Fluoridation Vote
Dear Editor: I am very pleased and applaud those five members of the city Assembly who voted to not discontinue the community water fluoridation program. This is a big win for Sitka kids. Community water fluoridation enjoys seven decades of excellent scientific support by numerous peer-reviewed papers. That support includes more than 100 health organizations such as the American Medical Association, American Dental Association, American Fluoridation Society, CDC and WHO.
Indeed, peer review is the gold standard for science. The anti group has zero peer review papers to support their views for no water fluoridation.
Additionally, it is well-documented public health science that communities that remove fluoride – or never fluoride the water – burden the youths of the community with a significant increase in dental pain and suffering.
Interestingly, about 10 years ago Juneau discontinued the community water fluoride program. Because of this, Juneau has seen a remarkable increase in the pain and suffering of the youths. Ten years ago there were no pedodontists (children’s dentists) in Juneau and today there are four pedodontists. I understand that Juneau parents have observed the tragic results of no fluoridation and there is a plan being developed to bring the community fluoridation program back.
Those who do not support community water fluoridation are clearly anti kids dental health and the parents who bear the burden of the increased expense, pain and suffering. Although the burden is shared by all kids, it is not equally shared in that the kids from the lower social economic groups bear the majority of the suffering.
Having practiced dentistry in Sitka for many years, I know of no documented case of anyone harmed by the community water fluoridation program. Settled science confirms this, which means the program is not broken and does not need to be fixed. Indeed, Sitka kids won last night in spite of those who wish to increase their pain and suffering.
Kenneth M. Cameron, DMD, Sitka
Taxi Ordinance
Dear Editor: My name is Sigurd Rutter. I am a taxi operator. I first drove cab here, some 38 years ago. At that time, I typically did $60 or $70 a night. Keeping 40 percent for myself. Seldom more than $30-$40 in a 12-hour shift. Not much different now. My night driver is lucky to take in $100, keeping $45 for himself. That’s because he is competing with no less than six other cab companies.
Nine years ago I started my business. And, Sitka’s taxi ordinance read ‘‘When the Chief of Police finds more taxi service is necessary to meet public demand, he may issue more permits.’’
It no longer says that. And Chief Ankerfeldt says he has no authority to limit taxi operations, so ... I’d like you to consider the impact of this emerging economic, and social Darwinism, the first effect is that drives begin to steal. From the public, from each other, from their employers. Just last night a guy from a downtown restaurant told me he was sick of cabbies trying to charge his patrons $50 for a trip to Shotgun Alley.
Someone told me, long ago, that anyone will steal. When their kids get hungry, people steal. Which reminds me of Victor Hugo’s novel, ‘‘Les Miserables,’’ where-in the protagonist begins his fall from grace stealing a loaf of bread to feed his starving children.
I’m not here to ask for a whole lot. Just that the Assembly maintain enough stability, and order, so that cab drivers don’t have to steal bread for their children.
When drivers quit paying employers their share, taxi operators stop accurately filing their sales tax declarations with the finance department. Curiously, when two new cab operations sprang up last year, the city’s taxable stream of taxi revenues fell by $70,000 – from $480,000 something to $417,000.
In the last quarter, my firm contributed 66 percent of the city’s sales tax from cab operations. Not because I’m doing two-thirds of the business. But because compliance with the sales tax is markedly off. And, there is no oversight or audit.
Robert Schell used to sit on the Assembly. He tells me that in that era, the Assembly limited it to two taxi companies in Sitka. I’m hoping the Assembly might revisit the taxi ordinances. Because this business is dissolving into complete chaos.
Another impact of this chaos is that public service goes out the window. No one wants to sit in a car all night for nothing. So people glom on to the peak hours. Forsaking the less-rewarding periods of the day. People complain, regularly, that no cabs are answering the telephone. Out of seven companies. It takes a certain economy of scale to operate a reliable service. No one can work 24 hours a day. It takes some help. And nobody wants to work for nothing, because there are four times as many taxis out there than customers.
Here’s what I’m asking for: that the Assembly establish an optimum number of taxi companies. And impose a moratorium on new operators, until attrition brings participation into a sustainable range.
I am not asking for a taxi medallion or a limited entry permit. I’m 62 now. I’ll be long gone before taxi numbers reach a reasonable level of administration that would allow competition – and a reasonable chance for taxi drivers to earn enough that they don’t have to steal bread.
Having made my case, I have one final request of the Assembly. When you see taxi drivers at the supermarket buying groceries with the food stamps, don’t forget to wave at their children.
Sigurd Rutter, 738-TAXI LLC
No Privatization
Dear Editor: Public lands are available for all to use to support their culture, lifestyle and spirituality. S1481, which is a bill Senator Murkowski has introduced, would privatize up to 175,000 acres of the Tongass. This land would go to private for-profit corporations whose legal mandate is to do their best to maximum profits to provide a dividend for their shareholders.
In the Tongass that means cutting timber. Once the forest is gone, it negatively impacts the culture, lifestyle and spirituality of all of us and it also takes away that land’s ability to produce revenue until the regrowth is large enough for harvest again, a minimum of 60 years on the most productive land, but 100 or more years for most. In addition, this land will never regain the old growth characteristics needed for deer winter survival. In the long-term, no one benefits when the old growth is gone and we can’t access key areas of local use and subsistence. On Mitkof Island, a friend recounted to me watching his favorite hunting places being clearcut in the late 1960s, and to this day they are no longer viable to hunt in. The results of such action are not a formula for sustained wellbeing.
If Senator Murkowski is successful, areas in our backyard will be available to be privatized; specifically, the southern shore of Hoonah Sound and upper Tenakee Inlet. The north-facing streams in upper Tenakee Inlet are critical for salmon reproduction because they are dark and the snow pack above them maintains a consistent water flow for salmon spawning. We need both Tenakee Inlet and Hoonah Sound not only for salmon, but also for gathering, hunting, hiking and enjoying the majestic stands of old growth. There has to be a less destructive way to address those Natives who received money, but no land, in the ANSCA (the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act).
Do you want to see these areas clear-cut? I don’t, and ask that if you agree that our land is better suited to provide our food, provide for our salmon, our spirits, our hiking and camping, that you write to Senator Murkowski today telling her how you feel.
You can email her at https://www.murkowski.senate.gov/contact/email or call her at 202 224-6665. Senator Murkowski, don’t privatize public land!
Marian Allen, Sitka
