Wouldn’t you think those who run local polling places would be happy to let voters have information on their candidates, provided by the local newspaper, as they enter the voting booth? We thought so, but were shot down this week as we asked Hooksett, Bedford, Goffstown, Bow and Salem to let us drop off our papers at the polls.

Never mind the Constitutional right to free speech. Don’t worry about informing voters.

Their concerns centered around the “fairness” of our coverage to each candidate and simply not wanting to deal with a newspaper wanting to help voters.

All we wanted to do was drop some papers off by the polling place. Indoors, outdoors, we didn’t care. But Ryk Bullock of Bedford specifically told us he didn’t want to deal with candidates who felt we portrayed them unfairly. How that’s possible we don’t know, as our candidate profiles are in the candidates’ own words. In Goffstown, we were told we could not so much as set foot in the parking lot with our papers – which we regularly deliver to the school every week.

In Salem, we could barely get a public official to even talk to us – and were ultimately told to look up the moderator’s number in the phone book because the clerk couldn’t be bothered to give it out!

We consider our candidate profiles a public service. We consider our news coverage a public service as well, one protected by the First Amendment. If we can’t make our papers available at a polling place, that right to free speech is diminished, but local officials just don’t care.

— Editorials published by Neighborhood News Inc. are written by an editorial board. The board is composed of Publisher and President Amy J. Vellucci, Executive Editor Ginger Kozlowski, Managing Editor Christine Heiser and News Editor Susan Clark.

To the Editor:
Imagine receiving assessments for property taxes, rent increases and capital improvements that you had not planned for? These are a few of many things that can and do happen when property is not owned by its tenants.

Large corporations study potential acquisitions very carefully. They stay in business by not losing money. Corporations plan for additional income in the form of anticipated pass-throughs.

The Medvil Cooperative Association (Medvil) and some 300 households, with the experience of a board of directors and the expertise of a property management company, will plan, develop and implement their own operating budget and project plan. The project plan allows for guidance and control of our own destiny and future. Part of Medvil’s financial package is a capital reserve account. It is required by the lenders and will deal with the capital improvements that Medvil will plan to make. The cooperative will pay for repairs from funds in the capital reserve account and from grants rather than from pass-throughs.

Medvil does not need to make a profit. All profits will go directly back to the park in the way of improvements or used to pay down the loan much faster.

The security of our welfare and investment will be assured when we (the residences and Medvil) have control of our own decision making process.

Your vote to purchase Medford Farms and Village of Glen Falls will guarantee our collective welfare and community.

Dave Doiron
Chairman, Ad Hoc Transition Team
Medvil Cooperative Association

To the Editor:
This letter is to the residents of Goffstown.

My name is Diane Desmarais, and I consider myself an average resident of Goffstown. My family has lived in Goffstown for 10 years. I have two children who have attended the Goffstown school system. I volunteer at the schools where I can. I attend town fundraiser when I can. I vote and pay taxes. I have attended planning board meetings when topics concern me, and like most other people, my time is precious.

I urge residents of Goffstown to take a good look at the town government we have in place. It really doesn’t take as much of your time as you think. We have members on our town government who have been there a long time, and have personal interest of who, what, where, and why changes occur.

We are all aware of the recent ousting of our fire chief as a prime example. If this hot topic does anything for the residents, it’s to let us know that this is a time for change in Goffstown. It’s a time to change the people who are deciding our future.

Nick Campasano is a resident who took it upon himself to attend some meetings just as I did, to hear of topics that affected our neighborhood and was appalled at the strings pulled and laws blatantly ignored to waive variances and ordinances to pass special interest projects.

I commend Nick for caring enough to take it further, investigate and educate himself with countless hours put forth to understanding town procedures and politics.

Nick is truly a man of integrity and honesty. He cares about Goffstown. He lives here, has a family here, and pays taxes here just like you and I.

Residents of Goffstown need to look at our town and know that we need to grow, to move forward, and make smart educated decisions for our future.

People like Nick Campasano can be trusted to help sort through issues and make the best choices for the residents of Goffstown.

March 14 is a very important day in Goffstown and residents need to get out and vote for a trustworthy town government.

Diane Desmarais
Goffstown

To the Editor:
Although I understand the hesitation for more spending in conjunction with the new school being built, it is important for us not to lose sight of the important role of educating our students.

Did you know that based on the state’s data for 2004-05, Weare spends less money on students in K-8 than any other town in the state? Weare spends $2,700 per student less than the average and although it takes more than money to produce good schools, we need to make sure we provide the resources.

The school board recognizes this and has created a budget which enables the town to get caught up in the necessary areas.

The teachers contract is molded not only to retain the teachers we have, but to also attract new teachers with a competitive salary and benefit package. Realizing that affordability is important, I believe this contract provides that for the taxpayer as well as the necessary funding to allow the administration to focus on educational improvements.

Laura Buono
Weare

To the Editor:
My name is Elaine Garland and I live in Medford Farms with my husband Richard.

We are members of the Medvil Association. I felt a strong desire to write to you so that you may contemplate these considerations before you cast your vote in March. After that it will be too late.

How can a park that is being financed for over $11 million operate with a surplus of only $58,605? This is only for the first year. The second year they lose their membership fees of $72,000 because this is only a one-time fee. You can’t subtract $72,000 from $58,605. You can, but it puts you in the red.

This figure of $72,000 isn’t really accurate either, because there is no way of knowing how each household will pay their $500 membership fee. Some won’t even bother to join, and others could join and pay in increments of $25 monthly; spreading it over a period of two years.

It was brought out at the Feb. 22 meeting, due to the park being sold as is, that there are many major problems in both parks; those being drainage, sewerage, and roads. Not to mention other situations that could occur in the next year.

Those in favor of the sale will retaliate by saying that grants will solve the problem. Grants pay only a portion of the cost and must be applied for by knowledgeable people.

These are time consuming and only so many are allotted each year. What if one is needed but not available at the time? This leads us to what is called a “pass-through.” When there isn’t enough revenue to pay for these repairs, it is turned over to the board of directors to place the burden on the people. The money owed would be divided by the number of park residents. Just one more financial burden.

Be aware also of the by-laws mailed to you in your packet. On page 1, 2.3 states that at least one person must be 55 or over per household, then at the bottom of the same page, 2.6, it contradicts itself. Only 80 percent of the units must be occupied by at least one person 55 or older. If just one home slips by, this will become a family park. You can see how easily this could happen. This is clearly HUD.

Isn’t it rather odd that there are something like 30 homes for sale within the two parks? This tells me that something is awry. Don’t be deluded. Your vote can make or break this transaction.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. I sincerely hope that by doing so it has made a difference.

Elaine B. Garland
Goffstown

To the Editor:
Weare voters, I suggest to you that the most important vote you can cast this year is to reelect Leon Methot to the board of selectmen. I can tell you why in one word: experience.

Those of you who know Leon understand the dedication he brings. He is well known for being respectful of our townspeople and their issues. He is a model of reason and positive attitude.

But the reason to vote for Leon Methot is that he has been there for us for years. As any member of any board will tell you, there is no substitute for years of experience. As it is, the remaining members of the selectboard have a total of four years’ service. We rely on Leon for his encyclopedic knowledge of town issues, both past and present.

I implore the voters of Weare to support Leon Methot for selectman, we need him more than ever.

Joe Fiala
Memorial Drive
Weare

To the Editor:
If Ms. Winrow and others who attended, or watched on television, the school deliberative session on Feb. 6, you will know that I asked the school board specifically whether the $306,510 appropriation in Article 2 was needed to cover construction delays due to litigation associated with the Tirrill Hill site or the Glen Lake site. In response, both Ellen Vermokowitz and Scott Gross answered that the additional construction delay costs referenced in this appropriation were due to litigation for the Glen Lake site and not the Tirrill Hill site. By simple examination of the records, we know this to be absolutely untrue.

This is not an issue of blame, as Ms. Winrow claims, but rather an issue of trust. When we enter the voting booth on March 14, we will be reading, and voting on, an article that contains false information in order to gain this appropriation. Information that the school board knows to be false. I will not support such an article and I don’t care about the source of the funding.

But the issue runs much deeper than that for me. If the school board is willing to tell a little white lie about Article 2 then how can I put any trust in the budget numbers found in Article 3? There are those who will say I should because the budget committee recommends the article. I have trust in the good work that the budget committee does; however, they are working with numbers and explanations supplied to them by the school board. My trust in those numbers and explanations has been shaken considerably by Article 2.

The school board is asking for $33.1 million in this year’s budget, a 10.3 percent increase over last year. That equates to a $1.47 increase in our tax rate. Last year’s tax rate increase due to the school budget was $1.52, about the same. If you think the increase in your last year’s tax bill hurt, get ready because it is coming again this year!

I do, however, support Article 4. This article would allow the budget committee to set the default budget. The school board has set their own default budget at $32.4 million, an increase over last year’s operating budget of $2.3 million, or 7.7 percent!

This default budget is only about $800,000 less than their requested budget, or only a 2.4 percent reduction! $2.3 million is an awful lot for health care coverage and fuel cost increases as the school board claims. Or are we being told the whole story? I don’t know for sure but I do know that I have lost a lot of trust. Article 4 would allow an independent party to more closely examine the default budget numbers and explanations, thus restoring some of that trust.

Of course the School Board does not support Article 4, who wouldn’t want to dictate their own default budget increases without budget committee oversight.

John Caprio puts it very nicely when he says that what we have here is the proverbial fox guarding the budgetary hen house. Time to change that unacceptable situation.

Collis Adams
Goffstown