We need straight reporting about fire station tree removal
One more time: Thank you for what you do to keep the neighborhood informed. You are an invaluable resource and do more to create community than most of the events the movers and shakers get up.
Sometimes I think people have trouble differentiating what you report as a reporter and what you opine as a resident. I generally assume that if it's opinion it must be yours, even if it isn't specifically labeled as such.
Case in point, the interesting news, and great pictures, of the new fire station project [at Regent and Motor]. I remember learning that most of these old fire stations [such as the present station on National at Vinton] were built as temporary buildings that have outlived their intended life spans by a good fifty years. I also remember at least one bond proposal for renovating them failed to pass the vote. Therefore, I'm grateful that a new facility, hopefully well suited to the task, is being built.
I totally agree with you about the trees, but isn't there a law that says that public works have to be built for the lowest price? To prevent malfeasance?
Moving trees is really expensive. Doing construction around trees is really expensive. My guess is that the price of such would have been deemed an inappropriate use of taxpayers' funds.
Do the Tree People provide aid in such a situation? Or some other agency? It doesn't do any good to rail at the removal of the trees without providing context and alternatives. A valid opinion, yes, it's a shame to cut down healthy trees. But making a lot of other people unhappy about the trees without providing more information isn't really useful, like the straight reporting portions of The Sun are.
JUDITH COHEN
June 19, 2005
Editor's note: This is a duplicate posting from our Letters page, here.
