Letters policy
We welcome letters, but please include your full name, address and a daytime
telephone number. We edit all letters for libel, length and clarity.
Send letters to: Letters, Illinois Times. P.O. Box 5256. Springfield, Illinois
62705. Fax: (217) 753-3958. E-mail: editor@illinoistimes.com
TREAT TROUBLED JUVENILES
A recent article in Illinois Times describes
the proposed expansion of mental-health services to children who
are at risk of becoming repeat juvenile offenders [R.L. Nave,
“Mind matters,” Sept. 29]. As stated in the article,
mental illness that is not diagnosed and treated at an early age
can lead to more severity and other problems. Along with this, the
reoffending rate of 50 percent for juvenile delinquents is
startling. Couple this statistic with the estimated prevalence rate
of mental illness of 15 to 20 percent among children, and there is
reason for the community to be alarmed. Early intervention for mental illness among
juvenile offenders is one of the keys to preventing more severe
mental-health problems in the future, as well as reoffending.
Allocating money to expand services for this population in need
makes sense financially and ethically. Without this type of early
intervention, the community at large is at risk for more juvenile
delinquency by children who are mentally ill. Jessena Williams Springfield EXPRESSIONS OF GRATITUDE
I am sure at this point you have received
much praise about your feature on The Network and Kimberly Moore,
Ben Hale, and Dwayne Bess [Marissa Monson, “Bringing the
word,” Nov. 3]. It is a wonderful thing to get the media to
recognize the efforts and vision of this team. In Springfield, big names and faces are
always featured — and they tend to be the same names and
faces. Far too often, simple, hard work is not recognized. But I
can always count on Illinois
Times to realistically represent those
that make up this community — whether it’s good or bad. It is honestly one of the best, most unbiased
media sources that I have used in Springfield. Illinois Times, like
Expressions in the Dark, is one of the more affordable and
considerate mediums available to the broadest audience. Keep up the
great work! Letrice Ware Springfield RIGHT ON THE MONEY
I’ve attended the Expressions in the
Dark event, and I must say Marissa Monson’s description of
the event and the people was right on the money. She accurately
captured the atmosphere, and was able to put it into words
wonderfully, I might add. Thanks for allowing articles that
highlight the diversity of Springfield. The article makes me want
to come back and explore! Monica Y. Allen Macomb REAL RED-EYE FLIGHTS
Smokers are legally
addicted to smoking. Many have a
problem being away from smokes for an hour or two. I know people
who don’t fly since airlines banned smoking. Why should
law-abiding citizens be denied public access to bars, restaurants,
and air flight? The airlines are hurting for customers. If
several flights starting at 10 p.m. or later were designated
smoking-only they would be full all the time at regular prices. Of
course the planes could not be used for nonsmoking flights and
cleaned more often but it would be good for everyone. Smokers could
eat and drink out like other legal citizens. I don’t like smoke but I hate having
life controlled by blue-nosed busybodies even less. Have asthma?
Eat at a nonsmoking restaurant. Problem solved. Patrick Johnopolos Springfield AAUW SUPPORTS SMOKING BAN
At its national convention in June, the
American Association of University Women adopted a public-policy
agenda promoting the economic, social, and physical well-being of
all persons. Essential to that well-being is a clean and healthful
environment. The board of directors of the AAUW,
Springfield Branch, representing 200 local members, has endorsed
the efforts of the Smoke-Free Springfield Coalition to promote a
clean and healthful environment for all persons in our community.
We urge the City Council to protect the public health and welfare
by prohibiting smoking in public places and places of employment.
Please guarantee nonsmokers the right to breathe smoke-free air. Kathy Klemens President, Springfield Branch, AAUW SHERIFF SHOULD CHASE REAL THIEVES
As we are all so painfully aware, the price
of gasoline has skyrocketed to record-high levels ever since the
invasion of Iraq. Recently, when a newspaper article spelled out
how far in debt government gasoline budgets would be, Neil
Williamson indicated that the Sangamon County Sheriff’s
Department would apply for “special operations grants”
to supply gasoline, at taxpayer expense, to keep department squad
cars fueled up and on the road. Neil Williamson was willing to declare that
gas prices were causing a financial crisis for law enforcement,
while various other levels of federal, state, and local, government
have suggested increasing taxes to ensure that government motor vehicles have
gas tanks full of fuel. Wouldn’t it be great if every citizen
was allowed to apply for “special operations grants” or
to insist on wage increases to meet the still unpredictably high
price of gasoline? As minimum-wage, poverty-level workers, who
have no access to “special operations grants,” have
watched gas prices soar, an increasing number of these low-income
motorists have been financially compelled to drive away from
gas pumps without paying for gas. Williamson refers to this as the crime of
“pump and run,” the act of stealing gas from stations.
As yet, however, I have read nowhere where Williamson has addressed
the issue of skyrocketing gas prices. Not once have I read
Williamson come forward to say that the increase in pump-and-run
cases is a response to corporate greed. Not once has Williamson
publicly stated that it is just as wrong, criminal, or illegal for
gas stations to steal citizens’ household budgets, as it is
illegal for citizens to drive away from fuel stations, without
paying for gas. Our next sheriff should be a person who
addresses both sides of any given issue and is willing to bring
justice down equally on all offenders. Norman Hinderliter Springfield THE TEST OF THEIR CHARACTER
The battle has been concluded, and the
preservationists have won. Once again constitutional rights and
fair play have been trampled. A property owner’s plans are of
no concern to the preservation cadre if they declare the property
to be of historical value. Of course, it is they who signify the
property as historical. The criteria are, at best, questionable. Are there buildings and sites that are of
historical significance? Absolutely. Is every old building of
historical significance? Not necessarily. Yet the preservation
folks believe every old building where someone of note lived or
visited must be preserved. Hogwash. Secretary of State Paul Powell
is certainly a large and lasting part of Illinois history. Why
hasn’t the infamous room at the old St. Nicholas Hotel been
restored and placed on the historical list of sites to visit in
Springfield? How about the buildings in the area along the stretch
of Washington and Adams streets, known as the Levee during
Springfield’s wild-and-woolly days? These suggestions are, of course, facetious,
but they are meant to make a point. The Margery Adams Sanctuary is
just that: a wildlife sanctuary. Ms. Adams maintained it as a
sanctuary during her lifetime. She bequeathed it to the Audubon
Society so it would be preserved as a wildlife sanctuary. What is
so exasperating is that the preservationists and all the
jump-on-the-bandwagon letter-writers totally ignored the fact that
Ms. Adams specifically stated in her will that the society could do
as it wished with the old deteriorating building. Well, the deed is done. Enough pressure and
thinly veiled threats were brought to bear so the society
capitulated. It will now build their new headquarters’
building so that the Adams home will be incorporated into the
finished structure. Now comes the real test of the character of
Springfield’s preservationists! It has already been stated
that the original construction budget will increase dramatically.
From where will this additional money come? There is an old saying,
“Put your money where your mouth is.” Mr. and Mrs.
Preserve Springfield’s History surely will make up the
difference between the cost of the original construction plan and
the revised plan. One cannot possibly believe they would assume the
attitude “we accomplished our goal; now let someone else live
with the consequences of our actions.” If they do this, then
the citizens of Springfield should give serious thought to their
supporting of future “save the building” campaigns of
the preservationists.
We shall see. John D. Kolaz Springfield
This article appears in Nov 10-16, 2005.
