Seattle Sun Newspaper - Vol. 7, Issue 3, March 2003

Copyright 2003 Seattle Sun. Please feel free to use the article and photos below in your research. Be sure to quote the Seattle Sun as your source.

Setting record straight on deportations

I note in your February 2003 issue an article entitled "Deportation forces local couple to return to Canada."

There is a significant difference between "deportation" and the situation you describe in the article. The headline writer may not have realized this, but it should be pointed out to your readers.

Deportation signifies that someone is removed from the U.S. at government expense, and it generally carries a long-term bar against readmission to this country.

This is hardly the case with the couple in question, who had worked legally in the U.S. while they were here and then, due to concern that their employment reauthorization might be denied, chose to leave voluntarily.

The problem with the use of the word deportation in this case is that it incorrectly inflames people who are already at odds with the U.S. government and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. While our current administration has certainly treated foreigners unfairly and inappropriately with procedures like Special Registration for most Muslim males, it has not deported individuals such as the McDowalls.

The paper should have made this distinction with a better choice of terms in its headline.

CHUCK PEROV, Laurelhurst

Three cheers for Matt Maury

As a member of the Board of PlantAmnesty, I was pleased to see Mr. Maury's well-written and informative article on trees in your February issue. Please let him and your readers know that qualified arborists can also be found through our referral service, 783-9813. PlantAmnesty is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to proper tree care and preservation.

TINA COHEN, PlantAmnesty

How it ended

Thank you for covering the Northgate issue again in the February 2003 issue of the Seattle Sun in the article titled "Mayor seeks to sell vision for Northgate area." Unfortunately there is once again a large error in the article. This error concerns what happened between Security Properties, Thornton Creek Legal Defense Fund (TCLDF) and Citizens for a Livable Northgate (CFLN). TCLDF, CFLN and Security worked out a collaborative design for a development in the Northgate south parking lot that included a daylighted creek incorporated with housing and retail space. This concept plan was presented to the City of Seattle on September 7, 2001. Unfortunately due to events following that meeting including 9/11, Mayor Schell losing the mayoral election, and Security not receiving an extension from Simon Property of its option to buy the south lot, the collaborative design did not get the consideration it deserved. Neither TCLDF nor CFLN ever threatened to sue Security Property over the collaborative or any other design or issue.

Also, the statement that the state appeals court ruled that Thornton Creek under the South Lot "does not qualify as a creek" is not totally accurate. The appeals court judge ruled "that no creek exists on the Mall property for purposes of" the General Development Plan code section 23.71.024(A)(8)(a). This section of the GDP code requires that the GDP show creeks in the topography and drainage component of the plan. It has not been determined whether Thornton Creek under the South Lot deserves protection under the city Critical Areas Ordinance and State Environmental Policy Act.

Bob Vreeland,

Thornton Creek Legal Defense Fund
bobvreeland@earthlink.net