PRYOR OFFENDS COMBAT VETERAN

First, I will admit, I don’t think I could ever vote for a Democrat. That being said, it doesn’t excuse what Sen. Mark Pryor said in an MSNBC interview in the first week of March about Congressman Tom Cotton, who is running against Pryor for Senate. I would feel the same if Cotton were a Democrat.

Sen. Pryor said, “Congressmen Cotton acts like his military service in Iraq and Afghanistan entitles him to represent Arkansas in the U.S. Senate, and it doesn’t work that way.”

Republicans, unlike Democrats, don’t believe in entitlements and about 90 percent of us who volunteered to serve in the Armed Forces and those of us who have served in a combat zone don’t look for entitlements for what we did. We want only that which we have earned through our service to the greatest country on Earth. Many of us just ask for a simple, heartfelt “thank you” on Veterans Day and maybe on Independence Day for what we volunteered to do, which is guarantee the safety of America and “protect the Constitution against all enemy’s foreign and domestic.”

What Sen. Pryor said was a slap in the face to all who have served and are serving in our military.

It really gets me when someone who has never served seems to think they know what and how we think. Those of us who have served in a combat zone have a saying, “If you didn’t go, you wouldn’t know.” My service was from August 1985 to October 1993. I was a calvary scout 19D and my combat zone was Kuwait 1991. You are welcome.

What qualifies a person to serve in the U.S. Congress and Senate is outlined in Article I of the Constitution: “No person shall be a representative who shall not have attained the age of twenty-five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of the state in which he shall be chosen.”

Unlike 90 percent of Democrats who believe in entitlements, 90 percent of veterans only ask for what we have earned. So when the election is over and Cotton has the votes to beat Pryor, then he has earned the privilege to represent Arkansas in the U.S. Senate. He’s not entitled to it. He earned it, and every six years must earn it again.

I hope Sen. Pryor has a plan to earn money after he loses the election in November.

Marvin Bair

Rogers

REGULATIONS FOR WATER LAX

On March 11, 150 people stood up for the Buffalo River at the Parks and Tourism Conference in Rogers. Before speaking inside at the convention, Gov. Mike Beebe came out to speak to the rally participants.

Each year 1.2 million tourists visiting the Buffalo River spend $44 million. More than 610 jobs are directly tied to the river and state and local governments collect

$3 million in taxes annually.

Later on March 11, the presentation by Andrew Sharpley, the head of the governor-appointed study for water quality in the Buffalo River Watershed, took place. It was covered in the Northwest Arkansas Times. Sharpley’s presentation left multiple questions unanswered.

One, why does he not have a geologist on his team of experts, particularly a hydro-geologist? Geology is one of the main concerns.

Two, after publicly being called out for the incorrect maps of the spray field in his first report to the governor, Sharpley made the corrections. However, he stated in a Feb. 21 Democrat-Gazette article by Ryan McGeeney that even though he knew he was submitting incorrect maps, he did not think it was his place to call public attention to the inaccurate maps. “I am there to do the science,” he said in same article. So why would he choose to submit maps he knew to be inaccurate? Accuracy is the mandate of science.

Three, during his presentation Sharpley said the choice of fields they tested was limited by whether or not landowners gave permission to test. In an Aug. 15 Arkansas Times article, “State Funded Independent Monitoring Of Hog Farm Doesn’t Need Landowner Permission,” Gov. Beebe stated that after researching the question, his office concluded the state has the authority to do so with or without landowner’s permission.

Four, but not finally, this study was initiated by the governor to study pollution testing and monitoring at the C and H operation in Mount Judea. According to Sharpley’s presentation, it encompasses studying the effectiveness of alternative management techniques, including the possibility of solid separation and transporting nutrients out of the watershed rather than applying them as fertilizer in the watershed.

North Carolina, which banned in 2007 the building of any new swine confined animal feeding operations with open lagoon and sprayfield methodology, spent millions of dollars researching alternative technologies, which thus far the industry has not embraced.

Instead, the swine industry looks to Arkansas, where our regulations are more lax. This type of open lagoon technology has been shown by reputable studies — like the University of North Carolina’s work and the 2008 Pew Study on Industrialized Farming — to be a broken system. Why are we allowing lax regulations to continue in our state?

Ginny Masullo

Fayetteville

BELLA VISTA FEE PLAN OFF BASE

Yes, Bella Vista has a financial crunch. Yes, Bella Vista needs an assessment increase, but not this one.

What do the board of directors in Bella Vista know that other like communities don’t? In communities like Bella Vista, the norm is for everyone to pay something (assessments), but depending upon what activities you want to participate in, you pay for that activity, not your neighbor. The board’s proposal would reduce or eliminate fees greater than amenity users’ assessment increase. We need more revenue, not less. We already have a two-tiered assessment that has angered enough people, so they won’t vote for an assessment increase. Now the proposal is to ask non-users to pay for users activities. How ridiculous can you get? The board has lost credibility. I use the amenities as do the board members and I can’t imagine voting for something structured to take advantage of my neighbors. This sounds like welfare for the “haves.”

Hot Springs Village’s unlimited yearly golf greens fees per person equals $1,854 vs. our board proposal of $1,000.

Cart lease per seat equals $799 yearly vs. our board proposal of $500.

Green fee of $18.40 vs. our Board proposal of $15.

Fitness center yearly of $431 vs. board proposal of free.

Tennis costs $382.25 vs. board proposal of free.

These are just a few examples, but the board in Hot Springs runs a financially solvent community. They also have a $36 per month assessment for all lots. Maybe the reason people in Hot Springs are willing to pay the $36 assessment is because they know their assessments go for the improvement of the village and not to make amenities either free or close to it.

We have been able to keep amenity fees low and stay afloat because we have used reserves. We have used the $4 million saved by turning over police, fire and roads to the city. We have sold POA buildings to the city for about $2 million. We have sold lots for $2 million to a company that went bust after buying them. We pay wages 25 percent under market, defer maintenance and capital expenses. We use more than 50 percent of assessments after administration costs for golf. The board has even dipped into the general manager’s emergency funds.

We have been “robbing Peter to pay Paul,” and Peter is now broke.

Roger Norbeck

Bella Vista