To the Editor
A huge thanks to Cottonwood City Council for deciding not to open the city’s new splash pad until the town’s water shortage issue has been fully resolved. As reported in the June 19^th Idaho County Free Press, for the splash pad to use as much water in an hour as the average household in Cottonwood consumes in a month puts all residents at unnecessary risk. Residents were asked last year to conserve water and city records indicate that is indeed what we did. Thanks now for not putting us at increased risk this summer.
After the second well becomes finally operational, I am in favor, as some reported council discussion indicated, of reducing the hours of splash pad operation to 11a.m.-7p.m. instead of the current schedule of 9am-9pm daily. I do think it appropriate to only have the pad running water four days a week instead of daily. Exceptions for summer holidays and the Fair could be made. If such a reduced schedule were adopted, splash pad water usage would be the equivalent monthly amount to the amount of water one hundred twenty-eight Cottonwood households consume on average in a month. If the current operational proposal of twelve hours daily is maintained, the splash pad water consumption would be the equivalent usage of three hundred thirty-six households per month. Will we have that much extra water when the other well comes back online? And looking ahead, will we have that much spare water in the near future? Just wondering and weighing risks vs benefits, necessities vs. niceties.
Frances Conklin
Cottonwood

To the Editor
American Dream: ‘Maker’ or ‘Taker’?
From 1892 to 1943 immigrants arrived in America at Ellis Island outside New York.  Those with sickness were turned back.  Immigrants were required to have a skill and resource(s) in order to provide for themselves.    The person made his or her way by their merit.  A person, who could provide for themselves, i.e., being a ‘maker’, was the requirement for assimilating.  No money from the public treasury was given to them.   In contrast, today many immigrants can and do apply for money and benefits from the public treasury.  It seems being a ‘taker’, a non-American, has replaced being a ‘maker’, i.e., becoming an American.  Although many immigrants become makers, as my ancestors did, today’s policy seems to select for takers.  Should immigration or public policy encourage takers or makers?  Is not becoming a self-sufficient maker the ultimate test to be called an American?  Does immigration, public policy, and the current invasion of illegal aliens increase or decrease the number of takers or makers?  Since pointing a finger at others means 3 more fingers are pointed back to me, I must ask myself, “Am I a maker or a taker?  Are my children makers or takers?”  If the answer is takers, I have failed myself, failed my neighbors,  failed my 3 great-great grandfathers that settled in the Idaho territory hoping by their merit to own their own home/’castle’, and failed  grandfathers who fought in the Revolutionary War to protect their small home/’castle’ and  their lives they had built by their merit.
Scott Perrin
Cottonwood, Idaho