Wasted energy
To the editor:
It was no surprise to see the predictable comments of the oil industry representatives quoted in your article entitled “Panel bashes climate legislation” [Daily Report PM, Aug. 21]. The article described a conference hosted that day by the LSU Center for Energy Studies on the energy bill pending in Congress.
Said one speaker from the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association: “We don’t believe in global warming, period.”
Quoting the article: “The panel did not include any cap and trade supporters.”
The article confirms my belief that the LSU Center for Energy Studies has become a wholly owned subsidiary of the oil industry. I expect as much from LABI and the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association, co-hosts of the conference, but I expect more from LSU, our state’s flagship university. The planners of this conference seem to have made no effort to be objective despite the central importance of the subject matter.
Has LSU become captive to its donors? Does the oil industry-funded energy center speak for LSU on global warming? As an academic institution, shouldn’t it acknowledge both sides of the issue and the fact that Louisiana is considered one of the states most vulnerable to climate change?
Others at LSU have gotten the message. The LSU Web site describes a part of the LSU Flagship Agenda known as “Big Coast and Its Communities.” Astrid Merget, executive vice chancellor and provost, said this initiative was one of three broad areas that are “really unique to LSU.” The initiative, she said, discusses “climate change, wetlands and the Mississippi River,” and “really shapes our ecological future and, in fact, shapes our way of life …”
Just last week, The New York Times quoted Robert Twilley of the LSU Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences on the federal government’s Mississippi River Delta flood-control and navigation works and their impact on erosion. He said: “You have these old infrastructure systems that are wreaking havoc in these natural systems. And things will get worse because of climate change.”
Heaven forbid the Center for Energy Studies would be objective and have global warming deniers share a stage with those who have different ideas. It’s as if they don’t want to be confused with facts.
I saw the center’s devotion to the oil industry firsthand as a member of the Louisiana Senate. One day its director was begging the Finance Committee for more funding for LSU; the next day he was fighting legislation to raise billions of dollars for higher education by taxing foreign oil processed in Louisiana.
LSU rightly defends its name and identity. The Center for Energy Studies obviously desires the credibility that comes from its association with LSU, not to mention the $2.4 million it gets from the school each year and the fine state facilities provided to it. Yet it acts like the ExxonMobil Center for Energy Studies. Call me old-fashioned, but I believe a state institution has the obligation to be fair and unbiased when it comes to public policy matters as important as global warming.
Foster Campbell, Public Service Commissioner
Trash or treasure?
To the editor:
I’m actually glad you made the comparison between Baton Rouge and Charleston [“Random Thoughts,” Aug. 25]. I am a former resident of South Carolina, and I can tell you that, largely due to the efforts of community organizations like those in Spanish Town, Charleston has some of the oldest and most comprehensive historic preservation laws in the country. I gather you have seen and admired the result.
In Charleston, historic preservation is not viewed as being incompatible with progress, but rather an enhancement to it. A sophisticated approach to development has evolved there, and people seem to have a keen understanding of what preserving one’s architectural heritage means to the city as a whole, not just to those residents of a particular historic neighborhood.
Too much of Baton Rouge’s rich architectural heritage has already been lost to haphazard development, and I am happy to see preservationist challenges to more demolition of historic structures in Spanish Town, our oldest neighborhood. You are quite right in that “Charleston it ain’t,” nor will it be until we begin to value and protect more of our history.
Robert L. Herndon Jr., Baton Rouge
To the editor:
As a Spanish Town resident of 20 years, six as a renter and 14 as a homeowner, I agree that Spanish Town residents and preservationists should spend as much time and passion as necessary pursuing deadbeat absentee landlords to clean up their properties.
So I want to thank Mr. Ball for pointing out that we “ain’t no Charleston.” We aren’t because the dilapidated state of some of the Spanish Town properties resemble and reflect the dilapidated state of the space between the ears, as well as the character, of these deadbeats.
Some of these folks live in real nice neighborhoods. I am sure that their residences can be spotted easily because they are probably in as much disrepair as their Spanish Town rental properties. Maybe not. If not, why not? If not, what does this dichotomy say about them? Maybe their noses delineate the extent of their eyesight. Perhaps the look of their Spanish Town rental properties is an insightful caricature of their personal moral and ethical qualities.
On this point, Mr. Ball’s observation does not negate the fight Spanish Town is waging against a developer who wishes to break the law and build whatever he wants. Mr. Ball’s observation correctly identifies the insipid shallowness and bigotry demonstrated by some real estate types against all endeavors that do not squeeze out the last dollar. [Lack of repair makes you rich].
So I believe those Spanish Town residents, renters who pay top-dollar rents, some of whom continually decry the shoddiness of their rental units, and homeowners who invest top dollar in their homes would love to read Mr. Ball’s eloquence describing why some Spanish Town properties are in disrepair and just how to relieve the blight.
If Spanish Town is not Charleston, it isn’t because of those who live there. It’s because of those who don’t. So the issue of the content of structures making up Spanish Town isn’t about tearing down something dilapidated and building a new structure destined to become dilapidated itself; it’s about the content of the character of those who own in Spanish Town, present and future.
Allan Williams, Baton Rouge
To the editor:
A walking tour of Spanish Town? Yes, I do so at least twice daily plus driving its streets, for I live “in the hood” where I was born and choose to retire. Our historic neighborhood is far more than the one-day Mardi Gras parade most associate with it.
In just the past few months I have seen homeowned and rental units repainted and under renovation: two on Lakeland, five on Spanish Town Road, three on North Seventh, two on Lucilla, two on Bungalow and two on Costello among others.
Yes, a few buildings and yards are neglected and trashed. We do need the Historic Spanish Town Civic Association, residents and especially owners and landlords, to continue and redouble their efforts for more restoration and refurbishing. I continue to do my part daily.
The Rev. Howard Hall, Baton Rouge
To the editor:
The main flaw in this argument is that the fact that while there are properties in the neighborhood in need of maintenance, this really has nothing to do with the issue of whether or not David Slaughter and Richard Preis should be issued a permit that is in violation of the neighborhood’s design guidelines.
The Slaughter/Preis proposed project is a new development and is therefore subject to the guidelines, whereas, the houses referenced as “blighted” are not—unfortunately. While it would be nice if the design guidelines did bear upon existing conditions, they do not.
This is not to say that we should therefore abandon enforcement of what they do pertain to: new developments. As it is, the observations about maintenance of existing homes really has no bearing upon the pros and cons of enforcing the historic district guidelines, even though they are obviously limited.
Peggy M. Good, Baton Rouge
Crime doesn’t pay
To the editor:
Thank you for creating public awareness of violence and crime in the Capital Region [“The impact of crime,” Aug. 25]. When people read about this, there is usually one of three responses: It doesn’t concern me, I can’t do anything about it, or it’s not true. I believe this is something that can’t be denied considering the increase in domestic violence-related incidents in East Baton Rouge and surrounding parishes.
For those who feel helpless, there is something you can do. The Capital Area Family Violence Intervention Center is working daily, with a shoestring staff, to get into schools and law enforcement trainings to provide the facts. Their motto of “Hands are not for hurting” should resonate throughout our community.
It does concern you, and you can do something. Together, we can reduce violence through a collaborative effort of this great community of people who, like Adrian Mayes, choose to live, work and play in our great city and surrounding parishes. Start by getting behind some of these initiatives to make a difference. No pointing fingers—except at the criminals.
Bert Fife, Baton Rouge
