Reply to a comment

Reply to this comment

Fossil writes:

Councilman Gibson asks "why not". When his mother scolded him to not not touch the hot stove, did he ask "why not". It's obvious why not. Facts are required only when there is an absence of knowledge. In the case of LCEC, the consumers already know all the facts they require to make a decision as to the wisdom of purchasing this utility. The consumers are actually owners of this utility and as owners have an interest in it. The consumers by testimony have stated that they are satisfied with the service and the cost for that service. What other facts are worth $100,000 to learn? Sounds to me that the proponents of this inititive want to hire a consultant to farret our facts to give them reason to purchase it. Facts that the consumers are not seeking. What are the real motives of people like John Arceri? That is a valid question and perhaps worth $100,000 to establish the "facts" as to why we should not purchase this utility. Mr. Gibson needs to rethink his logic and become more objective.

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.

Features