To The Daily Sun,
Kudos to the residents of the Town of Grafton who last March at the polls had the foresight not only to vote in clear opposition to the proposed Wild Meadows Wind Farm (366 against, 166 in favor), but also for having the perspicacity to vote in place a " Community Rights Based Ordinance" as a legal stance to decide their own energy future.
The towns of Alexandria (273 against, 101 in favor) , and more recently Danbury (249 against, 116 in favor), have also voted against this corporate onslaught in clear, verifiable and democratic fashion.
Just yesterday The N.H. Site Evaluation Committee rejected as incomplete the application of the Spanish company, Iberdrola, though most probably not as a result of an order by the N.H. Legislature to put in place a re-evaluation of how and where these wind turbines are sited. In addition, The Society For The Protection Of New Hampshire Forests petitioned that the Wild Meadows Wind Farm be suspended for a year until a review of the SEC siting criteria is completed. This together with earlier filings by the Appalachian Mountain Club, New Hampshire Wind Watch and the Wild Meadows Legal Fund point to growing opposition to wind towers in our scenic ridgelines. And in Groton there is ongoing bickering as to whether Groton Wind (another Iberdrola project) is in compliance with fire and safety issues due to violations there.
Meanwhile, these wind companies, both foreign and domestic, scramble for available state and federal subsidies while their reps continue to dissemble, mislead the public and be in denial as to the wishes of a clear and democratic majority in these N.H. towns.
Of course, contrary to what our Supreme Court ruled in 2010 in their 'Citizens United' decision, these corporate entities are not in fact people. Why not you ask? The answer comes easily. People most often possess a conscience and have a sense of civic responsibility.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 21 January 2014 09:43
To The Daily Sun,
I dryly note that progressives became so hated during the last century, they needed to rebrand themselves. They chose "Liberal" to next redefine and abuse. But their intent was not to elevate Classic Western Liberalism that emphasized the individual and rights granted by God but the regressive idea that the individual should be subservient to the collective which would grant (and therefore, could revoke) those rights, which otherwise should be held inviolate, including the right to private property. And as we know, they blew that word up and have retreated to the original word, progressive. Either way, I call them incremental socialists.
The Hathaway House situation in Laconia provides us with yet another GRAND example of people absconding with a word's original meaning: "stakeholder". Previously viewed as simply a person that held the stakes for erecting a tent or a fence, they have redefined its usage by involving themselves into "the process" as "interested and involved citizens". At the national and international level, they are generally known as Non-Governmental Organizations. Think of the EPA, its royal decrees (void of legislation) — and the environmental groups that insert themselves and "advise" on policy. Even though they have no ownership interest in property whose value may well be diminished, they have no problem in helping to promulgate regulations that diminishes the rights of the owners to use that property. They call themselves "advocates" — we used to call these people busybodies.
"Stakeholders" exist locally as well and have decided this building must be saved 'for posterity" and "historical purposes" — but put the entire financial burden upon the property owner and none on themselves. In other words, people like Pam Clark and Dorothy Duffy show a lack of respect of the right to private property (oft said that if we did not have such a right, we would not have freedom either as the Declaration of Independence was first drafted as "the Pursuit of Property"). They seem intent, in their communitarian-styled letters, to want to effectively deny the owner the use (or destruction) of their own property. One could consider this "theft without actual taking", for if control is taken away, what is the good of ownership?
They also have no problem in "hurting the little people" with their boycott call — the employees. Nice to see these communitarians are willing to up the local unemployment rate. Tell you what, Ms. Clark and Ms. Duffy — if you don't like what the owner is doing, reach into your own collective pockets and buy it. And perform the maintenance that you are screaming about if it is that important to you.
For then, you'd stop being busybodies and be property owners. Maybe.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 21 January 2014 09:39
To The Daily Sun,
This is in response to Niel Young's letter of Friday. I dryly note that while Jane Cormier may be in his "NOT friends" category (a rather large set of people, I imagine), I am quite sure I rate much lower than that (if at all, eh Niel?).
That said, ditto pretty much the rest of what he said; my vote is going to the conservative in the Special Election for District 1 Executive Council seat — Joe Kenney. He knows how the state political system runs, the doggedness and discipline of a prior Marine, and the conservative values as a foundation. It is time to elect someone who follows and stands by his values instead of the go-along-to-get-along mantra that waver in any political breeze.
He certainly has my endorsement.
Last Updated on Monday, 20 January 2014 11:56
To The Daily Sun,
I would like to comment further on the letter written in the January 18 issue of this paper by Thomas Tardif reminding us of the embezzlement of funds by the former County Administrator, Nancy Cook, which occurred under Mr. Boothy's watch as county commissioner. Your right about him (and the other commissioners) not fulfilling his fiduciary responsibilities. As if this were not bad enough what happened after is even more reason for the voters to shun Mr. Boothby.
When Ms. Cook was relieved from her office of county administrator she was replaced with the current administrator Debra Shackett, there are a lot of questions surrounding this decision. The job description for county administrator in every county in New Hampshire states that the MINIMUM educational requirement be a BS degree in a related field, (some require MS), yet Ms. Shackett has only a high school diploma. Why would the commissioners fill this important position with someone so woefully unqualified? Could the fact that she was related to a prominent state representative have anything to do with it?
I will remind everyone that Ms. Shackett's salary is $106,000 per year, plus perks. I believe this make her the highest paid county employee. Not bad for a high school graduate. What do we say to all those in our community who worked hard and went into debt to get the educational training that qualifies them for positions like this? What kind of message are we sending to our kids? Hard work means nothing, it's connections that matter. This is the status quo that politicians like Christopher Boothby represent.
It seems to me that Mr. Boothby is just another in a long line of typical politicians who talk out of both sides of their mouths, yes for me, no for you, depending on what the listener wants to hear. Just another politician who will take care of himself and pals and those who are politically connected.
The way our county government is currently run is a total train wreck. The underlying reason for this is poor leadership and bad management. As a result you have the 28 non-represented employees of Belknap County now throwing in with the Teamsters, not only to protect their pay and benefits, but to insulate themselves from the poor decision making of the current administration. I don't blame them one bit they are being attacked on all sides.
In my opinion Mr. Boothby is seeking election to enrich himself and others like him who have the right connections at the taxpayers expense.
Last Updated on Monday, 20 January 2014 11:53
To The Daily Sun,
I would like to voice my support for Michael Cryans for Executive Council. As we all know from our experience with Ray Burton, the position of Executive Councilor is very important. It requires a concern about all of the citizens of a very large district, and it requires considerable dedication. Mike Cryans knows what it means to work for the small towns of New Hampshire. Mike is a native of Littleton, and currently lives in Hanover. Mike has spent 18 years serving the people of Grafton County as a county commissioner, almost all of them side by side with Ray Burton.
The first district Executive Councilor is a considerable voice for dozens of small towns in Concord, and especially in the governor's office. The district encompasses all or parts of seven counties and more than half the state's land area. Just as he has done as county commissioner, Mike's focus will be on investing in the economy, protecting taxpayers and strengthening the middle class. Most importantly, Mike will always be available and responsive to his constituents.
Mike would appreciate the opportunity as executive councilor to work to improve the lives of thousands of people located in the more northern areas of the state. He has made it clear that he is opposed to Northern Pass as currently planned. He would like to work at improving northern infrastructure and roads. As a former teacher, Mike understands the importance of investing in education.
I believe Mike Cryans is the best candidate to continue Ray Burton's commitment to the working families of northern New Hampshire, and I urge you to vote for him in the primary election on Tuesday, January 21.
Last Updated on Monday, 20 January 2014 11:49