Reasons to question PUD proposal

While we in Skagit are considering a possible PUD takeover of electric service from Puget Sound Energy, I see that the leader of an effort to create a PUD on Whidbey Island is a paid “insider” for the Washington PUD Association. That’s a pretty expensive membership drive the association has going.

It made me wonder whether anyone in the Skagit County effort is also connected to the state PUD Association. One of our PUD commissioners, Robbie Robertson, is listed as secretary-treasurer on the association’s Web site. That certainly isn’t a crime, but it makes me wonder even more whether we’re getting straight information from our PUD or whether we’re being told only “what we need to know.”

For instance, no one at Skagit PUD has satisfactorily explained the discrepancies between its study and the PSE consultant’s study about the actual cost of acquiring all of PSE’s assets. For example, the consultant for Skagit PUD says we could acquire Baker River Dam for $280 million, but several years ago it was valued at $500 million and is undoubtedly worth even more today. 

Moreover, the “study” by the association claims our rates would be 20 percent less with a new PUD. But this is all based on fiction — a hypothetical PUD with some 300,000 customers getting the best deal on the cheapest electricity from the Bonneville Power Administration. What a joke. And it ignores the fact that it could take five to 10 years for us to get any BPA power.

Furthermore, we have not heard any solid numbers from Skagit PUD about the legal costs if the ballot issue is approved. 

This is our money the PUD is risking in this effort. When was the last time government provided anything more efficiently at less cost?

Richard Keyes
Mount Vernon


No excuses for fluoridation

Here’s a typical toothpaste warning: Keep out of the reach of children younger than 6 years of age. If more than the amount used for brushing is swallowed, get medical help or contact a Poison Control Center right away (contains 0.24 percent sodium fluoride). If fluoride is as safe, as proponents claim, why the poison warning? If we brush three times daily and then are forced to drink, bathe and cook with it, what are the consequences over five or 10 years?

We should demand that there be another vote on this subject. And this time, the whole county should be allowed to vote since some of us may want to or be forced to move downriver and be subjected to this poison. We should demand the vote be hand-counted by both opponents and proponents and not trust our voting system.

If you want to stop tooth decay, then brush your teeth regularly and stop eating so many foods loaded with sugar. I couldn’t care less about how safe they claim this poison is; I do not want it in my drinking or bathing water. Period! Those who do want it, insisting it’s safe, should go get some fluoride pills and take all they want. Forcing the masses to take poison just because a small percent of the population is irresponsible and refuses to brush their teeth on a regular basis or eat properly is insane!

I must question the motives of those who are wishing to hurry up and push this poison down our throats. If they are so concerned about our teeth, then they should offer some free informational literature, toothbrushes and free dental checkups to those in need! Don’t listen to the proponents who are teaming up to convince you this poison is safe!

Darrell Smith
Concrete