|
EDITORIAL
Considering the issues likely to preoccupy Shandaken in the coming days and weeks and the speed at which events are moving, we think a brief pause to look back is in order. Obviously Supervisor DiModica‚s 23-month old administration isn't waddling out with a whimper, as most lame ducks do. But since he‚s chosen to take his leave with strong statements of principle, whether one agrees or disagrees with them, we don‚t think they should pass into the whirlwind without comment. At last month's town board meeting, developer Dean Gitter drew loud applause by calling Di Modica‚s resolutions on casino gambling and a Fair Campaign Code "sore loser resolutions," as if the issues they address represent some sort of unsportsmanslike conduct on Di Modica‚s part. We don't think that‚s the case. The casino resolution emphatically affirms the town's opposition to gambling here, but also calls into question the 2001 agreement signed by the County that leaves the door open to it. As for Shandaken‚s new Fair Campaign Code, had such a thing been in place before last month‚s election, it certainly might have affected the outcome. That, along with well over $40 per vote spent by the winning campaign - mostly from unknown sources - does suggest that maybe our local electoral process could stand a bit more accountability than state law seems to require. But leaving that question open, the Fair Campaign Code that was adopted unanimously by the town board speaks for itself simply and eloquently. It‚s not a law but a voluntary pledge for future candidates for town office, and because we think it‚s a good read as well as a very good set of guidelines, we've reprinted it on page 30. Perhaps that code of fairness is a fitting farewell, certainly it's part of a solid legacy of Di Modica's brief term in office. He did both promise and deliver a level of openness and responsiveness in town government that's rarely been seen in Shandaken before. Nobody was ever precluded from speaking their piece at any meeting he ran, and when they did, he rarely hesitated adjusting his positions to accommodate public opinion. He managed to put town board meetings on television for the benefit of those of couldn't attend. Administratively, even his harshest critics were hard pressed to find fault with his handling of town business. He kept tax increases low, resolved a number of old lawsuits against the town while minimizing new ones, acquired Pine Hill‚s water system for it's users, and moved forward construction of Phoenicia's water treatment plant. He insured the continued public use of Phoenicia's only town park and oversaw the creation of a very good law to help bring cellular phone service to the town. In his handling of the state's assessment suit, he appears to have saved Shandaken's taxpayers over half a million dollars. There's more of course, and on balance we think it's an exceptionally good record for a one-term supervisor. To those who believed Di Modica‚s real" agenda was about stopping the Belleayre Resort, his actual record is as notable for what it didn't do as for what it did. Not wishing to create an adversarial relationship with the developer, he didn't sue Crossroads for its breach of contract to provide funding for Shandaken's review. Instead, he found alternative funding to make sure Shandaken's taxpayers wouldn‚t have to foot the bill. And to insure that at least some part of that review actually happens after he‚s out of office, he's arranged for the guy who literally wrote the book on fiscal-impact analysis to deliver that critical study to us, using funds provided by New York City. And he's made sure our planning board can pick it's own consultants and not have to worry about paying for them. The other thing Di Modica didn't do was to simply zone the Belleayre Resort into oblivion. Towns have the right to change their zoning, and such a move would almost certainly have been upheld by the courts. Had he wanted to actually kill or cripple the project, Di Modica could have done so at any time; all that was required would have been a resolution and a simple majority vote to revoke the 1999 zoning change which made golf courses a permitted land use in Shandaken. Given some of the circumstances under which that change was made, he probably had ample justification to have done so, even though none would have been required. Di Modica didn‚t take that course not because he feared a political backlash in early 2001. He didn't do it because he didn't believe it was fair to the town or the developer, and he believed Shandaken should make its own fully informed decisions about a project of that magnitude. Ironically, that's still the position he's fighting for in his final weeks in office. As for "sore loser", we think it's an attempt to trivialize the serious issues involved but it also suggests a game's been played and won fairly and we're not sure that's entirely true. Perhaps that doesn't matter once the score's been posted, but we still think how one plays the game is important, and Di Modica's been one of the fairest, most honorable players in memory. We also think there's no game going on, but there is a struggle of values over how our collective future will be shaped and whether the people of Shandaken will have much say in it. The day after the election, one of the architects of the winning campaign admitted to one of the defeated candidates, "Of course it was all lies, but that's the way it goes." We'd tell you who that was, but they'd just deny having said it. It is, sadly, the God's-honest truth. When a community chooses its leaders based on the strength of their principles and their commitment to work for the good of everyone, it generally gets what it votes for. When other criteria are the deciding ones, it's harder to guess how things will turn out down the road, though we're hopeful they‚ll turn out well. Now that we've chosen a change of leadership, we‚ll all have the chance anew to judge its integrity and its principles as they translate into actions. That's what the public trust is, and we're hopeful our new trustees will be as fair and as thoughtful in their approach to problem solving as what we've come to expect, whether we're pleased or displeased to see it go. |