'Hit piece' on Rochester mayor nothing but sour grapes: Letters

'Hit piece' on Rochester mayor nothing but sour grapes

Aug. 4 -- To the Editor:

Dana Berlin's hit piece on Rochester’s mayor is nothing more than sour grapes. He's obviously upset his friend was removed from the Rochester City Council and his own remarks during the removal proceedings are all anyone needs to know to point that out.

I wasn't a fan of the process of removal from office for Chris Rice's misconduct as prescribed by NH RSA 49-C:13 and chapter 70 of the Rochester city charter, but it's the only remedy afforded to elected municipal bodies. And let's not forget, it was Mr. Rice's conduct towards other members of the city council that sparked the controversy in the first place.  Whether he should have been removed from office, for better or worse, has to be decided by the elected body. Neither the state RSA or city charter spell out any other option.

Now, as far as Mayor Callaghan's temper, self- control and self-serving agendas are concerned I've not seen anything out of the ordinary. I don't agree with placing unreasonable limitations at public input nor should there be any limitation during a public hearing, but during the meeting in question Mr. Rice did start to stray a bit and he was asked to stay on point. I've seen that happen many times by other meeting chairs before. I suggest be smart and find the right opportunity to express the point you want to make and move on. I've done that myself on countless occasions.

All told, this is much to do about personal feelings. If Dana Berlin believes a rule isn't being followed then call for a point of order during that moment in the meeting or challenge the chair's ruling and deal with it then instead of penning a letter that does nothing but stoke further unnecessary bickering.

The people of Rochester aren't concerned with trivial personality conflicts. We are (I am) concerned, however, with large scale supplemental spending just days after the budget when into effect. Where, Mr. Berlin, is the transparency you promised for that?

Fred Leonard

Rochester

I strongly oppose making State Street into a two-way street

Aug. 4 – To the Editor:

I strongly oppose turning State Street into a two-way street as doing so, on a very narrow street with parking on both sides, will actually promote longer stopping or idling times for cars attempting to negotiate the congested area.

Additionally, Middle Street already handles traffic coming and going to Route 95 and thus elevated speed remains an issue. Recently reducing the speed limit to 25 mph helps, but police monitoring continues as drivers still speed over the Route 1 overpass bridge as they head to 95, or continue their speed off of 95 into town. Funneling traffic from State Street to Middle would force many more  cars through residential neighborhoods whereas down Islington Street pushes traffic mostly through business areas.

Lastly, if "pedestrian friendly" remains the goal of the Council, then considering making Market Square and Congress Street to Maplewood Ave a Pedestrian Only Zone (with the cross streets allowing traffic and necessary delivery trucks) makes the most sense. Burlington, Vt., Boulder, CO. and many European cities successfully made centers of town pedestrian only (despite initial concerns of businesses and locals), yet businesses thrived as they expanded outdoor seating, and the new spaces allowed cart businesses and created a more festive, walkable area for both locals and tourists. Such an idea should be explored fully rather than simply changing a street direction which continues to put cars, and their emissions, in the downtown area.

Kathryn Brandin

Portsmouth

Candidates should be judged on their performance, not their ages

Aug. 3 – To the Editor:

In his recent Op Ed Ron McAllister expressed his opinion regarding an 80-year-old president.

Many people perform at a high level in their seventies and eighties and McAllilster acknowledges President Biden’s rigorous schedule and ability to get difficult things done.  To use chronological age as the principal qualification for service is an obvious case of age discrimination. Candidates for office–including president– should be judged on the strength of their character, ideas and their track-record of accomplishments to the benefit of the nation.

Among President Biden’s successes since taking office just eighteen months ago: passage of the first gun safety law in 30 years; largest  infrastructure bill since President Eisenhower; confirmation of the first African American woman on SCOTUS; enactment of the Covid rescue plan; and, record job creation.  And, it looks like we’ll finally achieve Medicare negotiating for drug prices.

To sum up, Joe Biden has had a steady hand and done an amazing job even with a slim Congressional majority and relentless GOP obstruction and mendacity (the Big Lie). It is premature to speculate on who’s going to run for president in 2024 when we’re barely into the campaign season for the critical 2022 mid-term cycle. Fixating on anyone’s age is a distraction.  New Hampshire voters need to elect candidates committed to solving problems and honoring the rule of law and their oaths of office.  That means electing Democrats up and  down the ballot this November.

Joan Jacobs

Portsmouth

Gail Huff Brown is best candidate to represent CD-1 in Congress

Aug. 3 – To the Editor:

Gail Huff Brown is running to represent the citizens of NH Congressional District 1 because she is deeply concerned about and focused on the future of America. Directed by impractical, high spending, liberal career politicians with no private sector experience, America is on the wrong course. Gail will work to bring positive change to Congress and represent the values and goals of New Hampshire citizens.

Gail worked for 30 years as an accomplished on-air Boston TV reporter. A pragmatic conservative, she is a devoted mother, grandmother, and military spouse with valuable experience working alongside her husband, former Senator and Ambassador Scott Brown.

Gail has a passionate love for our country and in Congress will:

• Support a strong economy by fighting to bring inflation under control;

• Work to reduce deficit spending and fight against out of control federal debt by pragmatic reforms;

•  Stand for realistic law and order practices and support of our police;

•  Support American energy producers while cost effective alternatives become more prevalent;

•  Enact rational border controls and immigration policy changes;

•  Ensure a strengthened foreign policy to face the threats coming from China, Russia, and Iran;

•  Ensure that power constitutionally reserved for the states remains with the states;

Gail is not a partisan politician. She is running because she passionately seeks a better and stronger future for all Americans. Please join me in voting for Gail Huff Brown, who will represent New Hampshire with common sense and intelligence, on September 13th.

Peter White

Rye

Don't waste my tax dollars on Nancy Pelosi trip to Taiwan

Aug. 3 – To the Editor:

Ever wonder here your tax money goes? Let me tell you of two places,it will make your blood boil !!

Congressional junkets: many millions of our tax money is spent on trips like Ms. Pelosi is taking to Asia. Never mind how upset her trip makes Beijing…it is my money that pays millions of dollars to fly, wine, dine, lodge the congressional delegation, and what is accomplished? Nada. Nothin. Zippo.

Are you mad your tax dollars are going down this rat hole? You should be!

Why should you and I pay for civilian child care and retired military healthcare at the Kittery Shipyard?

This is a military base The facility exists to preserve active duty military effectiveness. I support that use of my tax dollars. Why should civilians have a free ride on my and your tax dollars?

You may shed a tear for those displaced, but our tax dollars are not for civilian benefits.

That’s my opinion…what’s yours?

David Lincoln

York, Maine

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: 'Hit piece' on Rochester mayor nothing but sour grapes: Letters