(Letters from February 1, 2007)

Dear Editor,
This letter is addressed to the property owners of the Hamlet of Phoenicia. On Saturday, February 3, 2007, we will be voting yes or no on Proposition #1, a Proposal to Establish a Sewer District, for the Hamlet of Phoenicia. The law requires that any such sewer district benefit everyone in the district. In this case, however, the primary beneficiaries of the Sewer District and the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) they want to build are the City of New York and Delaware Engineering Company.
From the beginning, the request of the taxpayers of Phoenicia to pursue other options for sewer treatment was ignored. These other options include a Septic Maintenance District Program and a Community Septic Program as written right into the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that governs waste water management in the New York City watershed. If we were in such dire need of a multi-million dollar sewer system, why did the DEP give these two options to begin with? Discussion of these and other much less expensive options were shut down early in the process by our Elected Officials who were supposed to be negotiating on behalf of us, the taxpayers of the Hamlet of Phoenicia. If the taxpayers vote down the Sewer District, the Catskill Watershed Corporation has funded, and will continue, to fund acceptable alternatives like updated septic systems, septic maintenance programs, and community septics for anyone who lives in the watershed. People who live and work in the watershed are grandfathered in and cannot therefore by law be forced out of their homes and businesses. Most of the small towns in the watershed and almost all of the hamlets in Shandaken have no WWTP, and they do fine.
Money from the DEP Grant to build the WWTP should have been used, as the taxpayers requested, to hire a contract manager, or at least an independent attorney and engineer, chosen by the people of the Hamlet, to give a second-opinion on the entire process. This could have avoided the jumbled confusion we now have and could still prevent a catastrophe for Phoenicia like the Ulster County jail project. An independent review of the contracts could prevent over-runs that end up costing everyone. Without independent review the taxpayers are now being asked to trust the attorney and engineers chosen by the Town Board. This is a problem because the attorney and the Delaware Engineering Company just want to get this done no matter what. Read the proposition: “The sewer district will own and be responsible for the sewer system.”
We the taxpayers – the ones who will be paying for it – are thus faced with a proposal that is an open-ended contract, with no guarantees of anything! Nothing is in writing, yet the consequences will affect our lives for generations. At the last public information meeting, Bob Cross and Kevin Young, the attorney for the project, told Mike Ricciardella that he can opt out of the system, and anyone can opt out, but after all’s said and done, who would that leave to pay for the ongoing costs of the system? To try to frighten people into accepting the District, the Town Board has threatened that the Health Department will close people down who refuse to join, yet the Hamlet does not have to form a District in the first place!
If this proposal is voted in, the Town Board will run the Sewer District. The Town Board can expand the District at will, create jobs for themselves, change the boundaries, or whatever they choose. This will mean additional monetary burden for us. This same spend-spend Town Board, who raised our taxes 35% over the past two years and raised our water taxes 137% in 2006, now want to run a $17 Million Sewer system, where they can levy taxes at will (as stated in the Sewer Use Law).
Why exactly would anyone want to build a $17 Million Sewer System for a Hamlet with only 200-plus hook-ups? Phoenicia does not have the tax base to support this. Figures that the engineers are using to calculate costs are not the same figures that we have, and they repeatedly refuse to give us access to the list that the engineers are using so that we can correct it. So while they say that New York City will pay 85% of the costs of Operations and Management (O&M), we come up with a figure closer to 60%. That means we pay almost half the costs. If they will not make public the figures that they are using, we cannot trust those figures. We the taxpayers are being told to just trust them and “take their word for it,” with no guarantees in writing. We are being treated like fools by people who could care less about us, the people they are supposed to be serving. This is America in 2007. You have to have a written, concise, easily understood contract for a project of this magnitude. Don’t be fooled. Vote NO on Proposition #1 on Saturday, February 3rd.
Mike Ricciardella
Jeanne Schofield
Concerned Taxpayers
of the Phoenicia Water District

Dear Editor,
We will be voting in favor of the sewage treatment plant this Saturday. We will be voting yes to protect the environment, to benefit property owners, and for the good of the town.
A year and a half ago we were contacted by the Catskill Watershed Corp. to have our septic system tested and our septic tank pumped out. We agreed only to learn that we have no septic tank. Our wastewater is going into a hole in the ground, which is about ten feet from a mountain runoff that goes directly into the Stony Clove Creek. If this is the case on our property, it surely is the case on other properties along Rt. 214. The sewage treatment plant would rectify this situation and protect the waters of the Stony Clove and the Esopus.
If the sewage treatment plant does not go through we will have to build a new system costing thirty to forty thousand dollars. While it is likely that most, if not all, of the cost will be covered by the CWC, it will involve tearing up our property, running lines through our neighbor’s property and putting up a pump station in our yard, which will, of course, detract from the appearance of our property. At least we have the room to do it. If the septic systems of homes in the Hamlet of Phoenicia are tested, undoubtedly many will need to be upgraded and we wonder if there will be the space to do it. Not upgrading antiquated or failing systems will negatively affect resale value. Putting in the sewage treatment plant would resolve those situations and increase property values.
If the sewage treatment plant goes through, the look of Main Street will be improved. Several of the businesses on Main Street have already renovated their facades by taking advantage of grant money. If the street is dug up for the sewer pipes, the power lines could be buried and more attractive street lighting could be installed. In all likelihood new restaurants would move into the vacant buildings improving the look and appeal of the town and increasing business for all of Main Street.
All of the other towns that were offered sewage treatment plants eagerly accepted them and this has resulted in positive changes in the infrastructure and in the “curb appeal” of these towns. We hope that Phoenicia will join this group of towns that has taken advantage of the money offered by New York City now and avoid getting to the point where the sewer system is required and it’s left to the taxpayers of Shandaken to pay for it.
Veronica & Jon Rowe
Phoenicia, NY

Dear Editor,
To my friends and neighbors in the proposed sewer district: While I realize that newspapers have the right to publish their editorial opinions, I do not think it appropriate for The Phoenicia Times to editorialize and attempt to sway opinion on a project that solely affects a small group of taxpayers in the hamlet of Phoenicia. Per the attorney handling the district, the sewer district is supposed to benefit only those taxpayers in the district, and the taxpayers in the district have the ownership and financial responsibilities associated with it. As far as I know, the editors of the Times do not live in the proposed sewer district, nor do 4 of the 5 members of the Town Board. I believe the taxpayers that have the financial liability for this project should be the only ones to decide on this issue. I would also like to address the following comments made in the editorial that I feel are misleading.
“…at $100 per year for homeowners that is as close to free as it will ever get” - True at face value, however in reality it is already said that the district will also collect $50-100 per hook-up for a slush fund, so that cost is immediately doubled. Coming with the project is the Sewer District, which has the ability to raise taxes. What other expenses will arise that need to be paid for by taxes? Add taxes to the cost. There is no guarantee there will be money in the project to pay for hook-ups, and the homeowner is responsible to pay that expense out front, with the “anticipation of reimbursement”. Add the cost of hook-ups and the closing of current septic systems to the cost. That will be a crippling expense for many, myself included. Who will pay for maintenance of laterals? Owner expense according to the Sewer Use Law.
“..the project is about protecting Phoenicia’s property owners, the value of their homes and businesses”. Nonsense. The project is about enabling the plans of the big money developers. The Town Board has every intention of expanding the district to accommodate interests outside of the hamlet, and the hamlet of Phoenicia is just a pawn in that game. Get the project going in the hamlet with NYC money, and when built the Town will control it and do with it as the developers direct them. The real danger is that the 250 or so taxpayers in the Hamlet own it and have the liability for it. If the interest was the protection of water quality, there were and are better options, as stated in the editorial. “…no one stands to gain more from the hamlet’s revitalization than the current business owners”. I disagree. The O & M expenses for businesses are uncapped. The current estimates are based on unrealistic figures, and not to be counted on. The costs for business operators in the District have the potential for being astronomical, especially if you combine the O & M costs with the potential taxes from the District added. It is more likely that any business that is operating on a narrow margin will fail. As far as I know, there are no deep pocket business operators in the hamlet, but there is one just down the road a piece. I guess it doesn’t matter in the overall plan if the current businesses fail, as long as there are others to replace them.
“…to kill a project of this importance because of handful of people, elected and appointed, may not have handled things perfectly….” This is the most important point of all. Think about all the things this administration has accomplished, (??), and things they have destroyed (skyrocketing taxes, more lawsuits, no cell service, ambulance set back years, water district crippled). Think about whom these people actually represent, because they certainly do not represent the taxpayers in the hamlet, nor the town for that matter. The fact that this group of special interest politicians is so ardently supporting this project is cause for suspicion. Be aware that after the referendum, there will still be plenty of time for this administration to change the district boundaries before the next election. In fact, Bob Cross added 18 properties to the district all by himself just yesterday.
It is a shame that a project with such potential benefit has been so mishandled from the beginning. Had there been realistic negotiation with NYC; had there been answers based on fact to legitimate questions that were asked month after month by concerned taxpayers; had there been a source for unbiased advice for the taxpayers rather than all information coming from people with a vested interest in the project; had there been respect from the committee for the concerns of the taxpayers rather than the bored looks and snide comments coming from at least 2 of them at every meeting they attended; perhaps there would have been a project that actually did benefit the hamlet and could have been supported by the taxpayers.
I personally am voting NO on this proposition, since none of the questions I have asked have been answered with anything more than opinion from the lawyer and engineering company, and vague and empty promises from the town supervisor. To all my neighbors that have asked questions, I ask: Have your questions been answered, and if so, can you trust the source of the answers. Is there anything in writing to fall back on? If the answer to these questions is no, I urge you to vote NO as well. I believe that this project has the potential to do far more harm than good for our community.
Jerry Pearlman
Phoenicia, NY

Dear Editor,
“Would you buy a used car from this man”? This is how I feel when it comes to Supervisor Bob Cross and his multi-million dollar sewer district and sewage treatment plant project that he is so hard pressed and anxious to force upon the citizens of Phoenicia.
Would you trust a project of this size that will affect your pocketbook to a supervisor and his town board that mismanaged something as simple as the building of a cell tower. It’s been four years since Bob Cross promised us cell phone service. Why don’t we have it? We don’t have it because he signed a contract with a PAGING COMPANY NOT A CELL PHONE SERVICE. This is a man who wants to give away millions of our dollars by signing a contract with Delaware Engineering and the city of New York.
Would you trust a project of this size to a supervisor and his town board who raised our taxes 35% over the last two years and our water taxes 137% in 2006? This due to mismanagement of the town’s resources. Once that $17 million is in the hands of Bob Cross, the town board, and Delaware Engineering, who will pay for the inevitable overruns in the building of the wastewater treatment plant due to mismanagement? Does Supervisor Cross and the Town Board think we’ve forgotten the Ulster County Jail fiasco? We know who’s paying for that, all of the citizens of Ulster County through their taxes. We won’t have the rest of Ulster County to back us up when the Phoenicia Wastewater Treatment plant goes into overruns, needs repairs, Operating & Maintenance costs skyrocket due to inflation, or fines are levied for spills and infractions. That, my dear neighbors, will come out of YOUR pockets in the form of elevated and new taxes. And we all know Bob Cross is NOT adverse to raising our taxes and making us pay for his mistakes.
Would you trust a project of this size to a supervisor and his town board who so mismanaged the handling of our precious ambulance squad through lies and deceit that they endangered the lives of every single individual in this town because we were left without certified paramedics to respond to emergencies? Through mismanagement, the replacements are costing the town more than what we were paying to the previous squad.
Would you trust a project of this size to a supervisor and town board who word a proposition ballot with vague terms like “funded primarily by NYC”:(primarily: for the most part), “estimated that NYC will pay 85%”: (estimated: probable, likely), “the town board anticipates that it will have significant funds”: (anticipates: be hopeful of, think likely)? I find no concrete wording here that anything regarding the funding and eventual cost of the project will not be placed squarely on the backs of the taxpayers of Phoenicia. In fact, I see lots of “wiggle room” for excuses as to why it will cost more than anticipated. I want to see words like “funded totally” by NYC, “it is a fact that NYC will pay”, and “the town board GUARANTEES that it will have significant funds”, not terms that leave room for “Clintonese” interpretations.
I want GUARANTEES, IN WRITING. Never lose sight of the fact that this proposition was written by Kevin Young, a lawyer hired by Bob Cross and his Town Board and who gets his paycheck by these very same people.
Would you trust a project of this size to a supervisor and his town board who through mismanagement and deceit are costing the Shandaken townspeople thousands of dollars in lawyers fees (four lawyers and counting) for all of the lawsuits they’ve incurred since taking office?
The list of mismanagement and wrongheaded decisions made by Supervisor Bob Cross and his Town Board is endless and I won’t bore you with what you already know…
There are just way too many questions that have gone unanswered by Supervisor Cross, the Town Board, and Delaware Engineers. The few answers that have been offered are often times vague and backed up with unsubstantiated figures supplied by questionable sources who have much to gain from an approval for this sewer project as it stands.
I, myself, would love to see a sewer system in Phoencia, but we simply CANNOT AFFORD IT. New York City can. They want it, they should pay for it in total, which includes the Operation and Maintenance costs for the sewage treatment plant, as well as our hook-ups, and all other costs involved with the project.
We need someone who will negotiate properly for us with the city, not someone who doesn’t know the difference between a cell phone and a pager.
What it all boils down to is: Would you buy a Sewage Treatment Plant, or a used car for that matter, from Bob Cross and the rest of the Shandaken Town Board? I for one, WILL NOT, and I urge you not to either. Vote NO to Proposition #1, on February 3rd.
Carol Shalaew
Phoenicia, NY

Dear Editor,
I would like to take this opportunity to express some important aspects of obtaining our water treatment facility. Being a commercial user in the village of Hunter, I do have some facts. Our construction fee for excavation, hook-up, and filling in of our old septic tank was $2,800. Through grants, however, we were reimbursed the full amount of the hook-up. We also received our usage fee for the year. Our 3,800 square foot commercial business paid $400 for this service in 2006.
As a Town of Shandaken Planning Board member, I have learned about waste water management in several seminars. Programs are being executed throughout New York state. We are not the exception; this is the rule. Clean water is a priority. I had the opportunity to attend a seminar with an engineer working on projects in the Finger Lakes region. In these projects the towns are required to pay for the waste water treatment plants. The projects are going forward for the best interests of the towns and their residents.
I have a dual interest in the towns of Hunter and Shandaken. I am a resident of the village of Phoenicia, and I am a business owner in the village of Hunter. I believe this gives me a neutral prospective concerning this project.
The annual usage fee for a commercial property owner in Hunter who owned a restaurant that seated 60 and had an 800 square foot bar, with a three bedroom apartment above, and also had a two bedroom rental unit behind the restaurant, was $1200. unH
At this time we have the opportunity to keep water clean with assistance from government agencies. If we were to turn this opportunity down, the village of Phoenicia will most likely have to build the treatment plant at its own expense. The EPA doesn’t care who pays as long as the water stays clean.
Keith Holmquist
Phoenicia, NY

Dear Editor,
On Saturday, Jan. 13, we went to the Parish Hall to once again try to get answers to our questions about the proposed sewer district. To our disappointment, once again we left without answers and our concerns just as strong.
Attorney Kevin Young had given out at the last Town Board meeting a paper showing what each business would pay for sewer use based on the latest water meter readings. Following his formula we could not understand how the figure was reached we would be responsible to pay for our business, Simpler Times. Mr. Young was at Saturday's meeting and we gave him our water bills and asked him to explain to us how he reached our sewer use fee. He tried, a few different times, and could not come up with the figures on the sheet he had distributed. His answer? "Are either of the Winchells still here?" In other words, the figures he used, on a sheet EXPLAINING what each business would have to pay annually came from a waste water committee member, NOT an engineer, and were not verified by an engineer or anyone else! If ours is wrong, how many other businesses were given incorrect information on their annual cost? We have been attending waste water committee meetings and town board meetings for a year and a half trying to understand the responsibilities we and our hamlet are being asked to take on. We have been asking for FACTS so we can decide if this project is right for us and for our community. Twice I have given written questions to our town board at public meetings. I have yet to receive the courtesy of written answers. All we are given is conflicting answers by our town board members and representatives of Delaware Engineering.
At this same meeting on Saturday, Helen Morelli asked Fred Grober, an engineer from Delaware Engineering, to estimate her cost to connect to the sewer system. Then she went across the room and asked Tad Johnson, also from Delaware Engineering, the same question. She got two different answers. Amy Wright asked her cost to connect, and when she was given a very high figure, our town supervisor, Bob Cross, looked it over and the answer changed by thousands! He knows more than the engineer? This is something that has happened meeting after meeting. Bob Cross and John Brust, of Delaware Engineering, promise you whatever you want to hear, but none of their promises are in writing.
Duane Formont received a request for an easement on his property. It would have greatly hampered his business so he asked to meet with Delaware Engineering and Steve Stettine, who is in charge of easements. After physically coming to the property they determined there was no need for an easement as no water went to the business! Didn't anyone from Delaware Engineering check this out before requesting the easement? Plans were 100 percent complete! What if Mr. Formont hadn't asked questions? His business would have been interrupted for nothing.
Joe Munster, the liason from the waste water committee to the town board, told us that Delaware Engineering was buying 70 grinder pumps so when one broke down, there would be another available. We asked the engineer at Saturday's meeting about this. He said the project requires 12 grinder pumps so they could purchase up to 24, a big difference from the 70 Joe says he was told. Also, attorney Kevin Young says it will be up to the town board to decide if those needing grinder pumps would have to pay for their replacement of if they would be covered in the cost of maintenance and operation. Other than Mr. Munster, no one on the town board lives in the proposed district, so none of them will bear any financial burden yet they are all in favor of the project.
We are not against improvements, including a municipal sewer in the hamlet of Phoenicia. We are against being asked to pay for a project, for the rest of our lives, when we have been given no solid information on what our costs will be. We are paying, PLENTY, for our water. Let New York City pay for theirs, as they do in the other Shandaken towns of Pine Hill and Chichester.
The purpose of this letter is to share information we have learned so you can vote knowledgeably on Saturday, February 3rd. Please vote. Thank you.
Vincent and Susan Bernstein
Phoenicia, NY

Dear Editor,
Make sure you read the ballot carefully when voting on Proposition #1 Feb. 3, forming the Phoenicia Sewer District. The ballot states that NYC will be paying an estimated cost for the Operating and Maintenance of this plant. After two and a half years of meetings which I have been attending for the last two years, I can't understand why the Sewer Committee, the Town Board, and the attorney who have all met with NYC, still do not know what percentage NYC will be paying of the O&M costs.
Besides the word anticipates, they use for the reimbursement of the hook-ups. So at this point in time with nothing in writing the town board can add or delete anyone from the Sewer District. If more people are added to the sewer line that are not in the water district, this will deplete the amount of money left for the reimbursements.
If the taxpayers do not meet their estimated percentage cost of the O&M, the Town Board has the right to levy taxes, as stated in the Sewer Use Law, to make up the deficit, like they did with the water plant.
With all the unknowns we are facing, by voting to approve this proposal as it now stands, we are on all sense & purpose giving NYC, Delaware Engineering, and the Town Board a blank check, to be filled in after the work is done. It only makes sense to vote NO until we have all the information we have been requesting for the past 2 1/2 years.
Tom Gotimer
Phoenicia, NY

Dear Editor,
Who has outgrown the infrastructure?
If you believe Bob Cross, I have a bridge to sell you. Shandaken has not outgrown the infrastructure, Bob has. And, of course Gitter's "Grotesquely Elongated Emerson Plaza Shopping Tunnel," at more than twice the size it was permitted for. Ask a few of Gitter's major contractors if they have been paid yet. Gitter is a dead albatross hanging on the neck of Shandaken and our business community.
A couple of folks around here may still imagine themselves on Bob and Dean's glittering path to progress, but I bet you are not one of them. Bob is done, and for heaven's sake, if Jane Todd decides to run – as I keep hearing people say -- let's not elect her. "Don't run, Jane run". If you think Bob came up with all of those terrible decisions on his own, I have another bridge to sell you. Jane is just as responsible as Bob for the out-of-control spending that got us a 17 percent rise in town taxes... which she could have voted against but didn't. It's a real shame that these two well-liked people have allowed their good reputations to be ruined in service to a misguided guru. And to anyone who Jane gave money while at the SHARP office, remember- that wasn't her money, it came out of our taxes, and she got paid to do it.
I seem to recall Jane saying she wanted to spend more time with her grandchildren... well, we all need a break from the endless parade of red herrings, broken promises, and outright lies coming from Gitter's well-financed clique of rainmakers. The "Bob Mahal" town hall Cross proposes is just the latest in a dismal series of empty public relations stunts and backfired boondoggles like the no-show cell tower, the ambulance crisis, and the threat of industrial development in Woodland Valley. Your hollow could be next. Poncic got approval over the common sense objection of every Woodland Valley resident that cared enough to speak. The Cross administration and his mercenary appointments are caving in to their two top campaign contributors, Gitter and Poncic. It’s hurting our community, and making no measurable improvements. Cross even tried, with the help of one of Gitter's lawyers, to cram a crummy sewer deal down the throats of Phoenicia residents. A deal that would have put hamlet businesses out of businesses. The current deal still isn't as good as it could be. Hold out for better. It makes a hell of a lot of sense to build one large plant below Boiceville to serve the whole area. That could still happen.
When the smoke clears, I bet Ward Todd will be one of those blamed for the back-room approval of a bloated, defective prison four times the size of the old one. The cost of the glamorous marble rotunda alone would have paid for most of the renovations the old prison needed. Pork! A 40 percent rise in County tax! Follow the money! Investigate! Remember, Jane is on our town board not likely because she wanted to be, but because Ward wanted her there so Gitter could get his way with Golfzilla, the grotesquely elongated Belleayre Resort hamlet-killer.
If you like the prison, if your cell phone works, if you're happy that Poncic and Gitter run Shandaken, if you love those jacked up tax bills, if you believe Blake and the Townsman, if you want to pay for Bob Cross' health insurance for the rest of his life, then vote for Jane and Bob. If not...
This is an election year, and we will have a chance to vote for a change. Revitalize the hamlets! Don't smear us out along the highway! Obviously it is in Gitter's interests to suck the life out of local businesses so his flammable roadside attractions don't tumble ever more deeply into debt. Ask his contractors.
Dave Channon,
Shandaken, NY

Dear Editor,
The gerrymander, or drawing of legislative district lines for political advantage, is even worse than we think.
Party leaders in nearly every state where the legislature draws those lines follow a simple rule: “crack and pack,” which means “crack open as many of your opponent’s districts as possible”, and “pack as many of your opponent’s voters into as few districts as possible” thus minimizing their victories. Then spread your own voters into 55-60% majorities, in other words, safe districts, in as many districts as you can, thus maximizing your own victories. The result is that, by design and with Supreme Court approval, most congressional and state legislative districts are non-competitive, leaving most voters effectively disfranchised. By design, we have an electoral impact on our legislators only when we are members of these artificially created majorities.
Worse yet, the practice works, for the parties, but against the citizens. In 2006, the good news is that about twice as many House seats were competitive compared to recent elections; the bad news is that even in such a closely fought election, fewer than 1 in 6 seats were truly competitive, decided by 10 percentage points or less, meaning that in only 70 of 435 districts did the electorate have a realistic chance to affect the election.
The result of the Tom DeLay-led Texas redistricting in 2002 was that if Republicans won only 51.9 % of the statewide vote, they would elect 70 % of the legislature and 22 of 32 congressional seats. The Republicans called that “backlash insurance.”
In Iowa, on the other hand, a non-partisan civil service commission draws its legislative districts. In 2002, 4 of its 5 congressional districts were competitive; in 2006, 3 of 5, with the winners in the other 2 gaining only 57% and 58% of the vote, respectively.
Competition is not only the lifeblood of capitalism; it is the lifeblood of democracy. If you want competition in legislative elections, get rid of the gerrymander by taking redistricting out of the hands of the legislature, and assign it, as Governor Spitzer proposes, to an independent, non-partisan commission. We should also charge that commission with making all legislative districts as competitive as possible. That won’t guarantee good government, but it will enhance citizen power and bring us a lot closer to the democratic ideal we all aspire to.
Paul Scheele
Oneonta, NY

Dear Editor,
I would like to respond to the letter by Eric Hansen in your last issue.
Coyotes are an important part of the natural ecosystem of this region, along with mountain lions. The scarcity or absence of these predators is one reason the deer population has exploded.
I recently moved back here from the Rocky Mountains, where coyotes are more abundant, and I can attest that they are not dangerous to human children or adults. They cull sick and weak deer, elk and moose, but mostly they consume rodents. Their presence in our woods helps restore a balance that we upset by exterminating them in the past.
Hunters like to claim that it is their guns that keep the balance, but they can't do it alone. The proliferation of cats can't control the rodent population either, and it does irreparable harm to the bird population.
Trapping is even less effective against coyotes. They are notoriously hard to catch with traps. Their wily reputation is well deserved, and the traps catch more pets than coyotes.
We who have chosen to live in the habitat of these animals should respect the part they played in making the Catskills the beautiful ecosystem that drew us here. Driving predators out only takes us a step closer to making these mountains more like the cities we left.
Alan McKnight
Willow, NY

Dear Editor,
The Onteora School Board has a rough road ahead of them and it appears that they are going to have some real problems along the way. As reported they can’t come to a conclusion regarding the grade configurations and which schools should remain open. They still have a lingering problem that they have done nothing about. At least that’s been made public. Members that were running for a seat on the School board have said that they were very concerned about the high cost of education in the district, but in recent memory there has not been one resolution on any agenda to at least discuss the high cost of education in the district. The Onteora School District remains the leader in cost per student in Ulster County and beyond. The question is why.
Board members will no doubt have a problem deciding what to do with the upcoming multi million dollar budget for the 2007/2008 school year and also deciding on which one of the three Capital Improvement project options to go with. The Architects came up with three options with reported expenses ranging from $30 to $62 million. Of coarse the bigger the project the more it cost. It’s generally known that the more a project cost the more money the Architects get paid in Architectural fees. I hope that the board is aware that any project costing millions of dollars can have cost over runs and very large unexpected costs if any remodeling is done. If the board is still concerned about the tax payers struggling to pay their taxes one would think that they would agree to accept the lowest priced option that’s been presented to them.
The School board has had at least five meetings that were open to the public. As reported they have decided to have another community wide meeting and mail a survey to district residents. The meeting will be held on March 03, 2007. More then likely the same parents, teachers, and school administrators will attend that meeting with their same agenda’s for what they want. Posted on the School’s Web page is a section outlining many questions and answers derived from those five meetings. I urge you to go to the school’s Web Page and read the questions, answers and comments. Here is just one interesting and very important comment. “When you divide the number of Woodstock students by the levy the Town of Woodstock pays, the average cost per student from Woodstock is $26,000”.
As of December 2006 there were 1939 students in the district. It’s estimated that by year 2011 there will only be a little over 1500 students. Why are we even looking at this possibly 62 million dollar or more project? We already have two empty schools in West Hurley that are just sitting there costing tax payers money. Of the three options the lowest priced option is to simply forget the grade configurations and perform the needed work to our existing structures. Obviously we can’t let the schools get too far run down. If the board wants to truly represent the school and the tax payers they should consider using the available $662,000.00 grant any other required monies to simply fix what needs to be fixed. The $662,000.00 grant will cost tax payers nothing. There are nice things to do then there are things that we have to do.
In a recent e mail to all school board members but one I asked, was this possible 70 million dollar Capital Improvement Project mandated by the State? If not, how did it get started? As of this writing I have receive no replies. I couldn’t e mail one board member because I did not have that person’s e mail address. Board member e mail addresses are not listed on the schools Web page. By order of the board you must write a letter to the board and mark it personal to get board members e mail address.
William Warnecke
Glenford, NY

Dear Editor,
It is not difficult to write for or against a particular issue or proposal these days, but a problem arises as to which topic merits priority. As I listen today, [Friday, January 26, 2007] to an overstuffed windbag named Rush Limbaugh on ABC radio I wonder why he is not the President of these United States. Here is a "rejected" overweight draft dodger of the 1960-70's and recent "drug head" who now spends his radio time denigrating and insulting those military heroes who express their opinions in opposition to the "new" [or old] Bush plan and mission. Mr Limbaugh is not interested in the possible or projected increase in casualties in Iraq [don't forget Afghanistan].
Limbaugh, with arrogance insults John Warner [WWII], Jack Murtha, Chuck Hagle [Viet Nam] and three or four retired Generals [all conflicts] who have stated from their experience that the U.S. Forces have gained nothing for us at the expense of 3,000 plus dead and 18,000 disabled. General Abidsaid told Congress that, "we're not losing, but we're not winning [he's gone] Our youth and our treasure matters not to Limbaugh while blindly worshiping an "escape artist" by the name of George W. Bush.
Oh yes, Mr Bush enjoyed the rare arrangement of transferring from the Texas Air National Guard to the Louisiana Air Nat. Guard when his Texas unit was about to be activated for duty in Nam. How did he find out his unit was about to ship out? Go figger.
I am 80 years old and never cared to weigh in with war stories but as a senior veteran of WWII and Korea I have combat experience that I am proud of and the likes of a Rush Limbaugh just doesn't pass the "smell" test. How dare he attack those career Flag Officers and other veterans who have more time in battle and battle planning than Limbaugh has in three "domestic" conflicts? He even charges that the "Grunt" [and his family] who disagree with him and GW "want this country to lose in Iraq". That's a "stretch" but we did lose in Nam and we're still here.
Cheney is another "cardboard" warrior who shouldn't have a gun or access to one. Wait until this is over and Cheney cashes in his stock options with Halliburton. Those options are triple their worth of six years ago due to Iraq.
Now we come to "what if". What if we had voted for Gore or Kerry? To be sure, things would be different economically, socially, in foreign relations and environmentally. Crime might be up and 9-11 could be just a routine date on the calendar. Illegal immigrants would be at the same level as 1940 and two Border Patrol Officers would not be in prison for doing their duty.
Be sure to vote next time and vote for the person, not the party. Shut off Rush Limbaugh and others like him. Remember who voted for Iraq and who speaks against their own vote now that it's fashionable [or is working both sides of the street].
Glenn T. Anderson
Olivebridge, NY

Dear Editor,
After attending the Ulster County Chamber of Commerce breakfast on January 22 where Congressman Maurice Hinchey was the featured speaker, I was surprised at the coverage of the event in the Kingston Freeman (January 23rd article by Joshua Rinaldi and January 24th column by Hugh Reynold’s). Both missed something very significant.
When Congressman Hinchey was challenged by an attendee who asked if there were developments Hinchey would support, since he had been critical of the AVR and Belleayre Resort proposals, the question received moderate applause from some in the audience.
Hinchey proceeded to explain his reasons for his position on the Belleayre Resort - steep slopes, thin soils, potential for erosion, impact on water quality, filtration avoidance for New York City and the Ulster County towns tapping into the water system, and the cost of filtration for all New Yorkers, etc, etc. He concluded with a statement which Mr. Rinaldi quoted in his article, “I’m not opposed to that project just for the hell of it. I’m opposed to it because it’s a bad project.” At this point, the room broke out into widespread applause.
Mr. Rinaldi’s article mentioned the “moderate amount of applause” for the challenger’s question, but neglected to mention the widespread applause for Hinchey’s answer. Hugh Reynolds didn’t mention it either. In fact, Hugh said, “no one rose to defend the Congressman”. It’s true that no one “rose to defend” him; he didn’t need defense. The audience just applauded him - loudly!
This may tell us something about the ever-growing, ever-new Ulster County Chamber. It appears that more and more realize that smart growth is not only good for the environment and everyone’s quality of life, it is also good for business. And the Belleayre Resort, as proposed, is anything but smart growth.
One more thing. Neither writer happened to mention that Hinchey got a standing ovation at the end of his talk.
Judith Wyman
Chichester, NY

Dear Editor,
Under a new Federal grant called Money Follows the Person, funds will be available later this year to assist some people in Nursing Homes to return to community living. New York is one of 18 states to be awarded Nursing Home Transition and Diversion funding. The goal of the funding is to change the bias away from institutionalization and to support people who desire to live in their own homes and community.
Resources for Accessible Living (RCAL) in Kingston, an Independent Living Center, anticipates receiving funding to work with nursing home residents who might otherwise not realize that community living is an option for them or have complex needs that require special supports and intervention.
Staff and volunteers at RCAL recently met with Senator Bonacic and representatives of Senator Larkin and Assemblyman Cahill to talk about the need for affordable and accessible housing in order to assist people in transitioning out of expensive and inappropriate nursing home placement.
We are hopeful that New York State sets aside monies in a housing trust fund to supplement the Money Follows the Person Grant in order to help people avoid unnecessary institutionalization.
It is projected that each person transitioned from nursing homes into a community setting saves over $63,000 in Medicaid costs annually.
Fran Wishnick, Systems Advocate
Resources for Accessible Living
Kingston, NY

Dear Editor,
Here is a big thank you to all the wonderful people who made the concert and auction for Clean Money Clean Elections a great success--Maurice Hinchey, Kevin Cahill, and Susan Zimet; performers Bruce Akerman, Mik Horowitz, Gilles Malkine, Princes of Serendip, Sarah Kramer-Harrison, Robin The Hammer, Lane Akerman, and Tom Pacheco; everyone who contributed terrific items for the auction; all who worked so very hard to make it happen, and Citizen Action for sponsoring it.
In case you haven't heard, Eliot Spitzer has made Clean Money Clean Elections a top priority in his reform package for New York State. That means he is very committed to full public funding of candidates so that they no longer have to spend most of their time begging for money. It means we get to vote for candidates who run on ability and ideas, not how much money they raise. It means those elected can feel free to say no to big contributors who buy political influence that undermines our common good, like universal healthcare, good schools, and a clean environment. And it means we can have the democracy this country was founded on.
But don't be naïve. It will not happen if we do not work for it. Spitzer must have the support of New Yorkers all around the state. He and the rest of us are up against powerful entrenched interests. They will try to make us believe that partial public funding is the way to go. And who can blame them? With partial funding, which permits candidates to get both public and private money, big private contributors would still have the upper hand because their big bucks carry a very big clout. In fact, they may like it better because they would not have to contribute as much as they do now.
That is why I want to thank everyone who participated in the benefit concert and auction at Ric's New World Home Cooking on the 21st. And it is why I urge everyone who agrees that democracy is better than having money dominate our political process to join this bandwagon. We need you and you need us. Neither of us can do it alone. To learn how you can help, go to www.citizenactionny.org or call 518 678-3516.
Irene Miller
Palenville, NY