To The Daily Sun,
During the public forum regarding Kimball Castle, which was held in Gilford on April 9, it became apparent that there are misconceptions as to whether or not the castle can truly be considered a castle and whether it can be considered historic.
According to Webster's Dictionary, the definition of a castle is a large building fortified against attack with thick walls, battlements, and towers, or a large, expensive home. Kimball Castle is, by definition, a castle.
The National Park Service, the federal organization that oversees the National Register of Historic Places, requires that a property must be at least 50 years old to be considered historic.
When a property is considered for the National Register, its age, integrity and historical significance are carefully examined. If a property is listed on the National Register, it does not prevent its demolition. Once razed, the property is removed from the register. However, its historical significance can never be erased.
Kimball Castle was placed on the National Register during the 1980s, which confirms that it is historic and its history is significant. The castle's National Register of Historic Places Inventory – Nomination Form may be viewed online by visiting the website of the National Park Service at: nps.gov.
Carol Lee Anderson
Last Updated on Monday, 14 April 2014 08:44
To The Daily Sun,
Last week's letters to the editor were remarkable but not necessarily very accurate.
For instance, Bernadette Loesch and I had a meeting or the minds. I have no idea of what she's talking about and neither does she, apparently. She claims Republicans have cut back and eliminated Democratic programs but gives no examples to explain this extraordinary assertion. Six years ago Obama railed against our then $9 trillion national debt, saying among other things that it was unpatriotic. Now that debt is $17.232 trillion, so I must say Republicans must have done a pretty bad job of cutting back and eliminating since the debt has been nearly doubled by Democrats in six years. Making up stories and issues, really Bernadette!
I really wish Republicans had been able to roll back and eliminate selected government programs. A couple that come to mind are the Department of Energy and of course Obamacare.
The first, created in the 1970s and charged with reducing the growing dependence on imported oil has been a complete failure. It has become a dumping ground for rewarding political activists with government jobs by both parties. If it fell into a black hole tomorrow I doubt anyone would even notice. As for Obamacare, aka the Affordable Care Act, that is not affordable by most Americans, has been changed by executive order 27 times and exempted most of the president's supporters who would not get it for free and incidentally was passed by lies, deceit, misrepresentations by Democrats behind closed doors at midnight.
Another letter I'd take issue with was from Nick Vazzana, who went off like a cannon on the Koch brothers because they are rich and support Republicans. No rich people should support anyone Nick doesn't support is the message I get from Nick. Never mind that the Koch brothers are honest hard-working successful Americans who have every right to free speech and association.
I doubt Nick has any second thoughts about George Soros setting up and supporting the left. Never mind that Soros is a convicted fellon and fugitive from justice. So what the heck he supports what Nick supports so everything is good there. No double standards for Nick, right?
Last Updated on Monday, 14 April 2014 08:41
To The Daily Sun,
This is response to Robert Heinrich's letter in the April 12th Sun.
I understand his passion in regards to the Kimball Castle and its present state. I do not disagree with the points he's brought up. However, there is one suggestion he made that, as interesting as it is, is a non-starter, that being using the power of eminent domain.
After the disastrous Kelo vs. New London Supreme Court decision in 2005, a number of states changed their laws or amended their constitutions to prevent another Kelo eminent domain disaster. New Hampshire is one of those states that amended its Constitution, doing so in 2006.
Part I, Article 12-a states: (Power to Take Property Limited.) No part of a person's property shall be taken by eminent domain and transferred, directly or indirectly, to another person if the taking is for the purpose of private development or other private use of the property.
Taking the Castle by eminent domain and "selling" it to the Wildlife Forest Committee could be construed as violating the section of the state Constitution quoted above because the committee is not a public organization, meaning it is not part of the municipal or county government, but a private one. It might not matter that the committee will make the property open to the public. It would still be private property.
Then there's the matter of how much would the town compensate the present owner of the castle and for how much would the town "sell" the property to the Wildlife Forest Committee. Would it be a one-for-one price? Or would Gilford taxpayers have to make up the difference should the "selling" price be below what the town paid to the owner of the property taken? As it would apply here, eminent domain would take the town someplace it shouldn't go, despite the good intentions.
Dale Channing Eddy
Last Updated on Monday, 14 April 2014 08:37
To The Daily Sun,
I've got steam coming out of my ears on this one.
Let me quote what I read in The Daily Sun on April 12. Judge Jim Carroll ruled that the Franklin man who allegedly burglarized a elderly couple's home in Belmont can be freed on reduced bail in he enters an out-patient drug treatment program.
Let me stop there before I puke. According to Channel 9 News and the papers, this punk — hold on ... I have to use the word allegedly — was robbing this elderly couple's residence. They come home, pull in their driveway blocking the not-too-bright punk's car in. In desperation the punk attacks the old-timer, steals his car and takes off down Interstate 93 with a stolen car and jewelry with a multiple-police chase that ends on I-93.
Judge, you don't have to be Arpian Saunders to figure out this punk is a threat to our community.
Maybe the next Belmont resident who comes home to find a stranger robbing them was out at the Belmont gun club instead of out shopping.
Last Updated on Monday, 14 April 2014 08:34
To The Daily Sun,
As soon as the ACA went into effect, I was working on my application for a policy. Granted, it had its teeth-gnashing moments, but my spouse and I were delighted to enroll with a reasonable monthly rate on Jan. 1 of this year. We had not had health-care coverage for years because it was truly unaffordable, even for a catastrophic policy.
Now we're insured, Now we've had our first check-ups in a decade. Now we can buy pharmaceuticals at a reduced rate. Now we have the peace of mind of knowing we would not lose everything should disaster strike.
In time, the cost of health care should go down nationwide. With more people insured, the hospitals will be less burdened. Fewer people will go bankrupt when they have an illness. More people will have access to preventive care. The insurance companies will be better regulated — in favor of the policyholder.
And it seems that the GOP is beginning to come around. Recently in Washington they supported a bill (HR-4302) — a small fix to ACA rulings — to make it easier for small businesses to enroll their employees in the ACA by offering higher-deductible plans. Tellingly, the House did this with a voice vote, rather than a written vote, so that there would be no paper trail showing the GOP members support for Obamacare, but it's progress, nonetheless.
We've turned the corner. It's time to drop the toxic rhetoric about Obamacare and agree on its merits.
Last Updated on Friday, 11 April 2014 10:51