To the Editor:

I am writing this letter in support of Eileen Ehlers.

In Hooksett, I personally feel it’s time we had a woman candidate, and I feel she’s an excellent, level-headed choice.

Her progressive initiatives will greatly benefit the town of Hooksett and she also would make wise decisions on a bi-partisan level. These are assets I feel will be crucial to Hooksett and this state in the next couple of years.

We as a town and state are seeing a lot of changes, especially with educational funding. The age old myth of increased taxes for residents will not be an issue.

After meeting Eileen, I feel that the many other residents of this community will take comfort that they have made the right choice this election.

Sean Joncas
Hooksett

To the Editor:

As a candidate for a second term as your state representative in District 8 ­ Allenstown, Epsom, and Pittsfield ­ I ask you, as constituents, to consider preserving family values first and foremost in this next legislative session in the following ways:

The idea of parents being able to choose where and how their child would be educated can be realized in the form of school vouchers. This would ensure a lower cost for both taxpayers and towns and provide the accountability and competition to best utilize our education dollars. I believe that, through this market principle of competition, higher test scores would be more easily achieved. Faced with the threat of broadbased taxes, it is important that taxpayers have the choice by voting to decide whether they want to fund more government with higher taxes or make do with less government and lower taxes.

The Second Amendment of our U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. I believe it is paramount in keeping with family values that we protect what was guaranteed in our Declaration of Independence, that all citizens including the unborn have the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” whereby without this protection none of us would be around to make any choices at all.

As a parent, citizen and taxpayer, I believe that the best way to preserve our liberty to make these important choices is to exercise our rights by voting in the upcoming election.

I have been honored to serve you all, the constituents of Merrimack District 8. I graciously thank you for your votes and support in this past primary and in this 2006 election season as a whole. I hope to have earned your vote this upcoming Tuesday, Nov. 7.

For more information, you can visit me on the Web at www.geocities.com/lang_for_nh_house/.

I look forward to being “your say” for a second term in Concord.

Rep. Tom Langlais
Merrimack County District 8

To the Editor:

After reading the article about “Mother petitions to remove Dupont principal,” I’m shaking my head trying to figure out why you would publish such a baseless article. Dr. Cox is an excellent administrator and has been responsible for many initiatives since her arrival.

My question to the Banner is, when was the last time you wrote a positive article about Armand R. Dupont School? Perhaps you could stop by this Friday and cover the “Good Conduct” activities and our positive rewards program. Maybe you could spare a reporter to cover next weeks Veterans Day activities the kids are putting on? While you’re at it, how about seeing how the kids are doing with the laptop program and check out other technology we’re using. You may be surprised to see how advanced we are compared to other schools in New Hampshire.

Make sure to bring a photographer to capture the expressions of engaged students and teachers; clean hallways; spotless gym; and much more.

Still not enough … how about an article about all the fundraisers the kids and the PTO (A.P.P.L.E.) are involved in. You know, collecting food for the homeless shelter; collecting items for the military; the annual A.P.P.L.E. fundraiser and more!

On the negative side, perhaps you can get some feedback from the five teachers who don’t have their own classrooms and see how they cope. Also, pop out to the modular and see how the teachers shuttle the kids back and forth to the main building.

ARD is a positive, technologically advanced and safe school. Just stop by and see for yourself.

Patrick Langdon Armand Dupont School Teacher
Allenstown

To the Editor:

We ask Merrimack County voters to join us in supporting Clark Karolian for sheriff. Clark’s platform is sound: He advocates restoring the Sheriff’s Department to its intended purpose of serving justice, and eliminating peripheral tasks best performed by others. Public safety and wise use of tax dollars are at stake. Clark will work for his ideal; Law Enforcement, Not Politics.

Two years ago Scott Hilliard endorsed Clark Karolian for election to sheriff, noting that Clark is capable of bringing an unprecedented level of cooperation to the law enforcement community. Now, two years later, Clark Karolian is still that man of integrity and vision. We are impressed with Clark’s articulate clarity. We are convinced of his ability and ethics. His background will serve us well. We are proud to support his candidacy, and ask you to vote for Clark Karolian for Sheriff on Nov. 7.

Bob and Eileen Ehlers
Hooksett

To the Editor:

If you think your home and property are safe from activist judges and politicians, I have bad news for you!

The recent United States Supreme Court Kelo decision created a new underlying constitutional principle that allows eminent domain for any “public purpose” including shopping malls, casinos and hotels!

The actual words in both the constitutions of New Hampshire and the United States say the government, through the power of eminent domain, can only take a home or business if the use will be by the public. In other words, society has accepted that a wider road, a school, fire station or sewer plant can override your enjoyment of private property.

But now, five Supreme Court judges have rewritten the federal Constitution’s protection of property clause to say that a mere “benefit” to the public is enough!

The United States Supreme Court permitted a private New London, Conn., developer to take homes and property and destroy them for a hotel and some stores. The houses were not derelict. Some folks, like Wilhelmina Ciavaglia’s family, had lived in their neighborhood for over a century.

Unfortunately for New London, the developers backed out and now grass covers the 90 homes and businesses that once were enjoyed by those families. No homes! No jobs! No taxes! No public use, except as an open field. Everyone lost.

Governments may now try to take people’s homes to make room for big-box retail chains or other private development. A powerful private developer who offers more jobs and taxes from your property than you can, may steal your land with a vote of some politicians. That is why the New Hampshire Municipal Association opposes protecting your land by a constitutional amendment.

Andy Smith of the University of New Hampshire found our citizens overwhelmingly support protecting private property. On July 20, 2005, he said:

“And while New Hampshire may be divided over many issues concerning the Supreme Court, they are nearly unanimous in their opposition to the effect of the Kelo decision ­ 93 percent say they oppose the taking of private property for economic development reasons, only 4 percent favor this use of eminent domain and 3 percent are unsure.”

Now, a bipartisan coalition has given you a choice on Nov. 7. A constitutional amendment is on the ballot that would protect private property rights by defining “public uses” in Part 1, Article 12 of the New Hampshire Constitution to guarantee that the rich, the powerful and the connected cannot take your property to develop casinos, hotels and strip malls.

The proposed language of Question 1 is as follows:

No part of a person’s property shall be taken by eminent domain and transferred, directly or indirectly, to another person if the taking is for the purpose of private development or other private use of the property.

Can we count on you to join the fight to protect private property? Please vote for Question 1 on Nov. 7.

Chuck Douglas
Concord