Merging of the Twin Cities is a hot subject again. I have heard that a merger would save a lot of money, but not much has been revealed exactly where the savings would come from. I am not convinced that there would be enough savings to justify the disruption of city operation deriving from the merger. And there are costs not mentioned: changing street names, as there are similar names in both cities; changing logos on city vehicles for both cities; changing names on letterhead, checks, all paperwork associated with city business — just a few costs of renaming the Twin Cities — not to mention that private businesses would need to do the same.

I have read that the question will be brought to the people on the November ballot. I feel that the cart was put in front of the horse — it should have been brought to the people before spending thousands of dollars on a consulting firm, plus many hours spent by the committee to make the merger happen.

I feel strongly that the people will vote no on the merger, so the expense and hours spent could have been placed on more lucrative endeavors.

Jennie Peters, Lewiston


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.

filed under: