The Student News Site of University of Arizona

The Daily Wildcat

60° Tucson, AZ

The Daily Wildcat

The Daily Wildcat

 

    Mailbag: Oct. 17

    Parking prices still lower than other schools

    In response to ‘Campus Parking: Slim pickings’ (Oct. 11 issue):

    Michelle,

    I wanted to respond to the editorial written today by you in the Wildcat about campus parking. Having not had an opportunity to address the issues mentioned in the article, I would like to say that many of the statements are simply just not true. Many of the changes that we make are to maintain the integrity of the parking system on campus and to ensure that permit holders have a space to park in when they arrive here. Many of the spaces that are mentioned in the editorial are paid for as reserved spaces, and as far as the disabled spaces go, I am not sure why this would even be addressed by the Wildcat. As for the 9 p.m. rule that is mentioned, this pertains only to lots 5067, 5072, 6090, and 6092. Lot specific permit holders that park in these lots adjacent to their residence halls have asked us to control these lots later for safety reasons. All other lots are controlled until 5 p.m. on campus. Our pricing for parking has not gone up in three years, as we wanted to hold costs steady for students that are challenged by the ever increasing tuition and other expenses of going to college. In addition, our prices are in the lower third of all peer institutions, including Arizona State University, which is at least twice as expensive as UA parking. The benefits of alternative transportation programs provided by PTS are numerous: CatTran, bike share, car share, subsidized Sun Tran passes. The list goes on and on for things that we do to help sustainability and to better the lifestyle of the students. PTS can and should only be seen as a positive partner with the entire UA campus. A partner that is always there for the customer and for the environment.

    — Bill Davidson
    Marketing manager, Parking and Transportation Services

    Stoops gets his deserved punishment

    In response to ‘Stoops’ firing: necessary roughness’ (Oct. 12 issue):

    As an individual who has followed Wildcat football since the days of Frank Kush at ASU, I made a Sept. 26 post on the Arizona Republic online, “Mike Stoops Should Go,” observing that today’s football is two games. One of them is called “Hurt the Quarterback;” that refs should be allowed to penalize coaches for playing injured ballplayers. In both the Oregon and Oregon St. games, Mike Stoops (without scruple) played an injured (Nick) Foles. This is one of the reasons that he was fired. If Tim Kish does not understand the need to establish a consistent running game and protect the quarterback, he may fall into the same pit.

    — Michael J. Beisch

    No Wild West here

    In response to ‘Tucson: a lawless land’ (Oct. 12 issue):

    Your assertion that Arizona is the “Wild West” and bursting with violent crime is simply wrong. Your thesis, while well-written and evocative, was factually unsound.

    — Jason

    In response to ‘Social networking breeds awareness of news’ (Oct. 14 issue):

    Nice column, Ashley. Rock on!

    — Curtis Reid

    More to Discover
    Activate Search