Advertisement

I can speak for myself, thank you

My name is Stephanie Lopez and I have lived in Pahrump since 2005.

I must again reiterate that I have never classified myself as an organizer or a spokesperson for anyone in this town.

I started this journey and began attending the town board meetings for the mere fact that the CCSC group stated they spoke for and were the voices of the town of Pahrump. I again want to make this clear -- no one person or group of people speaks for me or my family.

Each and every person in this town has his own voice; the CCSC cannot and should not assume their beliefs are the same as everyone else's, because clearly they are not.

My first attendance at the June 23 meeting was to support Bill Kohbarger for his efforts in improving Pahrump. After now attending several meetings, my belief and support for Mr. Kohbarger are even stronger.

You asked what I want to see and I will tell you once again:

I want more places for my children to go to, such as fun, family-friendly restaurants, updated parks that are maintained and cleaned on a regular basis, a multiplex movie theater, well-known department stores, etc.

Having these businesses here in Pahrump will generate much needed jobs, will attract more tourism, which will in turn also generate income for the town.

I do happen to know many residents who agree and believe in the same things I do. I do understand there are those residents who have much negativity on change in Pahrump, all of whom happen to be affiliated with the CCSC.

What I find hard to believe is that you do not comprehend the fact that, although we may not all agree on this subject, we all need to maintain a level of respect and professionalism for one another.

Your written response was more of an attack on me and my opinions. I have never met you. I do not agree or disagree with what you want or don't want. I will say now that I am truly sorry for the confusion my letter may have caused to others.

I do not speak for others and have always urged all residents to speak for themselves. This is the main reason why I set up an e-mail address so that residents, like you, can comment on Pahrump in general.

As I have mentioned before, and want to clarify to you, we need amenities in this town for all ages, a point I made several times during the past town board meetings. I have never held back on what I believe needs to be improved in Pahrump.

As for being unhappy, this is absolutely untrue. I am very happy. It amazes me how you have taken my opinion and turned it into your unhappiness.

I have my children involved in all sports this town has to offer. However, beside practices and games, what is there for our children to do? This brings up the famous question regarding the "fairgrounds." Most residents are giving up on waiting for this. Where is it?

I have also stated we should not be hiding behind the comment, "It's our constitutional right," and make the changes we want to see without badgering others. I have done research on Mr. Kohbarger, Mr. Dolan and Mr. Borasky. I, along with Mrs. Schupp, found nothing in regard to the ethics of their job.

They may or may not want to see positive, and right away they are on the list to be recalled?

Some of the residents in this town do not want the detention center built, which, I believe, is one of the reasons the recall list was started.

Well, I don't want the brothels here, but is this a reason to start a war? My point is that we all may want different things, but accommodate the residents we do have now and we can fight about it later.

This will be my last response. I refuse to go back and forth regarding the way I believe vs. the way you believe. I know the CCSC does not want growth, but quite honestly it's too late. There are far too many more people that want it.

If you still do not understand my point, then I am truly sorry. I do not want another Las Vegas. I want this town to become more functional for you and me. I think we need to let the representatives of this town do their job, and when their term is up we can criticize away. I believe all people deserve the fighting chance to make a better and safer community for us.

And that community is 38,000-plus people.

STEPHANIE LOPEZ

Are you kidding me?

I did not believe what I was reading when I saw the Nye County employees received 4 percent raises.

How can they justify any raises at this time? Four percent is ridiculous, and on top of that they receive "longevity pay." Are you kidding me?

Sixty-five teachers and school staff lose their jobs, state employees take cuts in pay and benefits, and you have the audacity to take raises. You disgust me.

You know what people like you are called? Pigs. Greedy pigs. You should be happy just to have a job, but instead you take more. Take, take, take.

Thanks. Thanks a lot.

GEORGE MYERS

Town member's greed

Unbelievable. These town members increase their pay when the state and county workers get a cut.

How does this figure into money management? Let people go without and they get fatter. Hmmm, doesn't figure in for me.

The commissioners need to refigure their pay increase at a later date when the economy is not so bleak and people are not losing their jobs, homes and lifestyles.

But let's remember, the town board votes for only itself and could care less about the community.

LIZ MEEK

Employment and training representative

Nevada JobConnect

Let's look at

kinetic enrgy

I have been reading the letters regarding Mr. Alexander's traffic citation. The large majority of the letters have been supportive of the deputy who wrote the citation, but an analysis of the increased danger in which Mr. Alexander placed himself, his niece and everyone he encountered has been overlooked.

According to Sheriff Demeo, Mr. Alexander was driving 51 mph in a 35 mph speed zone. Using that data would mean Mr. Alexander was traveling 75 feet per second (FPS) rather than 51 FPS.

Using the friction of the average roadway, that extra speed increased his stopping distance from 59 to 124 feet.

That plus the perception reaction time of two and one half seconds for the average driver to react to an unexpected hazard increased his total stopping distance from 186 to 309 feet -- an additional 123 feet more.

What is more disturbing is the increased kinetic energy the vehicle possessed.

Using an arbitrary vehicle weight of 3,000 pounds and the Northwestern University Traffic Institute formula for kinetic energy (weight times velocity squared over two times gravity (32.2)), the kinetic energy for that vehicle would be 122594 at 35 mph, and the kinetic energy for that same vehicle at 51 mph would be 260638, or over twice as much.

In a collision, all that kinetic energy has to be converted into another form if energy, normally thermal through the crushing of the vehicle. What most people do not understand is that each time you double your speed, you double you kinetic energy, but it goes up by a factor of four, therefore a mere increase of 10 mph has a much greater effect than expected.

DALE G. GIBSON

Traffic collision consultant

My two ideas

I believe the health plan issue can be solved by one of two ways:

1. Require all our elected officials to give up their current plans and sign up for the plan they are trying to push down the public's throat.

2. If they refuse, then allow the public to sign up for the plan they currently have.

Nobody could then complain.

WALT WHITTIER

Effect of new health program

It is almost impossible to over-emphasize the effects of changing health care in America.

Change would affect all of us, but particularly senior citizens. It would not only change how we receive health care but also have the potential to bankrupt this country.

According to the non-partisan head of the Congressional Budget Office, the current proposals in Congress would increase, not decrease, health care costs.

With a current $1.8 trillion budget deficit, it doesn't make sense to accept a new program that will add to the deficit.

There is also this consideration: Given the government's (both Republican and Democrat) track record in managing large programs (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Post Office, Amtrak and, more recently, Cash for Clunkers) does it make sense to give the government control over another large program?

The programs cited are bankrupt or routinely run deficits. Why would anyone in their right mind now give the government control over one sixth of the country's economy?

ROBERT GOLTER