To the editor:

Looking back to the Journal-World (Jan. 18) article that quoted me about my inability to afford commuting to Topeka in a personal car, I realize that I neglected to mention that the money paid by van-pool riders also covers the replacement of their van over its 95,000-mile lifespan, and that my van would be the first one retired in November. Subsequent letters to the editor written by Abe Rezayazdi and David Barfield have reiterated that the van-pool program is self-supporting to the point of paying for the replacement van.

Ms. Deanna Williams has pointed out choosing how one gets to work is an economic decision. Most of us in the van pools leave our cars home with our families, and we cannot afford to purchase second vehicles for commuting to work in Topeka. The van-pool program is actually a family-friendly program. I invite Ms. Williams and other interested Journal-World readers to check the state van-pool Web site for more information: http://da.state.ks.us/fm/cmp/information/transition/vanpool/Default.htm.

Additionally, choosing how one gets to work is a personal decision. My choice also happens to conserve petroleum resources, reduce traffic and parking congestion, and diminish air pollution. All Kansans should be interested in these goals. Rather than being touted as an example of governmental inefficiency, the state of Kansas should set the standard for commuter van pools.

Michael L. Pomes,

Lawrence