Page 4-The Journal Opinion-March 1
PUBLISHING COMPANY, Inc.
Publisher of
Journal B Opinion
Wetly mlmp0r imblhll in Ik, aNttord, ¥oo, mmt. lkdmm, llpoto, ranoo. Vomol qmd Nqu, w Sempddro. $.oe
pet l;Oer; $1.10 tabr lira amtks; q q14 a4ql • $1|.S0 Ir yeor mid $7,fl fw |ira nNtho; Sedr €ltizom
dm SLOe.
Socoad cless poop paid et |mdh,d, ¥ormo OI0$$. Pld0od by Nortkqo PvblhMq Compen v. Inc..
P.O. hi $71, lmdfenl,
Robert F. Huminski
President & Publisher
An Independent Newspaper
Editorial
J
Public hydro could work
Saturday's Wells River meeting
between Newbury officials,
representatives from a community
minded energy consulting firm and
representatives from POWR Valley
(the People's Organization of the
Wells River Valley) provided all
parties involved with enough in-
formation to either make or break
any plans for public hydro in our area.
Judging from the information
provided at the meeting, the road to a
municipal or cooperative owned
hydro plant in the Newbury area
would be an enormous undertaking.
But we believe that those members
of POWR Valley who have worked to
carry the issue this far have provided
the townspeople of Newbury and their
municipal officials with an op-
portunity too great not to warrant
their interest if not their support.
Hydro-power technicalities Mide,
the issue boils down to a question of
alternative revenues and whether
these kinds of projects are worth the
effort. We believe they are.
Communities throughout this
region are finding that it is getting
painfully expensive to fund their
municipal governments by relying
solely on property taxes and state and
federal aid that is drying up quickly.
Sooner or later most of our towm
may find themselves forced to look
for some kind of alterative revenue.
Alterative revenues do not
necessarily have to come from
projects such as hydro-power dams.
For example, the Haverhill precinct
of Mountain Lakes owns its own ski
area.
But after considering the question
of alterative revenue, the thing that
Newbury residents should keep in
mind is that, for a number of basic
business reasons, hydro-power is a
pretty sound investment. At any rate,
it is certainly a safer investment than
a skiarea.
We suggest that if the question of
public hydro power is to be pursued
further, a public meeting should be
set up soon for a larger body of area
townspeople to hear roughly the same
information from the same people
who spoke at Saturday's Wells River
meeting.
None of these people are now
calling for the take over of someone
else's power plant. Their idea is for
the town, a public cooperative, or
both, to initiate an independent
project.
The sites are available and ap-
parently at least part of the in/tial
funding. It is an opportunity worth
looking into.
00Letters to the Editor__00
Does not deserve increase
To the Editor:
Recently, Central Vermont
Public Service Corp.
requested a 25 percent rate
increase; the Public Service
Board has already granted a
12.5 percent temporary in-
crease on this filing. Does this
upset you as much as it does
me? Aren't our utily bills
high enough already?
The Public Service Board
will hold a public hearing on
Thursday, March 25, at 7 p.m.,
at the Old Bradford Academy
Auditorium. The Board will
hear comments on the
proposed 25 percent increase,
as well as such related issues
as rate structure, investments
in the scrapped Pilgrim II
nuclear plant, purchased
power costs, planning costs
for the high voltage powerline,
tax deferrments, and use of
future test year.
You don't have to be an
expert to attend the hearing --
just take a look at your
electric bill and you'll see why
it's so important to attend this
hearing! There are so many
reasons why CVPS doesn't
deserve this increase. I urge
everyone to go to the PSB and
show them that we care ?
Charlene Stebbins
Bradford, Vt.
Contact +our representative
To the Editor:
Outraged by your electric
bills? Now we can take actinn
together to stop the electric
companies from surcharging
us until we are broke. The
House Commerce Committee
is considering S. 220, a bill that
would ban recoupment.
Utilities would no longer be
able to collect their rate in-
creases retroactively. Walter
Brunette from Lunenberg
(892)5525) William Farrell
from Newport (334-24444)
Lloyd Selby from Derby (873-
3174) are on the committee
and need to hear [rom all of us
that electric rate increases
must be controlled. Call then
and let your voice be heard.
Vermont is the only state in
the country that gives utilities
recoupment. In the last year,
the PSB has allowed Green
Momltain Power to collect $8.4
million from us. CVPS is
taking $12.3 million in
recoupment, although the
Public Service Department
thought only $9.2 million was
justified. New England
Telephone is charging us $7.3
million. Enough is efiough ?
Both PSD Commissioner
Saudek and PSB Chair
McCarren support passage of
$220. The Serrate passed the
bill by a wide margin of 19-10,
Now it's time for the House
Commerce Committee to
approve this utility reform
quickly. Contact your
Representatives and tell them
to ban rccoupment, They've
heard from the utility lob-
byists, have they heard from
you?
Gary Murphy
('hair, Executive Board
Vermont Alliance
ln00n of ualit00 rates
To the Editor: business if they are in public annually several years ago, so
In my 1948 college
economics course, I learned
that people invested in utilities
for security, not high per-
centages of interest. This was
considered necessary for the
economy to encourage all
other businesses, to provide
necessities for all from the
poor on.
I am horrified to find CVPS
determiaed to do all they can
to destroy the local economy.
The inflation of electric rates
will crucify many. To hold
inflation down one cannot
raise rates and subsidize the
poor. (That is greed. )
I can see budgetary
measures that CVPS should
take and others will see more.
I am angry when [ see TV
programs sponsored by CVPS.
Whether they call these in-
vestor's or * rate-payer's
monies is immaterial. Their
reason for existence is to
provide power, not an in-
vestment service. If they have
money to put into TV
programs - those monies
should come as a rate
decrease instead. Nor should
they spent rate payers money
to print an extra flyer included
in your bill, I do not want to
pay for receipts for "Finan
Haddie" to be mailed with my
electric bill and feel it is an
offense to these rate-payers
who must pay for that which
they did not choose to buy. I
don't want any extra print-
outs with my bill.
Administrators (of $89,000
salary) who want to be more
creative are in the wrong
ilities.
It is unfair to the rest of us
who wish to use any spendable
income to keep the house
warmer or eat other than
turkey hot dogs rather than
have those funds forced into
the utilities...
A comparison with other
sections of the country is in-
-valid. Our producivity is
limited by our rugged winters
in particular, and absence,
(thank heaven) of a strong
manufacturing base. Nor
would a difference in our
productivity make it valid for
CVPS to charge more than the
bare minimum essentials to
providing the basic service
needed by local customers.
Businesses pay a higher
rate than residences. I found
my electric bill over $1,000
l had to put each tenant on
their own electric meters.
Last month my households
paid over $1,000 together. One
apartment only has electric
heat.
I urge all who are as con-
cerned as I am about the 25
percent rate rise wanted by
CVPS to take the time to
protest at the March 25th
hearing in the Old Bradford
Academy. The 25 percent rate
rise "requested" is incredible.
May I urge even those who
invest in utilities to join those
who do not. May I urge all
those who felt whipped when
they saw their last bill to
appear. The other side of the
ixfflationary coin is greed.
tlelen Pierce Swetland
Aloha Manor
Fairlee, Vt.
Enough, Mr. President
To the Editor : of answers. We are tired of
, Now is the time to say, image making instead of
'Enough, Mr. President, action.
enough." At long last the Vermonters have spoken out
people are speaking. We are in town meetings and now
tired of CIA schemes and "from sea to shining sea" our
deceptions. We are tired of the representatives are echoing
murderous meddling in the cry, "Enough? "
Central America. We are tired Storm clouds of unrest are
of seeing the poor. the old, the gathering over the cities and
handicapped, and the millions the winds of discontent are
of unemployed being used as blowing off the hills. Take
sacrificial lambs for the in- heed, Mr. President, before it
satiable Pentagon. We are is too late. We have had
tired of the endless nuclear enough?
arms race which can result WinniePineo
only in a world holocaust. We S. Ryegate, Vt.
are tired of anecdotes instead
New Federalism
Returning power to the people
"Our citizens feel they have lost control of
even the most basic decisions made about the
essential services of government, such as
schools, welfare, roads, and even garbage
collection. They are right... Let us solve this
problem with a single, bold stroke...'"
pmsm aon/I Iwn
T$tote of tho Unkm 12
The single, bold stroke which President
Reagan promised is "New-Federalism," the
most dramatic shift in state and federal
relations since the New Deal.
Actually, while the action is bold, the goal is
not new. New Federalism ia designed to put
government "back on track;" returning
power to people and restoring the gavern-
mental balance created by the founding
fathers.
If approved by Congress, the New
Federalism will unfold during the next
decade, with the first major changes
beginning in 1984.
The two major elements of the plan occur
simultaneously, with one element being a
"swap" by which the administrative and
financial responsibility for Medicaid would be
assumed completely by the federal gover-
nment, while in return, Aid to Families with
Dependent Children (AFDC) and Food
Stamps would become state and local
responsibilities. The second element,
developing over an eight year period,
beginning in 1984, will turn back to the states
full responsibility and funding sources for
more than 40 categorical grant proams
currently administered by the federal
government.
THE PROBLEMS
"A maze of interlocking Jutions and
levels of government confronts the average
citizen in trying to solve even the simplest of
problems. They do not know where to tam foe
answers, who to hold accountable, who to
blame, who to vote for or agaimt."
--Pcmmt R
The need for New Federalism is perhaps
best illustrated by the skyrocketing growth in
the number and complexity of categorical
grants-iwaid during the past decade.
TEXT AND PHOTOS PRINT[D WITH I@AIS$;ON FROM NmT
MOI{IAY
Categorical grant programs, such as job
training grants, are designed to combat
specific problems. Categorical grant money
is earmarked for each program's specific
purpose, so decisions about how it can he
spent--and what it can be spent for--are, in
effect, controlled by the federal bureaucracy.
Regardless of whether a state has such a
problem, and regardless of whether the
regulations fit the needs of the state, under
the categorical system, the state can only
comply with the federal bureaucrats or refuse
the grant.
In 1960, federal grants to states and
localities totalled only $7 billion. By 1981 they
had grown to an annual cost of $95 billion.
During that period, their funding rate grew by
13 percent a year--faster than the growth of
the Gross National Product, the federal
budget, or the public sector as a whole.
Grants-in-aid now finance 27 percent of all
state and local government, and their share of
the federal budget has doubled to 14 percent
of all federal spending.
While growing in budgetary impact,
categorical grants also grew in numbers,
nearly tripling during the last 20 years. In
1981, there were more than 500 categorical
programs. Of these, more than 160 ad-
ministered by the Department of Health and
Human Services, deal with health alone.
There are 76 separate grant programs just for
elementary, secondary and vocational
education. The typical categorical grant
imposes between 300 and 500 separate
requirements on states and localities:
(spread over 500 grants awarded to fifty
states), the bureaucratic demands posed by
categorical grants are astronomical,
resultingin mountains of paperw.ork, a
wasteful expenditure of the taxpayer s dollar
and needless bureaucracy at the federal,
state, and local levels.
Consolidation of categoricais into block
grants addresses some of the problems im-
by categorical grants. It provides.
states and localities with federal money and
fewer regulations, but block grants are
limited to specific categories of federal grant
spending. Congress attaches "strings" even
to these; in some cases, for example,
minimum expenditures out of block grams
funding are required to be spent on a specific
problem.
POWER TO TIlE STATES
"As one Democratic governor put it
recently--the national government should be
worrying about 'arms control and not
potholes"
--PreskJemt Re.on
President Reagan's New Federalism seeks
to restore the traditional balance among
state, local and federal authority without
subjecting the states and localities to difficult
or unfair financial burdens.
By shouldering Medicaid responsibilities,
the federal government saves the states from
risk and hardship. From 1975 to 1980, total
U.S. health care spending doubled, while
Medicare and Medicaid costs rose even
(please turn to page 5)
Thetford
From 1848 to 1875,
Thetford had a strawboard
mill known as the Noosuc Mill.
It was on the Ompompanoosuc
River, about half a mile below
the covered bridge, and on the
old road from Thetford Center
to Union Village.
In an article in the Town
of Thetford Annual Report,
980, Charles W. Hughes
presented all the information
he could locate on the Noosuc
Mill. Its chief product was a
thick, tough, yellowish paper
made from straw and waste
paper, these materials being
stored in a large barn nearby.
The mill also made binder's
board for book covers, and a
coarse brown wrapping paper.
The paper or strawboard
was manufactured by a paper
machine in a continuous sheet,
but was cut into large rec-
tangles and in the early years
was spread out on the grass to
dry. Later on, the mill
acquired a "patent drier,"
which made it possible to
manufacture paper year-
round. At one time the mill
was selling its strawboard for
as much as $124 a ton in
's strawboard
dismantling of old houses in
the Thetford area, workmen
have discovered squared of
the old strawboard, which has
been used as insulation in the
outside walls. One surviving
piece measur 22 by 31/
inches.
The strawboard mill was
built by Stephen G. Rogers,
who came to Thetford from
Plymouth, N. H. in 1848.
Rogers operated the mill until
about 1866, when he shifted his
attention to building and
operating a woolen mill far-
ther downstream.
In 1866 the Noesuc Mill
was taken over by Horace E.
Brown, S. M. Gleason and J.
B. Cram. Mr. Hughes tells
about these men: "Born in
Thetford, Brown had a dif-
ficult childhood and later
worked in various places as a
mason and then as a con-
tractor before returning to
Thetford in 1861. After serving
in the Civil War with the rank
of captain, he managed the
strawboard mill and later
established a shoe factory.
Gleason was a lawyer and
later a probate judge who
is now Route 113.
had previously
.storekeeper m
broke, N. H.,
1870 to the old
opposite corner
became 'Cram's
daughter, Helen
states that he had
voice, led the
Timothy Frost
Church, and
school in the
"The last
strawboard mill
and H. M.
acquired an
mill in 1872. Their
destined to
was destroyed
1875. An article
ford Opinion
loss as eight to
dollars, of
thousand
was covered by
later entry
'the Lovejoys
Center have
Northfield and
there Jan. 1,
known as the best
makers in New
was the end of
the proposed revision of the Superfund
National Contingency Plan (NCP) for
managing hazardous material spills and
abandoned hazardous waste disposal sites.
The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has drawn up a plan that
reflects the administration's policy of
straightforward, flexible regulation and
careful resource management. It should
go far to speed the actual cleanup of wasta
sites and spills under the five-year, $1:6
billion Superfund program.
The plan sets out guidelines for coor-
dinating federal and state responses to
immediate or long term threats to human
health and the environment from hazar-
dons waste. In announcing the NCP, EPA
Administrator Anne M. Gorsuch said,
"The Reagan Administration believes that
a policy of straightforward regulation and
careful resource management, combined
with an unshakable commitment, is our
mandate from the American people. And I
believe that this policy will result in a swift
cleanup of existing environmental
hazards. This cleanup will be our en-
vironmental legacy to future
generations."
I share this commitment and this belief.
Already--even before the proposed NCP
goes into effect--we have made real
progress.
EPA has taken removal actions at 54
hazardous waste sites across the country,
including five in New England at Nashua,
Kingston, Epping and Raymond, N.H., and
Coventry, R.I. Remedial actions or field
studies and engineering design to contain
or treat hazardous substances on site have
been started at 37 sites, including Nashua,
Coventry, Winthrop, ME, Smithfield, RI
and Woburn, MA. Ten cooperative
agreements have been signed with states
for cleanup at Superfund sites, including
two in New England, at Nashua and
00Letters to the Edi
To breathe clean air
To the Editor:
The Clean Air Act, that
critical piece of en-
vironmental legislation which
has, year by year since it was
passed in 1970 (with amen-
dments in 1977), brought the
nation cleaner, healthier air
and clearer skies, is currently
facing a double threat in
Washington. Scheduled to he
reauthorized in 1981, delays in
Congress have allowed action
to carry over into this year,
and even now it is not clear
when the "new" Clean Air Act
will eme'ge. What is clear is
that a strong delegation in
Congress has targetted the
Act for legislative destruction,
and furthermore, that the
Reagan Administration is
quietly dismembering the
Act's enforcement team, the
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), under the
guise of cutting the federal
deficit and providing
regulatory relief. In each
case, many of our leaders in
Washington reveal an ap-
palling disregard for the
health of their constituents
and the ecosystem which
supports them, while ignoring
the undeniable connection
between environmental
degradation and the economy.
In late December, ReD. Tom
Luken (D-Ohio)introduced
H.R. 5252, a bill which, if
passed, will severely damage
the effectiveness of the Clean
Air Act. it attacks virtually
every important aspect of the
Act, and includes the following
provisions:
(1) slips deadlines for at-
taining health standards,
while repealing most of the
effective tools for progress
towards those standards.
(2) weakens the federal auto
emissions control program by
doubling carbon monoxide
and nitrogen oxide emission
standards, which the vast
majority of 1981 cars had
already met, and easing the
standards for diesels, while
also gutting the premarket
certification procedure.
(3) essentially repeals the
prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) program,
which currently protects our
remaining "clear Jr" areas.
t 4) blocks necessary federal
action to protect the ozone
layer which guards against
cancer-causing ull a,iolet
radiation.
Perhaps
than its
H.R. 5252 fails
ignores that
cancer-cuasing
p011utan, and
the problem
among the
threats to '
ecosystem. H.R.
Revised Plan
The revised contingency plan
the scope of the existing NCP to
additional chemical substanceS
transfer media, air, land
Forthcoming from EPA will be
guidance manual for
Superfund from the site
through preliminary
engineering
be guidance, not regulation.
emphasize this.
net dictate to them.
A total of 13 New England
EPA's interim priority list of
sites throughout
negotiate with res;
for site cleanup.
We have learned that
industry, rather than
paid the greatest dividends,
Agency is prepared to take
action wherever cooperation fa
results.
We have also learned that no
are alike, and cleanup needs
On one site drums may be
the surface scaled, graded
Or a system may be built for
contaminated leacbate on the
remedy will depend on many
such as the substances
hydregeology, climate and
population, the iS't
Therefore EPA has taken ,
approach in revising the NCP i 1.:
give full play to invention al[ ""-
back the limits of waste mam]
technology. There are no easy
the problems confronting us. ],10
quoting Administrator Gorsuch,
the NCP can be used to usher in _
of environmental technologY
plication."
support of the
and a great many
hope.
Waxman
tered the Luke
comprehensive
package, H.B.
man's bill h
deficiencies
while allowing
amount of
tuning", and
million ton
rain-causing
ten years
'similar to that !
Moffett-Gregg
(House) and
(Senate Action
before
Should
reauthorze
Act, the battle
(please
Boston and Springfield. "lived at the junction of the old
During renovation or Union Village road with what
-- WO00Wb00-00
SPEED CLE00-UP
by LESTER A. SUTTON Coventry. _ J ':
U.S. Environmental Prottctioa Agon of federal funds for_..m -
Regional Administrator and remedial action totals $54 .m'_
The commitment of the Reagann m" t:,':
cost-effective
Administration to effieient, - ' Superfuzation. The !'';
environmental cleanup is exemplified in authorization for 1983 is$233
Page 4-The Journal Opinion-March 1
PUBLISHING COMPANY, Inc.
Publisher of
Journal B Opinion
Wetly mlmp0r imblhll in Ik, aNttord, ¥oo, mmt. lkdmm, llpoto, ranoo. Vomol qmd Nqu, w Sempddro. $.oe
pet l;Oer; $1.10 tabr lira amtks; q q14 a4ql • $1|.S0 Ir yeor mid $7,fl fw |ira nNtho; Sedr €ltizom
dm SLOe.
Socoad cless poop paid et |mdh,d, ¥ormo OI0$$. Pld0od by Nortkqo PvblhMq Compen v. Inc..
P.O. hi $71, lmdfenl,
Robert F. Huminski
President & Publisher
An Independent Newspaper
Editorial
J
Public hydro could work
Saturday's Wells River meeting
between Newbury officials,
representatives from a community
minded energy consulting firm and
representatives from POWR Valley
(the People's Organization of the
Wells River Valley) provided all
parties involved with enough in-
formation to either make or break
any plans for public hydro in our area.
Judging from the information
provided at the meeting, the road to a
municipal or cooperative owned
hydro plant in the Newbury area
would be an enormous undertaking.
But we believe that those members
of POWR Valley who have worked to
carry the issue this far have provided
the townspeople of Newbury and their
municipal officials with an op-
portunity too great not to warrant
their interest if not their support.
Hydro-power technicalities Mide,
the issue boils down to a question of
alternative revenues and whether
these kinds of projects are worth the
effort. We believe they are.
Communities throughout this
region are finding that it is getting
painfully expensive to fund their
municipal governments by relying
solely on property taxes and state and
federal aid that is drying up quickly.
Sooner or later most of our towm
may find themselves forced to look
for some kind of alterative revenue.
Alterative revenues do not
necessarily have to come from
projects such as hydro-power dams.
For example, the Haverhill precinct
of Mountain Lakes owns its own ski
area.
But after considering the question
of alterative revenue, the thing that
Newbury residents should keep in
mind is that, for a number of basic
business reasons, hydro-power is a
pretty sound investment. At any rate,
it is certainly a safer investment than
a skiarea.
We suggest that if the question of
public hydro power is to be pursued
further, a public meeting should be
set up soon for a larger body of area
townspeople to hear roughly the same
information from the same people
who spoke at Saturday's Wells River
meeting.
None of these people are now
calling for the take over of someone
else's power plant. Their idea is for
the town, a public cooperative, or
both, to initiate an independent
project.
The sites are available and ap-
parently at least part of the in/tial
funding. It is an opportunity worth
looking into.
00Letters to the Editor__00
Does not deserve increase
To the Editor:
Recently, Central Vermont
Public Service Corp.
requested a 25 percent rate
increase; the Public Service
Board has already granted a
12.5 percent temporary in-
crease on this filing. Does this
upset you as much as it does
me? Aren't our utily bills
high enough already?
The Public Service Board
will hold a public hearing on
Thursday, March 25, at 7 p.m.,
at the Old Bradford Academy
Auditorium. The Board will
hear comments on the
proposed 25 percent increase,
as well as such related issues
as rate structure, investments
in the scrapped Pilgrim II
nuclear plant, purchased
power costs, planning costs
for the high voltage powerline,
tax deferrments, and use of
future test year.
You don't have to be an
expert to attend the hearing --
just take a look at your
electric bill and you'll see why
it's so important to attend this
hearing! There are so many
reasons why CVPS doesn't
deserve this increase. I urge
everyone to go to the PSB and
show them that we care ?
Charlene Stebbins
Bradford, Vt.
Contact +our representative
To the Editor:
Outraged by your electric
bills? Now we can take actinn
together to stop the electric
companies from surcharging
us until we are broke. The
House Commerce Committee
is considering S. 220, a bill that
would ban recoupment.
Utilities would no longer be
able to collect their rate in-
creases retroactively. Walter
Brunette from Lunenberg
(892)5525) William Farrell
from Newport (334-24444)
Lloyd Selby from Derby (873-
3174) are on the committee
and need to hear [rom all of us
that electric rate increases
must be controlled. Call then
and let your voice be heard.
Vermont is the only state in
the country that gives utilities
recoupment. In the last year,
the PSB has allowed Green
Momltain Power to collect $8.4
million from us. CVPS is
taking $12.3 million in
recoupment, although the
Public Service Department
thought only $9.2 million was
justified. New England
Telephone is charging us $7.3
million. Enough is efiough ?
Both PSD Commissioner
Saudek and PSB Chair
McCarren support passage of
$220. The Serrate passed the
bill by a wide margin of 19-10,
Now it's time for the House
Commerce Committee to
approve this utility reform
quickly. Contact your
Representatives and tell them
to ban rccoupment, They've
heard from the utility lob-
byists, have they heard from
you?
Gary Murphy
('hair, Executive Board
Vermont Alliance
ln00n of ualit00 rates
To the Editor: business if they are in public annually several years ago, so
In my 1948 college
economics course, I learned
that people invested in utilities
for security, not high per-
centages of interest. This was
considered necessary for the
economy to encourage all
other businesses, to provide
necessities for all from the
poor on.
I am horrified to find CVPS
determiaed to do all they can
to destroy the local economy.
The inflation of electric rates
will crucify many. To hold
inflation down one cannot
raise rates and subsidize the
poor. (That is greed. )
I can see budgetary
measures that CVPS should
take and others will see more.
I am angry when [ see TV
programs sponsored by CVPS.
Whether they call these in-
vestor's or * rate-payer's
monies is immaterial. Their
reason for existence is to
provide power, not an in-
vestment service. If they have
money to put into TV
programs - those monies
should come as a rate
decrease instead. Nor should
they spent rate payers money
to print an extra flyer included
in your bill, I do not want to
pay for receipts for "Finan
Haddie" to be mailed with my
electric bill and feel it is an
offense to these rate-payers
who must pay for that which
they did not choose to buy. I
don't want any extra print-
outs with my bill.
Administrators (of $89,000
salary) who want to be more
creative are in the wrong
ilities.
It is unfair to the rest of us
who wish to use any spendable
income to keep the house
warmer or eat other than
turkey hot dogs rather than
have those funds forced into
the utilities...
A comparison with other
sections of the country is in-
-valid. Our producivity is
limited by our rugged winters
in particular, and absence,
(thank heaven) of a strong
manufacturing base. Nor
would a difference in our
productivity make it valid for
CVPS to charge more than the
bare minimum essentials to
providing the basic service
needed by local customers.
Businesses pay a higher
rate than residences. I found
my electric bill over $1,000
l had to put each tenant on
their own electric meters.
Last month my households
paid over $1,000 together. One
apartment only has electric
heat.
I urge all who are as con-
cerned as I am about the 25
percent rate rise wanted by
CVPS to take the time to
protest at the March 25th
hearing in the Old Bradford
Academy. The 25 percent rate
rise "requested" is incredible.
May I urge even those who
invest in utilities to join those
who do not. May I urge all
those who felt whipped when
they saw their last bill to
appear. The other side of the
ixfflationary coin is greed.
tlelen Pierce Swetland
Aloha Manor
Fairlee, Vt.
Enough, Mr. President
To the Editor : of answers. We are tired of
, Now is the time to say, image making instead of
'Enough, Mr. President, action.
enough." At long last the Vermonters have spoken out
people are speaking. We are in town meetings and now
tired of CIA schemes and "from sea to shining sea" our
deceptions. We are tired of the representatives are echoing
murderous meddling in the cry, "Enough? "
Central America. We are tired Storm clouds of unrest are
of seeing the poor. the old, the gathering over the cities and
handicapped, and the millions the winds of discontent are
of unemployed being used as blowing off the hills. Take
sacrificial lambs for the in- heed, Mr. President, before it
satiable Pentagon. We are is too late. We have had
tired of the endless nuclear enough?
arms race which can result WinniePineo
only in a world holocaust. We S. Ryegate, Vt.
are tired of anecdotes instead
New Federalism
Returning power to the people
"Our citizens feel they have lost control of
even the most basic decisions made about the
essential services of government, such as
schools, welfare, roads, and even garbage
collection. They are right... Let us solve this
problem with a single, bold stroke...'"
pmsm aon/I Iwn
T$tote of tho Unkm 12
The single, bold stroke which President
Reagan promised is "New-Federalism," the
most dramatic shift in state and federal
relations since the New Deal.
Actually, while the action is bold, the goal is
not new. New Federalism ia designed to put
government "back on track;" returning
power to people and restoring the gavern-
mental balance created by the founding
fathers.
If approved by Congress, the New
Federalism will unfold during the next
decade, with the first major changes
beginning in 1984.
The two major elements of the plan occur
simultaneously, with one element being a
"swap" by which the administrative and
financial responsibility for Medicaid would be
assumed completely by the federal gover-
nment, while in return, Aid to Families with
Dependent Children (AFDC) and Food
Stamps would become state and local
responsibilities. The second element,
developing over an eight year period,
beginning in 1984, will turn back to the states
full responsibility and funding sources for
more than 40 categorical grant proams
currently administered by the federal
government.
THE PROBLEMS
"A maze of interlocking Jutions and
levels of government confronts the average
citizen in trying to solve even the simplest of
problems. They do not know where to tam foe
answers, who to hold accountable, who to
blame, who to vote for or agaimt."
--Pcmmt R
The need for New Federalism is perhaps
best illustrated by the skyrocketing growth in
the number and complexity of categorical
grants-iwaid during the past decade.
TEXT AND PHOTOS PRINT[D WITH I@AIS$;ON FROM NmT
MOI{IAY
Categorical grant programs, such as job
training grants, are designed to combat
specific problems. Categorical grant money
is earmarked for each program's specific
purpose, so decisions about how it can he
spent--and what it can be spent for--are, in
effect, controlled by the federal bureaucracy.
Regardless of whether a state has such a
problem, and regardless of whether the
regulations fit the needs of the state, under
the categorical system, the state can only
comply with the federal bureaucrats or refuse
the grant.
In 1960, federal grants to states and
localities totalled only $7 billion. By 1981 they
had grown to an annual cost of $95 billion.
During that period, their funding rate grew by
13 percent a year--faster than the growth of
the Gross National Product, the federal
budget, or the public sector as a whole.
Grants-in-aid now finance 27 percent of all
state and local government, and their share of
the federal budget has doubled to 14 percent
of all federal spending.
While growing in budgetary impact,
categorical grants also grew in numbers,
nearly tripling during the last 20 years. In
1981, there were more than 500 categorical
programs. Of these, more than 160 ad-
ministered by the Department of Health and
Human Services, deal with health alone.
There are 76 separate grant programs just for
elementary, secondary and vocational
education. The typical categorical grant
imposes between 300 and 500 separate
requirements on states and localities:
(spread over 500 grants awarded to fifty
states), the bureaucratic demands posed by
categorical grants are astronomical,
resultingin mountains of paperw.ork, a
wasteful expenditure of the taxpayer s dollar
and needless bureaucracy at the federal,
state, and local levels.
Consolidation of categoricais into block
grants addresses some of the problems im-
by categorical grants. It provides.
states and localities with federal money and
fewer regulations, but block grants are
limited to specific categories of federal grant
spending. Congress attaches "strings" even
to these; in some cases, for example,
minimum expenditures out of block grams
funding are required to be spent on a specific
problem.
POWER TO TIlE STATES
"As one Democratic governor put it
recently--the national government should be
worrying about 'arms control and not
potholes"
--PreskJemt Re.on
President Reagan's New Federalism seeks
to restore the traditional balance among
state, local and federal authority without
subjecting the states and localities to difficult
or unfair financial burdens.
By shouldering Medicaid responsibilities,
the federal government saves the states from
risk and hardship. From 1975 to 1980, total
U.S. health care spending doubled, while
Medicare and Medicaid costs rose even
(please turn to page 5)
Thetford
From 1848 to 1875,
Thetford had a strawboard
mill known as the Noosuc Mill.
It was on the Ompompanoosuc
River, about half a mile below
the covered bridge, and on the
old road from Thetford Center
to Union Village.
In an article in the Town
of Thetford Annual Report,
980, Charles W. Hughes
presented all the information
he could locate on the Noosuc
Mill. Its chief product was a
thick, tough, yellowish paper
made from straw and waste
paper, these materials being
stored in a large barn nearby.
The mill also made binder's
board for book covers, and a
coarse brown wrapping paper.
The paper or strawboard
was manufactured by a paper
machine in a continuous sheet,
but was cut into large rec-
tangles and in the early years
was spread out on the grass to
dry. Later on, the mill
acquired a "patent drier,"
which made it possible to
manufacture paper year-
round. At one time the mill
was selling its strawboard for
as much as $124 a ton in
's strawboard
dismantling of old houses in
the Thetford area, workmen
have discovered squared of
the old strawboard, which has
been used as insulation in the
outside walls. One surviving
piece measur 22 by 31/
inches.
The strawboard mill was
built by Stephen G. Rogers,
who came to Thetford from
Plymouth, N. H. in 1848.
Rogers operated the mill until
about 1866, when he shifted his
attention to building and
operating a woolen mill far-
ther downstream.
In 1866 the Noesuc Mill
was taken over by Horace E.
Brown, S. M. Gleason and J.
B. Cram. Mr. Hughes tells
about these men: "Born in
Thetford, Brown had a dif-
ficult childhood and later
worked in various places as a
mason and then as a con-
tractor before returning to
Thetford in 1861. After serving
in the Civil War with the rank
of captain, he managed the
strawboard mill and later
established a shoe factory.
Gleason was a lawyer and
later a probate judge who
is now Route 113.
had previously
.storekeeper m
broke, N. H.,
1870 to the old
opposite corner
became 'Cram's
daughter, Helen
states that he had
voice, led the
Timothy Frost
Church, and
school in the
"The last
strawboard mill
and H. M.
acquired an
mill in 1872. Their
destined to
was destroyed
1875. An article
ford Opinion
loss as eight to
dollars, of
thousand
was covered by
later entry
'the Lovejoys
Center have
Northfield and
there Jan. 1,
known as the best
makers in New
was the end of
the proposed revision of the Superfund
National Contingency Plan (NCP) for
managing hazardous material spills and
abandoned hazardous waste disposal sites.
The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has drawn up a plan that
reflects the administration's policy of
straightforward, flexible regulation and
careful resource management. It should
go far to speed the actual cleanup of wasta
sites and spills under the five-year, $1:6
billion Superfund program.
The plan sets out guidelines for coor-
dinating federal and state responses to
immediate or long term threats to human
health and the environment from hazar-
dons waste. In announcing the NCP, EPA
Administrator Anne M. Gorsuch said,
"The Reagan Administration believes that
a policy of straightforward regulation and
careful resource management, combined
with an unshakable commitment, is our
mandate from the American people. And I
believe that this policy will result in a swift
cleanup of existing environmental
hazards. This cleanup will be our en-
vironmental legacy to future
generations."
I share this commitment and this belief.
Already--even before the proposed NCP
goes into effect--we have made real
progress.
EPA has taken removal actions at 54
hazardous waste sites across the country,
including five in New England at Nashua,
Kingston, Epping and Raymond, N.H., and
Coventry, R.I. Remedial actions or field
studies and engineering design to contain
or treat hazardous substances on site have
been started at 37 sites, including Nashua,
Coventry, Winthrop, ME, Smithfield, RI
and Woburn, MA. Ten cooperative
agreements have been signed with states
for cleanup at Superfund sites, including
two in New England, at Nashua and
00Letters to the Edi
To breathe clean air
To the Editor:
The Clean Air Act, that
critical piece of en-
vironmental legislation which
has, year by year since it was
passed in 1970 (with amen-
dments in 1977), brought the
nation cleaner, healthier air
and clearer skies, is currently
facing a double threat in
Washington. Scheduled to he
reauthorized in 1981, delays in
Congress have allowed action
to carry over into this year,
and even now it is not clear
when the "new" Clean Air Act
will eme'ge. What is clear is
that a strong delegation in
Congress has targetted the
Act for legislative destruction,
and furthermore, that the
Reagan Administration is
quietly dismembering the
Act's enforcement team, the
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), under the
guise of cutting the federal
deficit and providing
regulatory relief. In each
case, many of our leaders in
Washington reveal an ap-
palling disregard for the
health of their constituents
and the ecosystem which
supports them, while ignoring
the undeniable connection
between environmental
degradation and the economy.
In late December, ReD. Tom
Luken (D-Ohio)introduced
H.R. 5252, a bill which, if
passed, will severely damage
the effectiveness of the Clean
Air Act. it attacks virtually
every important aspect of the
Act, and includes the following
provisions:
(1) slips deadlines for at-
taining health standards,
while repealing most of the
effective tools for progress
towards those standards.
(2) weakens the federal auto
emissions control program by
doubling carbon monoxide
and nitrogen oxide emission
standards, which the vast
majority of 1981 cars had
already met, and easing the
standards for diesels, while
also gutting the premarket
certification procedure.
(3) essentially repeals the
prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) program,
which currently protects our
remaining "clear Jr" areas.
t 4) blocks necessary federal
action to protect the ozone
layer which guards against
cancer-causing ull a,iolet
radiation.
Perhaps
than its
H.R. 5252 fails
ignores that
cancer-cuasing
p011utan, and
the problem
among the
threats to '
ecosystem. H.R.
Revised Plan
The revised contingency plan
the scope of the existing NCP to
additional chemical substanceS
transfer media, air, land
Forthcoming from EPA will be
guidance manual for
Superfund from the site
through preliminary
engineering
be guidance, not regulation.
emphasize this.
net dictate to them.
A total of 13 New England
EPA's interim priority list of
sites throughout
negotiate with res;
for site cleanup.
We have learned that
industry, rather than
paid the greatest dividends,
Agency is prepared to take
action wherever cooperation fa
results.
We have also learned that no
are alike, and cleanup needs
On one site drums may be
the surface scaled, graded
Or a system may be built for
contaminated leacbate on the
remedy will depend on many
such as the substances
hydregeology, climate and
population, the iS't
Therefore EPA has taken ,
approach in revising the NCP i 1.:
give full play to invention al[ ""-
back the limits of waste mam]
technology. There are no easy
the problems confronting us. ],10
quoting Administrator Gorsuch,
the NCP can be used to usher in _
of environmental technologY
plication."
support of the
and a great many
hope.
Waxman
tered the Luke
comprehensive
package, H.B.
man's bill h
deficiencies
while allowing
amount of
tuning", and
million ton
rain-causing
ten years
'similar to that !
Moffett-Gregg
(House) and
(Senate Action
before
Should
reauthorze
Act, the battle
(please
Boston and Springfield. "lived at the junction of the old
During renovation or Union Village road with what
-- WO00Wb00-00
SPEED CLE00-UP
by LESTER A. SUTTON Coventry. _ J ':
U.S. Environmental Prottctioa Agon of federal funds for_..m -
Regional Administrator and remedial action totals $54 .m'_
The commitment of the Reagann m" t:,':
cost-effective
Administration to effieient, - ' Superfuzation. The !'';
environmental cleanup is exemplified in authorization for 1983 is$233
