Mark Parchman: Thoughts about deer
November 18, 2010
To the editor:To the editor:
To the editor:
I'd like to present some ideas for your consideration on the deer subject.
Many have said we should fence the deer out of our yards. So, let's present a mill increase to the voters to help.
Many people can't afford the price of fencing. That's not fair to them and we could all share the pain with a levy increase. We can require a tax return and billing statements to see if they qualify.
In certain places we couldn't put up fences, such as intersections due to obstructing the view of oncoming vehicles. So, plexiglass should be considered.
If plexiglass is used, then PETA will probably write another letter since the deer will be able to see the food and wouldn't be able to get to it.
That would constitute cruelty to animals. If we can fence, then we should disband the yard of the week committee or rename them "fence of the week." Our Chamber of Commerce could add a subtitle to its web page and brochures that says, "most fenced city in America."
Along with that suggestion, we now know that many tourists come from around the country to see our deer. With deer coming out mostly at night, we should consider renting night vision goggles.
Of course, anyone using them will need a background check. We wouldn't want a peeping Tom, Mary or criminal to have access. All background checks would be confidential.
Since they are looking for deer, the city should put up signs around town that read, "Caution, slow moving vehicles viewing deer."
So, suspicious vehicles in neighborhoods shouldn't be profiled and the police department should be informed.
Tourists have rights.
A way to campaign and raise money to support the deer and Craig with tourists should include bumper stickers that say, "Craig or bust to see the deer," or "To Craig to bust a deer."
Finally, since many think we should have the right to speak at city council meetings, I suggest you and all council members quit businesses and jobs so you have time to hear all 12,000 citizens of Craig when they want to speak for hours on end.
By voting on this new way of government, we could sweep aside your ability to postpone an item on agenda, refer to committee, or academia for more time and information.
We can forget Robert's rules of order, that governments do business with the same as you. At present, governments and corporations don't have to allow anyone to speak at meetings if they so decide.
Perhaps if we can pass a rule to hear everyone we can then be instrumental in getting New York to do the same.
Then they can hear nine million people speak on every item. You know that all nine million will have something different to say and the council would like this, too. That would be the most ineffective government in all the world, but 330 million U.S. citizens would be heard, all the time.
I'm thinking I'd better get my Kiwanis play tickets early this year.
Mark ParchmanMark Parchman