Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

"Minnesosiphus": Weary person from a northern state doomed by having a pile of snow so high that each new shovel-full tumbles back down, and must be heaved up again. And again.

Jim Almendinger, Stillwater

Thank you, Star Tribune editorial staff, for adding a little different perspective from the common theme we hear about war between Russia and Ukraine in the Jan. 18 Readers Write.

There were, however, two letters on the same page that followed the narrative we hear over and over. Two to one is not what I would call balanced, and the commentary by Hal Brands on Jan. 13, which took up half of a page on Opinion Exchange ("Now for the good news ..."), deserves a commentary of equal length that speaks to those who have a different opinion of the war and the history that has led to the awful mess in Ukraine we see today. If our Congress can't have a little debate before sending us into another war, we could at least have some in our printed media.

Seems to me that when the U.S. invaded and occupied Iraq in 1991, there were also similar reports of artifacts being stolen from museums in Baghdad. Maybe the thieves took them to preserve them from our invasion? Maybe the same thing for the Russians? There is always more than one side to a story.

•••

Would someone please tell Fritz Knaak ("Fine European whine won't bring back globalist U.S.," Opinion Exchange, Jan. 19) that Russia invaded Ukraine over a year ago? Although it's hard to tell from his commentary if he supports or opposes MAGA isolationism and "America first" dogma, the need for U.S. involvement to prevent aggression is the greatest it has been in decades. We can deter the aggressors now, or try to correct matters later (you can also mention World War II to Mr. Knaak). In addition to national security, issues like global climate change and our interdependence on international markets mean this is not a time for us to put our head in the sand. Things have changed since 1802.

Roger Hippert, New Ulm, Minn.

For the last three weeks, while my car has been in the shop, I have been using Metro Transit to travel extensively all over the metropolitan area. I have reached the following conclusion: The farther the driver is from the back of vehicle (light rail and articulated buses) and the easier it is to get on the vehicle without paying the fare (light rail and bus rapid transit), the greater the chance for disruptive or even dangerous behavior. It's really that simple.

This should be an "all hands on deck" moment for Metro Transit and its troubled guiding agency, the Metropolitan Council. Anyone at Metro Transit who is not involved with day-to-day operations (for example, designing extensions or revisions that are potentially unnecessary due to rider-safety concerns) should be tasked with traveling the system (not just commuting from home) for part of each week to supply the eyes and ears that the Metro Transit police chief does not seem to have at his disposal ("'Eye-opening' transit crime spike," Jan. 19). They don't have to provide enforcement, but they could send trouble alerts via text message to a central dispatch facility.

•••

Reading the limp excuse from Metro Transit management, all I could do is laugh (and cry). For Metro Transit leadership to admit the report about the disastrous state of our once-excellent transit system was "eye opening" is to admit they haven't been on a bus or train in years. All these many-pointed plans are little more than wasted paper in the excuse mill. If the Metropolitan Council cannot see the problem is management, then the council needs to open its eyes. I rarely ride the buses anymore and certainly not the trains. As a lost passenger I am outraged. As a citizen I feel bad for the incredibly dedicated staff — drivers and others — who have to work in this unsafe, filthy environment.

Michael Smith, Minneapolis

In the 2022 election season, candidates rightly emphasized reducing violent crime. That is why I was delighted to see the Star Tribune coverage of proposals to reform criminal justice for Minnesota's young people ("DFL pushes to reform juvenile justice system," Jan. 13).

The goal of safer communities is not achieved by more of the same — more policing, more incarceration, longer sentences and more probation and supervision. We need to interrupt the cycle of violence. We can do this for the children and communities of Minnesota through proven restorative methods.

A state office of restorative justice could set high standards, share best practices and monitor and measure outcomes of local juvenile justice programs. Please ask your legislators to support this legislation — specifically HF 46 and SF 55 — this session.

Dorothy J. Doyle, St. Louis Park

•••

If Gov. Tim Walz truly wants to make Minnesota the best state to raise kids ("Walz plan takes aim at child poverty," Jan. 18), then we must invest in early childhood education. As economists, pediatricians and the business-led Itasca Project all point out, 80% of brain development happens in the first three years of life — literally a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to prepare a child to learn and to function socially. The alternative is to continue having children who fail in school and settle disagreements with a gun.

Karen Bachman, Minneapolis

I am wondering if the folks who voted for the Democrats in Minnesota had unlimited abortion up to birth and legalized marijuana as their reasons. This flies in the face of Walz claiming he is going to make Minnesota the best place for children. That certainly doesn't include unborn children, and legalizing marijuana adds to the burden of parents trying to keep their children away from things that can do them harm.

Louise Burton, Minneapolis

As a Roseville resident, parent of students and the spouse of a Roseville schools staff member, I disagree with both the assessment and conclusion of the Star Tribune's Jan. 15 editorial ("Stop silencing public input").

For over two years, the community input time at ISD 623 school board meetings has been used by a recurring cast to perform their most recent outrages before the cameras and a captive audience (the board, which by rule cannot respond). Their performance complete, the cast invariably walks out on the rest of the meeting agenda, to go use the content so graciously provided for them by district taxpayers.

Removing this time from the meeting broadcast is neither a slippery slope to closed government nor censorship. The people filling the community input time are still free to communicate with each other and the board on any topic they choose, but the district is not required to be the conduit for their communication.

Jonathan Beck, Roseville

Regarding "Norwegian archaeologists find 'oldest datable runestone'" (Jan. 18): Once the newly found runestone is translated, don't you think it could be my long-lost family recipe for lefse? Or lutefisk?