Current workforce housing solution might benefit developers more than island workers
Workforce housing
Hilton Head Councilman David Ames, a former real estate developer whose OpEd on workforce housing was published last Sunday, thinks the Town’s solution to workforce housing is to build apartment buildings with a certain designated density number of units for low cost rentals for a certain length of time to entice developers/investors and more island workers.
More than 10,000 workers commute to the island every day, and the percentage of those who would choose to live in this temporary apartment arrangement is unknown. Plus, the total units that would be made available for this purpose cannot possibly solve the Mayor’s and Council’s perceived problem. It would only provide a small number of units in each building for a few years — a temporary band-aid situation.
But in the meantime, thousands of apartments at the full rental costs would be the new development pattern to be scattered throughout Hilton Head Island’s limited land space in order to provide for this small percentage of temporary reduced units.
A developers/investors dream profit situation — and a questionable residential situation for island workers.
Lyn Piwko Bullard, Hilton Head
Gun rights
Enough is enough! When are our politicians going to show courage and enact laws banning the public from owning an automatic weapon? Are they that afraid of losing a few votes? I hope and pray that the next mass shooting doesn’t involve any of their family members.
Dennis DiCarmine, Bluffton
America First
What is wrong with an “America first policy”? Is it wrong to put American interests ahead of the world? To provide jobs for American citizens or to want the American economy to grow? To make the American energy program the envy of the world stage? To put American workers to work?
Is it wrong to make illegal immigration a criminal offense? What is wrong with making America safe while sending bad guys back to their home countries? The American family is our backbone. So, I ask: Is it wrong to focus on securing the American border?
Is it wrong to expect other nations to pay for their “cost of living” expenses, like security and military utilization? Or to punish bad nations for terrorist actions? Is it wrong to expect the world be responsible for maintaining peace? Is it wrong to focus on capitalistic development and not socialistic expansionism?
Is it wrong to expect American politicians to be honest? To expect people to play by the “rules”? Is it wrong to believe in the American Constitution? Do we still expect constitutional rights to be valid? Of course we do, and what is wrong with that? Are we still Americans?
Clifton Jester, Bluffton
Domestic Violence, our other pandemic
The U.S. House of Representatives just passed a renewal of the Violence Against Women Act. This bill provides a wide variety of prevention and victims’ services in response to a nationwide crisis. It builds upon decades of legislation to protect women and children and other vulnerable communities against sex trafficking and other exploitative crimes against families.
As a former marriage and family therapist for over 30 years in this community, I have worked with both victims and perpetrators of domestic violence. I can tell you personally the emotional, psychological and economic damage domestic violence brings to not only women, but children and families. I hope that our senators vote for this bill; it is not a partisan issue.
I am disappointed in our House Representative Mace for voting against this bill. I wonder if she could hold a town hall to discuss her issues with domestic violence, and insights as a single working mother with respect to what vulnerable women may face. Currently South Carolina ranks as the nation’s sixth worst state among rates of women murdered by men. In my opinion, the life saving benefits of this bill far outweigh any “legislative concerns “ for voting against it.
Charlie Nutting, Beaufort