Don’t misrepresent Ark

Letters to the Editor

Don’t misrepresent Ark

I was surprised to read such a sarcastic Aug. 31 letter from a scientist who is not very careful in his research. Regarding the Ark Encounter, he falsely claimed that Ark officials tried to “avoid having to pay for adequate fire and police protection.”

On the contrary, the Ark Encounter has stated many times that it was willing to pay its fair share into the city’s new safety fund and suggested a yearly cap of $500,000. It is a very generous amount, given the fact that the city has only 4,000 residents. From my research, I found that emergency-service calls to the Ark from both Williamstown and the city of Dry Ridge have averaged only about two per week for the first year.

Many of these emergency calls were for medical reasons, and Ark guests who were tended to were often covered by their own insurance. The cities were reimbursed. Unfortunately, Williamstown officials refused to accept the reasonable cap of $500,000. Regardless, the Ark has been paying into the safety fund, not avoiding it.

The writer is a longtime vocal opponent of the Ark who has misrepresented the theme park many times. However, the remarkable Ark has been a huge success, to his chagrin.

Pat Moran

Crittenden

Comments

Letters to the Editor

Cringe-o-rama: Mitch McConnell, lower standards for nursing home inspections, UK shoe fetish, us. Us?

By Herald-Leader readers

February 15, 2019 04:51 PM

Cringe-worthy McConnell

In opinion pieces in the Herald-Leader and on the floor of the U.S. Senate, Sen. Mitch McConnell has opposed the Democratic Party’s legislation to reform the methods states use for electing members of Congress. He characterizes the bill as an unprecedented power grab by Democrats. He casts himself as a defender of the constitutional rights of state legislatures to prescribe the time, place and manner for holding elections for U.S. senators and members of the House of Representatives. He pledges that he will not let such a bill come before the Senate for a vote (as an aside, how democratic is a system based on procedures that allow one person to block a bill from being considered by the full Senate?).

As a retired University of Kentucky law professor, I cringe that one of our graduates would make an argument that ignores a basic tenet of constitutional interpretation — read the whole sentence/clause. The Constitution, Article I, Section 4, states: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations...”