Jim Nintzel's article gets to the dilemma facing the City Council regarding Rio Nuevo ("Give or Take," Currents, March 26). In the past, the council has been accused of not having anything to show for Rio Nuevo. Yet when they take action to complete a project, they are branded as mismanaging tax dollars allocated by the Legislature from the tax-increment financing district.
Beyond this dilemma, one senses the philosophical difference between the Republican-controlled Legislature and the Democratic-controlled City Council. The Legislature doesn't see the value of completing the Mission Gardens, but rather would support revenue-enhancement projects like the proposed hotel and expansion of the Tucson Convention Center. The City Council is caught in the squeeze from the Gem Show folks and the Legislature on one side, and the voters who see the council reneging on the proposition that favored cultural/historical projects like the Mission Gardens and Convento on the other.
Missing from the discussion is how the cultural/historical components will complement the expected growth in tourism that would enhance our tax base.
As a westside resident, I would truly lament the death of Rio Nuevo, including the Tucson Origins Heritage Park.
Raul E. Ramirez
The columnists in the April 2 issue just blew me away. First, Tom Danehy says the average citizen with a job is doing OK. I doubt it. He also thinks that we wouldn't mind having a temporary tax increase. I doubt that, too. Enough of him.
Catherine O'Sullivan doesn't want marijuana legalized, because she doesn't like potheads. Her description of them fits most 20- and 30-somethings today, with or without chemical alteration. She also seems to be incapable of writing a column without a gratuitous expletive being included. Enough of her.
The Guest Commentary piece has Sarah Cadrobbi griping about not getting selected for a position that only requires a high school diploma. Sarah, you say you have three university degrees. Why are you surprised at not being picked for a lower-level job? The hiring manager took one look at your résumé and decided, probably rightfully so, that you would not work for the advertised salary, or you would be gone in a few months for something better. Why would they bother with you? Get used to the rejection.
A. Roy Olson
What was up with Catherine O'Sullivan's column (April 2)?
She starts out by citing Hillary Clinton's statements during her recent trip to Mexico about the United States being partly responsible for the drug violence there due to our consumption of drugs (which is true), but goes on to argue that pot shouldn't be legalized, because potheads annoy her with their constant rambling. Then she goes into a Shaun of the Dead metaphor that doesn't really go anywhere, then she does a rant against technology that ends in a parable about a woman who dies after being hit by a truck, because she's listening to her iPod too loud, and the truck driver is texting a girlfriend who is downloading a song and WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT CATHERINE O'SULLIVAN?!?! Are we sure that she wasn't high when she wrote this column?
In "'Old' Artists, New Tricks" (March 26), Mari Herreras writes about several art galleries closing. She added Illusions Gallery to the list. While we are down, we are definitely not out. In an effort to survive this tough economy, we closed our Tanque Verde Road location and moved to a new studio location at 150 S. Camino Seco Road, Suite 116. We currently are showcasing the works of six artists, along with ourselves, working in various mediums: glass, sculpture, painting and jewelry.
Illusions Gallery is located in the front room, and our glass shop, Glass Illusions Studio, is located in the back room. This allows our clients and guests to come and see us working in our natural habitat and get the feel of how our art is created.
Please let your readers know Illusions Gallery is alive, well and surviving these tough economic times.
Pattie and Mark Johnson Illusions Gallery/Glass Illusions Studio
After reading Leo W. Banks' rant on the sins of immigrants ("Trashing Arizona," April 2), primarily that they cause too much litter, I was brought back to the Bush mindset: They both see the world through a good-and-evil lens, a place where grey areas don't exist. People coming here without documents are bad and messing up our environment, and the way to stop this evil is to capture these "illegals" and "force them to clean up their own mess."
There is another way to tell the same story. Sadly, people from all over the world are suffering. Many feel their only hope is to try to make it to America. Thousands have died; millions have been arrested and harassed, yet they still come. On their perilous journey, they litter. What can we do?
In this version, we don't blame the victims. In this version, we use our brains to try to solve a complex problem.
Get on the Obama bandwagon!