The editor is right that for the city to grant money exceptionally - outside its own process - is a bad precedent ("Last-minute reversal set bad precedent," Dec. 6).

However, I support the City Council's action.

There are 70-some people with serious mental illness, most of whom live downtown, who depend on Mid-Valley Housing Plus. The city elders understand that, suddenly deprived of the services that keep them afloat, there would be a series of crises that might easily cost the city much more than this $20,000 grant.

I have two questions:

• Is United Way the best arbiter for these grants? About two years ago, United Way was a failed organization. In fact, it was United Way's inability to pay out its grants that first got Mid-Valley Housing Plus, among others, in financial trouble. This process needs reexamination.

• Why are essential social services being provided by volunteers and nonprofits instead of government? (OK, because this is America and this is how we do things.)

At least the city seems to recognize some responsibility. Friday night the National Alliance on Mental Illness and Mid-Valley Housing Plus host their annual holiday dinner for the mental health community and hope to raise a few hundred dollars for MVH Plus.

Do you know how much work goes into raising a few hundred dollars via these fundraisers? And how many people in this community are engaged in such activity?

It would be pathetic if it weren't so heroic.

If the government would take over "normal" social services, citizen activism would not be so overburdened.

Dianne Farrell, Corvallis

More music funding needed in schools

Last year our community voted to provide funding to support music education for all students when we passed the five-year local option levy.

The levy specified that the money raised from local option taxes was "… to support academic achievement, music skills and appreciation, and the health and physical fitness of all students."

Yet changes in the music program have been minimal.

Next year, I'd like to see a reasonable allocation of the monies go to funding a quality music education program in all our schools.

We offer our children a very limited education if we put a preponderance of our resources into what is traditionally called the core subjects.

It seems to me that music is central to a good education.

Music education offers students many benefits. It promotes creativity and enhances teamwork skills. There is plenty of data showing that students of quality music education programs score higher on standardized tests, such a SAT, and get better grades. Students also learn to perform.

A band, orchestra, or choir enriches the community and allows each student to know the value in hard work that culminates in a successful performance.

The school board should acknowledge the will of the voters by creating an appropriate budget for music education in our schools.

Barbara Thompson, Corvallis

We need different federal farm bill

Since 1937, the U.S. has lost 5 million farms. Today fewer than than 1 million farmers produce all of the food grown in the country.

While small farmers are earning increasingly less money, a few corporate agribusinesses have doubled their profits since 1990.

Current agricultural policies give millions of dollars in subsidies to large farms, which gives those farms an advantage in the market, thereby contributing to the demise of family farmers.

This loss of family farmers is causing economic disaster in rural economies, and contributing to the use of environmentally unsustainable practices.

Every five to seven years Congress renews a piece of legislation called the farm bill, and it's up for renewal right now.

Now is the time to tell our leaders that we want a different farm bill - one that will bring an end to million dollar subsidy payments in the new farm bill.

For more information, visit www.cfra.org.

Caitlin Schroering, Corvallis

Keep Iran military option on the table

The article recently published under the headline "Reversal on Iran hits Bush Credibility" goes directly to the line being offered by Bush haters, non-thinkers and head-in-sand dwellers.

The article does not mention the fact that there is no sign of Iran stopping uranium enrichment nor any high confidence that it has not started the nuclear weapons up again.

With enriched uranium on hand, even if a program has not been started, it is fact that nuclear weapons could be developed in months.

Why dismiss the threat that Iran poses on the basis of this report alone when this source has very limited credibility?

Keeping the military option on the table does not, in any way, commit this country to war but rather lets Iran know that it's there.

Maybe, just maybe, this could have been the main reason they stopped in 2003.

Ted Langton Sr., Corvallis

Vote in Venezuela was all about Bush

Recently in Venezuela, voters turned down constitutional reforms that would have removed presidential term limits, paving the way for Hugo Chavez to run again. A stunning defeat for the would be dictator?

Maybe not. What the U.S. corporate media are not shouting from the rooftops is that of the 69 reforms on the ballot, bundled into several packages, the term limits provision was among the least controversial.

In pre-election polls it had a 60 percent approval rating.

Bad enough, but there is more.

The vote wasn't really about Venzuela at all, according to U.S. news sources; it was a validation of U.S. foreign policy in general and George Bush in particular.

How so? Apparently Chavez, never one for rhetorical subtlety, campaigned for the reforms using a slogan suggesting that a no vote for reform was a yes vote for Bush.

Who would have guessed that the first time George Bush won a national election fair and square it would be in South America?

Jim Roy, Albany

Real danger to U.S. security is Bush

The president seems hell-bent on military action against Iran, just as he did against Iraq.

His comments about Iran leading to World War III seemed strangely reminiscent about his remarks about the mushroom cloud if we didn't act on Iraq.

Now it turns out that he has known for months that Iran stopped weapons systems development four years ago, but that hasn't stopped his ominous threats.

The Washington Post has reported that Bush contends that Iran is still a threat. "Look, Iran was dangerous," Bush said. "Iran is dangerous. And Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

If anyone is dangerous to the economic and military security of this country, it is George Bush.

Philip Scott, Corvallis