Letters – Editor accused of ‘good ol’ boy’ politics
To the Editor:
In your editorial of August 23, you wrote:
“. . .I’m in support of the idea of our governmental bodies entering an agreement that will, in essence, save us, the taxpayers, a fortune.
I’m not in support of that agreement if it’s going to cost even one of my friends a job.”
Wow. You seem to be saying that you value friendships more than responsible fiscal policy. That sounds like “the good-ole boy system” to me. A business that pays the salaries of friends instead of paying the bills will soon be in no position to pay any salaries at all.
I do not believe that (my) tax dollars should be used to pay the salaries of (your) friends. Instead, I much prefer that by keeping taxes low, you and I should each have more of our own dollars in our pocket to share with friends or strangers as we see fit.
I appreciate your honesty. I know that many people feel the same way. That’s probably why we continue to have so many “pork projects” in our budgets at most levels. No one wants to be the one to ‘save taxpayer money’ when the fat is feeding your own friends.
I wish that the good questions you bring up further in your editorial (especially about how we get out of such an agreement once entered into) were not overshadowed by my ire for the previous statement.
Letters – River safety starts with courtesy
To the Editor:
I read the column in The Guardian about the recent drowning tragedy and the problems that Sheriff Law has with policing the area and I agree.
I live on the river as well. However, I would like to address another problem that no one seems to have much interest in. Sadly I was witness to and involved with the recent tragic drowning. This leads to my area of concern.
It seems to be common knowledge that anyone tubing on the river may exit at any site and proceed at will to any desired destination by crossing any yard or fence obstruction. This is erroneous and in fact is trespassing and is unlawful. All property along the river bank is private property.
I have had numerous occasions to involve the Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Department for tubers walking by my bedroom window, urinating and depositing beer cans in my yard, swinging on my grandchildren’s swings, passing out on my porch and walking into my house.
Trespassing signs may be present but are usually torn down by trespassing tubers but purple painted trees and posts are a state-recognized no trespassing sign.
I think it would behoove the tube rental purveyors to educate their customers about the laws as well as the courtesies when using the river. This would certainly diminish the anger and friction between the river land owner and drunk, rude, irascible and crude river tubers.
We could all use some long needed change.
Roy J Hotz, Jr., MD
Letters – EMS conversation should be adult
To the Editor:
I too believe that we should have an adult conversation about the elephant in the room. I say adult due to all the misinformation about and insults hurled at Luling EMS.
I don’t wish to engage in counter insults or accusations, suffice it to say I have known three members of Luling EMS for almost 20 years. (Two of them I went to EMT class with.) Not only do I believe them to be competent paramedics, I know them to be good people.
As far as quality of care, not only would I allow them to treat and transport my child, I have had them take my child to the hospital.
While we need to discuss all aspects of the proposal, we should be able to keep it on an adult level and stop making unsupported accusations and personal insults.
Letters – Commuters pay the price for toll road
To the Editor:
SH130 sounds good if you are a customer… then again, maybe not.
Concession Chief Executive Officer Javier Gutierrez says, and I quote, “the trip from San Antonio to Georgetown along the full 90-mile expanse of SH130 is likely to cost around $6 for a light vehicle.”
I suppose he was talking about a bicycle!
I have a Honda Civic and twice, I have gone from Georgetown to 183/SH45, and the cost averaged $8-$9 each way.
Ninety days after SH130, TxDOT representatives may be willing to perform a study to reassess the speed limit on Highway 183.
Previously, 183 was 65 mph, and now it’s 55 mph for construction purposes. If they reassess, it could be raised or even lowered.
Let’s all hope that SH130 Concession Company doesn’t persuade TxDOT to keep the speed limit low to get people to pay the toll.
It’s bad enough that the traffic light at 183/130/Toll 45 is timed so people getting off the toll road won’t be inconvenienced by a red traffic light – yet the heavy traffic on 183 sometimes has a green light for only 10 or 15 seconds, so as not to inconvenience toll payer.
How many more of these traffic lights are going to be put up between here and Mustang Ridge for non-paying drivers?
Not everyone has money to drive on a toll road. Should people be punished for living on a budget, working in Austin or beyond? We already have high gas bills and wear and tear on our vehicles.
TxDOT, I ask you not to punish the drivers trying to make a living for their families. If I could work in Lockhart, I would. SH130 Concession Company representatives, you will make a profit from the toll. There is no need to put untruthful information out there.
No related posts found