PG PensionsThe situation in Maryland regarding Gov. Parris...

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

March 01, 1995

PG Pensions

The situation in Maryland regarding Gov. Parris Glendening and his aides requires full disclosure. I hope The Sun will pursue this sad affair until all of the Prince George's pension scam is exposed.

The names of the trustees of the pension fund, along with the those of the tame lawyers who ruled that a resignation, although requested, constitutes involuntary separation, should be exposed.

Those employees had the right to refuse to resign, so it is obvious that ruling that they were terminated is a falsehood.

Further, if any of the trustees, the attorney or any of their immediate family benefited from their actions in changing the rules, there is an obvious conflict of interest.

Prince George's County or some taxpayer should sue to recover those funds already disbursed. The courts should be requested to issue a restraining order on any additional payments pending final resolution of the legality of the trustees' actions.

After 50-plus years as Prince George's homeowners, we sold our home and moved to Annapolis, mainly to get away from a county that Mr. Glendening and his cabal had almost destroyed.

His statements while campaigning for governor regarding his tax record were about 90 percent falsehood, as were his statements about the fiscal condition of the county.

As county executive, he loaded that office with multiple layers of executive assistants, administrative officers and administrative assistants. His recent ploy as governor to increase the salaries of his principal aides is a continuation of his practices as county executive.

Having gotten the requested increases, those aides will now be able to hire principal deputies or assistants at a salary about $10,000 to $15,000 under their own.

Mr. Glendening imputed that those high-priced aides could move to private industry at a higher salary. Starting with Major Riddick, I suggest that they all be given that opportunity, by having the governor advise them that he will accept their resignations if offered.

I have been a registered, voting, Democrat for 60 years. Now I am seriously considering changing my registration.

Having a governor who has such disregard for taxpayers and exhibits such greed is bad enough. That Mr. Glendening has been teaching this brand of "good government" to University of Maryland students is almost beyond belief.

William C. Hudelson

Annapolis

Gay Rights

In a brief Sun article that appeared Feb. 17, reporting the hearing before the Maryland House of Delegates Commerce and Government Matters Committee on House Bill 213, which would extend civil rights protections to gays and lesbians, Conrae Fortlage of the anti-gay group Concerned Women of America is quoted as saying, "We cannot give special rights for sexual behavior."

Apparently Mrs. Fortlage doesn't realize that gays and lesbians face repeated discrimination, intimidation, harassment and sometimes physical violence throughout their lives solely because of their sexual orientation.

We are not asking for "special rights"; we want the same civil rights (in the areas of housing, employment and public accommodations) that heterosexuals enjoy.

Mrs. Fortlage should realize, moreover, that the state does already grant special rights for sexual behavior -- in the form of the legally sanctioned protections and privileges associated with heterosexual marriage.

Mrs. Fortlage disingenuously asks, "What about people who say they like children?" This concerned woman needn't be. The laws that protect children from molestation and abuse will still be in place and will still be enforced.

And as to the person who says he or she "likes children" (behavior is not the issue here), is Mrs. Fortlage really advocating that people be discriminated against because of what they merely say they like?

Rawley Grau

Baltimore

Hunters Pay

In response to Professor William G. Rothstein's article (Opinion * Commentary, Feb. 7), though I may agree with some of his contentions, I would like to take exception with a statement proffered therein.

The sociologist states that many special interests receive benefits that outweigh their contributions. One of his examples is the Maryland hunter. I strongly object.

This may be one of the few "special interests" that contribute more than they take. In fact hunters fund 96 percent of the budget for the Department of Natural Resources' Wildlife Division through their licenses and other fees.

The professor's contention that license fees do not cover the cost of processing and licensing is simply wrong. The other 4 percent of the budget comes from contributions to the Chesapeake Bay tax check-off.

Do the non-hunters, who benefit from Maryland's wildlife, contribute as heavily to conservation and the economy as the hunter? Let's take a look.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.