Letters to the Editor

To the Editor:

Is this really the Democratic response to fuel costs here in Maine? Could Rep. Bryant or Energy Czar Nagusky tell me how I can save $1.00 per gallon by tuning up my already tuned vehicle that also has the proper tire inflation? These comments from them are quite insulting.

Czar Nagusky states that the State is removing any barriers that could impede the sale of motor fuel. How about cutting taxes? How about stopping the automatic raising of gas taxes every year (with no vote)? Isn't this the same official that suggested raising fuel oil taxes in order to create a fund to help the needy?

I look around my community and see an awful lot of people the are definitely needy but do not qualify for programs. These are the same friends, relatives and neighbors that would be taxed yet again. It is high time that our leaders stop raising taxes before looking for actual solutions. Instead of fuel assistance how about assistance with efficiency upgrades of heating systems? I cut my yearly fuel bill nearly in half with some small upgrades.
Rep Bryant states that he and his fellow Democrats corrected a major flaw in the LIHEAP program. He adds that "we could not force oil dealers to participate." Then he states that the State is working with MODA. This seems very typical, first we try to force then try to work with the parties involved. Why try to force first?

Please let there be someone in Augusta that will show true leadership and offer real help!!

Ken Viger, Gray

Letter to the Editor:

I find that your commentaries are thought provoking. I believe that "Policy Shift" [Editorial: 9-8-05] has another point of view. I believe that making policy, regulation, and rules IS what council does to get "stuff done." These rules and regulations define how we work and play together despite growing pressures in Gray. We demand that our cell phones always work, but we do not want to see the towers. We want more business in Gray to shift the tax burden, but not in my back yard. We want freedom to assemble, but we don't like crowds. We want to use our private property the way we want, but we don't want our neighbor to interfere with us or be unsafe. Remember, that each time a new policy or ordinance is put into place it is because there are people demanding that government solve a problem.

The procedure that the Council uses to conduct their business is important to us. We elect representatives we trust and will represent our point of view. Once in office they become them and don't listen to our point. They (government) become suspect. So we demand Freedom of Access.

Computers have files and e-mails are meetings. I've received concerns about the Ordinance Review Committee transmitting information by e-mail. Is it just information, or does a reply constitute a meeting? We don't like the idea of possible conflicts of people holding more than one office, but we are too busy to volunteer.

I have noticed that the parliamentary procedures are a bit rough. Many of the Council Rules are similar to Robert's Rules. This is a new Council and our friends and neighbors, who we have elected. I am willing to cut them some slack while they learn the finer points of their job.

Thanks for the thought-provoking editorial.

Respectfully,
Bill Getz, Gray

To the Editor:

I read the article in last week's Monument, "Zoning changes tabled." The Council said at their meeting that there were several zones that have not been reviewed and there were more sections that would have changes to them coming soon. If the package had been passed that night, the Council said that they worried how the upcoming changes and further reviews would affect landowners and their property.

I want to thank Councilor Denise Duda for her comments at that meeting. She was concerned for the landowners who would be affected. I thank Councilor John Welch, too. He thinks things through and is direct in his comments. He doesn't beat around the bush.

It means a lot to me that these Councilors listen to the public. I want to thank them all for their work.

Phil Pulsifer, Gray

EGAD

Dear Madam Editor,

While I do appreciate the wonderful press that I received in this week's issue of The Monument, I would like to make a very important clarification.

I am the Stud of two, that's right, count-em, two litters of pups. Uh huh, I did say Stud, which in fact would make me a ... HE, not a "she" as reported. I understand that the name may have thrown you but I must ask that a correction be made otherwise the word could get out that I am an imposter and not in fact the Dad of many.

Thanks in advance and I'm taking applications.

The name's Jade-LE, rhymes with Studly.