4 - February 17, 2012 | Salem Community Patriot


The Word Around Town... Letters to our Editor


Curbside Pickup in Salem


I am a member of the Salem, NH Solid Waste Committee and have been since it started. Regardless of what you may have heard or read, I am against curbside pickup for the following reasons: 1. Taxes to accommodate curbside pickup will be covered by everyone who receives a property tax bill, including those who may own a separate parcel of land, commercial properties, trailer parks, apartment style condo’s and seasonal camps, yet they will not benefit from the pickup service.


2. Schools are not included in this proposal. Tey will be in the schools portion of the tax bill.


3. Barrels have to go out on your appointed day regardless of the weather or your health. Barrels have been seen left out for a week at a time.


4. Salem being rural could also be very inviting to animals.


5. Narrow winding roads with barrels lining them may cause traffic congestion and/or worse. As an example - North Main Street, School Street, Millville Street, etc.


6. If trash blows into your yard it becomes yours to pick up and dispose of.


7. Persons standing to gain the most from curbside pickup are those who have already chosen this service.


8. If curbside pickup is approved and for any reason you are not satisfied with the service you cannot change vendors for the next five years, since that is the length of the contract. I would like your “no” vote on curbside pickup but,


whatever your choice, please vote on March 13, and remember to protect your vote by attending the second deliberative session on March 17.


Bill Arivella - Salem Political Correction


Te defenders of politically correct language claim it is a civilizing influence on society, that it discourages the use of words that have negative or offensive connotations and thereby grants respect to people who are the victims of unfair stereotypes. In this view, the


purpose and effect of politically correct language are to prevent bullying and offensive behavior and to replace terms loaded with offensive undertones with allegedly impartial words throughout a society that must accept everything without question and that have been forced to accept every word as true. People are discouraged from referring to someone


as “mentally retarded” to say instead, “having special needs,” and not to refer to a “garbageman” but as “environmental service worker.” Before passage of the civil rights laws in the 1960’S Black persons before integration, had little identity as an individual or group. Now we use special words to describe a race of people as African Americans certainly politically correct and not insulting, plus a good result. However, many would like to be just called Americans. Te ugly words of being too fat or skinny in our society can cause harm for those having these conditions. Tese words involve over half the world populations. Tey can invoke anger when used in any language. So, we say the person has a glandular problem the person cannot help the unhealthy food they eat. As we make political correct excuses for that person, not wanting to hurt the individual; instead of speaking out and encouraging the person to diet and exercise for their own health. Te word skinny is avoided because it may be caused by bulimia, anorexia, smoking too much, or some disease like cancer. Rather than facing honest realities of a serious inquirer about health conditions. Political correctness in any form does not reduce


offensive behavior. It aims at eliminating offenses to anyone at all costs in society. It encourages groups to coalesce into oppressed entities by suppressing free speech. It helps governments oppress churches to conform to the state, by placing restrictions on free speech and mandating obstacles of control over policy of free religious societies. Perhaps the heart of politically correct language lies a dishonesty, not civility. Tis reality is manifested in the preference for vagueness over specificity, and for propaganda over honorable intentions. Could it be the politically correct society has carried this too far and is not the civilized society, but rather the dishonesty society?


Ed Brooks - Salem Hands Off My Medicare Te federal government runs a program that we


like, Medicare, and they run it very well. Te New Hampshire legislature thinks it can do a better job by passing the Health Care Compact law (a takeover of Medicare and Medicaid). I have read the law over twice and I can’t find any mention of state administration costs. Where will these funds come from? Tis will be massively expensive to administer, to me it looks like a disaster waiting to happen not to just the seniors but other New Hampshire programs as well. Since the election of 2010 NH legislature has passed gun laws that are terrifying, guns carried, concealed or in the open, without permits, on college campuses, in bars, and the mall. It’s ok now to carry loaded rifles in the cars. Te legislature is now thinking about a bill to stop background checks before someone buys a gun. And there is, strongly opposed, by police of all stripes, the Deadly Force bill, if you feel threatened in a crowd, feel free to shoot to kill. Another outrage will prevent police form arresting an abuser who has assaulted a spouse unless the police see the crime. Last year our legislative body cut 58 percent of money to the University system and $250 million to hospitals from the Medicaid fund. (What have they done with this Federal money?) Tis shortfall to hospitals caused the reduction in staff by over 1,000 people, and I’m sure the Universities lost staff as well. Tese hospitals are still being taxed by the state on the one hand while they take Federal money away with the other. With the new Home Care Compact law the State Children’s Health Insurance Program will be cut, leaving sick children out in the cold. Once again the legislature is trying to curb student


voting, citing lack of life experience. If that’s the case why do we send college aged kids to war? If you want their vote, earn it. Tey are again trying to past “right- to-work” legislation. Often we refer to “those poor southern states” as it turns out they are all “right-to- work” states, on average not just union wages go down but all wages, by one third. With reduced wages you’ll pay less into Social Security, and when you retire you get less. Te name of the bill should be “right-to-work- for-less.”


A law was proposed that would mandate that new


laws find their origin in the Magna Carta, a foreign document. We would have to restructure our whole form of government, we would need Barons, and serfs and freedmen and of course we would need a king. Tey wanted an 800 year old document to be the basis of our laws.


Tese people want to manage your Medicare. Really? Tank you, Gov. Lynch for your vetoes.


Unfortunately many bad laws have over ridden and passed. He can’t do it alone, we as citizens need to do more to stop this dangerous legislature.


Rebecca Fee - Salem Jim Keller for Selectman I’d like to encourage Salem residents to vote for Jim


Keller for Selectman on March 13. My association with Jim started five years ago when


you elected both of us to the Planning Board. Jim was elected as Chairman of the Board this whole time, which shows the respect the other Planning Board members have for his organization and leadership abilities. During the five years that I’ve served on the Board


with Jim, I’ve found him to be completely open minded to all presentations. He listens attentively, considers the facts compared with Town ordinances and regulations, and makes decisions based on what’s best for the Town and the applicant. Jim has the ability to state his opinions and decisions in a logical, clear and concise manner. While Jim can be firm and makes his statements with authority, I’ve never known him to be rude to an applicant or other Board members. Jim has served Salem residents very well during his


many years on the Planning Board. Te knowledge he has gained from being on the Planning Board will be a definite asset to the Town as a Selectman. From my perspective, there is no better qualified candidate for Selectman on this years ballot.


Linda Harvey - Salem


Letters to our Editor - comtinued to page 5


Why you should vote NO! for “curbside pick-up’ It is not just voting no for Curbside pickup! You are voting NO to the few who are trying to TAKE AWAY your RIGHT to choose how you spend your money!!


Highlights:


-They say curbside will bring Salem a comprehensive, long-term and sustainable solid waste solution. We already have one: It’s called the Town Transfer Station. It may need some improvements, but let’s focus on resolving those first! -They say the plan encourages recycling by limiting each household to one 96 gallon tote for trash. Put simply, this means you will absorb a charge for an extra tote (which most households will need) and you will absorb a monthly charge for the pickup of extra totes. I ask also: how is recycling encouraged when recycling will be limited to a pickup of every other week? Bulky recyclables take up room and 2 weeks’ worth will mean most households will have no alternative but to get another tote for recycling—absorbing yet another fee for that. These fees will be in addition to extra taxes on every household! - They say curbside will bring education curriculum across all subjects, k-12 of schools … we ALREADY HAVE educational programming in schools to encourage recycling and promote sustainable efforts – we don’t have to pay extra for it! -They highlight “target marketing” as a pro to curbside—and they admit that “target marketing” means they’ll be monitoring homes to “identify issues.” Once the issues (homes they deem problems) are identified, they’ll be “targeting education and/or resolving issues that they would be otherwise unaware” of… And, how will they “resolve” what they deem to be “issues”? Most likely those that are deemed “problems” will absorb extra costs, fees, or fines. - They say they’ll have a customer service supervisor in Salem 5 days/week for the 5 year contract. What will this “customer service” rep be helping with, what power will they have to resolve problems we complain about? -They say curbside is a benefit for all… what about our senior citizens on a fixed income who presently have the right to get a sticker for the Transfer Station at no cost? Under curbside collection these same senior citizens will be mandated to use a tote and pay in added taxes


VOTE NO ON CURBSIDE and DEMAND that we resolve the problems at the Transfer Station to ensure a comprehensive, long term and sustainable solid waste solution


**There are real and simple solutions to improving recycling at the existing Transfer Station and reducing our current costs: -have people use clear bags so recyclables can easily be identified when mixed in with trash -give the monitor the power and the responsibility to have people step out of line when problems are identified and give them the choice to sort their recyclables on site, or go home to do so


-give the monitor the responsibility to identify people who are not properly recycling by getting their license plate and providing it to the selectmen who can then step in and get actively involved in resolving the issues


-have our selectmen rotated every Saturday so they can see for themselves what is happening and make recommendations for resolutions


These suggestions would guarantee the recycling rate would rise significantly higher than the present rate of 11% and are easy, immediate, and cost-free solutions. Let’s try a 6 month pilot program to resolve the problems at the Transfer Station before jumping into a guaranteed tax hike and a guaranteed reduction of our rights and choices!


For a long-term solution, let’s make the Transfer Station generate revenue by: -putting out an RFP to vendors to either lease or rent the part of the landfill where the vegetation pile is (leaves/brush from residents) – if we rent to someone who is qualified to turn that into a product (loom), we would be able to take care of the town cemeteries, ball fields and any green space in the Town at no cost. The leftover would be allotted to the winning bidder who would re-sell the remaining product for profit, giving the Town of Salem a host fee by going over our scale at $.25 per ton or yard, whatever is deemed appropriate. -we could do the same for road asphalt and concrete which can be recycled to create fill These options allow bidders to pay a rental fee to the town for a section of the property at the Transfer Station, have the product brought to them free (at the Transfer Station) then take the product, reprocess it and give the Town a host fee for everything that goes over the scale. It’s a win-win, the company gets their product and the Town gets more revenue.


Finally, let’s get people in power who actually listen and learn about what they are recommending… not like Pat Hargreaves…


-Two years in planning curbside collection and Pat doesn’t even know where the trash in Salem is taken. Pat said that he didn’t want to “spend his life worrying about his grandchildren having to deal with the repercussions of our creation of mountains of trash in another state”. The Town of Salem isn’t creating mountains of trash, Pat. In fact, our trash isn’t taken to a landfill it is taken to facilities in Haverhill and in Maine that burn trash for energy. -Pat’s group also fails to acknowledge that one of the private vendors in Salem, Waste Management, doesn’t use the Transfer Station for their waste, therefore there will be more than the present tonnage hauled by the mandated curbside pickup which will raise anticipated costs. They didn’t do all of their homework and their numbers are incorrect. Pat, I’d rather be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. Perhaps you should keep mum about trash in Salem.


Did you know: “Somebody influential” who came from the Town of Merrimack tried to get a similar curbside pickup passed there and it was voted down, twice… The Town of Merrimack presently still has its own Transfer Station. They weren’t fooled by the “facts” presented by the powers that be, why should we be.


Frederick Leccese, A Concerned Citizen Political Advertisement


Approved by United States Constitution, under First Amendment Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression


Paid for by FJ Leccese, 31 Cove Rd, Salem, NH


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16