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must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.


There's a very large difference between 'impractical' & 'idiotic'

To The Daily Sun

I was embarrassed and insulted to read a letter accusing state Rep. Norman Major, of Plaistow, of suffering from dementia because he proposed an alternative way to pay for the upkeep of New Hampshire roads. (Laconia Daily Sun, page 4, Oct. 13).

Norm Major is chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. He's a Republican and I'm a Democrat, and he's a friend of mine. I served with him in the 2013-2014 Legislature. I'm in a much better position to judge Rep. Major's mental status, and he is a competent, responsible and articulate representative. He is a credit to our state.

Rep. Major's sin is that he proposed to impose the fee by the mile instead of by the gallon of fuel. (Our gas tax is actually a "road toll" because — theoretically — all the revenue is to be used to maintain and improve our roads.) It might surprise the reader to know that New Hampshire charges a per-mile fee for use of certain roads on top of the fee charged per gallon of gas. You pay this fee every time you drive to Manchester and south on I-93, or Portsmouth on the Spaulding Turnpike, or Boston on I-95.

Why paying for the roads based on how much you use them instead of by how much gas you buy is idiotic, rather than simply impractical, is a mystery to me. Perhaps bringing up new ideas and talking about them would make our government work better than calling people names.

David O. Huot



  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 254

Sanbornton residents enjoy major benefits from Recycling Center

To The Daily Sun,

I am disappointed that our (Sanbornton) selectmen decided to close the Recycling Center at the Transfer Station — a disservice to our town residents.

We know from experience that sending material to landfills can become one of the biggest cost items in a town budget. Recycling is a key component is keeping taxpayer costs down, providing great benefits to town residents.

Some of our trash is currently being hauled to a landfill in New York State. Sanbornton resident can now hitch a ride on the trash truck and take a fall foliage tour to upper New York.

Along with reducing landfill costs, town residents experience significant benefits:

1. Several years ago, a woman retrieved a doll house for her children from the Recycling Center. Since her children outgrew its use, she wanted to return it to the Recycling Center for another family to use. She was turned away.

2. A gentleman in a wheelchair can no longer use the Recycling Center as his library, as all of the books have been disposed of. No longer can library staff bring books and duplicate material to the Transfer Station for resident use.

3. This facility provided an opportunity in our rural community for neighbors to meet neighbors and have a healthy exchange of ideas.

4. Lastly, no longer can Sanbornton dogs look forward to getting in their owner's pickup truck on a Saturday and going to the Recycling Center to get their "free" dog biscuit.

In my opinion, the closing of this facility and program represents poor stewardship by our selectmen.

Tom Salatiello


  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 351