Letters to the Editor

10/18 Letters: Don’t let money be ‘the main driver’ for RDU land proposals

Regarding “A park or a quarry? RDU weighs two visions for 105 acres of its land” (Oct. 12): As a concerned resident, I attended the RDU Airport Authority meeting regarding the airport property. It was disconcerting that the RDUAA used this platform as means to undermine proposals submitted from the Wake County Board of Commissioners and the Conservation Fund. The RDUAA legal representative presented legal arguments against approving any other proposal except for Wake Stone Corp. He misled the RDUAA by strongly implying that the FAA would not approve a lease for recreation use. Yet, leasing the property for recreational use is allowable, common and desired by the community.

I strongly resent the tactics used during this meeting, and I am left with the belief that the community’s efforts to work in collaboration with the RDUAA are all in vain. The RDUAA will vote to lease the property for a rock quarry or for recreational use. Disappointingly, money will be the main driver of the decision. There was much discussion about land compatibility. I am confident that if the quarry is approved, it will be less about compatibility and all about profit. It is important for RDUAA and community to work in partnership to find a solution that satisfies each party.

Leah Ranney


Laws still broken

The human side of deportations” (Oct. 13) wrote that Norma Contreras is undergoing a deportation procedure and has been separated from her family and that she is an innocent bystander to President Trump’s hardline immigration policies. Based on this letter to the editor, it appears to me that Contreras is a blatant lawbreaker who has been allowed to stay in this country far too long as she had been deported once before because she came here illegally, and then she had the audacity to come here again, also illegally.

What gives her the right to break our laws with impunity? Why couldn’t she apply for legal status instead of blatantly ignoring our laws? Why is it that many believe that people who are here illegally and haven’t committed a heinous crime should be allowed to stay, despite the fact they are ignoring our laws? What should be done with our immigration laws? Should they simply be ignored so that our borders would, for all intents and purposes, be open to all, and why would this make sense to anyone?

Paul Duffy

Rocky Mount

Not ‘wrong,’ different

In the conclusion to “After Las Vegas, liberals are righteous and wrong” (Oct. 11), J. Peder Zane writes, “[a]s our nation becomes ever more diverse, the political challenge of binding us together as a people will only become harder. It is tempting to avoid these complexities by dismissing different ways of thinking as false, beyond the pale. That does nothing to encourage the conversations we ought to have.”

Can you please tell me how calling an entire party “wrong” is encouraging the conversations we ought to have, and not dismissing different ways of thinking as false?

David Larson