Letters to the Editors: SunTrust focuses on serving clients

Letters to the Editors: SunTrust focuses on serving clients

April 16th, 2012 in Opinion Letters

SunTrust focuses on serving clients

Several recent stories unfairly question SunTrust's commitment to this community and to serving the needs of wealth management clients. I appreciate the opportunity to set the record straight.

SunTrust has a long, well-documented track record of meeting the needs of clients and serving this community; our 290 teammates deliver industry-leading client service every day through more than 30 branches in the area.

Further, SunTrust has been providing wealth management services for more than 100 years. The suggestion that some vacant office space somehow signals a lack of commitment to providing these services to clients is not based on fact -- and facts are stubborn things. We have 30 experienced, well-qualified, wealth investment and trust professionals in Chattanooga dedicated to delivering those capabilities to clients. While the strategy 30 years ago might have called for these teammates to be located in a central office, to better meet the needs of clients today, our team is dispersed throughout the market.

Banking and wealth management are dynamic businesses and we believe increased competition is good for clients. However, it is only fair that your readers know that our commitment to this market has never been stronger, and we remain focused on delivering high-quality service and the financial tools -- including wealth management services -- that help our clients achieve their goals.

MICHAEL R. BUTLER

President and Chief Executive Officer,

SunTrust Bank

Eastern Tennessee

Watson's biology degree didn't take

Although Gov. Haslam said "we really do have to train more students" in science, he allows the "evolution" bill to become law. Does he really value science education?

Bo Watson's degree is a BA, biology, not BS -- there is a difference. And it seems that the biology part, like some vaccinations, did not take.

He justifies the bill as allowing teachers to feel safe discussing weaknesses of scientific theories while teaching within the state curriculum. If within the curriculum, in what sense do they need special protection? If they don't feel comfortable talking about science, they have no business teaching it.

Science teachers are protected in so far as presenting what we know, how we know it, and what we don't know about science. If they inject faith, they should be concerned about repercussions, because they are failing students in their responsibility to teach science.

I am weary of legislators ignorant of science confusing the questions science can answer with those that science does not purport to, and cannot, answer (e.g., ethical, philosophical, spiritual).

The ignorant beliefs of legislators pandering to certain religious interests should not carry more weight than the large group of credible scientists who lobbied against this bill.

JANET SECREST

Hixson