For past Letters to the Editor, view our Archives by publication date.

Bad Links?
Other glitches?
Notify Webmaster

What our Readers Are Saying

Letters to the Editor

Agencies not there to help sell papers

In response to your article, “Grading local law agencies on openness,” in the March 16, 2005, issue of The Citizen, here’s a news flash: law enforcement agencies do not exist for the purpose of feeding you information and statistics so you can sell newspapers. Just so you know, they are in the business of combating crime and saving lives.

Law enforcement agencies nationwide are always under-staffed, overworked and under-paid. I suppose you would have their staff to just put aside their daily duties so as to provide you with any and all information you see fit to publish in the name of “the public’s right to know.”

Are you willing to provide these government agencies with the funds to hire staff for the purpose of producing the stacks of information you want?

I know for a fact that to provide you with some of the information you desire, additional software would have to be purchased and installed on these agencies’ computers. Otherwise, it has to be manually compiled. Are you willing to cough up the funds for this? I think you would rather have the taxpayers [pay] for it, so you can profit from your newspaper sales.

Your article conveys utter contempt for our local law enforcement agencies. Was it intentional and with contempt that you failed to capitalize the words “police, marshals and sheriff’s department,” or are you grammatically challenged? You capitalized the words “Fayetteville, Peachtree City and Fayette County.”

If you desire a less “tightfisted approach to public records,” as you call it, you might consider offering a little respect to these people who risk their lives each day for us.

No, Mr. Beverly, you don’t work for the public as the law enforcement professionals do. You work (spin) for profit! What law enforcement pays its personnel can hardly be called profit.

All of our local law enforcement professionals do an outstanding job. We are fortunate to have such a low crime rate compared to the counties all around us. That’s no accident, but can be attributed to the efforts of our law enforcement professionals!

James Fryar
Fayetteville, Ga.

The editor replies: My goodness! I wasn’t grading you; or was I? By the way, we sell only a relatively few papers; most of them we just give away, for free. Seriously, though, you seem to think that the agencies are doing us a favor by providing limited information that the law requires them to provide to any member of the public. One would think that law enforcement agencies, paid for by public tax money, would also want to uphold and enforce very specific state laws about releasing public information. These agencies can’t arrest folks for violations of some laws and then ignore other equally valid and binding laws governing their own conduct. If they bought software that ignores state law, that’s their own mistake. They should upgrade their software to follow state law. That’s their duty under the law. As for capitalization, we simply follow the standard AP Stylebook rules for proper use of capital letters. As for contempt, you seem to exhibit contempt for public scrutiny of people with the power to put citizens behind bars and otherwise disrupt their lives. That’s a dangerous contempt, especially if you wear a badge.

What ‘emergency’?

Rep. Fludd’s call for an “emergency” meeting to put forth a measure that would change the county’s voting procedures is highly suspicious.

What’s the emergency, and why was [state Senator] Ronnie Chance not invited to vote?

It’s very obvious that there would have been a tie vote if Mr. Chance would have been afforded the opportunity to vote, and therefore the measure would not have been given to the legislature.

Mr. Fludd’s statement, “We have a number of constituents, a very large number and a growing number, that would like to see an approach to electing people who represent them who reflect their interests and viewpoints,” is very telling.

It could easily be translated to say, “We have a number of minorities, a very large number and a growing number, that do not feel that they can be represented by white people, and want a chance to be represented by people of color. Forget what is best for Fayette County, we need more minorities in office.”

This type of underhanded shenanigan should not be tolerated. All Fayette Countians that are against district voting for County Commission should write our legislature and let them know that we will not tolerate divisive politicians who are out to turn our county into a mirror image of Clayton County.

Matthew Washburn
Fayetteville, Ga.

Our members of Congress are unresponsive to constituents’ letters

A few days ago I sent President Bush, senators Chambliss and Isakson and Congressman Westmoreland an e-mail about the deplorable condition of our borders. I wrote the President and everyone in Congress should be impeached if we were attacked again and the terrorists entered this country illegally.

Sen. Chambliss did answer my e-mail (the only one who did). He wrote about how much the Senate, the House and the President had done in securing our borders.

I sent him another e-mail rebutting his claim that our borders are safer now than before 9/11. His reply to my second mailing was an identical letter (word for word, period for period) telling me how much safer our borders are now.

I know Chambliss does not read the mail sent to him but I thought someone did. It appears the “person” reading the mail is a program or machine and it looks for key words. Once it determines the tone of the mail it answers with a canned message.

My second message did contain the words “border,” “illegal aliens,, “jobs,” etc., so it wouldn’t have been too difficult for a computer to pick out the tone of the message. I guess the above job description could fit a human as well.

My next “mail” to the senator will be a phone call to his local office. I won’t waste time writing again and, if I can’t talk with someone at his office, I won’t waste my time voting for him again either.

By the way, our borders are still like sieves, no matter what Chambliss claims, and if the next attack happens because the terrorists came through the holes in our borders, the impeachment process should be swift and final.

Charles James
Fayetteville, Ga.

County Commissioner Pfeifer, PTC Mayor Brown debate: Part 2

Pfeifer:

One of the members of the Peachtree City Council has responded to the remarks I have been making. I do not have their permission to quote them, and I didn’t ask for their permission, so I’ll just refer to them as a council member.

The mayor has also responded; his was in the newspaper. I’ll address the issues raised by the council member, for now, and leave the mayor’s comments for another time.

Another council member contacted me after I had almost finished this letter. I think I address at least part of their concern at the end of this letter.

As I understood what they said, the first council member had four comments. One is that Peachtree City personnel are offended because they think I doubted their competence.

Second, I want my own way and I won’t be happy until I get it.

Third, I want Peachtree City taxpayers to pay twice for the same service.

And fourth, I don’t understand that if I have a disagreement with the mayor that he is not the only person to deal with in Peachtree City.

First, and most important. Can any of my comments be interpreted as being negative towards the fire and EMS personnel in Peachtree City? I don’t see how they could but if someone has misunderstood me or if someone has misstated my comments, I apologize for that.

I have no complaints about Emergency Services personnel. Every time I have dealt with them, and I have, they have been professional and competent.

What did I actually say? In one letter I said, “Fire and medical emergencies do not differ in themselves because they occur on one side or another of an imaginary line (the city boundary). Fire and medical services should then be handled in the best possible way for the citizen who needs the service, at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer. Fayette County Emergency Services are the equal of, or better than, any emergency services in this state. That leaves the issue of cost.”

In another, I said; “Chief Krakeel is saying something I have also said about the phrase from their report claiming that, ‘PTC provides a superior service at an economical cost.’ If true, this would be good but it is an opinion and an assertion that needs some basis or reason for saying it. What is the reasoning? What is the comparison? What are the facts? What kind of leadership produces silliness like this and expects you to believe it?”

I do not believe that saying that Fayette County EMS people provide excellent service means that Peachtree City people do not.

My comments should be understood as saying that having a separate, Peachtree City-only, fire and emergency medical services is probably less efficient service-wise and probably costs more money than would a consolidated Fayette County and Peachtree City operation.

That I do not believe that the service to our citizens would suffer in a consolidation and that the only way to know with any certainty would be to have professional fire and EMS and finance people look at the situation, make a comparison and make recommendations.

I’m not a fire and EMS person. I need to have this stuff analyzed and explained by the professional people that the taxpayers employ to have this type of knowledge and to use this knowledge. I do not believe that we should employ professionals in order to have them create conclusions to satisfy our preconceived solutions.

I have also written, “My complaints are about the mayor and council and possibly about the staff who provide them with information. I do not know if the mayor and council are provided with correct and sufficient information.”

This means that I am specifically critical of the mayor and City Council. I am critical of city staff if they are voluntarily providing incorrect or incomplete information. If their information is incorrect or incomplete because they are intimidated by the mayor or council, that is another issue.

I have tried not to make any personal comments about any member of the council. That is one reason I refer to them as “the mayor and council,” so I do not get personal.

Let’s address the comment that I have to have things my own way. If we mean that I insist that we should know and understand the facts before we make decisions, I am guilty. I do believe that.

In circumstances when we have the time and ability to determine the facts, that we should lay them out for our constituents and ourselves so that we can all understand. I plead guilty to that as well.

But as far as insisting on things being my way on, for example, the EMS issue, my belief that consolidation offers the best combination of service and cost, it is just that: my belief.

Nobody can determine for sure what the best course is until we can take an honest look at the situation. Am I willing to talk? Yes, and always have been.

Next, do I want Peachtree City taxpayers to pay twice for the same service? I will remind you that I am a Peachtree City taxpayer. I don’t want ANY taxpayer to pay twice for the same service and I don’t know any member of the County Commission who does.

It seems to me that commission Chairman Greg Dunn’s comments on this are correct. If Peachtree City taxpayers are paying twice, it is the mayor and council who are charging them the second time.

Do I understand that the mayor is only one member of your council? Sure I do. But you must understand that you, the City Council, have to act. This, I think, was the concern of the second council member who contacted me. They were concerned that I am putting all council members in the same basket.

My point is that you are the only group that can control the mayor. When you don’t say, “This is right or this is wrong,” and put it to a vote, even if you might lose that vote, then you empower the mayor.

Each time you let something go forward that you know is wrong, and you say or do nothing; you have responsibility even if you may not have the blame.

The reason I have said “mayor and council” is because it certainly seems to me that you have enabled this mayor to run roughshod over everyone else. I do not hear you attempting to control him or thwart him or prevent him or force him to do the right thing often enough.

I know it’s not easy and I don’t say it is easy, but it is your obligation as a council member. My only choice when you do nothing is to understand that you must support the decisions made by the mayor.

It does not matter what the issue is: EMS, roads, SPLOST, tennis center, annexation or the wasting of taxpayers’ money.

I’m not saying that you need to say anything personally negative about the mayor, even though he may say it about you. But, you should stand up and say (if you think so) that “This or that decision is wrong.”

If something needs to be moved along (like roads), then you should say so and move it along.

I personally think it’s not right to let the mayor make the decisions and let the rest of us put up with the delays.

If you, as a council member, think we should have these delays, then say that. If you are on the council, you must say what you think and vote on these things so that your constituents will know who believes what. And, if you want to be known separately from the mayor, you need to say it clearly enough and loudly enough so that we hear you.

Peter Pfeifer
Fayette County Commission, Post 3

Pfeifer, who lives in Peachtree City, Ga., is serving his second term on the commission.

Brown:

In a Feb. 23, 2004, opinion column written by County Commissioner Peter Pfeifer entitled, “PTC has dismal record of finishing road projects,” the writer expresses some rather unpleasant remarks about the City Council and staff of Peachtree City.

Commissioner Pfeifer chastised the City Council of Peachtree City on how we were handling the Rockaway Road realignment situation.

He attempted to make it appear that our City Council and staff were not planning appropriately. Mr. Pfeifer stated, “Was this [Rockaway] road intersection included in the transportation plan and in the SPLOST? It was not.” He continued, “Was it [Rockaway] included in the Peachtree City projects that were part of the SPLOST? It was not.”

The commissioner’s statements are entirely false. At our March 17, 2005, City Council meeting, we presented the news media with a complete copy of a letter sent to Commission Chairman Greg Dunn, dated May 21, 2004, signed by our entire City Council which was accompanied by an attached spreadsheet of our SPLOST projects.

The project on line 22 of the spreadsheet clearly reads “Rockaway Road Realignment” with a description that reads, “Realign road to intersect with Holly Grove Road.” The May 21 letter was also mailed to the town of Tyrone and the cities of Fayetteville, Woolsey and Brooks. All of these documents are available to the public by contacting City Hall.

Unfortunately, Commissioner Pfeifer had also stated that our City Council mishandled the turn lane incentive for the new Cooper Wiring Devices headquarters.

In actually, the Fayette County Development Authority (FCDA) was the lead agency on that project. FCDA Executive Director Brian Cordoza acknowledged at our March 17, 2005, council meeting that the GDOT cost estimate figure that he had presented to us [was] drastically lower than the actual cost of the project. The County Commissioners had previously agreed to pay 25 percent of the initial project cost.

After our city obtained a second more accurate cost estimate, we again asked the county to honor their earlier 25 percent commitment on the new higher amount. Thus far the county has refused.

We are not sure why Commissioner Pfeifer is angry at us if the changes in the cost of the project were a result of an error from his own FCDA.

Our City Council welcomes Cooper Wiring Devices. Mr. Cardoza’s mistake was unintentional and our council is committed make this situation work out and we hope that the county government will join us.

Hopefully, this was a just case where the other county commissioners simply did not include Commissioner Pfeifer in their examination of our submitted project list for SPLOST and he was not trying to be mean-spirited or misleading. It is obvious that his communication with the FDCA was also deficient related to Cooper Wiring Devices.

Please know that our city government is always ready to assist our citizens and county commissioners with obtaining copies of our government documents. We want the information that the public receives to be accurate. Our city is one of the strongest proponents of “open government” in the state of Georgia.

I hope that we can anticipate more cooperation from Commissioner Pfeifer now that he knows the truth related to his past complaints. Our citizens also look forward to a county solution on being taxed without the services being rendered concerning Emergency Medical Services and recreation.

It is an honor to serve our citizens. Thank you.

Steve Brown, mayor
Peachtree City, Ga.

Point-counterpoint: Why Terri Schiavo should not be starved to death

In the interest of charitable debate on the subject, I am going to use the point-counterpoint method of Thomas Aquinas to analyze the Terri Schiavo case.

A caveat: I do not claim in any way to be as smart as Thomas Aquinas, or even as the average incoming freshman at Georgia Tech. However, Thomas Aquinas always started his debates by stating the argument of his opposition better than they could before offering his own refutation.

This was not some attempt at trickery, but rather was an expression of his respect for the dignity of all his opponents and his innate charity.

Point: removing the feeding tube from Terri Schiavo is fulfilling her wishes to not live in a vegetative state, as expressed to her husband, Michael Schiavo. He, as her husband and legal guardian, is in the best position to determine Terri’s wishes since he knew her best.

Counterpoint: determining whether Terri Schiavo would want to die in her current situation is a legal decision that requires appropriate legal documentation. The hearsay evidence offered by Michael Schiavo is simply not sufficient to make the legal determination.

When dealing with issues of life and death, the courts have the obligation to impose a very high standard for those wishing to end life. Without a clear statement in a written form, the courts should err on the side of life, not death.

Furthermore, significant concerns about the motivations and sincerity of Michael Schiavo have emerged since his wife’s trauma of 15 years ago. His behavior, whether it be the denial of rehabilitative care or his fathering of two children out of wedlock with another woman, have rendered his status as legal guardian in question.

This fact, taken together with the lack of written evidence of Terri’s wishes, should automatically disqualify him from making the life and death decision for Terri.

Point: Terri is in a vegetative state and as such cannot properly enjoy a quality of life to which any reasonable human being aspires. She cannot talk or feed herself, she is effectively bed-ridden, and except for a few moments where she smiles or reacts to stimuli, she is in a catatonic state. It is therefore cruel to sustain her life, especially when most of us would agree that we would not want to be kept alive in such a state.

Counterpoint: while many doctors would describe Terri as a “vegetable,” there is considerable evidence that people in her condition are not only fully conscious of what is happening, but are able to obtain a partial if not full recovery of their faculties.

If there is even a remote chance that Terri’s mental faculties are intact, albeit masked by her condition, she should be cared for with that presumption.

Ultimately, doctors cannot know exactly what is going on inside Terri Schiavo’s mind. Given this fact, we again, as a society, should err on the side of life and keep Terri alive with dignity.

Furthermore, although we may imagine we would not want to live in such a condition, we cannot know until we are actually in such a state. To deny someone in that state a chance at life because of our subjective feelings on a subject with which we have no real experience is legally unjustifiable and morally presumptuous.

Again, unless a clear, written statement was left by the patient in question, we need to rule on the side of life.

Point: Requiring a feeding tube means that a person is effectively no longer alive since they are 100 percent dependent on external intervention to maintain life. Therefore, to remove the tube only facilitates the natural process of death, which is artificially being delayed by outside means.

Counterpoint: This argument is true when applied to someone who not only has a feeding tube, but is on a heart-lung machine and is brain-dead. In that case, “pulling the plug” would result in the nearly immediate death of the person. Such a person is truly being kept alive by completely artificial means and has no chance of recovery.

However, this is not the case with those requiring a feeding tube. After all, an infant, certain surgical patients, and other people in various states of illness are 100 percent dependent on others for their nutritional needs.

If the feeding tube is removed, they do not die immediately. Rather, they starve to death just like a healthy person would if denied food and water. The process of dying this way is extremely painful and takes up to two weeks.

If there is even a chance that someone in Terri Schiavo’s condition could experience that pain, we again, as a society, should judge that such a person must not be put to death.

Point: Letting people die according to their own wishes is the truly compassionate choice. Forcing people to suffer a prolonged death or a diminished quality of life is not only unfair and cruel, but denies their right to determine their own fate, a right we have legally and morally.

Counterpoint: Suffering is not a “good” that society aspires to, yet it is part of life. We cannot entirely avoid it and society is using science to alleviate suffering in all its forms.

This is a good thing, but the expectation to completely avoid suffering is not only unrealistic, but dangerous. The desire to avoid suffering can be so strong that it causes us to harm others in our quest.

Witness the example of those who would destroy their unborn babies to avoid the “suffering” of having an “unwanted child.” Or those who destroy embryos in order to find a cure for a disease.

They are willing to sacrifice another human life for their own desire to avoid suffering. This is a moral line we simply cannot cross. The implications are deadly, for now we allow the destruction of embryos and fetuses, but later we may allow the destruction of newborn babies, the elderly, and the infirm, like Terri Schiavo.

Philosophers, ethicists, and politicians are busy promoting such an agenda in various guises. If we do not draw a line in the moral sand when it comes to terminating innocent life, we will go down a road that leads to the death camps of Auschwitz. (The Jews were seen by the Nazis as impediments to their own quality of life and were thus determined to be expendable.)

Furthermore, there are many practical problems with allowing euthanasia or the right to die. We already see in the Netherlands that doctors and state officials are increasingly taking the decision to die out of the hands of the individual or the family and making it themselves.

Children with chronic or terminal diseases under the age of 12 are being sentenced to death by committee in order to avoid suffering, regardless of the child’s or family’s wishes.

Ultimately, we must be a society that cherishes and promotes life in all its forms, whether newly conceived, elderly, ill, or handicapped. Allowing individuals to determine their own death may seem compassionate, but it is a notion too vulnerable to abuse and subjective ambiguity to be allowed.

Lastly, Terri Schiavo is not a “right to die” case. She is not the one asking for death; her husband is. Her parents are 100 percent willing to take care of her with no support or involvement from her husband. Shouldn’t we give them that opportunity?

Trey Hoffman
Peachtree City, Ga.

Be vigilant about registered sex offenders living in our neighborhoods

The recent disappearance of Jessica Lunsford of Florida made me wonder about how lenient Georgia judges, prosecutors, and legislators really are on sexual predators of children.

Curious about just how many “sex offenders” live in Fayette County, I searched the Web site of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) for a listing of child molesters living in our area and was shocked at just how many predators are moving about freely because these criminals are not kept in prison.

Twenty-one offenders are currently listed for Fayette County: four in Peachtree City, 14 in Fayetteville, one in Fairburn, and two in Tyrone; more than 60 offenders are registered in Coweta County, more than 150 in Clayton, and more than 600 in Fulton.

For example, a white male (date of birth 1960) was convicted on 4/21/03 for “enticing a child for indecent purposes.” Since he was registered as a sex offender on 4/24/03, he apparently was never incarcerated but placed on probation and is now living freely in our community (Deer Grass Trail, Peachtree City, last verified by the Sheriff’s Department on 10/7/04).

Another white male (d.o.b. 1951) was convicted on 3/20/00 for “child molestation.” Since he was registered as a sex offender on 3/20/00, he apparently was also placed on probation instead of being incarcerated, and his last verified residence (3/11/03) was at Spring Creek Court, Fayetteville. His residence should have been re-verified by the Sheriff’s Department in March 2004.

A black male (d.o.b. 1971) was convicted on 3/7/02 for “child molestation” and registered as a sex offender on 4/10/02, apparently placed on probation, and, as of 6/15/04, was residing at Fontaine Way, Fayetteville.

A white male (d.o.b. 1969) was convicted on 11/15/00 for “child molestation.” Since he was registered as a sex offender on 3/14/05, he at least seems to have been incarcerated for slightly more than four years. His residence (Pendleton Trail, Tyrone) verification date has not been posted.

A black male (d.o.b. 1962) was convicted on 12/6/99 for an “indecent act with a child.” Since he was registered as a sex offender on 6/3/03, he at least seems to have been incarcerated for about 3.5 years. As of 6/15/04, he was residing at Walnut Grove, Peachtree City.

A black male (d.o.b. 1980) was convicted on 3/22/04 for “sexual exploitation of children.” Since he was registered on 3/30/04, he apparently was placed on probation rather than being incarcerated, and, as of 4/5/04, was residing at Heath Way, Fayetteville.

A white male (d.o.b. 1954) was convicted on 5/24/94 for “child molestation.” After being incarcerated for almost four years, he was registered as a sex offender on 5/22/98 and, as of 5/18/04, was residing at Hidden Creek Lane, Peachtree City.

I was surprised to learn that the national average for time served for molesting a child is just three years (only six years for rape) (www.throwawaythekey.org). According to the Department of Justice, the average sentence length to a state prison for a felony conviction has decreased since 1992 from 6.5 years to 4.5 years (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fssc00.pdf).

Community notification about sex offenders is not required in Georgia (www.sexcriminals.com). It is the responsibility of the public to access the Internet (www.ganet.org/gbi/disclaim.html) to view all sex offenders registered in Georgia or to contact the local Sheriff’s Department to view a listing of the sex offenders.

At the GBI site (www.state.ga.us/gbi/index.html then go to the sex offenders link) there are no online maps of sex offender residence locations (go to www.maps.google.com to locate the residence), and only about a third of all offenders on the registry have identifying photographs.

Information about the offender (such as the nature of the sex offense, past crimes, etc.) is not available by a visit to a law enforcement agency, by phone, or by written or other request (www.sexcriminals.com).

It is the responsibility of the offender himself is to report to the Sheriff’s Department any change of residence so that the registry can be updated at least annually.

The sex offender is given up to 10 days before he must report for his initial registration after his release from prison, placement on probation, parole or supervised release, or entry into the State of Georgia.

Offenders remain on the registry for 10 years unless they have more than one prior conviction or have been convicted of an aggravated offense; these offenders will remain on the registry for life.

“Sexual predators” (offenders who suffer from a mental abnormality or a personality disorder that would make a person likely to engage in a predatory sexually violent offense) are required to verify their information every 90 days and will also remain on the registry for life.

If a person, however, was sentenced under the first offender act, is a juvenile, or was released from prison or placed on probation or supervised released before July 1, 1996, he is not required to register as a sex offender.

The failure to prosecute and convict child molesters was a factor in last year’s election between John Mrosek and incumbent Johnnie Caldwell for judge of Fayette Superior Court.

Since a sex offender is permitted to plead guilty and plea-bargain to a misdemeanor to avoid prison and registration as a sex offender, offenders’ lawyers can negotiate probation or a fine instead of prison time.

In fact, in one case presided over by Judge Caldwell, a child molester received probation and a fine after pleading guilty to a lesser charge (“enticing a child for indecent purposes”) because the entire investigative case file was somehow “lost” (www.thecitizennews.com/main/archive-040608/news/fp-06.html). This criminal’s name does not currently appear on the registered sex offenders list.

As citizens, we need to be concerned about the laxity of our legal system because sexual predators are very often repeat offenders. According to the U.S. Department of Justice (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#recidivism), two-thirds of felons released from state prison are re-arrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within just three years of their release.

It just makes sense that the longer felons are kept in prison, the fewer new victims there will be. But nobody in power seems interested in being a true advocate for children who cannot vote and have little voice in our society.

In an article in the 11/3/04 Citizen, a Fayette County sex offender was accused of the kidnapping and sexual assault of two 12-year-old girls in Ohio soon after his release from a Georgia prison, where he had been incarcerated after a March 1999 conviction for molesting a 9-year-old Fayette County girl.

Apparently, he did not serve the maximum five-year prison sentence but was out on probation because the Georgia Department of Corrections “had no reason to suspect [that the man] would allegedly strike again.” After being arrested in Ohio, he said, “You better lock me up or I’ll do it again.” (www.thecitizennews.com/main/archive-041103/in-04.html)

Go to the GBI site to see the pictures and addresses of registered sex offenders (the unregistered ones we are left to wonder about), and remember Jessica Lunsford and the many other child victims of sexual predators the next time you vote.

Gayla Conley
Peachtree City, Ga.

WHS soccer player Free Speech item ‘shameful’

The Citizen contains a section titled Free Speech which provides those lacking the courage to sign their names an open forum to express their opinions. Although this is nothing more than a sleazy ploy to sell papers, it is commonplace in newspapers these days and, generally, a harmless diversion. Intelligent readers understand that the rantings of the anonymous count for nothing.

However, in a recent edition The Citizen violated its stated policy: “We won’t print ... personal attacks on private persons....” when it did in fact print a very personal attack against a member of our girls soccer team and the coach of that team.

Thanks to The Citizen, some pitiful person who has an issue with our principal was allowed to discredit his daughter’s athletic ability and the soccer coach’s integrity. That is shameful.

We recognize that the accusations of the anonymous are unworthy of response, but for the record wish to state that the Whitewater High School girls soccer team currently has an 8-2 season and is ranked third in the region.

WHS faculty and staff
(48 signatures follow)

Comcast price hikes may force increase in rents

[I’m] the property manager of Brandywine at LaFayette Apartments, one of the few communities that still provides free basic cable services to its residents.

Comcast’s latest price increase leaves our community with the problem of either raising rents or discontinuing offering free cable.

Our cable has climbed over the past few years from $1,700 per month to this month’s bill of $3,150.

Other Atlanta-based communities have found it more cost-effective to offer satellite services to their residents.

In an industry where our budgets govern our success or failure, unexpected cost increases like Comcast’s latest one could result in decreasing other services or activities to our communities.

Michele Hines
Fayetteville, Ga.