Dear Editor,
SHUFFLING OFF A BUFFALO
That's just what the kids and staff of the Olivebridge United Methodist Church Sunday School are doing.
Actually it will be two water buffalo as this group of determined young people saves their small change to "fill an ark" . This group of children and teachers have reached and exceeded the half- way mark to raising $5000.00 which is what it costs to fill a "Gift Ark"for the Heifer Project which supplies livestock to families worldwide. A "full ark" consists of 2 cows, 2 oxen, 2 sheep, 2 water buffalo, 2 goats2 camels 2 llamas, 2 beehives, 2 trios of ducks, 2 trios of rabbits, 2 trios of guinea pigs, 2 flocks of geese, 2 pigs and 2 flocks of chicks.
Corrine Shultis and Nate Cayea collected over $80.00 recently just by tossing their loose change into their jars. Brittany Shultis says that she just empties her pockets every night of loose change, and it adds up really fast. These kids from tiny Hannah to the oldest, Brittany and Danny are committing the next couple of years to this project. Maybe they won't be able to buy the latest CD or the newest fashion item, it's more important to them that someone doesn't have to go hungry.
There will be two water buffalo shuffling off, perhaps a pair of portly pigs pushing off for Peru, a llama leaving for Lima. Each family who receives livestock from the Gift Ark will pass on one or more of the animal's offspring to other families who are in need in their community.
A bevy of bunnies could be bound for Bolivia, a gaggle of geese toGhana. Sheep can be shorn to provide wool for warmth and extra income. A very popular animal with the kids was the donkey. They were really excited when they had raised enough money to purchase one. They are keeping a chart of the animals that they are able to purchase, and they choose the species they work towards. Donkeys supply draft power for farmers in places like Tanzania, camels help families in Kenya to earn income by transporting agrigultural
materials.
One might think that there are a whole lot of kids, because this is a huge project. At last count there were about 9 kids and about 4 teachers and adults working towards filling the ark. Just like the ideal of the Heifer Project: Fighting Hunger Two by Two, this tiny group is going to have a huge impact on our global community. The
people of the Olivebridge church are also helping, because every third Sunday, the children take up an extra collection of loose change.
On April 30, the kids worked at a Mexican Dinner for Cinqo de Mayo,at the church, and raised over $1000.00 towards their project. They will be able to purchase several more animals with this amount. Because they are collecting loose change, their motto has become "Help CHANGE the World."
So when you hear that there are goats going to Guatemala or Heifers hotfooting it to Haiti, they may be going because this little group has worked very hard, and cares about their world.
Ruth Anne Muller
Olive Free Library

Dear Editor,
After the recent Onetora School Board election I was pleased to see new trustee Rita Vanacore declare that she would render "...decisions that will be fair and equitable for the entire district." This election commitment by Vanacore quickly went down in flames at the last Ulster County Legislature meeting. She lobbied against fair and equitable taxes in the school district and made unsolicited and insulting comments directed toward Woodstock residents who were speaking against a casino.
How very unprofessional and disappointing!
Ronnye Jai
Woodstock, NY

Dear Editor,
Thank you to all my supporters in the Onteora School District for electing me to the Onteora Board of Education. Thank you for your hard work, help, trust, faith, loyalty and confidence. I have listened to you and I understand what you would like me to bring to the table of the new Board of Education so we may collectively look at your concerns.
To the community members that did not vote for me, I know I must work even harder to gain your trust, faith, loyalty and confidence. It is my hope over the next three years our district can be ONE COMMUNITY-ONE DISTRICT by working with our town supervisors and local legislators to come up with a fair, equal and alternative way to fund our school taxes for the Onteora District which takes the burden off the property owner. I believe as a district and community if we work together we can accomplish this.
It is my hope over the next three years to keep our vision, structure, accountability and advocacy focused on the children of our district. To do this the Onteora School District and new Board of Education needs your help and support so we may move forward.
Cindy O’Connor
Olivebridge, NY

Dear Editor,
In last week's Woodstock Times, Mrs. O'Connor writes "...by working with our town supervisors and local legislators to come up with a fair, equal and alternative way to fund our school taxes for the Onteora district which takes the burden off the property owner." I wonder if Mrs. O'Connor has a proposal for this alternative funding in order to go independent from the State. Our local supervisor, legislature and assemblyman already support alternatives to school funding. Mr. Cahill has worked to bring money to this district and supports a bill in the legislature that gets no movement from the State. This bill would take the burden off property tax and offer alternative ways through income tax, sales tax and property tax combined. Mrs. O'Connor may not understand but our school funding cannot change locally, it must be Statewide. The Onteora school board also passed a resolution and sent a statement to the State School board about the unfair burden on local taxpayers.
In "Campaign for Fiscal Equity Vs. State Of New York," NYC schools were ruled unconstitutional due to funding. The NYS council of school Superintendents has warned this will cause disparity if Aid is taken away from the State to fund NYC schools and propose change in school tax Statewide. Governor Pataki's solution to this is casinos, just like the lottery was at one time and never happened.
The State creates the structure to how our schools are funded. The school board must work intensely with the State board of Ed, other school boards, Governor Pataki and Mr. Mills. Since this new school board was elected because of taxes, I expect them, including Mrs. O'Connor, to take the lead.
Lisa Childers
Woodstock, NY

Dear Editor,
I was pleased to see the recent letter to the editor by newly elected Onteora Board of Education member, Rita Vanacore, who acknowledged her obligation to make “...decisions that will be fair and equitable for the entire district.”
A brief look at the Memorial Day edition of the Kingston Freeman shows why tax equity is still needed throughout the sprawling Onteora School District. The real estate transactions for May 19-20 tell the tale: A property in Olive was bought for $300,000 with a school tax of $1,377. In the same listing a property in Woodstock was bought for $313,000 with a school tax of $2,070. The Woodstock property cost about 5% more than the Olive property yet gets saddled with 33% more in school taxes. Incredibly, the Freeman lists another Olive property that was bought for $950,000 with a school tax of only $1,796. The sale price was 300% higher than the Woodstock property, yet the school taxes on it are actually 13% lower than the Woodstock property. You do the math!
A close look at the results from the recent school board election shows that 8,476 votes were cast for candidates who supported school-tax equity, while only 5,808 votes were cast for the three candidates who supported the Olive-First position. Since the majority votes for tax equity were split among seven candidates, the three Olive candidates got the winning count.
When it’s time to vote on the issue of taxes and equity throughout the district, all board members, including Rita Vanacore, Mary Jane Bernholz, and Cindy O’Connor, have an obligation to act in the best interests of senior citizens, parents, students and taxpayers without children not only in Olive, but also in Shandaken, West Hurley, Glenford, and Woodstock. I expect they will live up to the responsibilities of school board members and follow Rita Vanacore’s promise to make “...decisions that will be fair and equitable for the
entire district.”
Meg Carey
Glenford, NY

Dear Editor,
In the May 12, 2005 issue, Ms. Martha Havisham mentions her neighbor
with an "older home" who "only paid $.56 to start" and thus the "thirty cent and fifty one cent" increase was not a hardship, compared to the "young neighbor" with a "new house...assessed at its market value" for which the Large Parcel Billcausing a monthly payment to increase by $700.00.
If this is true, then blame the assessor of Olive. I surely hope it is not true.
The equalization rate for the town of Olive, set by the state, is on the order of 1%. It is easy to see that it is never fair to have a new house in Olive with an assessed valuation of "full value" when there are other houses in Olive with assessed valuation of 1% of full value. For the new house, its value (similar to the market value, but not truly the same thing) ought to be determined and then the assessed value ought to be determined by applying the equalization rate.
Then the "older home" neighbor would not be paying $.56 but instead would be paying tax based on the value of his home (where the assessed value is 1% of the actual value) and the "new home" neighbor would also be paying tax based on the value of his home.
Isn't this simple? Isn't this the way it should be? And if everyone is assessed at 1% of the actual value then changing to 100%-value assessment is simply a matter of multiplying by 100, changing the equalization percentage to 100%, and that operation would not result in *any* change in the taxes (as taxes are based on the calculation of combining the assessed value with the equalization percentage).
It is unnecessary to have "each town have a 100% current assessment" as long as all the properties in a town are assessed at the same percentage of their value. It is the state-determined equalization rate that provides equity across towns. It is the town's responsibility to maintain equity within its own borders.
I expect that when the town of Shandaken revalues, my home's assessed valuation will increase significantly, as will the assessed valuation of all the other homes in Shandaken. But the equalization rate will compensate for that, leaving no net increase of taxes.
The Large Parcel Bill has a lot to do with the tax increases, but if there is blame to be layed, let's lay it in all of the right places.
Peter Relson
Shandaken, NY

Dear Editor,
Time for Olive Residence to Know the Truth About the Tower!
For the last six years, Masterpage Communications, Inc., of West Hurley, has been working diligently in order to construct it’s communications tower in the Town of Olive in West Shokan. This communications tower’s purpose is to provide the much needed Wireless Cellular and PCS telephone service as well as commercial Two-Way Radio service for EMS and Emergency 911 First Responder teams to the communities surrounding the Ashokan Reservoir and provide such service to the Route 28A and State Route 28 corridors in the Town of Olive where wireless coverage is difficult at best.
This site is located in a RC-10A zoning district where commercial radio, television and other electronic transmission structures are permitted pursuant to section 321.1(m) of the Town of Olive zoning law. Pursuant to section 6 of the Town’s tower law, Local Law No.3 of 2000, a special use permit is required to construct and operate a tower. Except for a building permit and certificate of compliance, no additional approvals are required by the Town Zoning Law or Code prior to construction of the facility. It should be known that the Town’s Tower Law designates the Town Board as lead agency and final decision making body thus legislating jurisdiction over proposed telecommunication facilities in the town and the Law dictates that the Town Board can go to the Planning Board for a non-binding recommendation only.
Masterpage Communications has been forced to endure unnecessary delays and expenses in the approval process from the very beginning. In June of 2000, Masterpage applied to the Town Board for a special use permit to construct, maintain and operate it’s facility. The Town then obtained the services of a consultant to draft it’s local tower law which provides standards for the design, placement and operation of wireless communication facilities and to aid the town in it’s regulation process.
Masterpage had drafted its entire application section by section around the new Town Tower Law. In August of 2000, the town’s consultant determined that Masterpage’s application was complete. In or about January 2001, the Town required a visual analysis of the facility. On March 31st 2001, the Town’s consultant notified the Town Board that Masterpage had proven the need for the facility and justified the height of its antennas and structure. On or about August 2nd 2001, one year after the application was deemed complete, the Town Board finally held a public hearing on the application. At this public hearing, the Town’s consultant again advised the Town Board that the height and location of the facility was justified and affirmed that Masterpage’s application had satisfied the requirements of the Tower Law and the consultant recommended approval of Masterpage’s application. Also, at this public hearing, an issue was raised regarding the use of the right-of-way, which would be superseded by the Special Use Permit. The right-of-way has been thoroughly searched and insured.
The timeline continued as follows. As of August 2nd 2001, the Town Board had not taken any steps to signify that it had commenced it’s SEQRA review of the application. On or about August 16, 2001, Masterpage submitted written responses to the public comments made at the public hearing held on August 2, 2001. On or about August 23, 2001, the Town Board held a special meeting. At the August 23, 2001 special Town Board meeting, the Town Board adjourned to an executive session to discuss, upon information and belief, the Application, the Facility, and the August 2, 2001 public hearing. Prior to the August 23, 2001 Town Board meeting, the Town Board failed to provide any notice to Masterpage that the Application was on the agenda or would be discussed. On or about October 3, 2001, the sixty-two (62) day period for the Town Board to act on the Special Use Permit Application expired pursuant to N.Y. Town Law §274-a. On or about October 5, 2001, over two (2) months after the public hearing and approximately one year after the Application was determined to be complete by the Town’s consultant and the Town Board, the Town Attorney sent Masterpage a letter regarding the Application. On or about October 9, 2001, Masterpage submitted a written response to the various “concerns” expressed by the Town in the October 5, 2001 letter. On November 27, 2001, the Town Board requested that the Planning Board of the Town of Olive issue a recommendation regarding access to the Site. The Planning Board was expressly advised by the Town Board that the Planning Board was not empowered to consider the entire Application. On November 27, 2001, the Town Board directed the Planning Board to schedule a public hearing to be held within two (2) months of the referral.
On December 11, 2001, the Planning Board held a meeting with Masterpage and it’s legal representation and concluded that the access involved for the Facility was no different in nature or degree than that utilized for the recreational cabin at the Site. The Planning Board advised that no further improvements to the driveway were necessary, and that the use was permitted as a matter of right. The Planning Board advised Masterpage that as long as the existing access road is maintained, it is out of the hands of the Planning Board and that the Planning board would not hold a public hearing regarding the Application or the access issue referred to it by the Town Board. After December 11, 2001, Masterpage and the Planning Board were advised by the Town Attorney that a public hearing must be held by the Planning Board despite the Planning Board’s earlier conclusions. On or about January 15, 2002, the Planning Board held a public hearing regarding the Facility. While the Planning Board was considering the access issue, the Town Board refused to take any other action regarding the Application.
On or about March 26, 2002, Masterpage sent the Town Board a letter objecting to the Town Board’s unreasonable delay in considering its Application, and demanded that its Application be acted upon at the next regularly scheduled Town Board meeting (April 2, 2002). As of August 2002, the Town Board has not commenced the SEQRA review process and has not granted or denied a special use permit to Masterpage for the Facility.
Given the following facts which are all well documented and part of the record, that the Town Board violated the Federal Telecommunications Act among other things such as, (A) Failing to schedule a public hearing within sixty-two days of receiving the complete application; (B) Failing to make a decision to grant or to deny Masterpage’s application for a Special Use permit within the sixty-two (62) day deadline imposed by the New York Town Law after closing the public hearing on August 2nd 2001; (C) Referring issues to the Planning Board for consideration despite the fact that the Town’s Tower Law expressly provides that the only approval needed for the Facility is a Special Use permit issued by the Town Board; (D) Directing the Planning Board to hold a public hearing after the Planning Board determined, in December 2001, that no Planning Board action was required regarding the Application; (E) Refusing to act on the Application until after the Planning Board had completed it’s review of the issues the Town Board referred to the Planning Board; (F) Considering access/right-of-way issues between private landowners that are beyond the scope of the Town Board’s jurisdiction under their Tower Law and the Federal Telecommunications Act; (G) Requiring Masterpage to make large deposits totaling $28,600.00 dollars to reimburse the Town for excessive consulting fees incurred by the Town’s designated consultants, and an additional $156,890.00 dollars in pursuing it’s right under Town Law to construct this facility, Masterpage Communications deem it necessary to present the factual truth to the citizens of the Town of Olive and to express why the Town Board left Masterpage with no other choice but to bring this matter forth to the Federal Court System for violation of Federal, State and the Town’s own Local laws.
Kevin L. Kellerhouse
Masterpage Communications
West Hurley, NY

Dear Editor,
No Saugerties Casino, Inc., would like to extend its most heartfelt thanksgiving to the community for its strong, unwavering, and clear rejection of the idea of a gambling casino in Saugerties. The turnout at the May 31st community meeting was overwhelming. Ten committees have been formed and are meeting. Almost $8,000 has been collected to cover expenses and advance the cause.
This past week saw a number of decisive votes occur that should send a strong signal to those who want to gamble with our future. On Monday, the Village of Saugerties Board started the ball rolling with a unanimous approval of a resolution against a gambling casino in Saugerties. On Wednesday, the Town Board added to the momentum with another unanimous resolution against the casino. Then on Thursday night the Ulster County Legislature added its unanimous voice of opposition to a casino in Saugerties (as well as other towns whose boards vote against casinos). Our hats are off to all our elected officials who took such a strong, clear and unified stand against this harmful proposal. It is a matter for real celebration that our community stands together on such a critical issue and that our officials respect and reflect that unanimity.
We'd also like to thank the Saugerties Times for its stellar coverage of the issue, which has kept us well informed about critical developments.
But we must not relax and slumber now thinking the matter has gone away. Fundamental power on this matter is in the hands of the governor, the legislature, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the U.S. Congress. While last week's votes were decisive, they were not the final votes. We as a community must stand ready to defend ourselves and our neighbors in the Hudson River Valley who do not want powerful gambling interests to destroy our way of life and the lives of our citizens. Even if the current bid by the Seneca-Cayuga tribe fails, the Winston Farm site remains an attractive location for other gambling proposals. We need to remain vigilant, especially since many of these high-level negotiations are carried on behind closed doors.
Therefore, the No Saugerties Casino Committee will remain active, will continue its lobbying, coalition-building and other work through its various committees, and will continue to develop a legal defense against the placement of a casino on the Winston Farm in Saugerties. (Donations to offset the costs of being vigilant may be sent to: No Saugerties Casino Inc., PO Box 209, Saugerties, NY 12477.)
One of the heartening aspects of our coming together as a community is the fact that all the Saugerties parties - Republican, Democrat, Conservative - have come out against the casino. As an organization comprised of a broad range of Saugertesians, our organization is highly committed to a nonpartisan approach to this issue, because United We Stand! Anyone is welcome to join any of our working committees (sign up at www.nosaugertiescasino.org) and we urge everyone to work in whatever forum, organization, or party you choose to keep this issue on the front burner. Our future as a community depends on it.
Rev. Richard Rockwood
Communications Committee
No Saugerties Casino, Inc.

Dear Editor,
John Dewey’s “I believes” on education in the POV column a few issues back reminded me of an incident that happened over fifty years ago. I was working as an attendant in a private psychiatric hospital and I was given the assignment of taking a new patient for a walk on the grounds. He had been a senior at Brown University, in English Literature when he had a mental breakdown. I had known him slightly from an eatery close to the campus and my home. A nice person, friendly, unassuming and somewhat mythic with an IQ of 180 or was it 220? It was something of a shock to see him appear on my ward in a psychotic state, buzz mumbling to himself, with a bemused smile continually on his face. We were walking along a path that followed the edge of a wide river and, suddenly he bolted and was splashing through the shallow water as if he was going right across and yelling as loud as he could, “fuck John Dewey!” I led him out of the water and back to the ward and dry clothes.
I know nothing about John Dewey and though William was loony that day I felt his problem with Dewey was some deep intellectual and philosophical problem and I read POV to see if I could discover what it was. Certain phrases stuck out to me and seemed to be a pattern such as: “...the formation of a certain character as the only genuine basis of right living;” “...the right organization of individuals:” “...the formation of the proper social life;” “I believe that every teacher...is a social servant set apart for the maintenance of proper social order and the securing of the right social growth;” and “I believe that the art of thus giving shape to human powers and adapting them to social service, is the supreme art; one calling into service the best of artists.”
Dewey does mention individualistic ideals a couple of times but it is very general and what I sense is social progress, the right social growth, etc. has priority. I think, when he writes about calling into service the best artists, and adapting them to social service, it sounds totalitarian. I don’t really know, of course, what led my friend William to curse Dewey but I may be close to the answer in what I am referring to here.
It is a difficult and complex question isn’t it? Anthony Appiah in his recent book, “The Ethics of Identity”, poses the question, “What should I make of my life?” The reviewer continues, “...because the ethical task of making a life is one that cannot be conducted in isolation from the lives of everyone else” Both Dewey and John Stuart Mill are referred to with the thought, “...we acquire both our individuality and our sense of who we are by learning how to fi11 the social roles available to us.” But who is to say what the social roles are? Are there only a fixed number and type?
Robert Jacobson
Mount Tremper, NY

Dear Editor,
On April 2, 2005 Mother Nature dealt out its wrath on the Town of Shandaken by bombarding the town and its residents with one the worst floods in many years. As it is well known, the rushing waters of the April 2nd flood caused disastrous amounts of damage to the Esopus Creek, town’s roads and bridges, resident’s homes, and businesses. Along
with the Town of Shandaken doing a great job to repair the roads and bridges I believe that a vote of thanks needs to be extended to the Ulster County Highway & Bridges Department for their cooperation, support, and aide to us in our time of need. Having been in contact with both Dave Sheely, Ulster County Commissioner of Bridges, and Joe Nalepa, Section Supervisor, I know first hand of the hard work and commitment brought forth by these men and their crews. On June 7 & 8, 2005 the County Crew successfully removed all of the dangerous debris from both the Woodland Valley and Bridge Street Bridges.
As well as the post-flood removal being part of bridge maintenance, the County has helped to eliminate the danger presented by such debris to the recreational users of the Esopus Creek. As the Esopus Creek is one of the main attractions for the hamlet, the debris removal aided in not only keeping the public afloat but Phoenicia’s economy as well. The removal of the debris from Bridge Street will also allow for the repair work to take place in a more timely manner thus inevitably leading to the re-opening of the bridge.
The town, business community, along with myself, owes a great deal of thanks to the Ulster County Highway & Bridges Department, Commissioner Dave Sheely, Section Supervisor Joe Nalepa, and their dedicated crews.
Harry G. Jameson III
Phoenicia, NY

Dear Editor,
Did you ever get the feeling that when you cast your vote for a candidate you believe in, send some dollars to the Sierra Club, the Humane Society, Planned Parenthood, whatever, that it's not going to make a bit of difference, just a tiny ineffectual drop, a dribble, nothing you can actually notice. There are very few causes in which you can actually behold your contribution working before your eyes (or in this case your ears) and I count them on one finger.
The Republican (Bush) Administration has threatened to cut funding for public broadcasting - this means NPR, PBS and, yes, our local wonderful brave radio station WAMC. Recently WAMC fought back with a fund drive, expressly to raise money so they can continue to be independent and spit in the face of the administration's threat. I happened to be recovering from very minor surgery, bed resting, I listened to the fund drive day and night. I contributed twice, a bit more than I could afford. I listened and I only heard three, yes three! Woodstockers phone in with contributions, two of whom I don't know, and one, a neighbor (thank you, Stuart O). Maybe there were more and I just didn't hear. There were contributions flowing in from everywhere, Connecticut, Maine, Florida, even all over NY State, but Woodstock? the so-called town of hippie liberality? The Marchers, the Women in Black? Where were you? I was so disgusted. Every week these pages are filled with irate letters expressing liberalism and outrage against the administration, but when there was actually something you could do about it, something that would count, where were you? The fund drive worked! WAMC raised the money and can continue without any funding. But I know so many people who express abhorrence for what this administration is doing: S.S., H. and ML., J.S. and husband, H.B., J and MP, E.B., where were you when your dollars, no matter how little, counted? I'm not a news freak but I knew about what the administration was planning to do. If I am wrong and dozens (why not hundreds?) of ua put up their fists and their money, then I apologize. I'd love to know if you contributed. This was one cause where you could actually affect the result.
Alice Stern
Woodstock

Dear Editor,
I thought this might be a logical opportunity to inform all of you on what's been happening out there. Right now we're in the middle of a heavy investation of defoliators in several locations. The towns of Shandaken, Hardenburg, Olive, Denning and Neversink show damage with Shandaken hit extremely hard. I flew over four of the counties on Wednesday and got the aerial view of the damage. What you see is damage from four different defoliators.
Spring cankerworms are the small green "loopers" that you see hanging from threads. These are found in much of the infected area and generally prefer maple.
Eastern tent caterpillar has a white stripe down the center of their back and actually make a tent on the host tree where they retreat during daylight hours to avoid heat and predators. These really pose no significant threat to the forest in general but do defoliate their preferred species which are cherries and apple.
Forest tent caterpillars have a keyhole pattern down the center of their backs and do not form a tent. These are prolific feeders on maple, birch, oak, aspen and many other hardwood species. Many times forest tent caterpillars and their damage are confused with that caused by gypsy moth caterpillars.
Gypsy moth caterpillars have five pairs of blue dots followed by six pairs of red dots down the center of their backs. They prefer oak species but also feed on apple, birch, boxelder, hawthorne, linden poplar, sweet gum and willow. When the food sources run out they will eat most anything.
All four species are found in the Catskills with forest tent and gypsy moth doing the most damage. These pests are cyclic. This is the second year of heavy infestation in Shandaken. I suspect we will see additional years of infestation before the down turn.
Most trees, if healthy, will re-foliate in about a month, usually with smaller leaves. Mortality is expected to be low this year. Healthy trees can usually withstand several years of defoliation.
I hope this helps explain what you're seeing out there, although it doesn't make the hiking any more pleasant.
We expect to complete a more formal explaination of the defoliation issue in a press release in the near future.
Jeff Rider
Senior Forester-Forest Preserve
NYS DEC Region 3
New Paltz, NY

Dear Editor,
There Ain't No Bugs On Me
(to be sung to the tune of
“The Lord’s Been Good To Me...”
Chorus
Oh there ain't no bugs on me
There ain't no bugs, on me
There may be bugs on some of you mugs
But there ain't no bugs on me.
Mosquito he flies high,
Mosquito he flies low
Mosquito better no land on me,
Or he won't fly no mo'.
Chorus
A peanut sittin' on a railroad track
His heart was all a flutter.
Along came a big freight train
Toot! Toot! Peanut butter!
Chorus
Oh there ain't no flies on me
There ain't no flies on me
There may be flies on some of you guys
But there ain't no flies on me.
Chorus
Oh there ain't no lobsters on me
There, ain't no lobsters on me
There may be lobsters On some of you mobsters
But there ain't no lobsters on me.
Chorus
Oh it ain't gonna rain no more no more
It ain't gonna rain no more
How in the heck can I wash my neck
When it ain't gonna rain no more?
Chorus
Well, the Juney bug comes in the month of June
Lightning bug comes in May
Bed bug comes just any old time
But, they're not going to stay.
Chorus
Well little bugs have littler bugs.
Up on their backs to bite'em
And the littler bugs have still littler bugs
And so ad infinitum.
Chorus
Mike O’Neill
Woodland Valley, NY