By Staff
Shipping company disappoints
Editor:
You expect that when you have a package shipped through a company as big as Fed Ex your package will get where it’s going. This is an assumption my son made. He is a soldier stationed in Iraq right now. On March 31, he purchased an MP3 player from Circuit City. He had it shipped to us at our address in Hartselle.
On April 5, I received a call from my son in Iraq asking if we had received the package because FedEx had relayed to him that we had received it. So on April 10, I called FedEx and asked what happened to the package because it had not been delivered to us. They discovered the driver had delivered it to another house in our trailer park. This house wasn’t marked with a lot number and my house is plainly marked with a lot number.
Then I asked what their policy was when they didn’t know an address. Was it just to guess and leave the package on the doorstep of whatever house they chose? Would it have been too much trouble for the driver to call back to the office and request directions to the right address? Or maybe they could just try to read the address correctly and not try to use the force.
We received no calls from FedEx for four days, so I called and asked what they were going to do about the package they lost. They said I’d have to call Circuit City and get them to ship me another item. Then Circuit City could file a claim for the lost item. I thought this was a sorry way to deal with a problem that they caused. I have to do the legwork to get anything done about this. Since it’s their job to deliver packages you’d think they would have someone to track down lost packages or make restitution. FedEx’s way to deal with packages they miss delivery on it to pass the legwork off to the party that sent the package and the party that never received the package.
After these parties do the hard part, then FedEx will pay for the lost package. FedEx kept saying how sorry they were about the incident. I agree with them they are sorry.
I just thought that the unsuspecting public should know when they have something shipped via FedEx. FedEx is not held responsible for losing it. It is your job to see about finding it; not theirs. Makes you think.
Renee Bridges
Hartselle
City not responsible for funding schools
Editor:
There is much truth to the phrase, “The lights are on, but no one is home.” While I respect Andy Vest and Linda Webster’s opinions on the school tax issue, I totally disagree with several points in their letters. It’s dedicated teachers and responsible parents that are the building blocks for any student getting a proper education. No building has ever educated a student!
I have read the Constitution of Alabama and the Code of Alabama, and have never read anything that declares, “the mayor and city council are charged with maintaining our schools.” This falls under the powers of the superintendent, the school board, and the principals, faculty, custodial employees, etc.
The city is only responsible for appointing board members, and paying off the bond.
Regarding the “made-up self-imposed rule,” or the “unanimous approval stance,” do you really want to go there? If representatives Grantland and Orr move to seek legislation and forgo the unanimous vote from the council, then this action will open a can of worms that could include a wide variety of topics, including the wet/dry issue.
If the overcrowding is at the junior high school, then why didn’t the city or the school system purchase the land adjacent to the junior high facility when the opportunity was presented to them and expand the junior high school? This would have solved everything. What will be the costs to renovate the current high school building in order to expand the junior high? How will this get paid? More taxes! How can we be “short changing our students,” when we are allegedly among the top 10 school systems in the state?
If the vote is ever brought before the people, estimates are, that it will cost approximately $20,000, I have no doubt the outcome will be the same as the two previous votes on the same issue, which was an overwhelming no. Would either of you be willing to sponsor the vote financially? After all, we are operating under a deficit budget, and I don’t see the need to squander any more funds that we don’t have.
One of the problems that have been discussed over and over, is the members of this school committee that Jennifer Sittason chairs. To date, she has only named three members of the committee. Why are the members of the press or you and I not invited to these meetings? She also stated that she would work with “select groups and individuals” in order to educate the public. There is a remedy for the entire school situation. Let all these people that are in so much support of a new school, build it with their own money. There are many wealthy people in and around Hartselle, that collectively, could easily afford to build and pay for this, without ever missing the money. Maybe Sittason could raise the money like her efforts at the old F. E. Burleson building.
Lastly, if our taxes in Hartselle are among the lowest in the state, then why would we want to be known as among the highest in the state. Wouldn’t that scare off potential businesses and homeowners? I agree that there is a need for a new school, but wouldn’t it be better to finance it with sales tax revenue from a much wider base, rather than increased taxes? The propaganda mill, (select groups and individuals), will soon be in “full speed ahead” mode. They will be using everything in their arsenal, including scare tactics. Don’t be fooled by their rhetoric. There is a better way.
Mike Dowdy
Hartselle