Letters are posted as we receive them during the week, and before they are printed in the paper, so check back frequently to see new letters. If you'd like to send a letter to the editor, use this postmarks submission form, or email your letter directly to [email protected]. Thanks for your patience.

Dear Editor,
    As a longtime resident of Canyon Creek, I was pleased to see in Michael King’s article (Nov. 9) [“Point Austin”] yet another person speak out in criticism of Don Zimmerman and his cronies who have pushed forward with the MUD court case, only to be frustrated and angered by the biased tone of the article, which suggests that everyone in this neighborhood agrees with Zimmerman. King is correct that our neighborhood MUD is being used to further a political agenda. However, the MUD board never solicited the input of the residents on this issue and has cried foul every time any opposition is expressed. Many residents do not support the lawsuit, but it was well along its way to the Supreme Court before most of us even became aware of it.
    I find, however, the insinuation that everyone, or even a majority, in Canyon Creek agree with Zimmerman to be completely unfounded. Mr. King is being as ignorant and bigoted as he unjustly accuses us of being. His broad assertions about people who live in $350,000 houses (in this “tony" neighborhood with street names that are probably similar to his own) suggest that he is as big a fool as Don Zimmerman. It seems to me that he is hurling the same political grenades that he was so critical of in his June 15 “Point Austin” column, "Knee Jerks: Quick! Let's jump to conclusions!"

   [Michael King responds: In the days since my column was published, I've learned that at least some Canyon Creek residents are extremely defensive about being tainted by the public image that inevitably follows their elected MUD's lawsuit against the Voting Rights Act. And I'm glad to see that at least a few of those residents, like Stephen Donald, are beginning to speak out publicly and not leaving that responsibility to the handful of minority residents deposed by the parties to the suit. If indeed, as Donald appears to believe, a majority of the residents in fact opposes the suit, I suggest they make that very clear to their elected representatives as well as the plaintiffs' attorneys – and suggest they take their "color-blind" (that is, blind to minority voting rights) venue-shopping elsewhere.]

Dear Editor,
   I was reading Louis Black’s "Page Two" last week [Nov. 9] regarding the noise ordinance and the city's recent attempt to stifle its music scene. I moved to Austin in '91, and I've seen this city change dramatically. Most of those changes haven't been for the best. In regard to music, we've seen many, many beloved venues swept aside in the name of progress. I've been lucky to see some great shows in Austin. Smashing Pumpkins at Liberty Lunch. Tool at the Terrace. Jane's Addiction at the City Coliseum. Before I get derided as another "old timer" lamenting the loss of "Old Austin," I have good reason to bitch. This February I'll be moving to Dresden, Germany, to join my wife there. I'm going to miss Austin, and from what I've heard Dresden is lacking in a live-music scene. Nevertheless, when I went there last Christmas, I couldn't help but be reminded of Austin. You see, Dresden is a college town with a population comparable to what Austin's was back when I first moved here. The area where the bulk of Dresden's students live is called the Neustadt or "new city." Sort of like the Drag but bigger and cooler. I see a lot of potential in Dresden, and I'm looking forward to living there and seeing what a Texas boy can get going in the way of bringing part of Austin to Eastern Germany. This city should do all it can to at least honor the term they themselves have exploited and try to live up to the title "live music capital of the world." Because when it's gone, baby … it's gone.

Dear Editor,
    As a Canyon Creek resident who does not approve of our municipal utility district board's lawsuit [against the Department of Justice over the Voting Rights Act], I agree with much of your piece ("Point Austin: MUD in Your Eye," by Michael King, Nov. 9) [News] but not the tone. This lawsuit was not approved by the residents but by the board that we elected. I think most of the residents I've talked to agree that this lawsuit was ill-advised, so I would ask that you limit your judgments about moral values and such to the members of the MUD board. None of them ran on the platform of fighting the feds with regards to this provision [Section 5] of the VRA, so this was a surprise to me, for certain. Back to my point: Would it be fair to characterize any Texan as a Rick Perry supporter or as a Republican? You must be a big fan of his since you live in Texas, right?

   [Michael King responds: I'm delighted to hear from John Abrams that some Canyon Creek residents – in addition to those minority voters who have already spoken out against the lawsuit – also oppose the MUD lawsuit against Section 5 of the VRA, and I hope more will speak out against it. In the same spirit, let me note that the Chronicle editorial board endorsed Chris Bell for governor of Texas.]

Dear Editor,
    On Oct. 12 the Brackenridge Tract Task Force issued a series of recommendations to the University of Texas System Board of Regents regarding the future use of the Brackenridge Tract.
    The task force concluded that the Colorado and Brackenridge apartment sites, for years now used for university student housing, “would be more beneficially utilized as part of a new master plan developed to produce significant funds to support the educational mission of the University.”
    As a graduate student and resident living in the Colorado Apartments, it is my hope that the board of regents will decide to include students in the master-plan process. We believe that the university would be best served if the respective sites remained used in their current facility. Graduate-student housing is a visionary and long-term investment that can truly support the education mission of the university.

Dear Editor,
    I saw a guy Downtown holding a Ron Paul sign. I understand there are numerous supporters around town. When will you people understand that supporting a person that cannot win only strengthens the mainstream Republican candidates? Look at our own state. Why not Kinky Friedman? Rick Perry wins, that's why!

Dear Editor,
   Regarding the various noise/sound ordinances, I became curious as to what different decibel levels meant in real terms ["Page Two," Nov. 9]. Here is what I found.
   A lawnmower is between 85 and 90dB. A dishwasher is 75dB, the same as the proposed new noise-ordinance level. A hair dryer is 70dB, and "city traffic/noise" is 80dB, 5dB louder than the proposal. Laughter is 60 to 65dB. (Don’t laugh too hard; you just might exceed the 75dB level!) A motorcycle is 88dB.
   Prolonged exposure to any noise above 90dB can cause gradual hearing loss.
   A garbage truck comes in a 100dB. A newspaper press is 97dB. A jackhammer, power saw, and symphony orchestra hit a whopping 110dB! Topping the list are "boom cars" at 145dB. At 100dB or higher, regular exposure of more than one minute risks permanent hearing loss. (Referenced from: www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Technical/Sounds/Decibles.htm)
   The lowest level, 0dB, is the sound of the space between the ears of the morons who thought up this sound ordinance BS. This isn’t about loud music; it’s about the future of live music Downtown.

Dear Editor,
    Thank you for printing the interview with our girls [“Playing Through,” Sports, Nov. 9]. They were all excited to see the paper.

Dear Editor,
    During the Mark Shields and David Brooks commentary portion of PBS's The NewsHour (Nov. 9), they were discussing the indictment of New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik. More specifically, they deliberated the effect of this scandal on Rudy Giuliani, who appointed Kerik to that post and stood by while the latter allegedly enriched himself by hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of dollars. Shields noted that Giuliani also has current business connections with a man defrocked of his priesthood for pedophilia (and who had officiated at least one of Giuliani’s weddings). Brooks, an editorialist of The New York Times, then offered his take. We, the American people, are not looking for someone who is "pure." We want someone who is tricky, a conniver, who can deal with other scoundrels, and get the job (of president) done (and can defeat Hillary Clinton). I have never heard so blatant a statement that our country is run by organized crime and that is what we want and need or so compelling an explanation as to why America is economically bleeding to death before our complacent eyes (Michael Ventura’s verbose columns [“Letters @ 3am”] on the subject notwithstanding).

Dear Editor,
    Bring up the smoking ban at every possible opportunity ["Page Two," Nov. 9]! Most of us knew the death of live music due to the introduction of the smoking ban was almost as big a scare tactic as weapons of mass destruction, and linking it with the Noise Ordinance makes no sense. You know what the smoking ordinance did? People smoke less in the bars now, even in the ones that choose to ignore the statute. Nonsmokers can have a drink and dance (or tend bar or play music) and not be forced to step outside for air or hang their clothes out on the back porch. Those with asthma or allergies can go out for a night on the town. It was not just West Lake soccer moms who voted for the ordinance! For the last 500 years (until the last 20 or so) since the introduction of sweet American tobacco to Europe, the nonsmoker has had to tolerate smoke in every environment, work or play. Instead of still bitching about the smoking ordinance (lots of smokers have no problem with it), why not consider it good manners to smoke outside (because it is)?

   [Louis Black responds: Yes, I have issues with the smoking ban, as I do with most efforts to legally regulate personal behaviors. But the larger point here is that though the city testifies to its love of live music, it is constantly bringing new pressures to bear on the club owners who make live music possible. Regardless of the consequences of the ban, the stomach-churning pressure on many club owners was very real.]

Dear Editor,
   Thanks to the deceptive warmongering of Bush, Cheney, and a few other unfathomably arrogant men in Washington, more than 800,000 Iraqi people, including tens of thousands of little children, have been killed since the U.S. invasion/occupation began. In addition, more than 1 million Iraqis have been crippled. None of them posed a threat to the United States. None of them deserved be killed or crippled.
    Every night, U.S. soldiers kick down an estimated 900 doors to Iraqi homes. Typically, the men are humiliated in front of their families, and if their reactions displease the young American soldiers, they are handcuffed and taken away like criminals. Most, if not all, of the Iraqi people have relatives and friends who have been killed, crippled, falsely imprisoned, or tortured by U.S. troops. The invasion and occupation has bred millions of potential terrorists, all of whom have many reasons to abhor U.S. officials.
    As usual, those in Washington who are most responsible for all this needless suffering, cleverly cloak their barbaric actions with fair words. "Our young heroes in uniform" they tell us, "are defending America, fighting terrorists, and liberating the Iraqi people." Daily, more Americans are grasping the fact that the U.S. military does not exist to defend the American people, or to keep us free, but is rather used as a tool to gratify the insane greed and psychotic bloodlust of the American oligarchy.
    Impeaching Cheney and Bush would be the wisest way to fight terrorism and a very practical way to prevent an invasion of Iran. It would send a message to the world that the USA is not a hopeless bully led by horribly corrupt men after all. Cheers to Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich for submitting House Resolution 333 toward that end. Everyone, please support justice via this impeachment resolution.

Dear Editor,
    The people of Central Texas really got screwed with the recent Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization vote for the five freeway-to-toll-roads surrounding Austin. Although greedy developers, contractors, corrupt government officials (Texas Department of Transportation and its underlings), and other profiteers are mostly to blame for that, the fault also lies with an apathetic populace too lazy and ignorant to participate in local politics.
    Now, with the recent passing of Proposition 12 [“Texas Voters Approve Props; Travis Narrowly Passes Cancer Measure,” News, Nov. 9], people seemed to have willingly spread their butt cheeks and said, “Here, TxDOT, do it deeper, please.” I am completely flummoxed by this. Why would voters pass all these propositions, especially Prop. 12? We’ve now given TxDOT, one of the most corrupt state agencies in history, up to $5 billion more to spend without accountability. This money will most certainly help fund the hugely unpopular Trans-Texas Corridor and be used to promote and build more private partnership toll roads. What the heck is going on with our local elections? What possible thought processes could have lead the small percentage of people who bothered to vote to pass Prop. 12?

   [Editor replies: Throwing around completely unsubstantiated accusations of corruption because one doesn't like a particular department's plans pollutes the entire dialogue. This kind of casual viciousness is one of the things that discourages rather than promotes citizen involvement. Perhaps one answer to your question, "What possible thought processes could have lead the small percentage of people who bothered to vote to pass Prop. 12?" can be found in the vitriolic tone of your letter. Can't there be very reasonable difference of opinions, even when those differences are extreme, without vilifying those with whom one disagrees?]

Dear Editor,
   I must agree that single-member districts are not the way we should be going but for different reasons ["Slicing the Map," News, Nov. 2]. Given only the choice between single-member districts and an all at-large council, the single-member districts would at least provide some sense of geographical representation and an opportunity for a diversity of opinions on the council. An all at-large council just means that every member is elected by the same constituency. It is the very definition of tyranny of the majority.
   However, there is no reason why we should have to choose between two very flawed ideas when a better alternative exists: multiple-member districts. By dividing the city into four to seven districts that would each elect three or four members to council by a proportional model, just about every Austinite could know that he or she really had a representative on the council. A broader spectrum of opinions in deliberations will mean a less "efficient" process, but it will also mean more innovative ideas and better decisions. And moving things through quickly shouldn’t be as important as making the best decisions for the citizens of Austin.

Herr Savlov,
    Thanks for yet another fine piece of writing ("Jam on Wry") [Screens, Nov. 9]. From the title to the well-fashioned line on remoras, you amuse and entertain while sharing an intelligent opinion.
    Over the past decade, I've enjoyed your work more than any film writer since the late, great Jay Scott (I can think of no higher praise). You are invariably entertaining and informative and usually pretty damn funny. You also quickly understand films that others apparently cannot (Fight Club [Film Listings, Oct. 18, 1999] comes first to mind, of many) and have a pleasing knack of seeing films in a wider cultural context.
    Thanks for the consistent quality and the frequent laughs. Your writing feels like the Austin we'd love to save and is the most fun to read of any Chronicle scribe by a wide margin.
    By the way, good luck at the Department of Motor Vehicles. Might want to hold off on the second one until later.

Dear Editor,
    As a former member of the task force that wrote the existing Noise Ordinance, I'm disappointed at the current efforts to emasculate it [“Page Two,” Nov. 9]. The existing one, though not what I wanted, was a compromise that at least allowed live music to exist. As the representative of the Austin Federation of Musicians and with my background in live sound, I was able to convince the task force that levels lower than 85 decibels would effectively outlaw performance. There has to be a certain amount of dynamic range over crowd ambient in order to make amplified sound intelligible and 85 decibels is about it. Anything lower, and all you will get for a performance is seeing people play instruments and watching the singer's lips move. I thought I helped keep live music from being outlawed in 2003, but it looks like it is at risk again. I owe the live-music community in this town a lot, and I would sure hate to see it go away. Everybody, please do what you can to prevent this change to the existing ordinance.

Dear Editor,
    Re: Corrections to article ["Portrait of a Refugee," News, Nov. 9]: The address of Gallery 1906 is actually 301 Chicon Ste. I. As for my stay in Germany for nine years, it was more than just brief. Nor was the former USSR mentioned.

   [Editor's note: We apologize for the error in the address of Gallery 1906, which is indeed at 301 Chicon. For a more complete story on the Jamal family, see "Holiday Greetings From the INS: Hit the Road," News, Jan. 10, 2003.]

Hi!
    Thank you so much for including me in the write-up [“Love Craft,” Arts, Nov. 9]! My business name is Handmade Julz. (“A vendor displays her jewelry at Stitch 2006.”) Thanks!

Dear Editor,
    As a former community theatre actor and former board member and president of Center Stage Theater, I was sad to see the pitiful little line in Marc Savlov's recent chronology of the history of the Ritz, depicting the five years that Center Stage Theater inhabited the space as "quickly wilting in the heat" [“Re-Re-Re-Re-Reopening Night,” Screens, Nov. 2].
    I can only imagine Savlov's reference is to the lack of air conditioning prior to Center Stage moving in. While this is an accurate statement of its previous condition, we air-conditioned the theatre shortly thereafter and made many other improvements. That was not the main thing, however, that saddened me.
    Although I admit to being a bit biased, what concerns me is that the chronology and main article "Re-Re-Re-Re-Reopening Night" do not accurately reflect the condition of the Ritz theatre or Center Stage's contributions to the Ritz or Sixth Street during its 10-year history there.
    The Seventies were a difficult time for any community theatre to try to exist on Sixth Street, where the conditions were far different from today. Crime and personal safety were major concerns, and I can remember board meetings where we discussed how to get patrons safely from the theatre to their cars. Regardless, Center Stage rose to that challenge and many others, struggling financially the entire time. Regardless of these conditions, Ken Johnson produced some wonderful productions, and sets, with the likes of Austin actors such as Dock Jackson, Karen Kuykendall, Joe York, Scottie Wilkison, Mavourneen Dwyer, Ethel Little, Libby Winters, and John Benadoni. There were critically acclaimed productions of Godspell, Born Yesterday, Camelot (Joe York's first role outside of St. Edward's), and Man of La Mancha, to name just a few.
    In addition to those productions in the Ritz, Center Stage occupied and produced admirable work in a small theatre off the alley in Sixth Street for four to five years prior to moving into the Ritz. Ken Johnson/Center Stage also presented West Side Story at the Paramount, which contributed greatly to Bernadoni's revitalization efforts.
    Center Stage and Ken Johnson's contributions to Austin community theatre, Sixth Street, and the Paramount Theatre revitalization may seem small in retrospect, but I believe they were significant and deserve more recognition than was given.