Make TEP bill reflect energy use more closely

Re: the May 12 article "Customers can't avoid cost bump in TEP deal."

The Pima County Interfaith Council, representing more than 20 congregations and community groups, considers the 40 percent increase in TEP's residential basic charge a hardship for many citizens.

There is an alternative: Instead of making the increase a fixed charge that customers must pay regardless of their energy use, the charge should be based on the energy portion of the bill. This alternative would empower customers to reduce their costs by reducing energy use. This would be a win-win situation for those who are least able to pay, those who have made their homes energy-efficient and those in the future who will have a greater incentive to save energy.

The Arizona Corporation Commission should also support energy efficiency programs that keep energy costs low for everyone, support local jobs and boost Tucson's economy. More energy efficiency will help all customers lower their utility bills now and in the future.

Alice Weekley

Chairwoman, Green Economy Team, Pima County Interfaith Council

Benghazi, IRS, AP relatively minor issues

Benghazi, IRS, AP, immigration, jobs, economy, taxes, health care, failing education, global climate change, population growth, environmental issues, terrorism, melting ice caps, drought, flooding, gun control, mass shootings, mental health, poverty, growing racism and anti-Semitism, nuclear and chemical weapons, abortion rights, states' rights, increasing arms trade, foreign economies, debt.

These, and many more issues, confront the United States today. What are our elected officials doing? Trying to dismantle the elections for Democrats in 2014 and 2016 by discrediting the current president.

The most important issues being examined in Washington are the first three: Benghazi, IRS, AP. Is this what we elected them to do and be paid by our taxes? If so, I want my money back.

My message - as should be the message of all Americans - every administration has had problems. Drop it and get back to work.

Sheldon Metz

Retired, Tucson

Speed cameras save lives, should stay

Re: the May 18 article "County's speed cameras might go."

I was dismayed to read that Pima County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry wants to pull the plug on speed cameras.

The article continues to say that Mr. Huckelberry wrote in a memo that "the number of fatal crashes has declined by 48 percent and this is a significant, positive trend." My husband and I constantly observe red-light runners at almost every intersection in town, especially those that have left and right green turn arrows. We shake our heads and wonder what is so important in the driver's life that he or she needs to run a red light.

Please Mr. Huckelberry, don't get rid of our speed cameras. They save lives!

Barbara Gross

Retired, Oro Valley

Eliminate speed traps that are unreasonable

Re: the May 18 article "County's speed cameras might go."

The fact that Chuck Huckelberry wants to remove the speed cameras on some county roadways has caused quite a reaction from the community. However, speed cameras are not the issue. The speed limits posted by the county are the problem, at least the one on River Road from Campbell Avenue to Alvernon Way. Generally speed limits should be set as near as possible to what 85 percent of drivers are driving at, or below.

It would be good if our public officials and the general public would be educated on how speed limits should be established on public roadways. We do not need unreasonable speed traps. It would be interesting to see a copy of the traffic engineering study that was done to establish the speed limit on River Road from Campbell Avenue to Alvernon Way.

Richard C. Buchanan

Retired, Tucson