Dear Mr. Colley,
Generally I enjoy listening to you on your radio program. I listen to you often. Thank you for your conservative insights.
The purpose of this communication is to comment on your Times-News column dated Jan. 17. In doing so I am going against my better judgment of taking on someone who sits behind a microphone and buys ink by the gallon.
In the first paragraph of your column you state “The representative from Northern Idaho is being censured … for speaking what could well be the truth about how women advance legislatively.” Really, Bill, really? Do you really believe that that “could well be the truth about how women advance legislatively?” Do you really believe that that “could be the truth” about how Rep. Maxine Bell, now in her 15th term, became, and continues to serve, as chairwoman of the very important Appropriations Committee? Do you really believe that “that could be the truth” about Boyle and Packer and Perry and Trujillo and VanOrden came to their position in the various committees? Bill, do you know of what you are accusing the speaker and the majority leader and the assistant majority leader and Rep. Bell and other distinguished women on the Legislature? Ye,s you do know. Bill, don’t hide behind “could be the truth.” You know what you are suggesting and, in my view, it is reprehensible and disgusting that you would suggest such a thing. That is something that Hillary or others on that side of the aisle would do. For this statement alone, you owe every woman in the Legislature a huge apology.
Later in your column you speak of attending the state GOP convention. I was there as well. You were speaking of electing party leaders and then you made some interesting comments. “A great many delegates simply asked party elders who we were supposed to vote for and this allowed the mandarins to drive the choices.” Really, Bill? You knew who was running. They had all been campaigning. Did you do your homework? Did you approach any of the candidates? Did you ask any trusted friends as to their opinion? Did you listen to the candidates as they spoke and then make a decision on your own? I did all of these things as I made my decision as for whom was going to get my vote. Surely a man of your stature cannot be swayed by “party elders.”
In that same paragraph, and while speaking of your local party meetings you make additional comments. You say, “At local party meetings the committeemen and women have seats facing forward. In a room behind them the local mandarins have a wide view if anyone goes off the farm. I’m reminded of the story of Soviet troops attempting to retreat from battle with the Germans. Stalin had his own men shot by a line stationed in the rear. It didn’t matter a retreat sometimes was the best strategic decision. The party leader didn’t approve.” Bill, how dare you compare your local GOP leaders to Stalin and his atrocities?
Bill, there are additional disgusting comments in your column, but I will end with this one. You write, “This is what Heather Scott and her growing army of allies are looking to stop.” Really, Bill? What army — a total of five out of 105 legislators. Have you visited with any of those five and inquired of the second thoughts that they are having about throwing in with her? They would be interesting phone calls.
Then, in this same paragraph you sum up with another disgusting and reprehensible analogy. “This is why the powerful have decided it was time to strike. The tanks have rolled into Prague, to make a historical analogy. As the story unfolds we’ll learn if Idaho’s ‘Prague Spring’ is finished or if the heavy-handed power mongers have miscalculated.” Bill, do you even know, or have you ever visited with, those that you are calling “heavy-handed power mongers?” I have. They are simply honest and good people who are sacrificing much of their life to serve the people of Idaho. They deserve much better than what you wrote in your column.
Bill, maybe you written what you wrote for shock-effect or to try to get an audience. The sad thing is that I will probably read your column this Tuesday. As I read it I will wonder what is true and what is just shock-effect, and than I will probably not read it at all the following Tuesday.
As mentioned at the beginning, I have enjoyed listening to you on the radio. You have some interesting guests and comments, but this column was way out of line.
C. Mark Peterson
In America, we have many advertisements focusing on skincare. There is lotion to get rid of acne, ChapStick to get rid of chapped lips, ointments for oily skin, sensitive skin, and separate lotions for your hands/face, etc. Although you may not have this exact skin care regimen, I know of people who use ChapStick, acne cream, and separate hand and face lotions. The prices for the individual products such as ChapStick, acne cream, hand lotion and face lotion (depending on the brand) can come out to around $60-$100.
This may not seem like much since you only use these products on a monthly basis, which would be the same for paying for your cable or internet. However, There is no need to spend so much on keeping a healthy, clean look to your face and hands. For anyone who wants to save money on skin care products, cocoa butter is for you. Cocoa butter goes for $15 if you are to buy Palmer’s, and with it you get a number of benefits. It’s good for chapped lips, dry skin, scars, stretch marks, rough hands, etc. The smell is pleasant but not overwhelming, and leaves you with skin softer than clouds. On the other hand, there is one problem with cocoa butter, and that it has a high chance of blocking your pores, resulting with more acne.
I’ve never had this problem, but there are people who say it has happened to them. Alternatively, you can use cocoa powder, which moisturizes the same and has a much lower chance of blocking pores. I recommend anyone who has skin problems or who spends a considerable amount of money on skincare products to try cocoa butter at least once to see if it works for you.
The beleaguered YMCA of the Magic Valley wants a new deal on its contract to manage the city pool. The city of Twin Falls should beware.
For years, the city has contracted with the Y to run the pool. The city pays the YMCA $120,000 a year to manage the aquatic center, and the Y is allowed to collect fees from swimmers, from $2.50 to $4.50 a swimmer depending on age.
But now the YMCA is in big trouble. Last year, it nearly lost its charter after squandering hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations. An attorney general’s investigation found the Y likely violated charitable trust laws. It’s since repaid the Internal Revenue Service for thousands in back taxes, proposed the sale of one of its facilities, hired a new director and made major expense cuts in a last-ditch effort to keep a YMCA in Twin Falls.
Part of that effort now seems to be renegotiating its contract with the city, no doubt for a bigger chunk from taxpayers. The city doesn’t have to discuss new terms — the contract doesn’t run out until next year – but on Monday the City Council agreed to open a new round of talks with the Y immediately.
It should proceed with caution.
We’ve said previously we hope that the YMCA succeeds in its turn-around effort. A city of this size should have a Y, and the group does countless good for the community.
Yet, we’re leery about a new arrangement, especially if it costs taxpayers more money. As new negotiations open up, the city should remember its responsibility is to taxpayers and not the membership of the YMCA. Y members have already paid a high cost for the organization’s mismanagement. It’d be a shame if that cost was passed on to taxpayers in the form of higher city contributions to the pool.
On Monday, the pool’s former director, John Twiss, testified before the Council, saying he hasn’t seen a dollar of city money reinvested into the pool. He called for a new strategy; the current one simply isn’t working.
Take, for example, the pure numbers. The YMCA claims the Y had a net income of $414,304 at the city pool between January and October 2016. Pool visits were up from the previous year. But in December, the YMCA cut pool hours during the school year as admissions plummeted.
Councilwoman Ruth Pierce wondered aloud whether it might be time for the city to cut ties with the Y and open up new bids for a potentially different contractor. That day may soon come, but city leaders first want to see what happens in a new round of negotiations with the YMCA.
Still, City Manager Travis Rothweiler indicated patience with the Y might be wearing thin around City Hall.
“I believe the time to determine whether or not the city wants to find a different partner or go a different direction may occur at some point in the future,” City Manager Travis Rothweiler said. “Not necessarily as a part of this process.”
It’s clear city leaders are already considering worst-case scenarios — the city almost certainly doesn’t want to be in the business of managing a public pool. Nor, though, is it keen to keep pumping taxpayer dollars into an enterprise that may ultimately fail.
The question now is whether the YMCA is in a position to keep managing the pool without a significant boost in cash from the city. Time will tell.
In the meantime, the city should be cautious not to wade too deeply and risk getting in over its head.