To the editor,
I usually avoid reacting to another writer's thoughts on a subject I have taken a position. Back and forth arguments in the paper rarely change anyone's mind. We all have opinions and not all will be the same. That is the way it is supposed to be.
I wrote my letter on recycling just to put out there where I stand on the subject and to explain some of the details to the public. It was not written as an elderly person for the elderly people, except that they do represent a huge percentage of our population and the numbers are growing each day. An article in the The Senior Citizens League reported that the seniors have lost 34 percent of their buying power since 2000. I also am not speaking JUST for Ward 4. This is a matter for the whole city.
I also speak for the average working person, earning just enough to get by, and they too represent a good percentage of our population. Like the seniors their buying power has also diminished due to high costs.
I have worked tirelessly for the residents of Ward 4 to restore Wyatt Park for the benefit of our children and their parents.
Then, there is indeed a poor segment of our population, many of them young people.
A point to make is that our school system receives a greater amount from the state than a lot of cities and towns because Laconia has 70 percent of its students eligible for free lunch based on family income.
Finally, I don't claim that mandatory recycling is the panacea to our problem. It is just another alternative and we are also considering the PAYT proposal and perhaps there will be other solutions. In the end, the more information we have will help me and others to decide which path to take. At this time I do not favor the charges in PAYT.
I took office eight years ago to represent ALL of Ward 4, and ALL of Laconia regardless of age, gender, politics, or financial worth.
Councilor Brenda Baer
Ward 4 - Laconia

To the editor,
This letter is long overdue, but none the less heart felt. A few months ago I ruptured my distal tendon in my right forearm while working in my backyard and had to have surgery to repair it. The medical team at Hillside Medical Center in Gilford performed the needed work and had me on the road to recovery without a hitch. Upon my follow up a few weeks later it was decided that I did not need physical therapy and was sent home with orders to do some basic exercises to strengthen the damaged area. With instructions being followed to the letter, it is now four months later and my arm is approaching 100 percent.
Dr Clingman and his team were both professional and very skilled in helping me in my time of need. To the fantastic group of people that make up this wonderful organization Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.
Daniel Downing
Center Tuftonboro

To the editor,
Gun control advocates question why anyone objects to outlawing large capacity (more than 10 bullets) magazines. Some, who apparently watch too much TV, wonder why anyone needs more than one or two bullets.
I suggest these people visit a shooting range, watch or rent a gun. (I am sure they will help you. There is a shooting range in Belmont on Route 106.) It isn't that easy to hit a still target when you are under no pressure.
How many bullets are needed?
Many hunters have distant targets running through the forest or flying and changing directions rapidly. If you run out of bullets, you may just go hungry.
Personal defense is a totally different matter. Unless you want the innocent victims to be robbed, beaten, raped, murdered or otherwise harmed, then a person needs "enough" bullets to get the attacker to stop attacking.
Gun control people think civilians should only need a few bullets, but heavily trained and prepared law enforcement sometimes uses many bullets. Four New York City policemen shot 61 bullets at Amadou Diallo who was unarmed and trapped in a hallway. A retired FBI agent tells how he and two other agents fired over 80 shots at an armed criminal who shot back (apparently incoming bullets affects your aim).
Remember that when one or more criminals arrive, intended victims will be surprised. Criminals won't stand still while you aim. You will be afraid, you may be trying to hide your, perhaps terrified and clingy, children, you will be calling for help, the attacker may be yelling at you, threatening or perhaps shooting at you, and you won't want to shoot another person.
Recently a woman needed six shots to convince the man attacking her and her children to stop. Had the attacker been drugged or drunk or if there had been more than one attacker, perhaps with large capacity magazines that criminals will always be able to get, then the woman would have needed many more bullets.
This is why some women like guns like AR-15s which are light and can handle large capacity magazines holding the bullets that an intended victim, especially a woman, may need.
Approximately two-thirds of gun crime is in our 50 largest cities and is committed by gang members 11-19 years old. None of President Obama's proposals will affect any of this gun violence.
For innocent people and their family members to survive attacks with least harm, they need guns with "enough" bullets. "Enough" may be zero or hundreds. When the intended victim doesn't have "enough" bullets, then the police only get there in time to make chalk outlines.
Don Ewing
Meredith

To the editor,
I attended a public meeting at the Moultonboro Library on December 17, 2012. Representatives from Plan N.H. were giving their recommendations about fundamentally transforming a "Quaint Town into a socialist dream of a Livable, Walkable Community. I have heard it all in others towns across N.H. and in other states, especially in Portland, Oregon where there is a real divide in the state. One side has no homes, store, etc. and is a vast parcel of empty land. The other side is a clustered community of homes and businesses.
"Sustainable Communities" were created by the federal government via stimulus money given to all the states.The Granite State Future initiative is the New Hampshire version of an umbrella program directly connected to the "Sustainable Communities Initiative. The SCI is a federal, top-down program combining input from HUD, EPA and the DOT. Special- interest groups, called "stakeholders", have direct input into state policy. It's imperative to note that appointed, not elected, officials as well as outside special-interest
groups are the primary decision makers in the Granite State Future. New Hampshire state agencies that are staffed with unelected bureaucrats are at the core of decision making in GSF as well as pay-to play partners. The Delphi Technique is used at all their meeting they use for consensus in the towns.
By the way this Delphi method was used for the charrett that took place for two days in the simmer of 2012 in Moultonboro. Facilitators are in the group to manipulate the outcome in their direction, but the public is told it was their input that determined the result.
Branches under the GSF are HEAL, creates Walkable, Livable Communities, NH Listens, which is out of the Carsi Institute of UNH. We now have another listening program called the Lakes Region Listens. This stem of NH Listens has been into our school system with the Delphi technique, recently with the kindergarten issue in Winnisquam. The American Planning Association, which is an arm of the federal government and is also associated with SCI. Many community organizers, planning board member leaders and companies are included in this organization. The main purpose is to regulate land, air and water in our communities. The people who work for the APA say they are volunteers, but they are also "Stakeholders who will make money via the towns and cities in the forms of surveys, listening boxes and consensus meetings. One survey was done in Dover, NH by Hawk Enterprises,LLC, which charged the city $28,000-$30,000 for 9-10 consensus meetings conducted with the Delphi Method.
The Moultonboro session dated 12-17-2012 was given by Mr. Roger Hawk of Hawk Enterprises. He stated he was a volunteer for Plan NH, but he was also a past president. I think a conflict of interest resided at this meeting, because some of the people speaking were pay-to-play partners.The other speakers were a architect, real estate agent and a land planner. I listened to what Mr. Hawk and the four other people said; I did not interrupt or laugh at some of the pictures they were displaying, or the speeches. The communities were taken right out of a plan-book, with embellished homes with porches creating round-abouts, moving buildings and creating new roadways. Another aspect was the creation of a town water system and a septic system, which both would cost a large sum of money.
When the group had finished talking, Mr. Hawk asked the audience for questions. There were a lot of questions and statements; one man stood up and stated HUD would be involved with all the planning and would make the decisions exclusively without much input from the town. I finally raised my hand and stated that I have always been a frugal person, and due to the terrible economy, the fact that many people are down-sizing, therefore I could not understand where the money would come from, and I thought that their vision one and two (I called it Habitat one and two) were not in my common sense view and that towns and citizens could not afford the money. All of a sudden I was interrupted by a boisterous voice from the back of the room, calling me unmentionable names, I turned around and said he was rude young man. I continued to speak and I asked Mr. Hawk why he laughed at my statement concerning Habitat one and two. He responded it sounded funny. I do have to mention that I did not interrupt him or laugh and that I was very respectful to him. I do have to comment that he tried to marginalize my thoughts, which is a Delphi Technique.
After the meeting, I found out the boisterous man was a selectman/minister of the town of Moultonboro! Mr. Ed Charest then verbally attacked me as I was leaving and stated that "you hate America" — an unfounded statement. I stated to him that he did not know me. I did not know this man whose conduct was disgraceful. Our country's greatness is the fact that we have the 'First Amendment',which gives us the right to 'Free Speech". It is very unfortunate when an elected official, chooses to sensor that right. When he does do, he does a disservice to the community and the office he serves.
Rosemary Landry
Meredith