By Monica Alonzo
By Stephen Lemons
By Jason P. Woodbury
By Dulce Paloma Baltazar Pedraza
By Ray Stern
By Pete Kotz
By Monica Alonzo
By New Times
I don't think I have seen a sentence diagram fired in anger in 40 years (Flashes, February 15), but the diligent teachers at P.S. 69 did their work well because I was able to decipher the diagram, then quibble over it, in short order.
The real defect in the sentence, Then, in a race shunned by candidates and voters alike, because Pat Buchanan gets five more delegates than he does, nationally, his campaign is reported to be on life support is "squinting construction"; i.e., the "because" clause may modify "shunned," or as The Flash diagrammed it, may modify "is reported." Thus, it is not clear if Buchanan's extra manpower causes the others to shun the contest, or his cause to be reported in mortal danger.
I have followed with interest over the past ten years articles reporting that the state's auditor general concludes that the Arizona Board of Medical Examiners does not sufficiently discipline offending physicians. New Times again reported the auditor general's assessment of Bomex in "Bomex: A History of Leniency" (Terry Greene, February 15).
Every article reports the auditor general's assessment of Bomex's performance as if there could be no doubt as to the validity and the accuracy of the auditor general's opinion. And yet, I have never been able to ascertain how it is that the auditor general would have the medical and legal expertise necessary to judge the performance of Bomex.
No educated person would believe that the auditor general could even begin to be qualified to evaluate the quality of justice rendered by the Arizona Supreme Court, the Arizona Court of Appeals or Maricopa County Superior Court. I submit that we taxpayers may have been paying for a process for years that has been wasteful, misleading and upside down.
Stephen W. Myers
Myers & Jenkins
I read with great interest Lisa Davis' "This Old $811,000 House" (February 8). However, the article barely scratched the surface of what is a gross misallocation of public funds; that is, the two Heritage Fund grants for the purchase of the Manistee Ranch property.
In order to be effective in preserving Arizona's past, the Heritage Fund must be nonpolitical, and all funds must be managed and allocated in a manner which is above reproach. Unfortunately, the Manistee Ranch grants have proved that even this noble effortis subject to political whims.
Clearly, to preserve the integrity of the State Parks Department, the funding committee, the legislators who have supported the project and for the integrity of the overall system, a simple, independent, unbiased appraisal of the property needs to be undertaken forthwith and, in any event, prior to the distribution of any funding. Why should a wealthy landowner again prosper to the detriment of the citizens of Arizona?
Seth D. Heyman