Letters to the editor: Renewable energy and emergency power
TO THE EDITOR
As most of us know, Congress and the president have been considering various proposals to
protect the Dreamers, who are participants in DACA, or "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals," These young people were brought to the U.S. as children and have done nothing illegal. DACA has unfortunately succumbed to politics between the branches of government despite the broad popularity of DACA among the citizenry. And, time is rapidly running out for extensions of DACA and the many contributions that these young people will provide to our communities.
There are other things we should all know. (1) We should not use or succumb to the phrase,
"Chain-Migration," which is a negative term used by immigration opponents. A more appropriate term is "family-based immigration," Family-based immigration is the foundation of the U.S. immigration system and it seeks to recognize the stabilizing influence of in-tack families. Some of the proposals to protect the Dreamers simultaneously threaten family-based immigration.
Furthermore: (2) Proposals to protect the Dreamers also threaten the protection of unaccompanied children migrants. These protections help prevent abuse, trafficking, and neglect of these children. It is cruel to pit one group of vulnerable children against another. And: (3) The president is calling for an end to the "Temporary Protected Status" for groups of legal immigrants whose return home is threatened by violence.
And finally: (4) Economists agree that immigration creates economic growth and job expansion in the U.S., and other experts remind us that immigrants are far less likely than others to commit crimes. Rhetoric to the contrary is just that: rhetoric. If you wish to support the Dreamers, unaccompanied children, and families, it is important to contact our legislators at www.senate.gov and www.house.gov immediately. Thank you for your concern.
Dr. Jackie Brux
Emeritus Professor of Economics
Town of River Falls
Renewable energy and emergency power
TO THE EDITOR
Eighty-five percent of our local, renewable energy is produced by our two profitable, debt-free dams and hydros! The dams also give us Lake George and Lake Louise, two different unique lake environments for us to expand and enjoy here in the heart of River Falls. The lakes provide a variety of habitat for birds and animals which complements the riparian nature of the remaining 21 miles of our Kinni.
On Feb. 27, 2018 the River Falls City Council will be making the decision regarding the application to renew the license for our two dams and hydros at their 6:30 p.m. meeting in the Council Chambers in City Hall.
If you value Lake George and Lake Louise, our debt-free dams and our profitable, independent source of renewable energy, please let your City Council representative know your feelings.
If the license is surrendered and the dams destroyed, we will lose a valuable energy resource, our two unique lakes, their water storage capability and the benefit of having an emergency power supply that is independent of the grid.
Our national power grid is vulnerable to damage by nature and also attack through cyber mischief. Our two hydros are independent of the grid and provide power 24/7. They produce over 2 million kWh of electricity per year which could be directed for critical local emergency needs.
Share your thoughts with your city council representatives. They have an important decision to make on Feb. 27 and would value any input, especially from River Falls taxpayers, as they decide our future course of action.
Save your wallets, conserve your tax dollars. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Keep and improve our two dams, lakes and hydros.
Town of River Falls
River Falls' problems should be put to a vote
TO THE EDITOR
I would like to address the tearing down of the two dams in River Falls Lake George and Lake Louise.
I've listened to both sides now and have come to my conclusion. Around 20 years ago, when I was on the Park Board I suggested to the city to dredge out both lakes to 10 feet deep, put the sludge on the south banks of the lakes, cover it with plastic then sod. I was told then that there were way too many contaminants in the lakes. That the sludge would have to be trucked to Missouri. This would cost the taxpayers $1 million. In the Journal dated July 27, 2017, the claim was there wasn't as much contaminants as first predicted.
I attended the last River meeting at the city hall and concluded that this and all other capital problems ought to be voted on by the resident of the city. After all, they are the ones footing the bill ($8 million).
Also I noticed that the majority of the people wanting the demolition of the dams were not voters of River Falls. Again, I say River Falls' problems ought to be voted on by its residents.
In the future, we all will need solar, wind and hydros to run our vehicles and heat our homes; all three of the above or plan on nuclear.
Thank you for your time.