Corpusfishing.com

[The Trash Heap]

When his letter was given top billing in the C-T's LTTE section today, I believe the editor recognized Bill won that round in the semantic bout with the Shexlickers. "Beach restriction" is still too mild a description for a situation like this, however, where even the right to petition and vote on the issue would be denied by the same editor and Shexlickers. How does "denial of civil rights and beach access by lies, intimidation, and vandalism" sound?

Caller.com

To print this page, select File then Print from your browser
URL: http://www.caller.com/ccct/letters_to_the_editor/article/0,1641,CCCT_841_4696737,00.html
Letters to the Editor: 05.13.06
May 13, 2006


Little people's beach

This letter is in response to Gladys Choyke's letter printed on Sunday, May 7. I question two statements in her letter; "Only a small section is being (restricted) . . ." and "The beach is not being "closed". . ."

If my measurements are correct, and keeping in mind that Padre Balli Park is in the control of Nueces County, approximately 85 percent of the city-controlled Gulf of Mexico beach from the Packery Channel south to the Kleberg County line, the section of beach most accessible to the majority of North Padre Island residents, will be restricted.

Eighty-five percent sounds like Galveston (88 percent) to me.

Speaking of Galveston, a previous Caller-Times article indicated that some Galveston residents stated that they were "intimidated" from using the designated beach parking lots (de facto privatization).

Sign the petition. Let the little people decide.

Bill Arvin
_________________
The Trash Heap Has Spoken!
NNYYAAAHH!!!

[JerryB]

Intimidation about using the pocket parks is very common up there. Some of the developments have put up signs stating no beach access when in fact there is a parking pocket in the area.