Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 5 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Dumpsters
Again
To the Editor:
Subsequent to my last letter, certain matters have been brought to my attention which I believe deserve comment.
It has been suggested that one of the reasons for removing the dumpsters was to shift the cost to the taxpayers personally.
Never mind that we are already paying for the service with our taxes. We should pay again for private haulers, with the attendant savings to the county. Obviously, our taxes would not'reflect these savings. It is indeed a clever ploy to raise our taxes without us realizing it. Each year our taxes are' increased, and now we are to have ser-' vices reduced. I thought that this was the District of Columbia’s game.
I hear that the closing of’the dumpsters is necessitated because of fires^There are many more fires in the county generally than in the dumpsters, and in any event, the dumpsters * contain any fire.
Another reason was liability, ftoy, • many liability claims have there been?*' ' Another proposal appears to be gpnp-' pactors. Who is going to pay for thenk’f* You guessed it. We taxpayers. Sorqe of the proponents of removal olaiw'f that the dumpsters are unsightly. How ' much worse will it be to have the same condition spread around the county?
There is an old saying “if it ain’t bruk, don t fix it.” Our dumpaterso have worked well through the years and they sure “ain’t bruk.” , ,
JOHN J. DWYER; /
Flint, WUL.
86.2%