Without building defect law, we’d be all wet

Your Sunday editorial, “Construction defects,” caught my attention.

In many cases I agree with your position concerning frivolous lawsuits. However, our entire community and others have been afflicted with plumbing system defects. The end result was a major financial settlement pursuant to a class-action lawsuit. As a result of that experience, I now understand how valuable good legislation is for the unsuspecting consumer.

If we hadn’t had the construction defects statute available to us for support, we never would have had any chance of correcting the poor choices of the building experts. I know, without a doubt, the developers would have ignored all pleas for corrective action, and the homeowners would never have resolved their flawed plumbing systems.

The problem we experienced wasn’t limited to our community. A lot of homeowners aren’t aware of the problem as of this time, but they will be in the future. This defect arose from the manufacturer’s improper selection of a brass alloy used to fabricate plumbing fittings. Our mineral-rich water corrodes the brass, leading to the fracture of the fittings, creating leaks. This condition has been well-understood by metallurgists, chemists and engineers for nearly a hundred years.

I believe that all manufacturers have a responsibility to the consumer for reasonable performance of their product. It’d be a tragedy if legislative action blocked any chance of securing a just resolution for a very costly corrective action. As it is, once the present statute of limitations is reached, the individual homeowner is faced with all of the repair costs.

KEN ANDERSEN

HENDERSON

Array

Just go home

To the editor:

Here we go again. Now that the Nevada Legislature is once again in session, all we can do is hold our breath and hope that 120 days go by without the idiots in Carson City doing any more damage.

Unfortunately, the idiocy has already begun. Assemblyman Harvey Munford’s Assembly Bill 122, which would put a 5-cent tax on fast food items with more than 500 calories, is a perfect example of why most of us wish the Legislature only met for only 120 minutes every 100 years.

If the Legislature would only concentrate on repealing laws that are already in place instead of trying to think up new ways to destroy our freedom and our economy, we might actually survive the next four years of the disaster taking place in Washington.

The best thing the current Legislature can do to help our state is to do nothing and then go home.

BILL EDWARDS

LAS VEGAS

Array

Freedom of choice

To the editor:

I read the Review-Journal’s Saturday article about Assemblyman Harvey Munford’s bill (AB122) to control more aspects of our lives and the lives of his constituents. He wants a new tax on fast food.

Mr. Munford, D-Las Vegas, represents the good people of Assembly District 6. It’s a district with a large percentage of minorities and a large number of folks who struggle every day to make the money they need to feed their children. Unemployment in that district (north of downtown Las Vegas) is much higher than the Nevada average.

But rather than try to improve the lives of his voters, Mr. Munford wants to raise the price of food, a necessity of life. He wants to make it more difficult for his constituents to feed their families.

Mr. Munford, here are just a few items that would really improve the lives of your voters:

1. Free your folks from the devastation of the minimum wage laws, the biggest cause of unemployment in the state.

2. Free your voters from the unproductive prevailing wage law, price controls that are destructive to the free market.

3. Free your people from an education system that’s more concerned about high-paid administrators then children — create school vouchers for all of the folks you represent.

If you want more good ideas, talk to the Assembly Republican leadership. Those are folks who understand that free markets and individual liberties (freedom to make choices) are what improve the lives of the people of Nevada.

PHIL REGESKI

LAS VEGAS

Array

The writer, a Republican, lost last year’s election in Assembly District 41.

Array

Cronyism

To the editor:

Cronyism may be defined as an “act of showing partiality to one’s close friends.” Clark County School District Superintendent Dwight Jones hiring Ken Turner as a consultant is an example.

I am referring to the Feb. 15 article, “Consultant’s salary OK’d.” After years of complaining that the Clark County School District budget had shortfalls, and that teachers would need to be fired or receive salary reductions in order to preserve jobs, I find it absolutely despicable that Mr. Jones would have the audacity to hire a consultant at a ridiculous salary during these economically difficult times. I also find it unbelievable that the School Board would vote 6-1 to approve the contract without knowing the specifics.

The $250,000 annual salary for the consultant’s position would easily support four or five teachers with benefits for a full year. I realize that Mr. Turner’s salary is being paid from private funds and not from the school budget. But what’s the source of these funds? Could we use them to increase the budget to purchase supplies, improve the teacher salaries and benefits or to hire new teachers?

My suggestion is that the School Board demands that this be the last year of Mr. Turner’s contract, and that Mr. Jones hire none of his cronies under any circumstances.

JIM WORMAN

HENDERSON