I am writing in response to your editorial supporting Peggy Wells after she was censured for her actions on council. I do understand that editorials are simply the editor’s opinion and as such do not need to follow the normal standards of journalism. Still, I was surprised by your emotion when you chose to describe these council members as “wimpy”, “thin skinned” and “gunning for Wells for years”.
In spite of this slant, your editorial did make it clear that all five of the other council members were part of this action. Getting five people to agree on anything is fairly tough. Your editorial confirmed that our council acted in unison. Ms. Wells made it easy for them to agree that she “Does not play well with others”.
Mr. Editor, I do understand your loyalty to Ms. Wells. Entering “Peggy Wells’ into the Beacon’s Archive search tool shows that Ms. Wells is responsible for 220 articles, mentions, letters and submissions to your paper.
No wonder you reacted so emotionally – if she actually has to listen and not speak for three whole meetings, what will The Beacon have left to report?
Richard Hale Buckeye Lake