.....Advertisement.....
.....Advertisement.....

Those responsible for fiscal court deficit should fix it

-A A +A

To the editor:

I would like to respond to a couple of things in the fiscal court story in the Jan. 21 edition of the paper.

First of all, I am sure everyone was as shocked as I was at the news Anderson County might be facing a $400,000 deficit. Blaming the recycling center, etc., does not get the bills paid.  The number one priority should be, "What are we going to do to balance the budget?"

Anderson County needs to do what the rest of us would do if we overspent our budget. We would have to sacrifice. Ouch! We may have to eat beans for dinner, do without cable TV, drive less or not shop until we got our bills paid.

The government should be no different.

I think borrowing from KACo or the pool fund or any other fund is irresponsible. Adding debt to debt is not the way to get out of debt. Look at Washington … how has that worked out?

Judge-Executive Orbrey Gritton is a businessman and I am sure he is capable of keeping Anderson County in the black. It is sad that the previous administration left him with a deficit. Seems someone needs to go through the budget and cut out any waste or surplus that might be there had the income been sufficient to balance the budget. Also, we need to work together to get the indebtedness paid. I do not believe that raising taxes is the solution nor is using money from other sources. The ones that got us into this mess should take responsibility to help get us out.

According to [editor] Ben Carlson, his solution is to ditch the recycling center and have mandatory garbage pick up. I do not agree. The money has already been spent so I believe we should give the recycling center a chance to pay for itself. I am not for mandatory garbage pick up; there isn't even a place at the end of our road to turn a garbage truck around.

The second issue is the use of cinders on county roads. Mr. Gritton said he was looking into using salt instead of cinders. I know nothing about the costs of either but I believe that cinders is much kinder on the environment and on our cars and roads. The hill that the road department cinders to get to our drive runs directly into Claylick Creek and eventually to the river.  I believe that salt in this shallow creek would kill all living creatures and therefore would not be a good idea. Salt also destroys the roads and the cost of repairing potholes, etc.,  would have to be taken into account when the cost comparison is done.

I, for one, vote to keep the cinders and not use salt on the county roads.  

Pat Bullock

Salvisa