Letters to the Editor - 6/21/2009
Font size: [A] [A] [A]
e-mail this
share thisHalt rush to raze
Editor: I had wondered whether there was, in the buildings that Mayor Chris Doherty boasts of tearing down, usable housing that might be transferred to worthy individuals and thereby be returned to the tax rolls.
My question was answered by finding out from utility people marking the street in front of 612 Moosic St. They related that the building is going to be razed soon. There was a letter to the owner in Newark, N.J., posted at the front entrance.
Whether he received it is unknown.
The thing that is astonishing is that this is the best-looking house on the block. The roof looks practically brand new. The siding, though dirty, is in good shape. The hedges and lawn are overgrown as is to be expected from a place that hasn't been lived in for some time. It makes one wonder how many like properties have been torn down and how many are facing the bulldozer simply because the owner didn't pay the taxes.
A sense of livability is not achieved by having the greatest number of vacant lots in a neighborhood but, rather, home ownership. It is well known that owner-occupied housing is maintained in far better condition than rental property. South Side used to have the greatest percentage of owner-occupied property.
Another unmentioned result of the Doherty Demolition Derby is that rents have increased greatly in the city in the past three years.
The going rate for people renting rooms has gone from about $60 per week to about $100. I attribute this to greed and a smaller pool of this type of housing. It may be that the city does not want this type of housing but it is a fact of life that some people only rent this way. A three-room apartment used to cost $350-$400 a month, with everything included. Now it's $500 per month and the renter has to pay all the utilities.
I think the funds used for ripping down usable housing could be put to better uses, such as identifying and replacing lead water service mains to houses (yes, there are still some lead pipes) or insulating houses and lessening the burden on the renters/owners.
Perhaps the biggest question in my mind is "How do you build up a city by tearing it down?" It seems as if it is an oxymoron.
WILLIAM KIBERT
Scranton
Wrong calling card
Editor: I commend Lynne Duncan and her calm reasoning on the moving of a proposed methadone clinic to a more suitable area, instead of Dunmore (Your Opinion, June 17). I, on the other hand, am infuriated that Dunmore council would think of allowing such a clinic in our area.
Born and raised in Dunmore, I left when I met and married my husband, an officer in the U.S. Navy. We traveled and lived in many places around the country. When it came time for my husband to retire, the question was where to find a safe place to raise our ever-growing family.
This place had to have good housing and schools. That place was Dunmore.
When people decide to move to another area, they do research, looking for good housing, schools, taxes, etc. Dunmore housing prices and taxes are increasingly on the rise. Putting in such a clinic would not bring people into the area, but almost definitely turn them away out of fear.
I implore Dunmore residents to attend the June 22 meeting at the Dunmore Community Center at 7 p.m. to protest this move. Let's keep our community safe for our children, grandchildren and the future generations of Dunmore.
FLO NOLEN
Dunmore
Everyone in pool
Editor: The best solution to getting uninsured people covered and lowering costs is a full-tilt single payer system of publicly funded, privately delivered health care. Only the payment system is "government-run," not the medicine. Single payer will create the largest possible risk pool and the largest possible money pool to cover everyone successfully without sandbagging the Treasury. That's real insurance and that's what we need.
Insurance companies won't disappear; they can sell luxury policies on private rooms and cosmetic surgeries. They are business geniuses and will find all sorts of things to insure.
Public option and co-ops are distractions from the real deal - single payer all the way.
JANE PRETTYMAN
Honesdale
Retain home care
Editor: I'm a Scranton home health professional concerned about the quality and access of home care for the elderly in Pennsylvania. Our state maintains the nation's second-largest elderly population.
As this population expands and faces chronic health conditions requiring special care, President Obama's proposed budget would cut $34 billion in Medicare home health payments over the next decade. These reductions being discussed in Washington could seriously affect the ability of our residents and their families to benefit from home care and could force many into costly institutions.
At the same time, federal officials want to improve care for older Americans and control rising Medicare costs. Advanced home health treatments are demonstrating their ability to keep people out of more costly hospitals for a year or more. A single day in a hospital costs Medicare more than $4,600, while a 60-day episode of home care is around $2,200, so it's easy to see why home health could save Medicare billions of dollars.
Pennsylvanians and their families should contact their members of Congress, including Rep. Paul Kanjorski and Sens. Bob Casey and Arlen Specter, to protest these reductions and save home health.
ELIZABETH SCANLON, R.N.
Scranton
2 posted comments