Letters to the Editor:
Editor: Mr. Takata, just curious you say you reached a speed of 60 mph at Park City Mountain Resort. Where did you find that trail? Because I know a bunch of mountain bikers that would like to ride it. Or is that statement just as frivolous as your lawsuit? Sincerely, Holley Hendrix Park City Loss of a good neighbor Editor: Bob Anderson was a good neighbor. He died last week, about eight months after his wife, Lynn, passed away. My wife and I miss them both. Before I bought a snow blower and relied on a plow service, Bob frequently cleared our driveway, never asking if he could and never telling us he had. He was always available to help figure out some small project, volunteering tools and use of his well-stocked basement shop. He and Lynn made numerous contributions to Park City over more than 20 years here. The three of us worked along with others to place a permanent monument at the base of Ecker Hill, recognizing its place in early Utah ski history. During our five years as neighbors we got to know their family and they got to know ours, usually over a cocktail or barbecue. We would look in on them, occasionally take down the trash, and perform other small favors. Their cat, Cowboy, often came to our garden, where I had planted him a small crop of catnip. Cowboy also is gone. A rarely used path separates our homes. What joined them were respect, friendship and a sense of being a good neighbor. Jon and Pam Weisberg Pinebrook County business licenses Editor:
Can it really cost $175 to issue a business license? A dog license costs $7. It appears that our good commissioners took last year’s revenue, divided by the number of businesses and voila, here is your new rate — not the cost-driven formula envisioned by the legislature. Ray Johnson Park City Regressive business license fees Editor: In your Dec. 28 article regarding the fallout over the quadrupling of the business license fee for in-home businesses ($175.44 vs. $40), Commissioner Bob Richer was quoted as saying, "It is not necessarily fair, but it’s the law." This is Bob’s attempt to shift responsibility away from the commission and onto the law for enacting a regressive fee structure. In fact Bob is half right: it’s not fair, but it’s not the law. A Utah law enacted in 1997 mandates that counties limit business license fees to cost recovery; that is, the fee must be revenue neutral. The law doesn’t stipulate how the counties must apportion the license fee for each type of business. That decision was left up to each county. To facilitate compliance, the county hired a consultant, Rosenthal and Associates, to determine the cost and voice the commission’s decisions regarding the fee structure. Last February, Rosenthal submitted its "Summit County Business License Fee Analysis." The study states that the county has chosen to charge the same fee to each licensee under an assumption of equal benefit. The county’s assumption is that all businesses are subject to the same regulatory framework and derive equal benefit, and therefore the cost should accrue equally to each licensee. Rosenthal rationalizes the county’s decision: "This means that the proposed fees are proportionate and reasonably related to benefit." However, as a hedge, Rosenthal states later, "the assumption that benefit from enhanced enforcement [which is the fee’s primary cost component — $108.08] accrues equally to all business licensees is not quantitatively demonstrable." Furthermore, Rosenthal ignores the issue of whether the additional $67.36 charged to each licensee for administrative cost is reasonable or reasonably related to benefit. So, it was the commission that decided to charge a flat fee based on questionable qualitative reasons. The commission transferred the cost from large businesses (collectively, a 91 percent reduction in fees) onto the backs of in-home business owners (collectively, a 332 percent increase). I have to agree with Bob; it’s not fair. Larry Eichner Right Home LLC Substitute teacher pay Editor: In response to the "Demand for Substitute Teachers" article 15 years ago I was a substitute teacher in California for the same pay as the PCSD pays its subs in 2006. (I later became a full-time teacher in a prestigious elementary school.) I moved here in 2000 and checked into being a substitute teacher while staying home with two young children. The pay insulted me! I got a job at The Canyons and make more money hourly than I would as a sub. Plus, my entire family gets a season pass in addition to other ski resort perks. You do the math! Melinda Breiholz Park City Social Security dilemma Editor: I am not a political activist. I vote my conscience in all elections hoping that the person elected will best serve the needs of the populace of town, county, state or country. But recently something came to my attention that I have not been able to put out of my mind and I would like to share my feelings about our federal senators and congressmen. First of all, these people we elect to represent our interests at the national level do not pay into Social Security while in office. They have, however, put into effect a golden parachute for themselves and their spouses when they leave office. It does not matter how many terms they serve, they will collect their pay after they leave office until they die. This amount may be increased from time to time for cost of living adjustments. This retirement plan is paid for out of the General Fund and adds an enormous dollar amount to the annual budget of our country. If one person draws $1,000 monthly in Social Security Annuity it would take approximately 68 years to equal what one senator could conceivably draw in one month after leaving office. I believe the solution to the Social Security dilemma is for the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives to put their retirement into the Social Security system. If this were to happen, not only would they correct the problems in the Social Security system but also they would be more likely to fairly represent the people who put them in office. People should contact their senators and congressmen and let them know how they feel about this issue and request a reply indicating the official position from each elected representative. Then when election time comes vote those persons out of office who are not willing to equitably represent their constituency. After all, these are people who are elected to represent the best interests of the masses, the common people, you and I. Patsy Ruybal Big Water, Utah
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Readers around Park City and Summit County make the Park Record's work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.
Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.
Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User
Park City Mountain Resort owner Vail Resorts in early June submitted a letter to the Park City Planning Commission in support of a Provo developer’s blueprints for a major project at the resort.