Her death was sudden and unexpected, her body ravaged quickly by a cancer learned of only three weeks before her death. Up until that time, she had the Goffstown Outreach food pantry going full blast and worked with area residents to help them pay their heating bills. She accepted big donations, like couches and washing machines, and she gave them to other people with big needs.

"It's about dignity," she would say as she donated anything from hair dye to dryers.

Just days before her death, she was on the phone from her hospital bed making sure a kid would have a scholarship to go to camp this summer.

Many of us knew Collett as a champion for Toys for Tots and Salvation Army around the holidays, and others, far away, knew her as a Red Cross volunteer who spent time listening and making them feel better.

She was a wife, a mother, a grandma, a sister, a friend, a servant, an athlete, a healer and a helper.

She was a hero.

If the value of our lives is measured, in part, with tears and sorrow at our death, Collett led a rich life, and she made us all richer for having known her.
Laurie Hambleton, Weare

Nevertheless, the arguing continues between donor towns and property-poor towns. Actually, the argument over New Hampshire's reliance on the local property tax to pay for public schools predates the Supreme Court's Claremont Decisions of the 1990s by 30 to 40 years.

Well, it's time to stop arguing like children and start thinking of the children.

New England is the birthplace of America's public school system. We taught the country how to educate its citizens. And then America taught the world! Don't forget, it was America's children that thrice save the world. First from the Kaiser in World War I, then from Hitler and Tojo in World War II and then from Communism. We are now facing new threats in the complex world we now inhabit.

In the United States, the organization and funding of local school districts is left to the individual states. Some states, such as Hawaii, send the school districts as much as 90 percent of the cost of running their public schools. Other states send aid to a lesser degree.

Before The Claremont Rulings, the state of New Hampshire sent aid to the local school districts amounting to 7 percent of the cost of running the schools - seven cents of the dollar. We were 51st out the 50 states . behind the District of Columbia (which by-the-way, is administered by the Congress of the United States) in the financial support of our public schools.

Don't for a minute think New Hampshire is the only state to be told by its highest court to change the way it pays for public schools. As many as 35 of the 50 states have at one time or another over the past 80 years had to supplement the property tax to pay for public schools.

I for one am ashamed New Hampshire has let the argument become a "tiff" over money. Which town is getting state money? Which town is giving the state money? Whoever said, "Money is the root of all evil," knew what they were talking about.

I am a father and grandfather. It was my responsibility as one of two parents to provide for and protect our children. I gave them love, food, clothing and shelter. I had the help of my communities. fellow taxpayers when it came to providing them with an education. I couldn't have managed without their help. Five or six thousand dollars a year for 12 years, times three kids! It adds up!

As I said, we can't continue to squabble over money; we need to come up with a plan that will provide enough funds to allow all the school children in New Hampshire to get a quality education. Is there one plan that will satisfy everyone? Probably not. But once a consensus has been reached we have to step back and see it works. Not run to court and argue over who is getting the most state money and who isn't. Remember, federal, state, county, local taxes - it's all "our money." And other point, we will have conducted ourselves as responsible adults.

When it comes to public education . your children . my children . they are New Hampshire's children, too. Yes, they live with you in your house in your city or town, but their education is New Hampshire's responsibility. That's the way the founders of our country set it up.

And, when our children graduate from high school and move on to higher education or the working environment, they will school the world how New Hampshire students are prepared to deal with the challenges presented to them.
Lou D.Allesandro, Manchester

At the suggestion of someone we encountered, I called the New Hampshire Fish and Game department, thinking their officers are out in the woods and perhaps they might spot them, and at least give us a call as to where they are now.

Instead of the kind of helpful reaction we have received from everyone else in our communities, I was informed tersely by Officer David Hewitt that it is illegal for my dogs to be running in the woods, and if they are seen chasing a deer, it is within the law for them to destroy my dogs!

I exclaimed, "But I am notifying you; they got out; they are small dogs. If you know they are my dogs, couldn't you catch them instead of shooting them?"

He informed me that the officers would not know they were my dogs until after they shot them.

As of this writing, I am waiting for a return call from Officer Hewitt's supervisor, Col. Jeffrey Gray. Isn't it nice to know that the same department that issues licenses to kill deer, would kill a family's beloved pets, with a shoot first, check the tags later attitude?

If you see our dogs, please call 398-0804 or 398-0158 or 487-3537. Thank you.
Julie Salvati-Steenson, New Boston

Both of New Hampshire's congressman voted in favor of federal action on what has been called a "right to life" issue.

So now, the national debate has extended to the difficult choices families make at both ends of life, birth and death, abortion and termination of artificial life support. Certainly, at both ends of life, individuals in New Hampshire and around the nation face difficult choices.

Imagine a family struggling with the desperate challenges inherent in the decision to allow a loved one to die, to let go. I cannot imagine a more private matter, one better suited for deliberations among family, doctors and ministers of faith. Our enviable medical advances have offered us previously unimaginable moral dilemmas.

My family faced that dilemma when, 10 years ago, my wife's uncle collapsed into a coma with a brain aneurysm. A decision was made, primarily by my father-in-law, in consultation with doctors and the entire family, to try a radical new medical procedure to open the pathways in his brain. As I write this, we are celebrating his 70th birthday. He is wheelchair-bound, declining steadily with dim and occasional awareness, but he is alive. A witty, robust man has been reduced to a dependent, mute, shell of his former self, with occasional sparks of recognizable personality. We do not know for sure what awareness he really has and often wonder whether he is better off alive. It was the right decision for many in our family but was it the right decision for him? Whatever you may think about the decision that was made, I could not have imagined the federal government intervening in our family decision.

What does freedom in this country mean if it does not mean freedom from governmental intrusion into our private family affairs? Our constitution was designed to keep government in check. The Founders were well aware of the intolerability of oppressive government intrusion. I believe that if our society truly cherishes freedom, we require a government which supports the sanctity of individual choice. We and our families live in a complex world and face troubling personal and moral decisions.

The federal government had no business intruding in those decisions. These beliefs are not Democrat or Republican. They are core American values. I am deeply troubled by the votes of Congressman Bass and Congressman Bradley.

Their votes are more than a calculated losing political gamble. I believe their votes are out of step with their constituents. core values about individual freedom and demonstrate clearly their willingness to sacrifice their constituency for partisan political gain.
Paul W. Hodes, Concord