- April 26, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
Send your letters to [email protected].
Dear Editor:
Regarding the recent Observer article about utility rate hikes, I must question Mayor Alfin's comment about relying on ITT's projection of growth rates when Palm Coast was being developed, which began in 1969. That was 55 years ago, and I would suggest that those projections have long since lost their validity. We recently paid a consulting firm to do a thorough study of our utility system, and it would appear that their findings are logical.
No one wants to pay the money, of course, but the updating of our infrastructure is inevitable. Pay the money and get it done.
Ed Danko chimed in with his opinion as well. His position is to wait until Mr. Trump has regained the presidency and then see what happens. Apparently in Danko's perfect world Mr. Trump will have Mexico pay for our storm drainage problem.
Jim Bennett
Palm Coast
Editor’s Note: As I do with all comments that make personal jabs, I gave Ed Danko a chance to respond. He wrote: “Apparently this person believes in the failed policies of Bidenomics that have destroyed our economy. In my perfect world, we will have a new president after November who doesn’t see and speak to dead people.”
Dear Editor:
There was an article in the Feb. 8 Observer about roundabouts.
“Roundabouts work, they’re safe,” was stated in the article. While that may, or may not be true, someone should ask if anyone other than politicians want to have them. I think that most drivers hate them. I know that I sure do!
Against my wishes, there are now two roundabouts on a state highway, U.S. 1! I can’t believe that the state folks allowed that to happen. Now, all of the through traffic has to negotiate the zigzags, just to pass straight through. It seems stupid to me. The intersections could have been redesigned, with a well programmed traffic light or even with an overpass that would have done the job at less cost.
I also read this headline in the Feb 15. Observer: “City Council questions necessity of utility rate hike.”
I don’t understand. If there is a 10% population increase, there should be 10% higher taxes and fees to pay for whatever is needed. Yes? No? Why is a higher percentage needed? Can anyone explain this to me?
Jesse Stoner
Palm Coast
