Letters and Comments for April 9, 2009

Letters and Comments for April 9, 2009

No to changing Union charter

To the Editor:

Should the Union City Charter be amended to increase the amount current and future city councils can borrow in our name without voter approval?

My considered opinion is no. City projects requiring more than $30,000 should continue to be presented to the public, be open to discussion and be voted on by the taxpayers.

The 1940 limit of $30,000 works well for today’s taxpayer considering the current economic situation. It costs less than $1,000 to add a funding request to the ballot.

In 2002 or ’03, I attended a public meeting explaining our Master Water and Sewer Plan. The cost of implementing that plan was considerable then and it increases yearly while little has been accomplished in the ensuing years.

In ’06, we voters decided to use the water/sewer funds only for water/sewer needs. That Water Reserve Fund is now over $200,000. Our vote to restrict the use of these funds was very wise and frugal. Does the fund cover what needs to be done? No.

Yes, we do need to replace pipes and connections. But we taxpayers need to be reassured priorities are set for each dollar this city has within its reach. How deep they reach into our pockets should not be their sole decision. I want the opportunity to vote on the “big costly projects.”

Instead of having a charter amendment to increase the $30,000 limit on the next ballot, why doesn’t the city council begin compiling facts and figures and have a couple of town meetings to inform us of our infrastructure needs. After public input a ballot measure, to add a tax levy or a request for approval to borrow, could be voted on by the “fully informed” taxpayers.

S. Smith

Union

Nothing constructive from D’s

To the Editor:

In response to the April 2 letter written by Norm Cimon regarding “some old policies that won’t work,” I would ask, what exactly disturbed you about Greg Walden?

His and other Republicans’ nonsupport of the recovery plan is because they believe it has been a failure from the beginning. Why support something that most of us believe is the wrong highway?

During Bush’s presidency, he tried many things that would be working well now (such as nuclear plants, offshore drilling, increased resource extraction like logging and mining), all of which were vehemently opposed by the Democrats, environmentalists, liberals, etc. Permanent tax decreases would have kept manufacturing and industry based in the USA. The Senate and House have been controlled by the Democrats for the last two years, and they have done absolutely nothing constructive. Health care costs are directly related to lawsuits and too many out-of-work lawyers.

The power production and transportation systems (ethanol, light rail, bicycle paths) are all a pit to throw good money into.

Education is out of control with most of each dollar going to pay for teacher salaries, retirement, 401Ks, health care plans and not to the student.

The reason that we can’t compete with the rest of the world is because of too many government regulations.

A burden of historical proportions, which our children will be paying back the rest of their lives from money we borrowed mostly from Red China, is an insult to future Americans.

The Pelosi, Reid, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank Democratic-sponsored stimulus bill was handed out only hours before a vote. No one in their right mind would vote on something they had no chance to read.

What changes do Norm Cimon suggest to get us off this treadmill and toward what different place?

How about we try this: Vote out the liars, tax cheats and insulting politicians and replace them with Americans who have a vision for the future.

It may just be Greg Walden.

Douglas G. Long

Lostine