Letters: Columnist wrong on opening the track

Note: Most newspaper content reprinted here is incomplete and delayed. Want it all? Sooner? You can subscribe to our full print and online editions by calling (559) 674-4207 and get both editions for the price of one!

webmaster | 05/07/12

Paul Stanford is an entertaining writer with well-thought opinions, but he is off base with his condemnation of the opening of Memorial Stadium to the public. Public spaces to play, exercise, walk or just relax are part of an attractive community. Madera is in desperate need of such places. Using Memorial Stadium is an easy and affordable answer.

Yes, graffiti can be a problem, as it has been all over Madera. But as Paul says, none of the security measures have prevented tagging. People whose goal is to tag or destroy property usually do so when they are sure nobody can witness them. Maybe families walking or playing soccer is a more effective deterrent than hundreds of yards of razor wire and expensive cameras.

His characterization of the track as “nothing more than a relic” is a gross exaggeration. It is true that the numbers and lines are a little faded, but the MUSD facilities crews have done a great job maintaining the field and track.

In this litigious society, there may be someone who is looking for a reason to sue, but that can be the case with any public or private facility. I believe that there are ways of limiting potential lawsuits with signage that states acceptance of liability.

The public is not allowed on the property during school hours, and sports practice time is considered school hours. So in theory the public should not be exposed to errant discus or shotput tosses.

My congratulations to Superintendent Balderas and School Board Chairman Ric Arredondo for opening Memorial Stadium for all of us to enjoy.

Christopher Mariscotti,
Madera

He’s running for board, regardless

It has been suggested that I have broken some rule or regulation regarding the Fair Political Practices Commission. Were that true, then why are these allegations being made against me rather than charges by the FPPC?

I appreciate Mayor Brett Frazier addressing me in his letter to the editor as a “candidate,” as is his right under the First Amendment of the Constitution as it addresses free speech.

I have no control, nor would I want any, on the right of the mayor or any other persons to use descriptive words to categorize my intentions to run for a political office. I do, however, thank him for referring to me as a “candidate” even if it is inaccurate.

The mayor is perfectly correct in that officially a person is not a candidate until the filling date has been opened. There are a number of other documents that follow that time frame as well.

Mr. Mayor, I also appreciate your characterization of me as a “nice man.” For that I am in complete agreement. Thank you also for wishing me well.

This marks my first entry into the political arena. As a novice I am sure there will be mistakes made. I do apologize in advance. I am equally sure each and every varying of protocol will be brought to my attention.

I am concerned that a busy person such as yourself, with all the budgetary problems of our city/state of affairs, would spend your time in a public arena to chastise me. A simple phone call would have accomplished the same effect. But wait, that would be an acknowledgment that I am running for an elected office. I guess this “Letter to the Editor” accomplishes the same thing. Either way, Mr. Mayor, thank you for your interest in this matter. I also wish you well.

Chuck Genseal,
Citizen running for Madera Unified School District Area 1

Doctor misses point on BSE

I was dismayed by Dr. Loraine Goodwin’s warning to both farmers and our public in her letter, “Take care to avoid spread of disease,” of April 30. She described the symptoms of the disease called bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) correct, but her knowledge of farming practices showed ignorance when she was urging “all farmers to spend time reassessing your farming practices to ensure you and your fellow farmers are not allowing any problematic shortcuts or sloppy clean-ups.”

Dr. Goodwin would be the first to be upset if her medical safety practices and procedures were described as being “problematic shortcuts or sloppy clean-ups,” and should be the same as the program and procedures of an eye surgeon, pediatrician, hospital, family practice, dentists, etc. So I must remind her that a dairyman’s food and animal safety practices are different from a cattleman’s program, who operates on the natural grass on the range.

Beef cattlemen can state that their food program (natural grass), containment (not in maintained small corrals), and of course daily handling is less. But to label all farmers as needing to “spend some time reassessing their farming practices to ensure for problematic shortcuts or sloppy clean-ups” because of one dairy cow’s death shows me that she does not have the logic to represent our area.

Our county area grows mainly “party foods,” from wine grapes, almonds, pistachios and, of course, beef. We also have specialty vegetable and herb industries. One cannot use the same types of decontamination procedures for these products as one uses in decontaminating a hospital or a dentist office; those materials are too hazardous to clean crops for consumption.

Within our state, one can find various forms of documentation of food and worker safety programs within 250 plus different farming industries; by the way, these same types of programs are not done to foods imported from other farmers from around the world. Unfortunately, it appears to me that Dr. Goodwin would trust the carrots grown in China more than the professionals in our county and state.

Our county’s dairymen and cattlemen didn’t own that dead cow; but, they would be happy to see that the system used by the dairymen, the state and the federal programs identified and recognized the dairy cow quickly. The other 249 types of farmers would be horrified that a candidate for Congress would assume that their farming practices should be compared to a dairyman’s animal health program while completely ignoring the safety of the foods from other countries.

In closing, Dr. Goodwin should be an advocate concerned about ensuring that her own medical industry reassesses for “problematic shortcuts or sloppy clean-ups;” indeed, there are enough local citizens who have a lawyer to advocate for their issues from poor medical-safety practices.

Nancy Mattrocce,
Proud Advocate for Local Ag Industries

 

comments powered by Disqus

1