Negotiate on SMU control

Re: “United Methodists should have control of SMU — Issue has been settled in church’s favor since 1911,” by Cynthia B. Astle, Sunday Opinion.

Astle provides a good summary of the argument about relations between Southern Methodist University and the United Methodist Church. As a retired faculty member at SMU, former dean of SMU’s Perkins School of Theology and a United Methodist minister, I find myself on both sides of the question.

Astle is quite right to say that the relation between church and university set out in the founding documents is part of the university’s heritage and part of its commitment to past generations of supporters. If this relationship is going to be changed, it should be done by mutual negotiation, not by legal action from one side or the other.

On the other hand, the productive history of this relationship, especially in the work of Perkins School of Theology, is not dependent on specific legal arrangements. In the United States, the United Methodist Church has five theological schools that are integral parts of a church-affiliated university at Boston, Drew, Duke and Emory, as well as SMU. The legal relationships between the church and these universities vary, but at all of them the school of theology builds important connections between the university and the community. And the university provides educational resources that no theological school could offer on its own.

The future of this collaboration at SMU does not rest on the outcome of a lawsuit. It depends on both church and university moving beyond recent disputes about ownership and control to rediscover their shared interests in truth and justice.

Robin W. Lovin, Dallas

Don’t dump, donate

Re: “Stores’ trash is a treasure for the taking — Dumpster divers find perfectly good merchandise that’s been tossed,” Sunday news story.

I read this story about dumpster diving with a combination of disgust and outrage. Can someone explain why retailers aren’t donating these goods to shelters, thrift stores, the homeless, schools or some other worthy outlet? Not only are they bypassing an opportunity to help the less fortunate, they are filling our landfills with more trash, most of which is not biodegradable.

Jim Welch, Dallas/Northaven Park

Politicians the nouveau riche

Re: “Salary set for new city manager — Base pay of $450K decided by council in 13-2 vote is third highest in Texas,” Friday news story.

If you’re scraping by on a teacher’s salary or on some kind of retirement that barely pays the rent, be happy, don’t worry, even though you are paying our politicians a king’s ransom in salary. Almost a half million dollars a year for a city manager voted on by the Dallas City Council is evidence that politicians are the nouveau riche in our society.

Don Skaggs, Garland

Enforce term limits

Recently, the Neighborhood Coalition of Dallas called on city leaders to comply with the city code regarding term limits for boards and commissions. As a resident invested in our city’s future, I echo their plea: Dallas leadership must replace all termed-out appointees immediately.

This simple action would demonstrate a commitment to the city charter and save taxpayers the cost of an unnecessary and preventable lawsuit. Dallas voters approved Proposition S, allowing citizens to sue the city to enforce the charter. Along with rejecting council pay raises, this sent a clear message: Public trust in the Dallas City Council is deeply eroded.

Ignoring citizen concerns, as seen during the Forward Dallas 2.0 process, will only widen the divide. Instead, leaders should seize this opportunity to rebuild trust. By acknowledging missteps, committing to transparency and appointing representatives who genuinely reflect the will of Dallas residents, city leaders can begin repairing their relationship with the community.

This is a chance for Dallas to turn the tide and reestablish confidence in its leadership. It’s time for city leaders to rise to the occasion and demonstrate responsible governance.

Natalie LeVeck, Dallas

Support bloodsport legislation

Re: “Texas’ Bloodsport Laws Must Be Toughened — Dog and cockfighting will be curbed only if the penalties are severe,” Friday editorial.

The SPCA of Texas urges North Texans to support the efforts of Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, who, working with Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot, recently filed House Bill 1795 to strengthen penalties for animal fighting. If passed, this law would make most animal fighting-related offenses felonies, aligning penalties for cockfighting with those for dogfighting.

The importance of this legislation is clear following the Dec. 17, 2024, animal seizure, resulting in the SPCA of Texas taking custody of 50 roosters, 43 hens, 34 adult dogs and 10 puppies from the Kaufman County property in partnership with law enforcement. The animals were found in appalling conditions, some with injuries consistent with fighting. Many dogs were unlawfully restrained without adequate shelter or water, clear violations of the Safe Outdoor Dogs Act.

While the SPCA of Texas is dedicated to evaluating, treating and caring for the animals we rescue, including these animals, stronger laws are critical to deterring and preventing such cruelty.

We call on North Texans to work with the Texas Humane Legislation Network, which makes it easy for citizens to ask their state legislators to support this legislation, and to report suspected animal abuse to law enforcement authorities.

Together, we can significantly reduce the horrors of animal fighting and cruelty. The SPCA of Texas will continue to speak for animals, but we need the community’s help to make lasting change.

Chris Luna, Dallas

President and CEO, SPCA of Texas

We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here. If you have problems with the form, you can submit via email at letters@dallasnews.com