Letters (Week of March 26, 2008)


Clothing ministry will need new place

 

The Shepherd’s Shed Free Clothing Storehouse will be open from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. Wednesday, April 2. Come in and get your spring and summer clothing.

This will be the last time I will be open in this location. The building has sold and I need to relocate by April 16.

I’ve had the blessing of serving the needs of Marion County for the past four years by offering clothing to those that may not have had it otherwise.

I’ve given clothing to foster children, families that have lost their belongings to fire, senior citizens, people in need because of unemployment, Marion-Florence schools, The Marion Community Christmas Program—and the list goes on and on.

Thanks to all of you that have been a part of this ministry by donating clothing, money and volunteering your time to help keep The Shed running. Thanks to Marion Ministerial Alliance for paying my monthly utility bills. Most of all, a big thanks to Brad and Patty Putter for offering the building at no charge. Without the building, this service to the community would not have happened.

The Lord willing, I’d like to continue to operate, and I need a building. If you know of, or have a building where I could relocate to at little or no cost, please contact me.

Do the citizens of Marion County want this service to continue? It’s been a blessing!

Robin Dicks
Marion

 

Is the treatment fair and balanced?

 

The March 12 issue of the Peabody Gazette reported that Randy Dallke, former mayor of Peabody, expressed suspicion of Shane Marler’s loyalty to the Peabody community if he were to become interim director of the Peabody Main Street Association while serving as a city council member in Hills­boro.

I was in attendance at the same Peabody City Council meeting in which Mr. Dallke addressed the city council members by specifically stating there may be a “double jeopardy” issue in the involvement of Mr. Marler as a council member in Hillsboro and as a paid city employee of Peabody as interim director of the Main Street Association.

Mr. Marler’s loyalty to the community as a volunteer, or his abilities and skills to perform a job, were never in question, nor were they an issue. The only issue was whether a conflict of interest might exist in Mr. Marler’s roles as Hillsboro council member and interim director of Peabody Main Street Associa­tion.

Peabody council member Leslie LaFoy, who also is a Main Street Association board member, fired back that Mr. Marler had already consulted the Hillsboro City Council and city administrator, and it was confirmed they saw no conflict-of-interest issue on the side of Hillsboro.

In my opinion, it would have been appropriate and diligent of Mr. Marler and Council Member Lafoy to have addressed our own mayor, city council and city administrator to determine if a conflict of interest existed with the city of Peabody due to Hillsboro setting the water rates for treated water that is paid for by the taxpayers of Peabody.

It appears the same diligence and ethical consideration that Mr. Marler and Council Member LaFoy extended to Hillsboro, but failed to give to Peabody, would have only happened if we lived in a perfect world.

Fair and balanced? You decide. I urge all citizens of Peabody to start attending their city council meetings. We all have a personal responsibility to take an interest and have a voice in the way our city government is spending our tax dollars. It is not their money. Our city officials have been entrusted with our money and have a fiduciary responsibility to us.

Karen Benbrook
Peabody

 

Self-governance is personal responsibility

 

The Sunshine Law, even if it were upheld, doesn’t change the nature of government and what it is doing to us.

What benefit is there to a sunshine law, whether broken or not, if we have a government that believes by its own interpretation that it is responsible for our welfare?

That claims by its own interpretation that a man’s labor is the property of the government for the purpose of providing that which belongs to the people in the first place.

Do we really have a “heritage of self-governance,” as Doug Anstaett claimed in his guest editorial?

What does self-governance mean? Does that mean that government has a right to tell us what is right or wrong, or what we can or cannot do?

Does it have the right to tax and redistribute that which belongs to those who earn what they work for, thereby making people dependent on government?

Does self-governance mean that I have the right to do whatever I want, but the government is responsible for the outcome?

On the one hand, we have a government that dictates what we can and cannot do, but on the other hand, it encourages self-indulgence without responsibility.

True self-governance means personal responsibility. Open government is one that acknowledges that its resources come from the people and that everything it does is done by exploiting the people. It has no resources of its own.

Jerry Plett
Lincolnville


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.