VIKINGS STADIUM
There would appear to be some casualties
The Star Tribune's "detailed map" of the Vikings' stadium proposal lacks important details. Where is 5th Street, the major entrance to downtown from the east?
It looks like it goes underneath a series of plazas for at least five blocks. It looks like it would have to skirt very close to the stadium at 11th Avenue, with little room for an S-curve. I am not clear about what our City Council is supposed to be accepting.
JIM HAEFEMEYER, MINNEAPOLIS
• • •
One of the most sensible features of the current Metrodome facility is the large, convenient parking lot for buses. (At times I've seen more than a hundred buses parked there.) Judging by the sketches of the proposed new stadium, that whole bus lot will be conveniently removed to make way for the expanded facility.
Have the development planners made any accommodations for buses? As a bus driver for 16 years, I have appreciated the ease and safety of parking on the current Dome property.
Please don't repeat the mistake made during the construction of Target Field by not providing such a lot for buses.
As it is now, groups wishing to see a Twins game must apply for parking permits at least two weeks in advance at a cost of $20 for the privilege to park on city streets or under the 4th Street bridge, and hope that the fans (many of whom are children) can find their way back to the bus after the game.
For many bus drivers and passengers, this has been a total nightmare.
For a large number of sports fans, buses are the only viable means of transportation to attend a professional sports event. Stadium planners need to take the safety and convenience of these people into consideration as well as that of those who drive to games.
DEAN BISHOP, AUSTIN, MINN.
* * *
Free trade
Costs jobs? Actually, it's not that simple
Josh Wise from the Minnesota Fair Trade Coalition thinks "we should be very cautious about the real costs of agreements like" NAFTA and the Trans Pacific Partnership ("Free-trade deals do come with a cost," March 2), and he repeats the trope that free trade "costs jobs."
Set aside for a moment that since imports must ultimately be paid for with exports, job gains in growing export sectors offset job losses in import sectors. Set aside, too, that more international trade means not only more export opportunities but more competition and thus lower prices and more choice for all American consumers, not just "the richest few," as Wise argues.
(Indeed, much of what the United States imports is consumed by low-income Americans.) Also ignore that when Wise argues against more trade with countries like Vietnam and Brunei, he is arguing to worsen the prospects of workers in those economies whose incomes are much lower than those of their American counterparts.
Finally, set aside the question of the ethics or morality of using government coercion to prevent two willing participants from engaging in what would otherwise be legal exchanges, thus curtailing freedoms simply because one is a foreigner.
My question for Wise and other modern protectionists is this: If job losses from imports are so objectionable, should we not also object to job losses that arise from new inventions (polio vaccines created unemployed iron lung workers), new technologies (digital photography has eliminated jobs in film processing and production), changes in consumer tastes (what has become of all those jobs in the eight-track tape industry?) or from any of a countless list of changes that will go on endlessly in modern societies?
The "richest few" aren't the problem here. The problem is a growing protectionism preached by people like Wise that curtails freedoms and inhibits the very thing that holds the most promise for improving the well-being of people everywhere, most especially the poor: economic growth.
MIKE McIlhon, Eagan
* * *
Burnsville schools
It may help to know mechanics of payout
The public uproar over the actions of the Burnsville school board is understandable ("Burnsville school board flayed," March 2). From the outside, it appears the decision to pay the district's human-resources director more than $250,000 to leave was a dereliction of board members' duties as public stewards of both trust and finances. However, one must take a closer look and gain a better insight into the workings of a public school system in Minnesota.
The development and execution of employment contracts for key administrators usually falls directly under the purview of the superintendent. He or she handles the negotiations and brings forth a recommendation for the board to approve or reject. In most situations, the board has entrusted the superintendent to staff the leadership team as he or she sees fit. This a guiding principal of governance.
The problem lies in the details of a contract. Laws surrounding employment agreements in public schools are fraught with gray areas. The negotiations and content of these can vary both inside and outside the district. There is no consistency. As an eight-year school board member, I can understand the angst this has caused. There is enough blame to be passed around. One could only hope that difficult lessons have been learned.
What we see in Burnsville quite possibly could be just the tip of the iceberg. Since we are in the midst of developing some reform initiatives for public education, one might consider including this issue in the mix.
CHUCK WALTER, BLOOMINGTON
The writer is a former chairman of the Bloomington school board.
