I am sure that some people are happy about having a free place to park, while waiting for their friends and family to arrive at Tampa International Airport-------BUT what happens to the people who do NOT have cell phones? Why is an assumption made that everyone has a cell phone? I don't,and most family and friends who visit me do not, because it costs too much. I can not even imagine a time when I would NEED it or use it. So what do I do? Since there is no way to know when a particular flight is going to be on time or late, am I supposed to go to the parking lot, near the post office, wait for awhile, then try to pick up someone? Then if they are not "Standing on the sidewalk with their bags in hand" go back to the parking lot again to wait for "who knows how long" before I try again? Is this a "Convenience"? Going around and around was not a good thing, but if I found a spot to park and wait for awhile, someone always came along and chased me, saying, "It is because of security. Someone might park here and try to shoot down an airplane". Are you kidding me? I can just picture someone parking on the access road to the arrival ports jumping out of their car and putting a surface to air missle up to their shoulder . I am sure they could do the same thing from the parking garage.

Meanwhile, is someone going to give me a cell phone so I can pick up my family at the airport?

Dear Mr. Horne:

First let me thank you for your response to my letter to both you and the Mayor. Even though it took a month it was welcomed, to a certain extent.

I can understand the city’s interest in saving the taxpayer’s money, by saving on set ups and rentals. I would do the same in your place, BUT I would not penalize the Handicapped by moving them to a place that would cause them great problems. Distance and curbs make attendance impossible in some cases. Might I suggest that you, or someone on your staff attempt to move those distances, and over those obstacles in a wheelchair. That is the determining factor in deciding if a building, or location is “Handicapped Accessible”. These things are required by LAW. They are not just mentioned as “If you would like to”.

You mention the Fire Marshall requiring the concession area be fenced in. If it is, as you state, how would people get TO the stands to make their purchases? You also mention the “remainder of the handicapped parking in the lot is available on a first come, first serve basis”. Just where is this “remainder”? I have never seen it. Or are you referring to the Hcpd parking up near Harborview? What good would that be to people trying to get into the park? It is further away than the ones your guards wanted us to use across the street. There is NO guard there to direct handicapped to these spots, nor to see that other vehicles do NOT park in these spots.

I have seen these things happen in other venues. Before the new Baseball stadium was built the close up spots were saved for the news media. The handicapped were told to park on the other side of the street. In the new stadium they have done a great job. Up close and have carts to help.

No one realizes more than I that the Handicapped parking placards are being ABUSED by people who are NOT handicapped. I have to blame that on the Doctors and the State Government who issue them. But that alone does not excuse the local governments from abiding by the law.

The news media have been in contact with me and have asked if the situation has been addressed and resolved. To this point I have to say “Yes and No” Only time will tell if this problem gets resolved, either by your administration or the next.

I have seen on TV and read in the mews media about all the "Poor starving children" , and how we should give money to save their lives; BUT I never see any "Poor staving adults". Where are they? I am sure that these children have parents. When we do see pictures of people with children, the parents all seems to be well fed. Aren't they feeding their children? Or are they expecting US to feed them.

There are many school programs where the "poor" children are fed a breakfast, then probably a lunch also. But when you see pictures of their parents picking them up from school, the parents weigh in the 200s. I keep wondering why the parents do not feed their children. Do they just eat themselves and count on the "Public" to feed their children?

When questioned about their "poor" status, I always hear that they need "Milk for my baby" . Possibly they would have the money to do that if they spent their welfare checks and food stamps for items that would solve their child's hunger.

After reading about the damage , from Hurricanes, and thinking about what seems to be the worst problem in recovery, I have come to the following conclusion.
IT IS THE LACK OF POWER
I do not know if the following can be made into law (either all or part) but it would help in the long run. My proposal is as follows.

Any time a road is widened, all power and telephone lines shall be put underground.

Any time there is new construction, all associated power and telephone lines shall be put underground.

The ideal would be to put all lines underground in affected areas. i.e. any that have blown down during a storm, BUT that would significantly slow down the recovery process. So that would not work.

I believe that this would help, along with encouraging communities to do this in all areas. Some tax incentives or other State and Government incentives could , of course, speed up the process. Money talks.

I just finished reading the article by Donna Winchester, and I still keep seeing the word "Disproportionate" . Does this mean that if there are 19 % Black students in a school and more than 19% do things that are illegal or against the school codes, that the extra ones should be excused? Ikeep seeing this word used all the time, by Black leaders and in your newspaper. A crime is a crime and you pay the penalty now matter what your color and no matter how MANY do the crime.

I was also dismayed by the statement made by Damon Hewitt that the 5 year old girl, handcuffed, "was doing nothing other than exhibiting behavior APPROPRIATE for a 5 year old child". Is he kidding? Or was he misquoted? I have seen the videos on TV and probably have not seen the whole thing, but how can ANYONE call that Appropriate behavior? Tearing things off the walls, jumping up on furnature, hitting teacher and Principle? I must be living in a different world for that behavior to be called APPROPRIATE