Published: August 26, 2009 05:31 pm      

LETTERS: Aug. 27, 2009

Reader: Outsourcing waste collection reduced quality of service



I would like to make a couple of comments regarding Mayor England’s letter last month regarding his response to another letter regarding the New Albany Street Department’s collection of yard waste throughout the city of New Albany.

I found it quite interesting that the job of picking up limbs, grass clippings, and other yard waste was “inherited” by the Street Department when the city’s sanitation collection system was outsourced to a private hauler in 2007. I thought we, the residents of New Albany, were sold on the outsourcing based on receiving the same services provided by the sanitation department, only at less costs than could be provided by the city employees. By saying that the Street Department “inherited” those duties, the mayor is saying that we did in fact receive less services for what we pay. In other words, we were sold on this based on comparing apples to oranges not apples to apples, as the old saying goes.

In addition, by dumping a sizable amount of additional work on the Street Department, the mayor has caused them to fall behind in their main responsibilities — filling potholes, repairing sidewalks and curbs, painting lines, trimming vegetation in city right-of-ways, and maintaining signage and traffic control devices. All of which is quite noticeable with the many weeds extending into the roadways, worn road signs, worn painted lines on the roads, etc.

The mayor has outsourced only part of the services provided by the old sanitation department and abolished the whole department. The remaining services were transferred to the Street Department, resulting in their resources being overwhelmed. The two departments that previously worked together providing outstanding services to our city can no longer do so due to one being outsourced and limited by its contractual agreement. Now, the mayor claims he can fix everything by re-negotiating the contract to include some of the items left out the first time. He also needs the residents to pay more per month to receive services similar to what they had before things were outsourced.

So far, outsourcing waste collection has resulted in a reduction in the quality of service and an overall deterioration of the appearance of our city, with a lot of frustration for the residents. Outsourcing a service will always lead to contractual problems when changes are needed. Therefore, in my opinion, we should go back to the city-operated waste collection system, instead of outsourcing it. With the city-operated system it is not necessary to negotiate a contract to handle unusual circumstances, such as the recent storms caused. Instead, the available resources of all departments can immediately take action to correct the problem together.

— Larry L. Howard, New Albany



Word play from GOP chair



Definitions. Has anyone besides me noticed that the political environment is getting hot? There are lots of words and names flying around out there that probably have many of us confused. So, I just thought I’d help our Floyd County residents with a few definitions of terms they might not have understood before. Here goes.

• BLUE DOG: The thought here is that this Democrat is like a dog on a leash, who is straining so hard against the direction of his party that he is literally turning blue at the strain. Of course, one would assume that occasionally, this Democrat would vote against his party, indicating occasional disagreement.

He is a Democrat, but as a representative of conservative constituents back home, he just can’t vote against the will of those constituents whom he represents. Indiana does not have any of these.

• LAP DOG: This type of representative climbs up in the lap of his party’s leader, agrees with and votes for everything that leader recommends, whether or not it represents the will and opinions of his constituents. This dog loves the attention of being close to the leader and wouldn’t bite his hand no matter how much the issue hurts those whom he represents. Usually a lap dog thrives on strokes and lots of persuasive petting.

• POLITICAL TERRORIST: Anyone, especially from the opposing party, who expresses a difference of opinion from the representative. This title has been accompanied by synonymous name calling like “angry mob” and “un-American.”

Usually, these individuals are accused of striving to “blow up the meeting” and “not try to answer thoughtful questions.” The way to effectively handle political terrorists is to not meet with them at all, even if you do represent them.

• THE RICH: Those whom you expect to pay the bills for everyone else. This group is difficult to define because the level of income they make continues to be adjusted downwardly. Of course, ultimately it will describe anyone who has gained any level of financial independence and they will be expected to carry the load of those who make nothing.

• INDEPENDENCE: Formerly the name of a declaration describing the liberties gained by our nation. Antonym of “dependence,” the desired future state of all citizens. Current political theory suggests that the more dependent citizens can be made on the government, the easier they will be to control and the more income can be confiscated.

• ELDERLY: Anyone who has worked for any length of time to earn a retirement. One representing the heaviest burden on systems like health care and social security, both to which he or she has “contributed,” usually for decades. Interestingly enough, this group never gets so independent that they can’t be taxed and burdened more, usually on assets that they have already been taxed on for decades.

I know that with terms like these being thrown about frequently by the media and in certain political circles, it is easy for the average American to become confused. I hope these definitions will make it easier for all of us to understand exactly the type of representation we are being presented with in this non-Election Year.

There is probably one more definition, however, that Hoosiers need to be familiar with as we approach 2010 and our next opportunity to affect a “change” through our votes.

• LOSER: The term describing representatives who choose to ignore their constituents when they think we won’t remember their actions one year later. One who refuses to meet with those whom he represents. One who thinks he can force his agenda on his constituents, even when they vociferously object to those issues. One who thinks he is safe because he has been elected so many times.

Remember, Election Day is just 15 months away!

— Dave Matthews, chairman of the Floyd County Republican Party