Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Editors reserve the right to edit letters for spelling, grammar, punctuation, excessive length and unsuitable content.


Democrats driving country toward one-party future, a blue one

To The Daily Sun,

Can't you just hear those New England and New York pundits now? "Goll darn that President Trump! Sending more snow to the northeastern "blue" states again. And more on the way. It's all his fault." And other than Massachusetts, where at least one court judge believes in the Constitution, the rest of the northeast will file lawsuits asking for a stay for any additional snow this spring.

Oh yeah, and how about the plea for another march on D.C.? This time the northeast environmentalists will shout "Down with DJT! Look what he's done to our always blue sky spring golf outings. This snow and blizzard conditions are exactly what we mean by global warming. Who cares what the season is, what do we care? He certainly doesn't; he can play anytime at Doral." (And it probably drives all the left mad that those trips to Florida are now on Air Force One. After all, that's not the same as vacationing on the Vineyard or in Hawaii.)

Poor President Trump. Blamed for everything. Even his hairstyle.

Democrats have to "wake up and smell the roses" before the country has a one party system — and it will not be colored blue.

Jim Raschilla

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 368

Why won't selectmen share lawyer's advice on private roads?

To The Daily Sun,

The public are "hardworking" folks as well, but do not have to suck up to the Board of Selectmen, or other "officials." That is not the issue.

I don't have a blog to pontificate on, nor intend to do so. Who elected you, Paul Punturieri, to be the Town of Moultonborough's conscience?

Policy #1 is a legal fiasco, as I'm sure competent legal counsel has advised.

Your comment about Page 22 Section 7.2 is more of your "fake news." It does not claim the 22 foot width that Policy #2 (not #1) does, and caused the angina in some folks. Why are you trying to confuse the two policies ... or are you genuinely confused ... again.

The widths in the Planning Board regulations are on page 23 and refer to 18, 20, 22, and 24 foot road widths with the assigned category. Policy 2 is what the Planning Board had queried to the Selectboard, and the Public Hearing was about. Policy 2 still shows 16 feet. The new recommended Policy 2 (at the top of the page on the town website) shows 22 feet. The real issue is the selectmen have no business having a policy on that. Maybe the town will have more sense, when it votes on Article 16 at the Town Meeting, and it gets rid of Policy 2.

The Prudential Affairs Doctrine gives no license to the Selectboard to act as the Planning Board. Ordinances and policies are different. I presume legal counsel has advised accordingly. There surely is no statute that does so either.

There has yet to be official "talk" about Policy 1 and the concern, that has been/is the elimination of plowing private roads, after this winter ... or are you confused about that as well? Some of us don't expect the selectmen to bring it up till after the winter. I've begun legal research on plowing private roads, and that was the purpose of my note to the chair and vice-chair of the Planning Board. It is not their actions that are confusing. It was a query to ascertain that the regulations of the Planning Board do not address plowing private roads, and get them out of the loop. The problem is with the Selectboard's policies.

I have no doubt that town counsel understands the real issue. I guess you haven't been listening or reading what has been sent the selectmen regarding the issue. Why doesn't the Selectboard waive attorney privilege, and tell the town what town counsel has advised already, about the presumptive legal stance that towns cannot legally plow private roads, with some exceptions.

Maybe you're being shortchanged. The selectmen are not volunteers. They are paid $4,000 a year, with the chair being paid $4,500 a year. It's a choice to run for office, not volunteering. Is it worth it? We'll see what the town thinks about its past choices come March. You'll still have your blog soapbox, but ...

I don't have, nor want, the audience you have. I will blind copy a lot of folks however. There's no comparison to the "exposure" you have. I don't view your comments on your bog as "electioneering," in your quest for another term. We both know that is illegal. Your disparaging comments, in the past election cycle, toward Rep. Cordelli didn't work either.

Joseph Cormier


  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 444