Works of art will distract drivers
Let me get this straight.
The City of Clearwater has partnered with the Downtown Development Board and the Clearwater Downtown Partnership to spend $14,000 to install three artworks in the downtown thoroughfare's median for motorists to view as they are driving through downtown Clearwater. Artwork that is quite noticeable and will cause motorists to take their eyes off their driving responsibilities to view the highly controversial pieces of artwork. Do I have that right?
Perhaps someone in this fine city should check with Mary Jo Weaver, Clearwater sign inspector, regarding her statement published in the St. Petersburg Times concerning the big, bad "Pierogi Guy" who stood by the street waving at customers while dressed in his pierogi costume. I quote Ms. Weaver, "We don't want motorists looking at these people and then rear-ending the cars in front of them."
Does this mean that Clearwater spent money on artwork, but they really don't want anyone looking at it as they drive by, or is it that they don't care if someone rear-ends another car if they were looking at abstract art which cost $14,000?
I say let's give Pierogi Guy the $14,000 to stand in the middle of the median in downtown Clearwater and wave to motorists, as he certainly looks better than the artwork that has been chosen by the committee! Sounds good to me!
Deanne Trill, Palm Harbor
Re: Lion meat not meant to offend | July 22 letter, and A taste of untamed delights | July 5 story
Shame on editor, shame on Spoto's
I was delighted at the public's outrage regarding a restaurant's menu including an endangered species! I am, however, appalled at Spoto's restaurant chef/owner Jimmy Stewart's justification for serving lion. He claims to serve it merely because the option was presented to him to do so.
Certainly, he must realize that if he did not purchase the meat, there would be a chance that the practice of sport-killing these animals would become less profitable. And comparing eating lion with eating other meat is preposterous. There is no comparison to eating an endangered species!
Stewart is indirectly supporting sport killing of this magnificent creature. The owner is obviously interested in one thing only: profit. The practice sickens and offends my sense of responsibility.
To you, the editor: Shame on you for supporting and exploiting this restaurateur's error in judgment and lack of consciousness. Shame on you for printing a favorable article about such an obscene practice.
To the people who chose to eat lion: Shame on you for supporting the senseless killing of an endangered species.
J. Nigro, Clearwater