I'm writing to comment on two different articles from last Sunday's paper (Feb. 10).
The first is for columnist Dan Geddings.
I am a female, and I neither hunt nor fish, but I am an avid lover of nature. I read one of your columns about a year ago and haven't stopped. Your descriptive writing style captured me from the start. I spent untold childhood weekends on railroad trestles, exploring Manchester Forest, as well as walking many a creek bed and plowed fields with my Dad looking for arrowheads and other Native American artifacts.
Dad, an Iowa farm boy, always taught us to respect and appreciate wildlife and woodlands, so I can relate to your writings. If you ever doubt your writing abilities, think of me because I am one of your more unusual but dedicated readers.
My second comment is on the commentary by Joe McElveen and James T. McCain Jr. Even though I am a product of Sumter public schools (Shaw Elementary, Shaw Jr. High and Hillcrest High), I have never had children so therefore no one to attend public or private schools in the area. However, I am a property owner and a taxpayer.
The one thing that stood out in that article was the "already" purchased land for an Applied Educational Technology Campus.
Can someone please explain to me why we are purchasing land when we have two presently shuttered properties and structures? Why couldn't one of these locations be renovated or new structures built on one of these properties in the future.
If neither location is adequate or too remote, why not sell those properties to have purchased an appropriate location rather than buying additional land? I'm not surprised finances are in a mess if this is how things are managed.
More Articles to Read