Clarendon Live

The Clarendon Enterprise - Spreading the word since 1878.

Opinions

Opinion: These are historic times in Donley County

by 1 Comment

Wow! Things are a poppin’ in beautiful Donley County these days. Only last week, for the first time in over 100 years, the official “watering hole” drought ended, thanks to our forward thinking citizens. Somewhat surprisingly, the margin of victory for the imbibers was larger than I expected.

Then, just today, the Donley County Commissioners’ Court approved a 10-year tax abatement program for a company that wants to create a wind energy project in the northern portion of the county, along I-40. The tax abatement was critical if the project was going to be successfully done in Donley County.

Fred Gray.
Fred Gray.

Also noteworthy, while the project is being built, the company, Cielo Land and Cattle, L.P., will commence a “local spending and support” plan, in which the company intends to spend one million dollars with Donley County merchants while the project is being completed. Now that we are wet, that spending could buy a lot of booze to help shepherd the project along during trying times – which usually accompany a project of this magnitude, even with the most meticulous planning possible.

When the project is up and running, it will sweeten Donley County coffers by some $160,000 to $200,000 a year for the first 10 years – the period of the initial tax abatement. After that 10-year period of time passes, the revenues to the county could be immense.

Wind energy is a huge part of America’s future energy equation, and Donley County will finally be a player in that industry. We all owe our county commissioners a large debt of gratitude for their foresight and ability to get this done. It’s also a wonderful legacy for outgoing Donley County Judge Jack Hall.

We also, for the first time in a good while, have a soon to be fully functioning city council. Well, sort of. It seems that the three aldermen who tarried, folks we can’t seem to get rid of, have decided to petition his honor, Judge Stuart Messer, to fire the mayor, if such a thing is possible.

Debbie Roberts-Hillis, Jesus Hernandez, and Tommy Hill have actually accused Mayor Larry Hicks of official misconduct, and want the judge to put him out of office, no matter that the voters put him in office. Talk about a dampener on local democracy, and the pots calling the kettle black, or vise-versa – whatever.

Meanwhile, back to the city aldermen; we now have a full roster of aldermen in place, ready to re-commence taking care of the city’s long neglected business needs. The voters have selected these fine folks to represent us and I hope we the people do all we can to support them in their efforts.

If his honor, Judge Messer, frees the mayor from his horse collar in the timely fashion, the city council will finally be at full strength and everyone can focus on leading the city into a new era of prosperity and bounteous living. Do I hear an Amen!?

Truth be known, I’ll be happy if we can just have a few months of uninterrupted peace and harmony in our town. Thanksgiving and Christmas are looming on the near horizon and peace on earth, good will to men seems especially appropriate this year.

Meanwhile, the Hedley Owls made it through a tough season with honor and good sportsmanship, and no one was seriously injured. They have a lot to be proud of. The Broncos have made the playoffs while overcoming enormous obstacles and still have a few victories to look forward to. Let’s all celebrate with them.

Clarendon College continues to prosper and provide us with an infusion of bright young people that makes our community better and brighter. A new administration will be commencing in early December, and an even brighter future seems possible.

In short, even though the world and America-at-large seem to be facing daunting problems in the near and longer terms, life in Donley County is good and getting better.

We have a lot to be thankful for – especially each other. Let’s not forget that while we celebrate the physical beauty of our county and our magnificent sunsets.

Editorial: City board can chart a new path

by Leave a Comment

The Way Forward, Part 7

Three new City Aldermen being seated this week give Clarendon a chance to chart a path of progress for our community. But to do that the board must start out on the right foot with thoughtful decision-making for the good of the whole.

Citizens have had enough of petty arguments and personal animosity and are ready for a fresh start. Above all else, however, the people of this city want results, and there are a few steps the new board can take to help restore the faith of the people.

There will be several things that will come before the board in the next few weeks, and among these issues, no doubt, will be questions concerning the sale of alcohol in the city following last week’s election that turned Donley County wet for the first time in 111 years.

Roger Estlack, Editor
Roger Estlack, Editor

The city has some regulatory ability in this area, but there is some confusion in the public that the city must do something with regards to zoning. According to the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission web site, the city doesn’t have to do anything. State law does, however, allow the city to set a distance of 300 feet between schools and churches and establishments selling alcohol. The city may even expand that distance to 1,000 feet, but in any case the city can grant a variance to a property owner if it chooses.

But in a town with 17 churches (at last count), a zone of 1,000 feet would eliminate most commercial locations and even a zone of 300 feet could catch several existing businesses, restaurants, and/or land that could be ripe for development. Thoughtfulness is therefore warranted in this situation in order to make sure that economic opportunities are not dashed even before they have a chance to bloom. Whatever personal feelings some aldermen may have on this issue, they should respect that the people have spoken.

Exempting properties on most of the US 287 corridor and on Kearney Street between First and Fourth Streets would provide ample opportunities for businesses to expand or develop, and it would eliminate constant requests for variances from current or potential businesses. Again, prudence should prevail, and the goal should be one of growth. City leaders must take care not to enact rules so strict that no restaurant could serve a beer with a meal or that no downtown shop could ever offer a selection of Texas wines, for instance.

Voters largely approved the local option for two basic reasons – personal freedom and the possibility of economic growth, which leads to greater tax revenue. City aldermen should take care not to unduly thwart what the people have said they want.

The next big issue for Clarendon hasn’t changed much in 25 years – the streets. They are the chief source of irritation and complaint in this city, and recent water and sewer replacements have intensified the problem. For months, drivers have been intermittently blocked off from their usual routes, and with every rain lower Third Street and the intersecting Koogle Street have been covered with several inches of dirt and mud that have had to be removed by the state. To say that it has created a nightmare for the people who live on Third and the numerous people who drive this road would be a gross understatement.

For the city to restore the faith of its citizens and for any future bond issue to ever have a snowball’s chance of passing, this all has to have been worth it. And the only way for that to happen is for Third Street to be paved in such a manner that it becomes the absolute best street in town.

The current plan for the Third Street, crafted by former administrator Lambert Little, is to narrow the road to 30 feet, put some little concrete valley’s for the water, and tar and gravel it. This “poor boy” plan has got to go. Third Street connects our central business district with the public school and the college, and it needs to be done up right.

From Bronco Stadium at Allen Street all the way to the First Baptist Church on Bugbee Avenue, Third Street should be kept the same width as it is from Parks Street (near the Episcopal Church) to the stadium, and it should have curbs and gutters all the way to the top of the hill.

How do you pay for this extra work? Simple, abandon Little’s plan to seal coat streets on the college campus. Those are not city streets, they are the responsibility of the Clarendon College District, and we need to focus the city’s resources on the city’s infrastructure. (Why the college would allow the city to touch their streets is a mystery anyway.)

And finally, as a point of community healing, let’s get rid of the elevator on the front of City Hall and restore the building’s façade. The project is a lightning rod for criticism and serves no useful purpose at this time. Its removal could be a gesture of goodwill as our city attempts to focus on new opportunities.

In these and other areas, our Aldermen have their work cut out for them. They will have several hard decisions to make; but if they focus on progress and work together, they can move Clarendon forward.

Editorial: This is it… vote alcohol up or down

by Leave a Comment

“The vote” is just days away; and when you pick up your paper next week, the outcome will be known. Will Donley County go “wet,” or will it continue being “dry.”

After months of people talking about it, numerous ads on the subject, and lots of statistics, people are largely in agreement about one thing: Let’s just get on with it.

If supporters of the measure succeed, the sale of all alcoholic beverages including mixed drinks will become legal in all of Donley County. If opponents get their way, things will stay just as they are and just as they have been for more than 40 years with alcohol sales being legal in the City of Howardwick but nowhere else.

Articles that your editor has looked at specific to counties going from “dry” to “wet” reported business expansion and increased tax revenues with little to no increase in alcohol-related crime. I’ve read about sales tax revenues going up anywhere from 16 percent to 75 percent.

Roger Estlack, Editor
Roger Estlack, Editor

To put this in perspective, if Clarendon could increase its sales tax revenue just ten percent over 2012’s total, it would be a net gain of $33,594.74. For that to happen, local merchants and restaurants would have to see higher sales of more than $1.7 million. But maybe our sales tax revenue only goes up three percent, and the city nets just over $10,000. Even that would take an extra half a million dollars in sales. Wouldn’t that be nice?

And as for crime, one study of Angelina County in East Texas could find no correlation in DWI statistics as the county went from “dry” to “wet” because it was “functionally wet” already since residents only had to make a 10 to 15 minute “trip to the river” to get alcohol.

That’s our situation. Alcohol is in Donley County, and it will still be in our midst regardless of the vote. The only difference is in where it’s available and who gets the economic benefit.

At the end of the day, it is about rights and responsibilities, actions and consequences, and jobs and revenue. And for some people it’s a moral question.

No matter which side you are on in this issue, you need to vote. Don’t get mad at the results of the election if you didn’t go to the ballot box to make your voice heard. This is your opportunity, so make the most of it.

 

Meanwhile…

Donley County voters have several other choices on the ballot besides the alcohol question. Nine amendments have been proposed to the Texas Constitution, and many people have no idea what they’re being asked to vote on. So here is the Enterprise voter’s primer on the subject. Feel free to disagree.

Amendment No. 1:

The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of a member of the armed services of the United States who is killed in action.

Our recommendation: Vote no. Too many exemptions are already in place for property taxes.

Amendment No. 2:

The constitutional amendment eliminating an obsolete requirement for a State Medical Education Board and a State Medical Education Fund, neither of which is operational.

Our recommendation: Vote Yes, unless you like obsolete requirements.

Amendment No. 3:

The constitutional amendment to authorize a political subdivision of this state to extend the number of days that aircraft parts that are exempt from ad valorem taxation due to their location in this state for a temporary period may be located in this state for purposes of qualifying for the tax exemption.

Our recommendation: Vote Yes. It would seem to be a rare circumstance and control is left to local officials.

Amendment No. 4:

The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of part of the market value of the residence homestead of a partially disabled veteran or the surviving spouse of a partially disabled veteran if the residence homestead was donated to the disabled veteran by a charitable organization.

Our recommendation: Vote No. Too many exemptions are already in place for property taxes.

Amendment No. 5:

The constitutional amendment to authorize the making of a reverse mortgage loan for the purchase of homestead property and to amend lender disclosures and other requirements in connection with a reverse mortgage loan.

Our recommendation: Vote No. Too much opportunity for scammers.

Amendment No. 6:

The constitutional amendment providing for the creation of the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas and the State Water Implementation Revenue Fund for Texas to assist in the financing of priority projects in the state water plan to ensure the availability of adequate water resources.

Our recommendation: Vote Yes. Texas needs water, and this measure has enjoyed bi-partisan support.

Amendment No. 7:

The constitutional amendment authorizing a home rule municipality to provide in its charter the procedure to fill a vacancy on its governing body for which the unexpired term is 12 months or less.

Our recommendation: Vote Yes. Clarendon can attest that cities need to be able to fill vacancies quickly.

Amendment No. 8:

The constitutional amendment which relates to the creation of a hospital district in Hidalgo County.

Our recommendation: Vote Yes. If Hidalgo County wants a hospital district, let them have one. 

Amendment No. 9:

The constitutional amendment relating to expanding the types of sanctions that may be assessed against a judge or justice following a formal proceeding instituted by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

Our recommendation: Vote Yes. Let’s have more options to hold judges accountable.

Not every issue is as exciting or controversial as alcohol, but that all deserve the thoughtful consideration of the voters. Read up on the issues at the Texas League of Women Voters’ website. And also be sure your make your choices known for Clarendon’s city board. Get out and vote!

Opinion:The question: To drink or not to drink?

by Leave a Comment

Now that November 5 is just around the corner and voting in the upcoming liquor election has commenced – with a pretty good turnout – there is little time remaining for additional discussion on the issue in question. Really, it’s probably a good thing, since things are getting a little out of hand. Now is a good time to wrap things up and get to the polls.

Some claims of the “naysayers,” for lack of a better word, have stretched the credibility of the folks making such dire, destructive proclamations. For example, I’m fairly certain that Claude has not, and will not, become a “destination drinking paradise” in which drunks and winos from around the area, perhaps even around the country, will suddenly descend upon Armstrong County like a pestilence of biblical proportions. Actually, since Armstrong County only passed a version of the liquor laws that allows for package stores, and not liquor by the drink, Claude will be similar to Clarendon as it now is.

Granted, I’m not sure about the three who tarried – those three “winos” who were discovered sleeping in Claude’s nice city park. That sure won’t happen here, lest those who sleep it off in our park end up with a backside full of goat heads and grass burrs. Anyway, as usual, I digress.

Fred Gray.
Fred Gray.

Back to the less civil and cordial discussion of the issues. Last week, while seeking sober solace from the trials of the world at a local establishment, I was actually verbally accosted by a person whom I had always assumed was a good, level-headed man. He gave me the Clint Eastwood stare, stated, “I’ve been laying for you,” and then actually accused me of being a blasphemer. Really? Blasphemer? Me? Hmm.

I won’t say who this person is. He needs to brush up on his theology if he is going to call me a blasphemer. The biblical definition of blasphemer is much different that the dictionary definition. For a moment there, I thought I was in some sort of space, time warp in which I was actually conversing with a Jewish Pharisee.

Well, now that I have that out of my system, I feel much better and am ready to point out that alcohol consumption is usually a pleasant endeavor, filled with joyous good cheer, and pleasant conversation. People drink for a reason.

The consumption of alcohol accompanies many of our most dear and heart-felt social and familial rites. We have toasts at weddings and anniversary celebrations. We drink alcohol to celebrate the birth of babies and at special events. We consume fine wines at formal dinners, and that fine wine enhances our dining experience.

Imagine going down to the pizza parlor and ordering a cold, frosty pitcher of beer to go with a steaming, fully laden pizza. That folks is drinking at its finest. Or, say we all head down to the restaurant and order a big frozen margarita to accompany our Mexican plate. If you prefer, have a Lone Star Long Neck or Shiner Bock beer instead.

To me, the best use of alcohol is simply three-fingers of Wild Turkey straight up. Three-fingers, or at the worst, six-fingers of Wild Turkey takes the edge off, loosens the vocal cords, and allows me to wax poetic into the wee hours of the morning. That folks is living high. It’s good and God is not going to smite me dead for enjoying great American bourbon.

Of course, the “naysayers” must think that we are all going to suddenly drink ourselves into the dirt, become destructive, and radically increase our licentious behavior. Well, sadly to say, that is only a pipe dream for most of us. It just isn’t going to happen.

Over the course of my life, I’ve spent many wonderful years in professional soccer. After every game, the players and coaches from both teams would meet in a local pub for drinks and camaraderie. I’ve spent enormous sums of time and money in pubs from the West Coast to the East Coast. In all those years, and in all those pubs and drinking places scattered around this fine nation, I have never witnessed anything remotely close to what has been proclaimed by the “naysayers.”

Regardless of what has been said, let’s all accept the outcome of this election graciously and get on with our lives. Like I’ve said, I don’t really care which way this election goes. I’m 65 years-young and have no intention of again frequenting bars and pubs. That doesn’t mean that I don’t want others to experience some of the joys and wonders that occur in drinking places if they choose to do so.

For those who are against liquor by the drink, I understand their fears and concerns, as unlikely as they are to prove accurate. Sure, there will be a few issues, but nothing as severe as forecast.

Readers air more views on alcohol

by 1 Comment

Trevor Leeper writes:
Mr. Watson [regarding: letter to editor, Oct. 24, 2013http://www.clarendonlive.com/?p=14802], KCDB Channel 11 out of Lubbock, Texas, did a great story on the matter. Try going to Google and searching “Dry v. Wet Counties” and see what comes up. The only crime that was higher in wet counties was domestic violence. You stated statistics of how many alcohol related deaths and accidents there were, but you’re not comparing them to anything. How many of those were in wet counties versus dry?
As we’re coming into the final days of voting, something I want to remind everyone in Donley County is this. Don’t let this decision divide our county or town. We are lucky to live in a country where we have the freedom to vote for what we want! Don’t “hate” someone for not having the same opinion as yourself. Don’t stop shopping at a store who supports something you don’t.
Drinking alcohol will not make you a bad person. I don’t drink, and never will; but if it will help our local businesses and economy, I’m all for it! I love our town, and I know everyone voting against alcohol loves it too. Remember: John 2:1-11 Jesus turned water into wine. On November 5th, you can to!
Will Thompson writes:
Roger, are you charging me and those that speak out against the expansion of alcohol sales with the suppression of free speech?
From my understanding of your column [October 24, 2013October 24, 2013], you make the ridiculous charge that the “naysayers” are abridging free speech by advocating their position; a charge that could be viewed as being offensive. For some of us “naysayers” who swore an oath to protect our Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic I find that charge is a very low blow. As for me and my experience, protecting free speech was not some lesson I heard in a high school government class. It was something actively lived, a solemn promise; so your charge that I have sought to revoke this oath is not taken lightly.
It seems that it might be some on the other side that are actively abridging free speech and violating federal laws by yanking up the yard sides of those opposing the expansion of alcohol sales within our county, my missing sign being one of them. You might want to rethink that article about those suppressing free speech and who are intolerant of other viewpoints.
Chris Moore writes:
I’ll pay $200 dollars for information leading to arrest and conviction of the coward(s) who are trespassing on people’s property and stealing their “VOTE NO to ALCOHOL” signs. I hope this is being reported as to what one side of the issue has stooped to. Let me say that you represent your side well with your actions. If you have information that would lead to the arrest and conviction of the punk(s), please contact me or the Sheriff’s office. Thank you.

Editor’s Note: The Clarendon Enterprise will match Mr. Moore’s $200 reward. Theft of any kind is abhorrent, and theft of a political sign has an affront to free speech which cannot be tolerated. People on each side of this issue have a right to express their opinion without fear of having their property stolen.

Readers sound off on alcohol

by Leave a Comment

Bob Watson writes:
Last week’s letter to the editor by Mr. Leeper started me to thinking. Where did where did he obtain his information that dry counties had more DWI’s that wet counties? I spent several hours searching the web for this information and was not able to find it. I did find several interesting web sites that I would urge you to research. www.txdot.gov/driver/sober-safe/faces.html, www.txdps.state.tx.us/DriverLicense/AlcoholRelatedOffenses.htm, www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/division/traffic/safety/sober-safe/intoxication.html, and www.txdps.state.tx.us/index.htm.
I served 40+ years in Law Enforcement (city & counties both wet and dry), Juvenile Probation Officer, County Judge of Collingsworth County and 6 months as Municipal Judge of Clarendon before Leukemia forced me to retire. Based on my experience I would ask Donley County citizens please vote NO in the upcoming election to serve alcohol.
Being arrested for public intoxication (just being drunk) is no big deal, right? It can be a humiliating and traumatic experience. The police often arrest first and ask questions later, minimum time in jail 4 hours. This will end up with you having an alcohol related offense on your record for the rest of your life that could affect future jobs, school admissions, and even the ability to rent an apartment.
DWI What’s the big deal about driving after you’ve had a few drinks, anyway? Just in case you missed all the commercials, public safety announcements, and were never taught this is in school, here is a brief refresher. Sobering 2012 Texas Statistics from http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/safety/faces/fodd-fact-sheet.pdf
• 25,755 alcohol-related crashes
• 9,458 people seriously injured in an alcohol-related crash
• 1,170 people killed in an alcohol-related crash
Source: TxDOT and Texas Peace Officer’s Crash Reports (CR-3)
Drinking alcohol affects your judgment, reflexes, depth perception, and other cognitive functions that are necessary to drive safely. People that drink and drive are far more likely to get in a serious auto accident than sober drivers. Whenever you drink, alcohol is absorbed into your bloodstream through the lining of your stomach and small intestine. The alcohol in your bloodstream directly affects your brain, with the amount of impairment increasing as the level of alcohol in your blood increases. By the time you reach Texas’ legal limit of .08, your muscle control is poor, your judgment is impaired, and your ability to detect danger is reduced significantly. In other words, you are in no condition to drive!
How do you know when you’ve had too much? Well, everyone’s tolerance for alcohol is different, and your BAC can be affected by factors like weight, gender, and how much you’ve had to eat. The general rule is to consume no more than 1 drink per hour, with one drink being 12 oz of beer, 5 oz of wine, or 1 single shot of liquor. However, this is not foolproof, due the factors mentioned above and also to the fact that if you have a low tolerance for alcohol you could become impaired at a BAC below the legal limit of .08. So, the best defense against a DWI is not to drink and drive at all.
Of course, if you drink and drive and the only thing that happens is that you get charged with a DWI, you are actually lucky. It could be much worse. For example, according to the Texas Department of Transportation, someone dies in an alcohol-related accident once every 5 hours! In 2004, 1,642 people died in drunk-driving accidents.
Latest information from: http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/division/traffic/safety/sober-safe/intoxication.html states: About every 20 minutes in Texas, someone is hurt or killed in a crash involving alcohol. We urge you to take responsibility for your actions. Don’t drink and drive.
Sure, it’s easy to distance yourself from the statistics, but consider this: each one of those 1,642 people had family and friends that they left behind. The tragic thing is that these deaths were entirely preventable-if the drunk driver had called a cab or gotten a ride with someone else instead, those people might still be alive today.

Don Stone writes:
Two amendments guarantee we are FREE TO SPEAK…FREE TO VOTE!
These give the right of the people to be heard. What majority is heard at the ballot box. Not always the true majority; only those who vote. We speak of the “silent majority” (but their votes don’t count.) Many elections are decided by one vote. Or two or seven. Maybe yours. Intentions, convictions don’t count at the polls without votes. Voting counts. Your vote counts--if you vote! So, vote your convictions. Let your voice be heard. Vote early or late, but VOTE NO TO THE ALCOHOLIC SALES OPTION!

Mary Linn Bills writes:
This is a true story. No names have been changed, and it is too late to protect the innocent in this story but not the innocent of Donley County.
The person who told this story in 1999 is Michael Dorris. His brave son is named Adam. Adam’s adoptive mother is Louise. “I drank hard in my twenties and eventually got hepatitis,” she related. “I was lucky. Beyond an occasional glass of wine, I can’t tolerate liquor anymore. But from those early days, I understand the urge for alcohol, its physical pull. I had formed an emotional bond with a special configuration of chemicals, and I realize to this day the attraction of the relationship and the difficulty of abandoning it.
“Adam’s mother never did let go. She died of alcohol poisoning, and I’d feel sorrier for her if we didn’t have Adam.”
By way of background, “the US surgeon general and the American Medical Association recently stated that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption for a woman during pregnancy – a fact unknown in 1971 when Michael Dorris became one of the first unmarried men in the United States to legally adopt a very young child.”
The following decades were a time of alarming discovery about the blight of fetal alcohol syndrome. Grandparents and parents of children who are victims of this syndrome may see evidence in adopted grandchildren and children. Teachers see it in their students. These innocents often show physical signs (including seizures), behavioral, mental, and emotional impairment caused by the consumption of alcohol by their mothers during pregnancy.
In Adam’s case, his developmental blocks included all the above. He had superior care and training to overcome these deficiencies, but they could not make up for the damage done before he was even born. His IQ was low, and his social development was functional only with care and supervision. Each and every day of his life was a struggle against the staggering effects of fetal alcohol syndrome.
You may only imagine how Michael felt on Adam’s 21st birthday when he said, “So Adam, do you feel any older? What’s good about being 21?”
“He turned to me and grinned,” commented Michael. “I thought, ‘Then there was something good.’”
“Well,” Adam answered, “now the guys at work say I’m old enough to drink.”
To learn more about this tragic, preventable problem, look online, or check out The Broken Cord by Michael Dorris from your local library.
Oh, yes. I nearly forgot. Please protect our unborn children by voting “no” in the upcoming election.

Editorial: Alcohol debate needs a dose of free speech

by Leave a Comment

“I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

With that simple sentence, Coach Don Beck summed up Freedom of Speech in Clarendon High School history classes more than two decades ago. Tolerance, although not necessarily acceptance, of differing views is one of the things that makes America special and creates a society where people from all kinds of backgrounds and with all kinds of beliefs can flourish together and accomplish great things.

Since 2003, the third week of October has been set aside as Free Speech Week, a time to underscore the importance of the principals of free speech and free press to our individual freedom and to the operation of our representative government at the federal, state, and local levels.

Roger Estlack, Editor
Roger Estlack, Editor

Which brings us to the main issue of discussion right now in Donley County: alcohol sales. Our citizens are faced with an important choice in the current election, but, with the exception of one letter to the editor last week, we’ve only really heard from people opposed to the legalization of alcohol sales. They have asked questions of the supporters of legalization and urged a debate on the matter, but why would supporters of alcohol sales subject themselves to such an exercise? The “naysayers” have shown they will not tolerate any other viewpoints and will treat alcohol supporters as the devil’s spawn.

Three weeks ago our featured columnist Fred Gray penned a neutral piece on the alcohol question, addressing his outlook on the current state of affairs, the prospects for its passage, and even the lack of public agitation by the supporters of alcohol sales. He discussed George Washington’s whiskey making and Sam Houston’s battles with the bottle. And he also discussed the biblical fact that Jesus Christ turned water into wine… and in so doing he set the opponents of this measure on fire. Fred did not endorse the legalization of alcohol, but the withering criticism he received revealed the vocal opposition’s real reason for fighting this battle.

Consumption of alcohol, in their view, is a sin. And just as they will go through a mental game of Twister to “prove” that Jesus only turned water into some form of Iron Age Kool-Aid, they will dig up all kinds of statistics to fuel their hysterical hyperbole that the legalization of alcohol sales in this county will turn us all into to a bunch of drunken murderers, rapists, and worse leading to the moral and social destruction of this community and ultimately the eternal damnation of our immortal souls.

If that’s your view, then fine. But it’s not everyone’s view, and you have no right to force your religious doctrine on someone else. Many churches and people of faith, believe that Jesus indeed turned water into wine, that He drank wine, and that He served wine to His disciples at the Last Supper. These same people would further put forth that the Bible condemns drunkenness not drinking. If you don’t believe that, fine. It’s a free country. Thank, God.

Those who support legalizing alcohol sales would probably agree with this column in the following statements. That most people are fully capable of consuming alcohol in a safe and responsible manner. That there is nothing wrong with moderate consumption, and that it is your legal right as a citizen of this country over the age of 21 to purchase and consume alcohol.

Are there people who find themselves in the grip of the bottle through some personal weakness? Yes. Do some people act irresponsibly with alcohol? Yes. Does that mean that none of us, therefore, should be allowed to purchase alcohol anywhere in Donley County except in the City of Howardwick? No.

Each side has its own online sources to back up its position. In any study of drunk driving or alcohol-related deaths or alcohol-related violence, it’s all in how you look at the numbers, what the source is, and what, if any, agenda there is behind the source. To say that alcohol is the cause of those social ills is like saying guns are to blame for murders. The fact is the responsibility lies with the individual. Gun laws don’t stop gun violence, and prohibition doesn’t stop people from drinking.

The thing we need to focus on is economics pure and simple. As a member of the economic development board, I can tell you that a business looking at buying property and building in Clarendon pulled out last year when they learned our community was “dry.” As a member of the museum board, I can tell you that the Chuckwagon Cookoff, in its early years, lost out on a major sponsorship by a beer distributor for the same reason. As a patron of local restaurants, I can tell you that I have personally seen travelers walk out when they learned they couldn’t have a beer. Our “dry” status is hurting us. It’s stifling our business opportunities and limiting our potential tax revenue.

The people I have talked to in communities that went from “dry” to “wet” in recent years and months tell me the wild predictions of crime and drunkenness by the “naysayers” have failed to come true. Instead, they’ve seen increased economic activity.

No one is asking those religiously opposed to alcohol to change their beliefs or habits. We’re just asking for you to consider that many good people like to have an adult beverage occasionally and urging you to have an open mind about the opportunities that could come about with legalization.

Dr. Ray Perryman of Waco is one of the top economists of our time. In the introduction of an analysis of potential alcoholic beverage sales in Canadian, Perryman’s organization states the following: “Extensive empirical analysis and academic research have demonstrated that enhanced beverage sales lead to greater overall retail activity in that shoppers who come to (or remain in) the local area to purchase alcohol often buy other items as well. In addition, the ability to offer these products is becoming a critical element in locating discount and general merchandise stores and desirable restaurants.”

That’s not hype. That’s the facts. If we want Clarendon and Donley County to grow and thrive, it’s time to make some changes. That’s why I signed the petition, and that’s why I voted “yes” this week. I would ask you to consider doing the same for our community’s sake.

Letter: Thompson needs to know the facts

by Leave a Comment

Will, you are wrong about the DWIs rising if Clarendon becomes wet [Letter: October 10, 2013]. If you do some research, you’ll see that “wet” counties have less DWIs than “dry” counties. You will also see, there are less alcohol related fatalities in a “wet” county than a “dry” county and less alcohol related accidents in a “wet” county than a “dry” county.

As for the alcohol being made available to minors, that part is true. You said you don’t want to hear “they’ll get it anyway,” but obviously you don’t want to hear the truth. They will receive alcohol even if the town isn’t “wet.” I’ve known parents who gave their kids alcohol which they purchased five miles away, sometimes 60 miles away.

Claude became wet; and then shortly after, a beautiful new convenience store was constructed. Why are we keeping that from Clarendon? The appearance of a town is huge for travelers! I don’t know about anyone else, but I don’t personally enjoy stopping in an old run down store.

Also, the money that could be made from alcohol sales is a huge amount! Events for Clarendon could be bigger and better! Sponsorships would be easier to receive. Plus, the tax revenue is greatly needed for Clarendon.

Let’s take advantage of it! Or at least give it a try? Citizens of Clarendon, don’t be afraid of change! Change can be a good thing. If you support the alcohol sales, then go vote for it! If you don’t support it, then go vote “no.” Just remember, it’s an opportunity for Clarendon. Are we going to pass it up?

Trevor Leeper, Clarendon

Letter: Alcohol issue is divisive

by Leave a Comment

I have resisted for some time voicing my opinion on this subject. After Fred’s [October 3, 2013] article, I can no longer be silent.

I was interviewed by Roger several months ago, and I gave him several reasons why I did not support this fool hardy push to bring alcohol to Clarendon. One of the reasons he did quote, which is manifesting itself more and more as the election draws near, is how this issue is another divisive issue that our community did not need at this time. During the interview, I asked the question “Why now?” I have not heard a logical and truthful reply yet? It seems that regardless of how divisive this issue is to our community, the other side is bound and determined to get their alcohol no matter what, no matter who is hurt, no matter the costs and without any types of limits to its availability.

Please excuse me for contributing to this divisiveness, but I cannot sit by and be quite any more. My silence would not only betray my faith but my parents’ virtues and their good name by continuing to do nothing, there is a saying that comes to mind about “silence”, but I will suppress that thought for now.

For now I have two questions for those who support bringing alcohol into our community;

1) What are you willing to do to secure the public safety from public intoxication and drunk driving that will occur at these new centers of intoxication within our fair city?

2) What are you willing to do to protect minors from the new availability of alcohol?

What laws and fines are you willing to support to keep our “Mayberry” a great place to raise a family? So far I have not heard one mention by the other side on this nor do they even acknowledge that there will be any negative effects from the passage of enhanced availability of alcohol in our community. My fellow citizens please understand this new measure is only about availability, you can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig.

Please do not respond with the shallow, illogical comment, “Minors are going to consume alcohol anyway”? Minors consuming alcohol is illegal and the sale to or giving of alcohol to them is also illegal, not to mention it is immoral (let me know if you need a quote from Jesus on hurting a child). My greatest fear is that the measure will only make it easier for minors to get access to alcohol. If you need some information on of the effects of alcohol on the mental development of a minor there are numerous studies, several can be found at the following NIAAA website; http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh284/213-221.htm. Certainly both sides will agree underage drinking is a problem and is not good for our community.

There will be more to come on this subject and especially on what the Bible says about drinking.

Will Thompson, Clarendon

Editorial: Shut it down and leave it shut down

by Leave a Comment

The federal government embarked on its second week of a “shutdown” as the Enterprise went to press Tuesday, and the country is better for it because it gives Americans a chance to see what they can do without.

The hoopla is centered on the inability of the president and the Imperial Congress to come to an agreement on a continuing resolution to keep several government functions funded. A continuing resolution is different than an actual budget… an actual thought-out spending plan that the government – namely the Senate – hasn’t passed in several years. A continuing resolution in simple terms just means that we’re going to keep on spending like tomorrow will never come and the bank will never run out of money.

Roger Estlack, Editor
Roger Estlack, Editor

Which brings us to another problem… the debt ceiling. As unbelievable as it sounds, the government can only borrow so much money before it hits a debt limit prescribed by law. As of Tuesday morning, the United States of America owes its creditors a mere $16,753,619,388,430.93. By the time you read this, that number will be inaccurate, because it goes up thousands of dollars per second or just shy of $2 billion in a day.

Tuesday morning, every citizen’s (man, woman, and child) share of the debt was $53,552. Every taxpayer owed $148,223. Your share is higher by the time you read this. It will be higher still when you’re finished.

There are some who will tell you that’s no big deal, but the time will come when this gravy train runs out of gravy. That time may be next week when some government pencil pushers say they will reach the debt limit, and the president and his party are pressing for Congress to raise the ceiling… again.

Republicans in the House of Representatives… driven by their Tea Party wing… are insisting that any new debt ceiling has to be accompanied by spending cuts. And they are being just as insistent that there will be no deal on a continuing resolution unless the federal takeover of healthcare is repealed, changed, or at least delayed. How long can they hold out before the more traditional Republicans convince them that “compromise” is in the best interest of the country?

Unfortunately, compromise is typically a one-way street in Washington with conservatives caving to the interests of big government and getting little or nothing in return. And that’s why the combination of this shut down and the debt crisis is so important. It gives the libertarian elements in Congress a chance to make something happen to finally put the shackles back on this out of control government and downsize the beast.

To watch the news, you would think that Armageddon is at hand, but the shutdown is not a crisis. One FoxNews.com report says that only about 17 percent of the government is being affected, and if you look at this CNN report – http://bit.ly/1aGsvqy – you’ll see full breadth of government agencies that are getting along just fine as well as some truly non-essential agencies that are appropriately shut down and more that need to be.

Given the state of our national finances and the largely unconstitutional nature of our government, now is not a time for compromise. Now is the time to carve up national government like a Thanksgiving turkey. If something is considered non-essential, close it, privatize it, or send it back to the states. National parks – turn them over to the states. TSA agents – abolish TSA and turn airport security back to local authorities. Go through every department and every agency and fund only what’s most important to this nation and only then what is authorized by the constitution. And here’s a thought, stop spending American citizens’ money to spy on us. Abolish the NSA domestic surveillance program.

And as far as the debt ceiling goes, that door should be closed. $17 trillion is enough debt. It’s time to pay our own way. As long as the government can borrow more money, it will never control its spending.

The GOP is largely to blame for the mess we’re in, but right now the hardliners in the party are giving America a chance to make real changes. They have drawn a line in the sand. Now we just have to see if that line means something… or if just like BO’s red line(s) in Syria – meaningless.

Verified by MonsterInsights