These New Boston Speaks meetings were sponsored and organized by the New Boston Planning Board and facilitated by personnel from the University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension.

What resulted from the meetings was formation of several citizen committees dedicated to addressing key issues confronting the town of New Boston, including The Foot Traffic and Road Safety Committee (FT&RSC) of which I am a member.

Attendees at the primary meetings identified many issues that they felt were relevant and then ranked these issues in order of importance. The following are pertinent to the request for special exception presently before the board of adjustment:

Three major state highways and several local byways come together in or near the center of New Boston Village.

Traffic flow has increased dramatically in the last five years resulting in an average annual daily traffic figure of more than 6,400 where Route 13 crosses the Piscataquog River Bridge in the center of New Boston. Traffic has increased proportionately on streets and roads in the immediate area.

Particularly heavy traffic flow occurring during peak periods - daily a.m. and p.m., weekends and seasonal - creates traffic congestion in the downtown area.

Congestion created by the increase in traffic flow has created safety issues for drivers and pedestrians, particularly for children on their way to and from school and recreation facilities.

The growing volume of vehicle traffic, especially heavy trucks, has resulted in a negative impact on the character of the town due to excessive exhaust pollution and noise. Excessive use of engine breaks by heavy trucks is especially intrusive.

Commuter through traffic through the village often results in excessive vehicle speeds; however, the New Boston Police have found it difficult to enforce speed limits due to lack of personnel and equipment.

Lack of professional transportation planning has resulted, by default, in a focus on vehicles not people.

Unanimously, New Boston residents said that they wanted to find ways to improve and preserve the character of the town center. The FT&RSC was specifically formed to address traffic and safety issues in the village. It is committed to the following:

• Address traffic concerns by development of pedestrian walkways, remote parking and, in the future, road bypasses.

• Encourage town officials to toughen the enforcement of existing speed limits on roadways leading into the town center.

• Expand village parking.

• Seek third-party assistance in developing a town transportation plan that enhances village character by addressing such issues as congestion, safety, noise and pedestrian access.

The plan by Lull Road Corporation for the truck traffic associated with their proposed gravel operation will be counterproductive to the goals of New Boston Speaks and especially the Foot Traffic and Road Safety Committee, because it will have a negative impact on the traffic situation in the Village. The "Travel Plan" will heavily impact traffic through the village of New Boston in terms of type and number of vehicles, frequency of travel, travel pattern, noise and diesel exhaust.

The applicant has stated that it intends to implement the following plan: Employ at least 35 trucks per day, 10 hours per day during the week and five hours on Saturday for five years, traveling south on routes 77, 136, High Street and Mont Vernon Road.

This will impact traffic volume through one of New Boston's most heavily traveled corridors. Residents and commuters alike will be adversely affected.

The disturbing fact is that the applicant has completely ignored what the effect will be on the village of New Boston. He has spent considerable time and money preparing so-called alternate travel patterns with in-depth information on traffic impact including average annual daily traffic figures; incidents of accidents; sight distances; auxiliary lane requirements; and level of service at key intersections, all supported by elaborate diagrams and charts.

All this information is concerned with intersections and roadways in the immediate vicinity of the gravel operation including Twin Bridge Road and its connections with Route 77 and Route 114.

However, no attention has been given to what the traffic impact will be on the more populated area of New Boston village. In terms of vehicle and pedestrian traffic volume, population density and business activity, New Boston village will be the area most adversely affected by this operation.

The board has seen fit to advise abutter towns of the possible impact on their citizens, and in fact, the town of Weare has taken steps to mitigate the effects of the truck traffic on its citizens.

It has closed a section of road between Neuman Wilson Road and Route 144 to through truck traffic. No such attention has been given to the village of New Boston. Likely, the thinking is that there is nothing that can be done for the village since the trucks will travel on state highways through the village. Nothing is further from the truth.

The zoning board has the power to refuse to grant the special exception on the basis of the fact that the operation will materially harm the character of the village and it will have a negative impact on traffic congestion in the village.

We urge the board to vote against this request for special exception in the interests of all the citizens of New Boston - those who pass through and use the facilities in the center of town as well as all those living along the travel routes and in the village itself.
H. Randall Parker
New Boston

We surpassed our goal of raising $5,000 and raised more than $8,000 for the American Diabetes Association. Funds will be going towards diabetes research and education.

We all received some diabetes education, had a great walk and some fun.

Thank you to Mr Chauvette, our principal, for kissing that pig, as promised. Thank you also to Mrs Stoneking, assistant principal for also smooching the pig because we went over our goal!

For the loan of the pig, we thank Don McCauslin of Swine Farm. Matt Thomas, thank you for holding that pig. Weare Friends PTO provided the water for all of our thirsty walkers. A very grateful thank you to our leader of the actual walk, keeping us all going in the right direction, Debbie Spadaro.

For all the preplanning and organizing, thanks go to Cheri Easter, Jon VanHam, Sharon Thomas, Maura O.Neil, Tina Healy, Caroline Corsetti and Lisa Ryan for their help with the skit.

A very special thank you to Sharon Thomas and Ariel Freedman for sharing with the students what it is like living with diabetes.

It was an awesome school walk fundraiser. Fifty years ago people donated dimes to find a cure for polio and research did. Your donation will help in the research for a cure for diabetes, perhaps in our lifetime. You made a difference. Thank you very much, everyone!
Patricia MacNeil, RN
CWES school nurse

Put our basic retirement at risk? We know better Mr. Bush.

We.ve seen wiped-out retirement funds; from Enron and Lucent to Healthsouth and WorldCom: Millions of stock/ retirement dollars evaporated.

The ultimate insult to our intelligence came last week. In a ploy to scare voters, he announced that the U's. Treasury bills held by Social Security are worthless IOUs.

Suddenly folks at the Treasury department had to speak up to correct the Bush gaffe.

Stating that your country's bonds are worthless is a quick way to start a worldwide dumping of U's. bonds, causing a global economic crisis.

Now, either Mr. Bush is so incompetent that he didn't realize the danger of his remarks, or he is so determined to scare folks that he didn't care. Either answer makes me worry for the future.

As more facts have come out, Mr. Bush recently was forced to admit that his private accounts have nothing to do with shoring up our Social Security - it will in fact require slashing future benefits.

Incredibly, we taxpayers are charged for his million-dollar travel bill on this propaganda, yet all over America Bush has prohibited anyone not supporting his idea from attending these public meetings.

That sounds more dictatorial than democratic to me.

Mr. Cheney added to the stupidity of the plan.

After assuring folks that the private stock market isn't a gamble - his parting words were - "Bet on America."

No thanks Mr. Cheney, no gambling with my security, but average working folks do.

We've already lost job security, pension security and healthcare security, please Mr. Bush, leave us a few strings of our shredded social safety net.

Don't privately dismantle it with your "Leave No Investment Company Behind" scam, instead really shore up the present successful program for the security of future generations.
Jeanne Stapleton
New Boston

The meeting on May 2 will be my third town hall meeting in Goffstown and my 90th meeting in the First Congressional District since taking office in 2003.

I look forward to meeting with Goffstown residents again on Monday, May 2, at 7 p.m., at Goffstown Town Hall, and urge you to continue to contact me with your thoughts, ideas and concerns.

Sincerely,
US Rep. Jeb Bradley

The letter was named "Two morality plays: one shows how to die, the other how not to."

The letter compared the deaths of Terri Schiavo and Pope John Paul II. These two deaths are not even comparable. One was out and out state-sanctioned murder/euthanasia and the other was an old man's dying wishes.

The only thing comparable of the two deaths was the media circus swirling around both of them, from there the similarities part ways. Even the Vatican spoke out against the treatment of Ms. Schiavo. She was a young woman that could breathe on her own, swallow her own saliva, and could possibly have been rehabilitated to a better quality of life, if only given a chance. So many things are left to question with her death.

The Pope lived a very full life, was succumbing to Parkinson's disease and never fully recovered from the flu or pneumonia. Like I said, not even close to a comparison.

This letter rails about Ms. Schiavo's situation as being a private matter. Not to be interfered with by the courts, Congress or anybody outside the family. It should have been a private matter, but she left no clear indication of her wishes. Her parents disagreed with the the husband's assertion that she would want to die.

His assertion is very suspect when he has moved on with his life and started a family with another woman. The courts sided with the husband and accepted hearsay as testimony for her wishes, also extremely suspect in that the only testimony accepted was from the husband's family. Both Judge Greer and attorney Felos have connections to the hospice where Ms. Schiavo was a patient. Lots of questions all around the entire case.

The Pope, on the other hand, made his wishes known and his doctors and staff made sure his wishes were met. Nothing to question about his demise.

He was able to speak for himself, Ms. Schiavo could not.

Congress stepped in to help the situation, creating a firestorm in the process. But, even they could see there were too many questions surrounding the Schiavo case. They passed a law to help the situation, but the courts did not follow it, assuming Congress overstepped their bounds.

The only thing wrong with this law is that it did not go far enough. It should have been more wide reaching, not designed for one individual. There are many in this country that are in similar situations as Ms. Schiavo.

It should have set a standard of complete review by the federal courts in disputed cases such as hers. This would help with all disputed cases, even ones with living wills. There are at least two cases that come to mind with living wills being disregarded, one in Georgia and one in Boston.

If these lawyers want rail against private decisions being interfered with, they should be looking into these cases. The courts interfered by hearing these cases. Blatant disregard for someones written wishes, when they were of sound mind and health at the time the directive was written, is a hijacking ones civil and legal rights. Where is the outrage over these cases?

It seems even lawyers can be blinded by standing behind the "rule of law." Squealing and squawking about the "hijacking of the legislative process," claiming the Congress had overstepped its bounds, etc., when passing "Terri's Law."

These lawyers really need to read the Constitution in full, instead of case law, which in my opinion, has perverted the original intent of the document that means so much to myself and many others.

In argument to these magnificent legal minds, I refer them to Article 3 of the Constitution, which gives the legislative branch authority to set the jurisdiction of the federal courts. The judicial branch does not decide their jurisdiction. So, if we want to discuss outrageous action, scrutiny should fall on to the courts for disobeying a Constitutional directive from Congress.

Instead we hear all this caterwauling about Congress not respecting the "rule of law." How about the courtsrespecting the Constitution?

This country needs to get back to the principles it was founded upon. Congress setting jurisdiction is a valid check and balance of the judicial branch. The judicial branch needs to quit considering outside sources of law when deciding cases; it does not matter what other countries courts do in legal situations.

Most of those countries do not even hold the basic tenets of our legal system, that a person is innocent until proved guilty. Judges should not be testing the wind to see which way the political winds are blowing.
Mark Loveless
Goffstown