Changes would cost money

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