Falsehood Corrections Were False And Must Be Corrected

Advertisement

Editor:

The Letter to the Editor written by Judy Buettner titled, "Falsehoods must be corrected" contains many falsehoods that do need correcting.

It is usually not wise to attribute words to others without really knowing what they said, but I understand in the passion of a political campaign that happens.

Let me correct the information:

Streets ... I did not say, "... the entire budget for the street department ... is $400,000." The real facts are ... the amount allocated to street maintenance (a supposedly top strategic item) is only $450,000.

Deficit ... I did not say, "$7 million in the red?" The real facts are ... I have stated that in the 2005/2006 budget, the Town has budgeted $7.7 million more for expenses than we are taking in.

We are spending our savings. Actually, the final numbers just put out by the Finance Department is $8.05 million.

Water ... Here I agree that there are consistent misstatements, but by the supporters of the Brewer-Henley team, not me. I did not say, "... the Town is paying Mr. Horton $750,000..."

The real facts are ... the town will pay $750,000 to Mr. Randall and Mr. Haught. An additional item that continues to be forgotten is that Mr. Horton was to pay Payson an inspection fee of 3 percent of the cost of the pipeline and based on our latest communication with the Town manager, this has not yet been paid.

Main Street ... you state that I imply that $500,000 has been spent on Main Street. The real facts are ... I have stated that this year's budget includes $500,000 for Main Street.

Citizen Input and Communication ... You state, "The Town has done a lot to improve communication." I agree that lately, just prior to an election, we are finally getting some meetings speaking to the issues of concern. But is it "improved communication" to have 300 people at council meeting and to not listen to them? Is it "improved communication" to not only disregard 2,000 signatures on a petition but to bring a high-priced lawyer in from out of town for the sole purpose of thwarting it? Is it "improved communication" to put out inconsistent statements on the status of our water, an issue so vital to the public?

While we may differ on the issues and our choice of candidates, please be careful with your research and report the facts.

Bob Edwards, Payson

Commenting has been disabled for this item.