Low turnout does not negate votes
DOES HARRY Gordon live in the U.S. or Australia? (Letters, April 13). In Australia people are required to vote. Using the U.S. as an example, I simply can’t follow his logic.
In this country, if two people vote in an election and they both vote for the same person, that person is elected. That’s how our (two) Rio Rancho tea party city councilors and two others were elected, with very little participation of the electorate. …
Not a single (one) candidate even got 10 percent of the vote of registered voters in Rio Rancho, yet (Gordon) tries to use the nonsensical approach that not enough people voted for the bond issues for UNM and the hospitals to make that vote legitimate.
Chuck Wilkins was elected with a mere 676 votes, yet Gordon doesn’t challenge his legitimacy as a councilor.
When I researched this before, more Rio Rancho voters voted for the bond issues than voted for all of the elected city councilors combined in that election.
I know I voted not only for the two bond issues mentioned, but I also voted for the road bond, which was defeated by the tea party.
So we continue to have broken down and unpaved roads all over this city.
And, since I live in Rio Rancho I have to drive on roads that tear up my car.
Faulty logic in college tax letter
A LETTER appeared recently that requires correction and clarification. The author criticized the conclusions of a poll performed on people who voted for a portion of Rio Rancho gross receipt tax allocations for UNM West in Rio Rancho. He implied that if the poll included all residents of Rio Rancho, the results may have been different. One cannot say “What if” and then draw a valid conclusion from the hypothetical answer.
The percentage of voters who favored helping UNM was about 63 percent of those voting. The author implied that had everyone voted, this may not have passed. I could have implied that had everyone voted, the results may have been even more favorable for UNM. The sampling was about 20 percent, which is very high for this type vote and reflects the general opinion of those community members interested. Score one logical error against the letter writer.
The second, and highly significant error the author made, was to imply that because Pauline Eisenstadt lived in Corrales, she was an outsider without the right to interfere. Surely, the letter writer saw that Eisenstadt is a former state representative and state senator? Her districts included Rio Rancho. She brought home, literally, millions of dollars from the Legislature to Rio Rancho for police cars, Rio Rancho Fire Rescue Department vehicles, Haven House, libraries, senior centers, recreation centers, parks and on and on. She has done far more for Rio Rancho than the letter writer. Of anyone, she has the right to be concerned about Rio Rancho.
Shame on the man who wrote the letter. He used faulty logic, but even worse, he implied that a former state representative and senator should not have a voice concerning the future of Rio Rancho after she has done so much for the city.
M. KIM JOHNSON
Good luck to new RR city manager
CONGRATS TO the … City Council for hiring another non-New Mexican to the Rio Rancho city manager position. With his “extensive experience” in economic development he will soon learn that Rio Rancho’s economic development exists in name only. Our infrastructure is horrid and can be quickly evaluated by taking a drive on our dismal city streets, but we have new police cars to drive on them!
Living in North Hills, streets haven’t been striped; cracks, crevices and potholes unfilled; and medians not landscaped for several years now — thanks councilor)! Oh yeah, that “white elephant” Santa Ana Star Center that Rio Rancho pays $3 million on the debt service each year out of the operating general fund and that has yet to break even generating revenue each year!
Surely hope (Keith) Riesberg can be effective with a divided City Council and a mayor who (is) a (Bernalillo County) deputy county manager and whatever else! Welcome to the “City of Vision”!
How about retail south of I-40?
READING THE new “Rio West” section of April 6, I am somewhat baffled at the article “Retail Mecca” on the outstanding growth of retailers/restaurants that have and are still coming to the Cottonwood area. One of the reasons given for this exceptional growth was that there are “lots and lots of families on this side of town.” Here’s a news flash; there’s “lots and lots of families” on the southwest side of town also; yet there has been no business’ showing any interest in coming out here. Why is that?
There needs to be a new study of the median income for residents here; we are not all on welfare. We have money to spend, but we’re tired of having to drive to the NW or NE sides of town to spend it.…
I ask Isaac Benton and Art De La Cruz (city and county representatives for our area) if they plan to take any action to remedy this situation.
— This article appeared on page 20 of the Albuquerque Journal