ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, December 29, 1996 TAG: 9612310129
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: 2 EDITION: METRO
TYPE: LETTERS
CONCERNING YOUR Dec. 20 news story (``State delves into I-81 expansion'') that outlined plans to widen Interstate 81 to six or eight lanes, at a cost of $2 billion over a period of 20 years, because of increased truck traffic:
Anyone traveling on I-81 can readily see the increasing safety hazards caused by heavy truck traffic. My guess is that more than 50 percent of accidents on I-81, and more than 75 percent of accident fatalities, involve large trucks.
A short-term alleviation of the truck problem would be to tax the trucking industry for its true share of the construction and maintenance costs for all highways. Also, state and federal agencies should make a strong effort to put long-haul heavy-freight traffic back on the railroads where it belongs. The railroads build and maintain their railways while highways are paid for by the tax-paying public. By favoring rail traffic, it might not be necessary to widen or build new interstate highways in the near future.
A long-term solution to the truck problem would be to build single-lane trucks-only roadways parallel to each side of I-81 for long-haul traffic. These would have one-way limited access with only heavy trucks allowed. There should be no speed limit. These express lanes could be located as near or distant from present I-81 as local conditions require.
This would take all except local heavy trucks off I-81, resulting in a much safer highway for the traveling public. Cost of these truck lanes might be lower than the cost of widening four-lane I-81, considering that much of the widening construction through congested areas could be avoided. Even if costs are greater, the savings in lives and property from accidents involving trucks would be worthwhile.
The cost of the truck expressways should be wholly borne by the trucking industry. After all, why shouldn't it, like the rail industry, pay for its own tracks?
J. L. VANNOY
AUSTINVILLE
County fosters price gouging
IS THERE a conspiracy between the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and Cox Cable?
Federal law no longer permits an individual subscriber to file a rate-increase complaint directly with the Federal Communications Commission. Instead, two or more customers must file a complaint with the county, and the county files on their behalf with the FCC.
The Board of Supervisors received two or more complaints about the February rate increase. Supervisors have no authority over the pricing of the rate - only the FCC has authority. However, the board had no interest in protecting its constituents from this price gouging, and it declined to file a complaint with the FCC.
Since the board has this cavalier attitude, it was with impunity that Cox announced still another rate increase effective March 1, 1997.
WILLIAM A. COOK JR.
ROANOKE
Teachers deserve the salary increase
IN REGARDS to your Dec. 14 ``Briefly put'' editorial, it was not wrong for the Roanoke Education Association to remind the School Board about the promised 6 percent pay raise for teachers in the Roanoke City public-school system.
It was indeed understood and put in writing by the school administration that, to achieve the national average by the 1998-99 school year, it would take a 6 percent raise each year for three years.
It is not wrong for any professional education organization to communicate its issues and concerns, and it is the goal of the current leadership of the Roanoke Education Association to do just that: to communicate openly and honestly with the School Board and the public about any and all issues that affect the education of students in the Roanoke Valley, including the morale of the professional teaching staff.
With situations arising within the urban settings in which we work, it would be fitting for the School Board to award the teachers a raise of 6 percent regardless of the national average. The many dedicated and caring teachers here are deserving of the raise.
ESTHER B. CIRASUNDA
ROANOKE
Judge immigrants by their character
CONCERNING BEN Rossell's Dec. 6 letter to the editor, ``Third World refugees aren't welcome here'' - here meaning Southwest Virginia and the Roanoke Valley.
As one who can trace his family history to this area for more than 150 years, and to this country since the mid-1600s, I felt a need to respond. Not only has my family lived in this country but it has fought in every conflict since and including the Civil War.
In every one of these conflicts, there was one common cause: someone preached bigotry and intolerance of others because they were different.
I hope Rossell's message will serve one purpose, and that is to remind those of us who believe that our differences is what makes this country and valley such a great place to live. Let's pass this message on to our friends, family, co-workers, children and anyone else who will listen:
``Judge people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin'' (Dr. Martin Luther King). And not because of their religion, nationality and all the other reasons.
JIMMY ST. CLAIR
ROANOKE
LENGTH: Long : 101 lines Type first letter of feature OR type help for list of commands FIND S-DB DB OPT SS WRD QUIT QUIT Save options? YES NO GROUP YOU'VE SELECTED: QUIT YES login: cby CNB