Site search
sponsored by
Home
News
Here's what you do in a flood: find a boat
I was perusing the Appeal on Wednesday. Capitol Snaps caught my attention. The photo of Mr. Neiuburt in his kayak in the Jan. 1 flood struck a chord with me.
He adapted to the crisis, found a way to transport himself around his property and did not appear as if he would shoot down any rescue helicopters if one happened to pass by.
Northern Nevada!
Bruce Rosin
Minden
Carson needs church more than old building
I think I hear Mark Twain groaning in his grave. To implicate him in the preservation of the Presbyterian Church would be an affront to a man who, by his own words, generally disparaged organized religion, mocked faith, and most likely did not ever set foot inside the edifice. Those who invoke his name would do well to consider whether this is an endeavor he would like to be remembered by.
Honestly, the man got paid to give a speech for a fundraising event to raise the final funds for the church, and now there are people who can say straight-faced that this qualifies as an event historically significant enough to warrant denying the Presbyterians their right to use their property to the greatest benefit to their congregation and this community. While Twain might be honored to be held in such high regard, his practical nature and sarcastic wit would see right through the nonsense.
Twain aside, the issue of what is best and fair for the Presbyterians lingers. Those clamoring for saving the building in its current decrepit state are not the ones who have been worshipping there, maintaining it, or bearing the burden it creates. To suggest it be taken over by another entity is rather unpractical is it still leaves the Presbyterians without a sanctuary and would divide their property, forcing them to have their Family Life Center in one location and their sanctuary in another.
Clearly, their vision was to maintain a unified campus as they have expanded. Not that it would completely satisfy the preservationists, but has the possibility of preserving at least a facade, or creating a suitable replica, been explored? The article on Jan. 15 indicates that the stained glass and some original stones will be saved, but if the preservationists are willing to pitch in for more, can a compromise be reached that maintains the visual integrity of the building and is structurally sound but does not force the Presbyterians to pay for saving an insufficient facility?
The article also states very clearly that the Presbyterians cannot guarantee that funds donated to them will be used exclusively for the building, which is probably the best argument for demolishing the existing building and letting them build a new one: Their priorities are not based on the place where they worship, or who attends, but on how they can most benefit the community and create a place for future generations.
No one seems to be genuinely asking which does Carson City need more: another old building, or a place that offers care, hope, and practical and spiritual help to those who need it most? To deny the Presbyterians this opportunity is nothing less than theft.
Julie Dawson
Gardnerville
Broad support for Douglas senior center
Nearly every one agrees we need a new Senior Center; the conundrum has been how to pay for it. I know raising taxes is not a popular task, but someone has to do it, and you did!
Some argue that "I'll never use it" or many who frequent the place "aren't really in need - they can afford to buy lunch at the local diner." Lunch is not the only thing "going down" as they say. There are many other senior oriented activities "going down" and more would take place if there were room to expand.
It would be nice to have a facility the size Carson City has, but we'll take anything we can get that leads to the needs of the senior citizen profile of the future.
I mentioned before the "I'll never use it" syndrome. Well, I've never had to call 911, the EMTs, had a fire or used any of the other taken-for-granted services paid for with our tax dollars. But it's there if I need it! I have driven on county roads, used a county provided restroom and had my roads plowed by the county. We won't find these services at a commercial establishment. We pay for them with our taxes and use them when in need.
So again, thank you. As Commissioner Smith said "we were elected to make the tough decisions" and you did. I am sure you can count on the support of the senior community for the second reading. It would be nice to see the support of the full Board of Commissioners.
Howard Althouse
Gardnerville
I was perusing the Appeal on Wednesday. Capitol Snaps caught my attention. The photo of Mr. Neiuburt in his kayak in the Jan. 1 flood struck a chord with me.
He adapted to the crisis, found a way to transport himself around his property and did not appear as if he would shoot down any rescue helicopters if one happened to pass by.
Northern Nevada!
Bruce Rosin
Minden
Carson needs church more than old building
I think I hear Mark Twain groaning in his grave. To implicate him in the preservation of the Presbyterian Church would be an affront to a man who, by his own words, generally disparaged organized religion, mocked faith, and most likely did not ever set foot inside the edifice. Those who invoke his name would do well to consider whether this is an endeavor he would like to be remembered by.
Honestly, the man got paid to give a speech for a fundraising event to raise the final funds for the church, and now there are people who can say straight-faced that this qualifies as an event historically significant enough to warrant denying the Presbyterians their right to use their property to the greatest benefit to their congregation and this community. While Twain might be honored to be held in such high regard, his practical nature and sarcastic wit would see right through the nonsense.
Twain aside, the issue of what is best and fair for the Presbyterians lingers. Those clamoring for saving the building in its current decrepit state are not the ones who have been worshipping there, maintaining it, or bearing the burden it creates. To suggest it be taken over by another entity is rather unpractical is it still leaves the Presbyterians without a sanctuary and would divide their property, forcing them to have their Family Life Center in one location and their sanctuary in another.
Clearly, their vision was to maintain a unified campus as they have expanded. Not that it would completely satisfy the preservationists, but has the possibility of preserving at least a facade, or creating a suitable replica, been explored? The article on Jan. 15 indicates that the stained glass and some original stones will be saved, but if the preservationists are willing to pitch in for more, can a compromise be reached that maintains the visual integrity of the building and is structurally sound but does not force the Presbyterians to pay for saving an insufficient facility?
The article also states very clearly that the Presbyterians cannot guarantee that funds donated to them will be used exclusively for the building, which is probably the best argument for demolishing the existing building and letting them build a new one: Their priorities are not based on the place where they worship, or who attends, but on how they can most benefit the community and create a place for future generations.
No one seems to be genuinely asking which does Carson City need more: another old building, or a place that offers care, hope, and practical and spiritual help to those who need it most? To deny the Presbyterians this opportunity is nothing less than theft.
Julie Dawson
Gardnerville
Broad support for Douglas senior center
Nearly every one agrees we need a new Senior Center; the conundrum has been how to pay for it. I know raising taxes is not a popular task, but someone has to do it, and you did!
Some argue that "I'll never use it" or many who frequent the place "aren't really in need - they can afford to buy lunch at the local diner." Lunch is not the only thing "going down" as they say. There are many other senior oriented activities "going down" and more would take place if there were room to expand.
It would be nice to have a facility the size Carson City has, but we'll take anything we can get that leads to the needs of the senior citizen profile of the future.
I mentioned before the "I'll never use it" syndrome. Well, I've never had to call 911, the EMTs, had a fire or used any of the other taken-for-granted services paid for with our tax dollars. But it's there if I need it! I have driven on county roads, used a county provided restroom and had my roads plowed by the county. We won't find these services at a commercial establishment. We pay for them with our taxes and use them when in need.
So again, thank you. As Commissioner Smith said "we were elected to make the tough decisions" and you did. I am sure you can count on the support of the senior community for the second reading. It would be nice to see the support of the full Board of Commissioners.
Howard Althouse
Gardnerville
