To the Editor
January 29, 2013
Proposed Klahanie annexation
Annexation is not a done deal for residents
The Klahanie annexation citizens task force is not addressing the primary issues affecting the Klahanie residents.
Examination of the makeup of the task force it appears to be the first meeting of the vote yes committee. They are just addressing one governance issue, which is whether Klahanie annexes to Issaquah.
Demographics and geography would dictate that the city of Sammamish should have some role in the task force, at least observer status.
Fire districts are represented but the water and sewer district is left out. Since Issaquah is considering providing utilities service to all its citizens, so why is the Nesbitt study ignoring the cost of providing such services to Klahanie?
The task force that is looking at the impacts to Issaquah needs to address all governance options. Many of us ask, “Why not consider Sammamish?” or “Why not consider incorporation?” Will the task force be open-minded to discuss all the issues.
We are concerned that Issaquah has so much on its plate with the Central Issaquah Plan and highlands that, can it give Klahanie the attention it deserves? We are concerned about Issaquah evolving from a suburban to urban character. We need to take a look at all our options before we can make the right decision. We need to remind people that there is no going back after annexation.
Members of the task force must keep an open mind and make their recommendations based on the best interests of the residents and to expand their scope to consider all options.
In closing as a resident of the annexation area I need to remind residents that it’s not the Issaquah of the 1980s that Barb Justice, Bernadette Anne and I fondly remember. This annexation is not a done deal and will have significant opposition.
Citizens for Klahanie
Centuries-old system is rooted in founders’ ideals
I read the letters regarding our Electoral College and thought an historical context would be appropriate.
In Federalist Paper No. 68, Alexander Hamilton discusses the reasons for the Electoral College. Remember that the Revolutionary War was still a recent memory and there had been a lot of foreign involvement in the war, so protecting the integrity of the election of our president was of prime importance.
Hamilton writes, “Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.”
Since the electors were to be chosen each time there was an election, there would be little opportunity to improperly influence their vote.
Further, by establishing the number of electors according to the number of senators and representatives apportioned to each state, the legislative apportionment would be maintained. This was important because the popular vote would favor states with greater population and large cities.
The founding fathers showed us their wisdom when they came up with the Electoral College and that design has stood the test of time.
Alexander Hamilton said it best when he wrote, “I venture somewhat further, and hesitate not to affirm, that if the manner of it be not perfect, it is at least excellent.”
Gun safety debate
Law-abiding citizens should respect changes in law
I felt disrespected by a recent letter writer with his disingenuous comments about our president on the issue of sensible, reasonable and practical weapon restrictions.
Like the writer would ever have voted for President Obama or a Democrat. Based on his political rhetoric, which is nothing more than talking points from the right and the NRA, I doubt President Obama was ever considered on his ballot.
As to the gun issue, if you have done nothing wrong, you have no reason to feel bad. As well what is allowable changes and if you respect the laws and rules of our country you respect them as they change.
Michael T. Barr
What is purpose of semiautomatic weapons?
Letter writer Bernard Wright said he owns a semiautomatic weapon. I wonder, for what purpose does he use it? For target shooting? Hardly necessary. For hunting? No true sportsman would use it for that purpose. For self defense?
Law enforcement authorities and mayors of most major cities are virtually unanimous in discouraging their use for that purpose.
They, as well as former President Reagan, have proposed that they be banned. On the other hand, they are great for committing mass mayhem for the mentally deranged and others so inclined.