works if it’s done properly, so make sure it’s
done properly.

Don’t keep perpetuating the myth that the ideal home for everyone is a single-family ranch on a
large, peaceful lot. Most of us can’t afford that dream, thank-you. And the way newer, single-
family developments are planned, the houses might as well be actual duplexes, there’s so little
room between them.

Let’s play nice, Calgary, and embrace this new concept that these folks have worked so hard on.
You just might be surprised.

Donna Ross, Omaha, Neb. (formerly of Calgary)

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/letters/your-letters-for-march-23-3