UW Everett: a touch exclusive Editor, The Times: A new campus complex for Everett would seem to be a very good thing...
UW Everett: a touch exclusive
Editor, The Times:
A new campus complex for Everett would seem to be a very good thing [“Everett top choice for new UW branch,” Times, Local News, Nov. 16]. The projected $800 million cost for 5,000 students plus $40 million per year operating costs equates to about $200,000 for every four-year degree.
Most Read Opinion Stories
- To save the orca, we must save the Salish Sea | Op-Ed
- Trump's disruptive tariffs are political, not economic | Op-Ed
- Brett Kavanaugh is the poster child of a corrupt bargain | Michelle Goldberg / Syndicated columnist
- As Florida chokes on red tide, governor denies environmental malpractice | Froma Harrop / Syndicated columnist
- Secret meetings via text: Hold Seattle's leaders accountable | Editorial
But the current cost for a state four-year degree of $24,000 would get 8,000 graduate degrees. The $40 million yearly operating costs alone would fund another 7,000 students every year thereafter.
With the Bothell campus struggling for students and other colleges around the state not at full capacity, it seems odd to spend taxpayer dollars on a whole new campus just because it is better real estate.
The cost for a new campus could instead go to low-income students with good grades but no hope of ever affording higher education.
Essentially, a self-funded college plan for the state’s poorest and brightest will be created.
Not building a new campus would seem an environmentally and socially better option. For no extra cost, thousands of our own best kids can be given the only thing they really need: a chance.
— David Wright, Seattle
Eyes in the wrong place
Last month, my husband, 2-year-old son and I visited the Snohomish Library. I was initially impressed with the family friendly atmosphere of the library. Baby story time had just finished and several children were roaming the aisles.
Any positive feelings I had for this library disappeared when my husband walked past a man viewing pornography on a library computer in view of anyone and just feet away from the children’s section. My husband confronted this man. He didn’t think it was right for him to display porn when children were all over the library.
Then, unbelievably, a librarian pulled my husband into a room and gave him a flyer on disruptive behavior in the library! According to the library, it’s within this man’s constitutional rights to view porn around children; it’s just not within our constitutional rights to complain or confront anyone about it, or even to enjoy the library free from porn!
This from a city that, in 2005, forced the owners of the BBQ Shack restaurant to cover its mural of naked pigs because it didn’t fit the “standards” of Snohomish! Something is wrong with the “standards” of Snohomish if viewing porn in the library is more important than protecting our children from it and those who might do them harm after viewing it.
There are already adult establishments where people can view porn. We don’t need it in our libraries!
— Elise Valentine, Everett