Letters
Tapes underscore 9/11 EMS casualties

New York City’s recent release of more 9/11 tapes hopefully makes the public aware of what we in the emergency medical services community already knew: EMS responders, volunteers included, played a much more vital role in the day’s events than reported until now.

The overall feeling is that the day’s EMS efforts and losses largely were overlooked in the enormity of the situation.

As one of the many New Jersey EMS volunteers who responded to the city on 9/11 while thousands more stationed to help on this side of the Hudson River, I witnessed innumerable acts of compassion and selflessness as everyone attended to victims.

With the civilian losses, we mourn the rescuer casualties suffered on every side of the police/fire/first aid triad.

Without wanting to minimize anyone’s grief or suffering, however, EMS responders can’t help but reflect on their own colleagues who died that day. Although far fewer than in the other departments, the number of EMS lives lost was devastating nonetheless.

In light of the latest EMS accounts and with this new view of 9/11 fresh in our minds, now would be an excellent time to focus on strengthening the often-forgotten EMS side of the triad, starting with adequate funding for volunteer EMT education, training and equipment.

Sue Van Orden

Northern Area vice president

N.J. State First Aid Council

Lincoln Park

Politics plays part in base closure

It is proper to assert that a state’s political leanings should not impact support by the federal government. That means that a state like New Jersey, which through history always votes for Democratic candidates, should be treated fairly when matters like homeland security or military base closures are determined.

But the reality is that the federal government, which is controlled by the Republican Party, has nothing to gain by treating New Jersey fairly. For that reason, I think that the closure of Fort Monmouth is a foregone conclusion.

Bob Witt

Tinton Falls

Peace vigil to continue

I would like to comment on your article about the peace vigil held in Red Bank 10 days ago.

I attended it, as one of almost 200 people who were mobilized within 24 hours’ notice.

Your characterization of the pro-war protesters as a “small group” seemed an exaggeration to me, as only three people showed up to protest against peace and bringing our soldiers home.

Their organizer complained that he had such a paltry group due to the short notice of 24 hours; yet, that was exactly the time frame we all had, and almost 70 times as many people showed up to protest the war.

The pro-war supporters like to characterize us as being against the military, which could not be further from the truth. We hate to see our sons and daughters sacrificed for an unjust war.

We plan to continue our vigils each Wednesday at 7:30 p.m., should others like to join us.

Sandy Van Sant

Little Silver

Citizens don’t want Sandy Hook developed

Thank you very much for your coverage of the Fort Hancock situation.

It is very sad that the National Park Service does not stand for the people. They are a tremendous disappointment.

The grass roots groups who are working very hard to thwart development deserve thanks. I commend those who respect the natural beauty of Sandy Hook and I condemn those who are attempting to exploit it.

History is important, but the commercialization of the park will result in even less citizen access than we now enjoy.

Our elected officials and local leaders should know the people do not approve of selling a national treasure (at less than market value!).

Jeffrey T. King

Tinton Falls

Fort closing harmful

I must say that I am terribly disappointed by the BRAC [Base Realignment and Closure] Commission’s decision to close down Fort Monmouth.

As a nearby resident, I am concerned about all the local jobs that will be lost, and the businesses in the area being adversely affected.

As an American, I am concerned because Fort Monmouth led the way in the communications capability for our brave men and woman fighting in harm’s way.

To uproot that infrastructure is harmful both for economic development locally and on a national security level.

Steven M. Clayton

Ocean

N.J. is third most expensive state to live

I am writing concerning the affordability of housing in New Jersey.

Homeowners in New Jersey have benefited from the real estate boom, as skyrocketing home values have provided them with rising home equity. However, the flipside to this equation is that more and more families cannot find affordable housing in New Jersey, which is now the third most expensive state to live in.

The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimates that in New Jersey, the average household requires a yearly salary of $42,000 to rent a “fair market” apartment. But the state Department of Labor reports that over a third of New Jersey workers earn less than $25,000 a year. Most new jobs created here in the next ten years will pay near or under that amount.

Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has not only turned a blind eye to this problem, but has actually continued to cut Section 8 funding for affordable housing on a yearly basis. The federal government’s cuts have offset New Jersey’s attempts to address the need for affordable housing.

New Jersey is one of the few states that recognizes affordable housing as a constitutional right. Unfortunately, the need for affordable housing is not being met. New Jersey must address this problem so that the less fortunate are not left behind by our state’s rising property values.

Concerned citizens can start by contacting their representatives in Congress and asking them to oppose continued cuts in Section 8 funding.

Eddie Konczal

Monroe Township