Ann Donnelly expressed her ‘strongest possible opposition’ to any further consideration of Councilor Wil Fuentes’ suggestion that the invocation be removed from Council meetings
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and do not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com
Here is the letter I sent to all County Council members on Jan. 13.
“Dear Council Members:
I am writing to express my strongest possible opposition to your further consideration of Councilor Fuentes’ suggestion that the invocation be removed from Council meetings. I appreciate that at your January 9 meeting you agreed to pause a decision on that suggestion.
Our region and state are facing very serious budget crises. As I wrote in my January 4 Columbian column on the challenges of paying for light rail, “on the state and local level, the Washington legislature, the Clark County Council, and the Vancouver City Council are simultaneously grappling with budget deficits and rising costs. When asked, voters are inclined to revolt against new taxes, as occurred last November with Vancouver’s failed Proposition 4 to pay for additional police officers.”
At the County level, voters will at some point be asked to approve measures providing new taxation for our urgently needed jail remodel and for additional Sheriff’s personnel to address our extreme need in that area. Our needs to address homelessness, mental illness, and drug addiction are also well known to all of you.
You must demonstrate to County voters that you, their elected leaders, understand these priorities. Councilor Fuentes’ divisive suggestion on his first day in office dangerously sends the opposite message. That he even momentarily considered removing the Pledge of Allegiance is even more concerning.
When you go to the taxpayers of this county for additional money out of their already burdened family budgets, you are going to need every vote, as shown by the results of Proposition 4. You cannot afford to alienate many who believe that a moment of reflection and faith to begin a meeting is time well spent in these challenging times.
As Manager Otto correctly observed, the invocation is not restricted to prayers. For people of faith, speakers of many churches and belief systems may participate.
Thank you for setting aside this ill-considered topic of discussion.”
Ann Donnelly
Vancouver
Also read:
- Opinion: Make employers pay striking workers? Too silly!
Elizabeth New (Hovde) critiques Senate Bill 5041, which would provide unemployment benefits to striking workers, calling it costly and disruptive. - Opinion: ‘Ridgefield residents deserve better stewardship of their tax dollars’Rob Anderson analyzes Ridgefield School District’s levy proposals, raising concerns about fiscal responsibility and taxpayer impact.
- Letter: Vancouver resident Ann Donnelly shares her letter to members of the County Council regarding the invocation and Pledge of Allegiance at County Council meetingsVancouver resident Ann Donnelly opposes removing the invocation and Pledge of Allegiance from County Council meetings, emphasizing unity and shared values.
- Letter: ‘The Pledge of Allegiance is more than just a tradition’Vancouver resident Cemal Richards urges Clark County Council to preserve the Pledge of Allegiance as a unifying symbol of shared American values.
- Letter: ‘You may not sir, but most Americans cherish these words’Anna Miller of Camas voices her support for keeping the invocation and Pledge of Allegiance at County Council meetings, highlighting their significance to American values.
