The city is on the right track with rental property

Regarding the Nov. 10 letter "City's Odd Priorities," from a Trafford owner of rental properties in the city of Pittsburgh: I myself am a landlord, and I agree with the Pittsburgh ordinance on raising the priority of property maintenance code enforcement. The letter suggesting that all resources should be applied to countering violent crime did not change my support for the Pittsburgh ordinance creating fines for unmaintained properties.

A difference between my situation and that of the letter writer is that I'm a landlord in the community where my home is. Because I have to look at tenants' trash across the street from my home, I know the importance of code enforcement and lack thereof. I have thought about this issue from both sides, wearing the landlord hat and wearing the neighbor-of-rental-property hat.

I say that Pittsburgh's ordinance is on the right track, but off on a crucial detail. Local government should hold landlords responsible for keeping their properties trash-free. A landlord can write a lease making the tenant the responsible party with respect to trash. Here's the piece the city of Pittsburgh ordinance is missing: The code enforcement office can record the name of the responsible party at each property -- that is, the person who should be the primary recipient of any notice of violation. The landlord in writing the lease decides whether the responsible party is the landlord, a property manager, a rental agent or the tenant.

KATE LUXEMBURG
Wilkinsburg

---

Piling on landlords

I believe that your Nov. 3 editorial "Trash Talk" is way out of line. Landlords rarely overreact to more oppressive rules that government keeps putting on them. Since when is forcing owners to properly maintain and operate their properties a key function of government? Governments can't even maintain the properties that they themselves own.

I am a landlord. It's a lot harder and more work to be one than most realize. I don't know if city Councilman Bruce Kraus is a landlord, but I believe that his thinking is that of a fool. All that his and City Council's mandates do is provide more money for the city's coffers and take the job of the police away from them and put it on landlords.

For 35 years I've had printed rules concerning the use of apartments including the putting out of trash. If tenants don't own garbage cans, I require all of them to purchase them before they can move in. Does that keep the trash from being scattered at times? No, it does not. When tenants are confronted, they deny that they did it. Do landlords in the city now have to live and sleep in their cars behind each property to watch what the tenants are doing 24 hours a day?

By the way, a cleaner city does nothing to enhance a landlord's property unless he wants to sell it. That is just what I would do if I had rentals in Pittsburgh -- get rid of them.

KERRY L. ROBERTS
Belle Vernon

---

Disregard for patients

I am writing in reference to the Nov. 8 article "West Penn Forces Out Group of 4 Doctors." I find myself among the patients who cannot be seen by their primary care physician for three weeks. During this period I was scheduled for testing at this particular office, to be followed by surgery at another location by a different doctor. I have great confidence in my doctor and am discouraged by the fact that he will be unavailable to me during this process.

Whoever is responsible, it is unfortunate for any patient to be placed in this position. Hippocrates, the father of medicine, found the commitment between doctor and patient so profound he set forth his principles in an oath.

In my present position, it seems that our health-care system is guided more by the principles of the founders of modern economics.

RICHARD K. FRANKOWSKI
Lawrenceville

---

Iraq foresight

I'm still somewhat gloating over the fact the Barack Obama has defeated John McCain, which in time, I think will be better for our nation. Naysayers will continue to say that he lacks the judgment or the experience to make sound decisions when it comes to foreign policy, but I know (and believe) differently. He (Barack Obama) was completely against invading Iraq from the outset, and that's why he got my vote.

TOM BURNS
Rosslyn Farms

---

A victory for change

On April 19, 1775, on a misty spring morning a shot was fired that was heard 'round the world. This set into motion a movement that would change history. These colonists, mere farmers and laborers, stood tall and told their British guardians that they would put their lives on the line in order to live free.

America became known as the land of the free and the beacon of hope and opportunity. With this came an influx of immigrants in search of a new life. However, a terrible stain in its history was that peculiar institution of slavery. Not only slaves and their descendants but also many of these immigrants were unable to fully participate in society. The reality was that only a choice few were allowed to reach out and grasp the American dream.

On Nov. 4, 2008, at 11 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on a clear, unusually warm autumn night, an explosion was heard 'round the world. The people of this country -- farmers, laborers, minorities and sons and daughters of those immigrants -- stood tall and elected the first African-American president of the United States. This was a vote for change -- a change in how all Americans want to be governed, but more importantly, a change in how all its people will be perceived from now on, with liberty and justice for all.

Now all citizens, even those who for so long felt lost and disenfranchised are a part of that magical, mystical promise of America.

LEE ZELKOWITZ
Penn Hills

---

Flippant Obama

I have to agree with Chris Armstrong of Shadyside, who wrote last week that he was disturbed and disgusted that those in attendance at Sen. John McCain's concession speech chose to boo our newly elected president ("Rude Response," Nov. 8 letters). As a Republican and McCain supporter, I completely agree with Mr. Armstrong.

I was also disgusted that at his first press conference as president-elect last Friday, Barack Obama chose to denigrate former first lady Nancy Reagan and the memory of former President Ronald Reagan by making a careless and flippant remark about Mrs. Reagan conducting seances -- something that she apparently has never done ("Obama Calls Nancy Reagan to Apologize," Nov. 8).

One of the main reasons why I did not vote for Barack Obama was because of questions I had regarding his judgment in several areas. Comments such as these are unnecessary and disrespectful, and I certainly would have thought that Mr. Obama would know better by now.

BRIAN BEERMAN
McCandless

---

He's earned nada

This letter is in response to Chris Armstrong of Shadyside ("Rude Response," Nov. 8 letters). He stated he was disgusted that the McCain supporters booed when John McCain mentioned Barack Obama's name at his concession speech.

Mr. Armstrong, respect is earned and Mr. Obama hasn't earned a darn thing. I will never call him president. I just hope these four years go by fast.

America wanted change -- well, change is coming. God help us all.

JOYCE FAYNOR
South Park

---

It's simple: Don't go to bars that allow smoking

Regarding the Nov. 11 editorial "Smoke-Filled Rooms: Tobacco Finds Some Havens Under the New State Law": I say, "Thank God for that." I may not be a smoker or think that it is healthy, but what is there really to complain about if 361 taverns that serve very little food allow people to smoke in their establishments?

If the owners wish to allow their patrons to smoke, they should have every right to, and you know what? You do not have to go there if you have a problem with that. I seriously doubt that you are going to visit all of the 5,500 bars and restaurants in the area, let alone the 361 that allow smoking. So why does this really bother you? That people enjoy smoking? That they have places where they can go and mingle and smoke in a private establishment? They have a right to smoke, and you have a right not to be a patron to these bars.

It is a simple choice. Besides, health is not a right, it is a privilege. You chose to avoid places where secondhand smoke may be and -- amazingly! -- you don't encounter secondhand smoke! Imagine that.

Don't get me wrong. I do agree with the ban on smoking in restaurants; no one wants a fog of smoke around when they are trying to enjoy a meal that they are paying for. But when I visit a bar, frankly I expect there to be people smoking. Really how "healthy" are you being anyway if you are frequenting a bar?

MATTHEW D. WILSON
Oakland

---