Homeless camp impact
Foster Park at Diagonal and Sycamore streets in Clarkston, has been designated as the homeless camp by the Clarkston City Council because of Ordinance 1706.
According to a March 29 KLEW news article by Christopher Mitchell, Clarkston’s city attorney Suzanne Hanson states about the decision of Foster Park: “The parks, we don’t have many of them, but the parks that we do have, of all of them, Foster Park was the one that was situated in the area that was going to be least impacted by nighttime residents.”
How about the daytime impact of the homeless camp on the tax-paying neighborhood? Did you think they would only be there for bedtime and then leave at daylight? Tell that directly to my two granddaughters who live across from the park and can no longer play there. Tell that to the neighbors who have to look out their windows every day and view the mounds of items each homeless person has collected. Tell that to the neighbors who have to listen to the screaming in the night or the neighbors who have to call 911 when the homeless are screaming for Narcan. Tell that to the families who no longer can enjoy picnics in the park for fear of drug paraphernalia and rude remarks by the vagrants as the children play on the equipment. Tell that to the children at Holy Family School whose family members donated privacy fencing ... .
Foster Park should never have been approved as a homeless camp.
Jennifer Graham
Lewiston
Post-dam vision dream
Richard Scully’s ideas of a post-dam vision for the Snake and Clearwater rivers (Tribune, March 27) must have come from some kind of dream world revelation. All his ideas never happened in the past and won’t happen in the future.
I don’t think he lived in the post-dam era in Lewiston and if he did, answer why, for more than 100 years, none of those convoluted ideas happened. The nightmare dreams proposed destroy our beautiful lakes, recreation, tourism and the entire economic factors from the dams and send Lewiston and Clarkston into an era of economic ruin.
You were a fish biologist in your career so you ought to get on board with preserving the fish runs through proper science with habitat restoration, predator control, oceans by-catch destruction, overfishing, barge transportation of smolts and warming of the Snake by the upriver dams. Leave our beautiful greenbelts, walking pathways, river transportation, carbon-free hydro power, present beaches and boat-docking facilities as they are now benefiting the people who use them.
The rivers belong to all who use them, not just the tribes who are working to destroy the beneficial uses. What has happened since the dams have been put in place are thriving ports, economical barge transportation ..., thriving tourist industry, leading jet boat manufacturing, improved rail and highways along the river and the list could be expanded.
Dam-removal advocates truly have the wrong approach to saving the fish. They are not the problem.
Marvin J. Entel
Clarkston
Wrong about border bill
In response to the letter (Tribune, April 7) from Varnel Williams: Sorry Mr. Williams, but you’re wrong.
What you refer to as “Joe Biden’s Border Security Bill” is incorrect. This was a bipartisan, painstakingly crafted bill, spearheaded by a Republican. That’s right: Republican Sen. James Lankford, of Oklahoma.
Donald Trump urged a veto for one reason only. It’s because he knew the bill was an excellent solution to the decadeslong immigration problem, and he would not be allowed to find a way to selfishly steal credit for himself. Trump even shamelessly admitted to quashing the bill for that reason.
So who’s the real game player here? Trump, of course.
Thank goodness Americans are no longer surprised by Trump’s tiresome, predictable antics. Let’s all send him packing in November. Please.
Patrice Yeatter
Kooskia
