Recalling an O’s Hall of Fame manager not named Earl

Thank you for the recent article on the unsuccessful consideration of Hank Peters and Davey Johnson to be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame (“Former Orioles manager and second baseman Davey Johnson, GM Hank Peters not elected into Baseball Hall of Fame,” Dec. 3).

While it is true that Earl Weaver is the only Baltimore manager of the modern era inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame, I feel compelled to mention a second Baltimore Orioles manager inducted in 1996 along with Earl. Ned Hanlon was inducted that year. He was the manager of the Baltimore Orioles from 1892 through 1898 and won three National League pennants during that span of time.

Hanlon’s team also had six future Hall of Fame players. In 1899 when the National League reduced the number of teams from 12 to 8, many of the star players went on to play for either the Brooklyn Dodgers or New York Yankees. What goes around comes around.

— Paul Schatz, Havre de Grace

Charm City Lights raises equity concerns

While the new Charm City Lights is a welcome addition to the holiday season (“Charm City Lights to transform Druid Hill Park with over 250,000 holiday lights,” Dec. 5), we wish to raise equity concerns relating to the event.

First, the vast majority of Charm City Lights dates are accessible only to cars. One-third of Baltimore’s residents do not own a private vehicle, and this is exclusionary and contrary to Baltimore City Recreation and Parks’ social equity mandate regarding universal access. One night each for bikers and walkers out of 25 nights means many people will be unable to enjoy the event. Additionally, the fee structure makes it more expensive for a family to enjoy the event on foot or bike than by car.

Second, closing the entire park (although Charm City Lights only uses a portion of the park’s roads and trails) daily at 5 p.m. — with towing starting at 3 p.m. — to anyone not paying to view the lights is further contrary to the city agency’s mission, and needlessly closes parts of Druid Hill Park that should remain open. The park is a taxpayer-funded resource used in all seasons for diverse recreation activities. Though it gets dark early in December, many residents use the park at the end of the workday and making the entire park available only to participants in one activity — which requires a fee — is inequitable.

We hope that for the 2024 edition of Charm City Lights, Recreation and Parks will better balance access to the event for residents on foot, on bikes and in cars, as well as maintain park access for those using other park facilities and not attending the paid event.

— Guli Fager and Andrew N. Dupuy, Baltimore

Voters can fill legislative vacancies by mail, if needed

The argument for appointing replacements to vacancies in the Maryland General Assembly is based largely on the claim that holding special elections would take too long and cost too much money (“Finding a better way to fill Maryland’s state legislative vacancies,” Dec. 5).

Well, there are two simple solutions: Restrict the period of time for campaigning to just a few weeks, and conduct the election entirely by mail. We conducted the Maryland 2020 primary election almost entirely by mail. Many counties then cast more than 50% of their ballots by mail in the 2020 general election. It’s high time we switched Maryland to voting entirely by mail all of the time just as Oregon, Washington and Colorado have done successfully with lower costs and higher voter turnout. Filling General Assembly vacancies using vote-by-mail would be a good first step.

— Don DeArmon, Frederick

First Amendment concerns over gun safety pamphlet are valid

In a recent letter to the editor, (“Gun dealers show ‘gleeful indifference’ to safety,” Nov. 26), Jim Giza criticizes local firearm dealers for resisting Anne Arundel County’s requirement to distribute suicide prevention literature with firearm purchases. I think that the writer is excessively dismissive of the First Amendment concerns associated with this situation. In this case, he approves of the government message and disapproves of the people who are being forced to deliver it. But it should not require too much imagination on his part to conceive of a scenario in which those conditions are reversed.

With rare exception, the First Amendment should shield private parties from being compelled participants in government speech. For the protection of all citizens from government coercion, this principle should not be altered simply because a particular instance of government speech is well-intentioned.

— Bradford Sharpless, Reisterstown