THIS WAS IN THE NORTH COUNTY NEWS
Ossining board curtails televised remarks from citizens
Controlling Free Speech
By Isaac Cass
Ossining Mayor William Hanauer is one elected official who supports limiting public speakers’ comments in front of television cameras.
The voice of the public is the overwhelming power behind democracy, but should it be limited or silenced? That ongoing issue is being discussed in local communities, with the Ossining Village Board recently instituting new guidelines to control the flow of public comment and whether those remarks should be televised.Debates on the matter have ensued and the Village of Ossining has not had an easy time appeasing its constituency. New rules mandate that those who wish to speak at public meetings are only allowed to comment for a maximum of three minutes at the end of meeting with the stipulation that they will be off camera. Mayor William Hanauer claims that the accessibility to the small screen became too much to handle as the local elections heated up. He remembers the same 10 to 15 people showing up and bringing forth personal vendettas and political agendas. The overwhelming opinion from the Village Board is that limiting comment time allows the meetings to run in a smoother fashion.Hanauer recalled that meetings would extend past midnight, as a result of the extended “visitor recognition,” which took place early in the evening. He also added that the main premise behind a legislative meeting is to pass resolutions, and with the older commentary rules it wasn’t happening in a timely manner.
The public speaksResident and community activist Linda Mangano believes that the local legislative agendas are bloated with too many resolutions, and something needs to be done to make it more worthwhile to the public. She also contends that the "power of the people" has become too much for the village to handle, and that fear has cast a large shadow over the Village Board. Hanauer refutes this claim, calling it “absurd.”Mangano remembers when the allotted comment time was first 10 minutes. It was then seven minutes and has now finally been trimmed to three minutes. She doesn’t understand the restrictions.The most interesting and best part of a newspaper is the obituaries followed by the letters to the editor, Mangano said.“It shows what the community members are thinking,” Mangano said.She also explained that the viewing public enjoys the audience’s interaction and exuberantly stated, “Do we work for them (village board), or do they work for us?”A rift has emerged between some outspoken Ossining community members and the board, but at the same time Hanauer believes that the changes encourage fresh-faced community members to show up at meetings.
Time limits the normMost town, village and school boards welcome comment, but guidelines are typically enforced to limit people from monopolizing the podium. The Yorktown Board of Education allows audience members three minutes at the beginning of a meeting and another three minutes during a second public comment session toward the end.Ed Ciffone, a Yorktown resident who frequently attends Yorktown board meetings, even carries along a stopwatch to the podium to regulate his time. As he meanders through a thought at a recent meeting, closing in on the three-minute time barrier, President Joyce McCoy waives her green highlighter in his direction, signaling time for him to wrap up. Ciffone calmly shuffles through his notes, looks down at his stopwatch and returns to his seat.Some would say the board is limiting the voice of the public, but Ciffone doesn’t see it that way. The allotted time given to ask a question is not the most important element of the forum. It is, however, the willingness of the recipients to answer the question as truthfully and detailed as possible, he said."When you don't answer or you don't give information about a question, then you are restricting a community from learning about what's going on,” Ciffone said. “When you have three minutes or six minutes, you have to answer the questions to the public."But McCoy sees the issue differently. She believes that people are too busy to come and comment on issues that are dear to their hearts just because it is on TV. On the other end of the spectrum, McCoy explains, "The point is that we need to get on with our business. We don't need to legally have anyone speak, and they have two times to speak. We like to run our meetings efficiently and get out within a reasonable amount of time, while also doing the job that we need to do. But we also need to hear from the public."
Contentious commentThe division between the public and the government regarding public commentary is often heated. This fact is highlighted by an incident that took place in Peekskill in 1999, where six people were arrested at a common council meeting for not adhering to time-limit guidelines.According to Peekskill City Clerk Pamela Beach there are two opportunities for citizens to speak on any topic they desire— three minutes in the beginning of the meeting and five minutes at the end.Anthony Bazzo, a local blogger and political activist, has experience attending board meetings in Peekskill.“On big issues people are usually to the point,” Bazzo said. “On general issues, I am convinced people speak just to hear their voice. It is at this point I feel sorry for those on the council."Bazzo utilizes a different medium to get his message across. He feels the power of the Internet and the ever-rising popularity of blogs provides an outlet for his thoughts. “I find using the written word less constraining,” Bazzo said “If it is really serious, I have an open door with any of the council (members) and the mayor. I never need an appointment. I know, as a point of fact, that the mayor's door is always open when he is at the office for any citizen to see him— with or without an appointment.”When questioned as to whether comment time is an issue, Bazzo responded, “As for time allotted, I think it should be more flexible depending on the issue. When it comes to the Target Store, (the) riverfront or downtown development, there should be more time. I realize the council and the mayor have day jobs, but so do the people so they should be more accommodating on certain issues.”More freedom in Putnam Valley Unlike Peekskill and Ossining and other more restrictive municipalities, Putnam Valley is one town that allows its citizens the freedom to comment without many restrictions.Supervisor Sam Davis said free speech is the staple of the working relationship between the people and the government. “The purpose of the government is to represent its people,” Davis said. “How can they be represented if they aren’t allowed to be heard?”Davis said he sometimes wishes there was a time limit, due to the occasional long-winded responses, but the First Amendment far out-weighs any ill will toward a rambling speakerAs long as people are well organized in their thoughts, and are considerate of others, there shouldn’t be a problem, he said.Arne Paglia, a Peekskill businessman who attends Common Council meetings, echoes Davis’ sentiments.“If elected officials fail to recognize the right of public comment, the inherent value in it, (or) choose not to allow it or not to air it, it is then clear that they do not understand their job and its concurrent obligations (and) they should resign,” Paglia said. “Despite the erroneous conviction that they may be uniquely qualified and dedicated to serving society, a board member or elected official who does not understand their role and responsibilities cannot fulfill them.”
************************************************************************************
THIS WAS IN THE NORTH COUNTYNEWS
Hall, Clinton say President missed the mark
Local pols, citizens react to State of the Union address
By Danny Lopriore
President George Bush renewed his commitment to continued involvement in establishing Iraq as a “free and Democratic” nation through increased military deployment and touched on several other domestic policy items in Tuesday night’s State of the Union address, igniting reaction from political leaders and residents of the community.Recently-elected Congressman John Hall (D-Dover Plains), who ran and won on issues like energy and fuel economy, immediately responded to the address by saying, “The President missed a real opportunity to demonstrate leadership and accept the need for change. As in previous addresses, the President paid lip-service to new forms of energy and fuel economy, but continued to focus on oil drilling and nuclear power,” Hall said. “I’m pleased to note that the President did mention ‘climate change’ tonight, however, and I’m ready to work with him on alternative fuels and conservation.”Hall said he was pleased the President acknowledged the need for accessible and affordable healthcare for Americans, too, but disagreed with the proposals presented in the President’s address, which would place a new tax burden on middle class workers. “The President and Congress should get to work on a simple, alternative approach to healthcare coverage for all Americans right away,” the Congressman said. “Most of all, I am disappointed the President continued to advance his mistaken plan to escalate the war in Iraq. He failed again to embrace the reality that a new, diplomatic approach is needed.”
Voices in the communityLocally, Buchanan Mayor Dan O’Neill was positive about Bush’s plans to develop alternative fuel sources, but disappointed in the President’s Iraq policy“I support the President's initiative to reduce our dependency on foreign oil by diversifying the domestic energy supply through increasing the use of 'alternative energy' sources such as wind, solar and nuclear power,” O’Neill said. “Senator Webb (in the Democrat response) said that Democrats were in agreement. I also agreed with the President's call to address global climate change. Americans want action on these crucial issues and now there seems to be bipartisan agreement.”O’Neill stressed his belief that the Iraq conflict needed to be resolved sooner rather than later.“I was disappointed that the President does not have a plan to get our brave troops home safely from Iraq soon and without causing further chaos,” O’Neill said.Community activist and bloggest Andy Bazzo, of Peekskill, took note of the partisan response to several of the President’s remarks and policies and the Republican Party’s weakening power after the recent mid-term elections.“There was a point in the speech when the President said now is the time to unite for victory in Iraq and to make sure we spare the American People Undo suffering at home,” Bazzo said. “The picture indelibly seared in my mind was all the Republicans standing and applauding while all the Democrat continued to sit.” “The picture presented was of a Democratic party shunning victory, convinced we are already defeated, while at the same time 20,000 more soldiers all volunteers are off to fight a battle they believe they can win. It is not a picture that will instill confidence that the Democrats can lead in time of war.”Bazzo noted that Bush had lost touch with his base when it came to domestic and economic issues.“When the President offered to grow government more domestically, it showed why the Republican base deserted the party in the last election,” Bazzo said. “People expect Republicans to halt the growth of government, not increase its size. His domestic proposals shined a light for all to see how the Republicans lost touch with their base.”Putnam Valley Town Supervisor Sam Davis said, “Mr. Bush was embarrassing in his now familiar exploitation of heroic individuals, 9-11, and the basic goodness of the American people. He was even more embarrassing in his efforts to distance himself from himself on (issues like) our nation’s dependence on foreign oil, no reasonable energy policy, the nation’s deficit, our lack of health care, a war that is indefensible and with no responsible withdrawal strategy. “We are grateful to know that global climate change does exist At least Mr. Bush has figured that out. Support our troops, absolutely. Protect our country and our freedoms. Let’s do that in a meaningful way.”
Clinton’s campaign begins After his party lost the majority in the recent mid-term election, Bush was somewhat conciliatory, asking those on the other side of the aisle to work with the Republican administration over the next two years. He graciously acknowledged the first woman Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-California) to a standing ovation. Senator Hillary Clinton (D-Chappaqua) released this statement s part of her reaction to the President’s speech. “There is no doubt that the state of our union needs to be much stronger,” said Clinton, who last week declared as a candidate for Bush’s office in 2008. “We face tremendous challenges in Iraq and Afghanistan, continuing threats to our national and homeland security and crises here at home in health care and energy. But (tonight), the President fell far short of the vision and solutions needed to meet these challenges and move our country forward.”Sen. Clinton said she was pleased that “the President finally acknowledged the problem of global warming and the need to develop alternative energy sources, but he did not offer a real plan to deal with climate change or to put us on a path to energy independence.”Clinton also noted that the President finally addressed the need to deal with the health care crisis, but offered a proposal that does nothing make health insurance more affordable or accessible for the millions of uninsured and underinsured Americans. “The President called for ‘No Child Left Behind’ to be reauthorized this year, but has failed to ensure the funding needed to fulfill the promise of this landmark law,” Clinton said. “And instead of charting a new course in Iraq, including the political solution desperately needed, so that we can begin to bring our troops home, the President continued his defense of failed strategy and his escalation plan in Iraq.Peekskill business leader and community activist Arne Paglia said, “American citizens and the rest of the world will continue to pay a heavy price as the President continues to learn respect for others, respect for the value of their knowledge, expertise, and perspective, and for their civil rights. “He's learning all too slowly, and in some ways not at all,” Paglia said. “Hopefully, Congress, emboldened by hearing from the American people, and the American people themselves, will step up.
************************************************************************************
THIS WAS IN THE JOURNAL NEWS
Peekskill school voters approve $7.75M in capital projects
By Diana CostelloThe Journal News(Original Publication: January 27, 2007) PEEKSKILL
Voters in the Peekskill school district this week approved $7.75 million in repairs and renovations, almost all of which will be covered by state aid.
Projects will include:
- A new roof on Hillcrest School
- Technology enhancements to upgrade the planetarium at Peekskill High School
- Renovating playgrounds and playgroup equipment
- Repairs to sidewalks, exterior doors and interior doors at Peekskill High School
- A new sound system and lighting system for the auditorium of Peekskill High School
- Renovating heating, venting and air conditioning systems
- Repairs to rear exit ramp at Uriah Hill
At most, the cost to taxpayers is estimated to be 20 cents a year per $10,000 of assessed value. Most of the cost is covered by a one-time allocation of state EXCEL aid and reimbursements from the state in building aid.
Peekskill has been allocated $2.3 million in EXCEL aid for the projects.
EXCEL Aid (Expanding our Children's Education and Learning) can only be used to pay for new school repairs that cover one of the following areas: education technology, health and safety projects, building expansion, handicapped accessibility and/or energy reduction.
That means the district cannot use the funds for construction of the new middle school.
The state will also provide Peekskill with 70.2 percent reimbursement in building aid, which comes to about $5.44 million.
In a small voter turnout Wednesday, the bond passed 347 to 157.
"By combining EXCEL Aid and Building Aid, we will actually be protecting taxpayers from the tax increases that would have been necessary in the future to get this repair and renovation work done," Schools Superintendent Judith Johnson said in statements. "Thank you to all those who took the time to demonstrate their concern and support for our children."
************************************************************************************
THIS WAS IN THE JOURNAL NEWS
New name for East Main Street in Cortlandt
By Robert MarchantThe Journal News(Original Publication: January 28, 2007)
One of Cortlandt's most prominent commercial thoroughfares is about to get a new look and a new name.
Town Supervisor Linda Puglisi is looking to give East Main Street (Route 6) a name change to "Cortlandt Boulevard," with new signs going up in the next few months. The town is looking for a visual makeover, as well, to upgrade the busy state road with new lighting, trees, benches and traffic features to make it a safer and more pleasant place to drive.
"I'm trying to make it more of a charming neighborhood roadway," Puglisi said, and the first step would be new signage with the name Cortlandt Boulevard.
Puglisi said she was looking for a resolution this month from the Town Board to make the name change, which is intended to be largely symbolic. Town Board approval will be followed by several thousand dollars worth of new signs. The supervisor said the new name of the road is part of a larger campaign, such as the recent expense of $1,800 for new town flags, to foster a stronger self-identity for Cortlandt.
The New York state Department of Transportation OK'd the request for a new name for Route 6 in Cortlandt in December. Puglisi said it was unclear whether the renaming would require businesses to change their mailing address from "East Main Street" to "Cortlandt Boulevard." She noted, "I'm hoping it won't change," and upcoming discussions with the U.S. Postal Service will clarify the point.
Besides the signs, the town administration is looking for a number of improvements to the road. First up, if a $250,000 grant from New York state comes through, will be cast-iron light poles, benches, planters and trees.
A larger plan costing around $3 million in state DOT funding will create a median on Route 6 with plantings in the center.
The goal will be to "calm" traffic and make it an easier thoroughfare to drive on.
Puglisi said some of the access points from businesses onto Route 6 will be consolidated, cutting down on the number of places where cars zip on and off the busy road.
Puglisi said the town administration would be meeting with the merchant community and state engineers to work out the design of the road with fewer "curb cuts," or access points. "We don't want anybody to panic about it," she said. "We're out to enhance the roadway, which will enhance the businesses."
Local merchants on the strip appear receptive to the upgrades, though they want more information before committing to any particular plan.
"It sounds good," said Ed Enea, one of the owners of Home and Hearth. "It could make it a more inviting setting."
John Marvin, who runs a printing business, said he'd like to see the specifics of the roadway design, though he liked the idea of a more attractive streetscape. "It sounds good in theory," he said. "To spruce up the area would improve business conditions. But I'd like to see the layout. Sometimes, small changes can cause big problems," he said.
Puglisi said the town administration would also be working on visual improvements to the traffic circle around the Annsville Creek, near the intersection of Route 9 and the Bear Mountain Parkway. That project will involve relatively small landscaping additions.
************************************************************************************
ANATOMY OF A HIT PIECE PART ONE:
IN DEFENSE OF MAYOR TESTA AND CHIEF TUMOLO
Dear Readers:
Sixteen years ago a young man named Jeffrey Deskovic was convicted in a jury trial in the rape and murder of a young girl named Angela Correa. The young man confessed to the crime. The DNA did not match the young man's. Remember DNA was not as an exact science then as it is now. Yet, the young man was still convicted by a jury. Recently the young man was set free when the DNA came up with a match of another man who is serving time in prison for another murder. A terrible tragedy has occurred, but what is that tragedy? There is a lawsuit going on now to decide. the young man states that his confession was cohersed. The lieutenant of detectives at the time was Peekskill's now Chief of police Tumolo.
Why do I bring this up? There is a free weekly "newspaper" called the Westchester Guardian that has headlined this week that the Chief must be fired. They demand that Mayor Testa fire the Chief before all the facts are in. That's right, to hell with the Chief's day in court, the Guardian say's "off with his head". At least Mr. Deskovic had his day in court, and will again. For those of you who have followed this in the papers, we will see if Mr. Deskovic says under oath what he has said in print.
As many of you know I am a local taxi driver and owner, therefore because of licensing requirements I have lots of contact with the Peekskill Police. This relationship is many times adversarial. The Chief Tumolo I know would never countenance the skirting of the law. I know that until this lawsuit takes place that all the facts are not in. My knowledge of the Chief also makes me believe that the whole story has not been told.
Mayor Testa has been asked at a few Public council meetings to comment on this. Mayor Testa has been demanded of by the Wescheter Guardian to comment on this. How ever with a lawsuit in progress, the Mayor has rightfully declined to comment, and the Guardian knows this! This is what is called in politics a "hit piece". The demanding of something damning that what cannot be given. As a civil servant that Chief cannot be arbitrarily fired by the Mayor, and the Guardian damn well knows this too!!!! Our system of justice allows ALL parties involved their day in court, and the Guardian by advocating action before this happens is trying to deny the Chief his rights, and that is truly damnable. By trying to paint the Mayor in a negative light (for purely political reasons), into this picture before all the facts come out is in of itself beneath contempt. I would ask all of you who have followed this story, to refrain from judgement till all the fact come out UNDER OATH. Any action needed (if any) should be taken then.
For more on this topic, link to the Peekskill Guardian at the bottom of this page.
************************************************************************************
THIS WAS IN THE JOURNAL NEWS
Business leaders see tax hikes in Spitzer budget
By JAY GALLAGHER GANNETT NEWS
(Original publication: February 2, 2007)
ALBANY - Although Gov. Eliot Spitzer pledged not to raise taxes next year, his budget proposes what amounts to an almost half-billion-dollar tax increase for businesses, the head of the state's largest business-lobbying group said yesterday.
"Sometimes tax experts may call what they're doing closing a loophole, but to the business owners paying the bill, it certainly feels like a tax increase," said Kenneth Adams, president of the state Business Council.
Indeed, Spitzer called the range of revenue-ranging measures in his $120.6 billion spending plan "eliminated loopholes," and has repeatedly insisted that his budget does not call for higher taxes, although the "loophole closures" would raise $449 million next year and $567 million the year after that.
"The difference between a loophole and a tax increase is a loophole is an anomaly not intended by the law," said Paul Francis, Spitzer's budget director. "Each of these loopholes meets that definition."
The largest change being proposed by Spitzer, which would cost businesses $215 million next year, would require companies with out-of-state subsidiaries to file combined, rather than separate, tax returns, with those subsidiaries.
Francis said this would prohibit, for example, a company with a large presence in New York to set up a subsidiary in a state like Delaware that has no state tax on businesses and shift, on paper, most of its earnings there, even though most of its money was actually made in New York.
"In many cases the primary reason for the creation of the subsidiaries was to reduce tax liability," Francis said.
But E.J. McMahon, who follows state-government finances for the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, said the change amounts to a tax increase.
"There are very real subsidiaries of very real companies who would be affected by this," McMahon said. "This was no unintended consequence. This has been part of the tax law in this state since 1945."
McMahon pointed out that Spitzer is also proposing cutting state aid to New York City by $300 million, but giving it permission for the same kind of "loophole-closing" that the state plans. McMahon said "the extra burden on New York City firms could be $300 million or $400 million more."
"That's enough to affect decisions about where they do business," he said.
McMahon and Francis agreed, however, that another Spitzer proposal - eliminating the tax deduction for some real-estate investment trusts - does amount to closing a loophole, and would raise $104 million for the state next year.
The burden would fall mostly on banks, who have used the trusts to shelter dividend income.
Then-Gov. George Pataki proposed the same thing last year, but it was rejected by the Legislature, which would also have to approve the Spitzer proposals for them to take effect. Lawmakers are supposed to act on the budget plan by April 1.
Some of the other "loopholes" Spitzer wants to close:
- End the tax exemption for cooperative insurance companies: $23 million.
- Raise the fees on limited-liability corporations: $30 million.
- Mandate reporting of tax shelters: $16 million.
- End use by banks of inactive subsidiaries to shelter income: $19 million.
- End the use of a deduction for manufacturers that is structured in such a way that a firm can get the break even if it doesn't make anything in New York: $25 million.
- Stop the practice of allowing individuals to set up corporations to reduce tax liability: nothing this year, but $100 million in 2008-09.
MY COMMENTS ON THIS
Dear Readers:
So, the new Governor's budget is in. Like he said on the campaign trail, "day one, everything changes." Like I said, our mistake was believing that it would change for the betterment of the taxpayer. This new budget comes in at $121 billion dollars. This is more than twice the rate of inflation. He will however not increase taxes, no, a new euphemism has been born, "closing loopholes." Now I am no fan of the banking industry, (you think big oil is screwing you, look closely at the banking industry), but as I have said before, corporations do not pay taxes, we the consumers do in the higher costs that are past down to us, and so in closing those loopholes we will get stuck with the bill, in the cost of higher bank charges. This is a typical New York State budget where the redistributing of wealth, the punishment of success is the foundation.
Let me say in fairness, the closing of the one bonifide loophole, that where a corporation can set up a subsidiary in another state to avoid our taxes, even though their primary business is here, should be closed. like any other business not big enough to open a fake storefront in another state, you make your money here, you pay your taxes here, then maybe you will use your influence to hold down the growth of government, instead keeping a blind eye while you take our money to another state.
A RELATED LETTER IN THE JOURNAL NEWS
Bill good for Albany, bad for environment
Once again Albany has found a creative way to to reach into the pockets of taxpayers while preaching no new taxes.
The expansion of the current bottle bill has little to do with the environment and everything to do with income for Albany.
The current bottle bill allows the deposit initiator to retain the nickel deposit when the consumer does not return the bottle to the store for the deposit refund (this does not mean that the consumer did not recycle the unit in another way). These unclaimed nickels currently amount to approximately $175 million a year.
If Albany has its way the bottle bill will expand to more than twice the number of containers currently in the program. This would also increase the dollar amount of the unclaimed nickels to approximately $350 million a year.
What Albany has added to the proposed bottle bill is that all these unclaimed nickels, which currently go back to the deposit initiator, will now go to them, representing some $350 million annually.
The expense will be passed along to the consumer. The estimated cost is 15 cents per unit. This information in detail has been passed along to the bill sponsor, who did not refute in anyway what was presented.
If this bill passes, consumers will be looking at the potential for a single serve beverage (which was not in the original bottle bill) that sold for 99 cents to now cost $1.15.
The issue of sanitation in city stores is also a critical issue in itself.
Mitch Klein
White Plains
************************************************************************************
THIS WAS IN THE NORTH COUNTY NEWS
REGION: Sustainable Development Study
Frustration grows over lack of progress
By Martin Wilbur
Officials in two of the three municipalities that participated in the Sustainable Development Study appear no closer to agreeing to conceptual plans that could provide the region with millions of dollars in traffic improvements.Comments from council members in Cortlandt and Peekskill this week again raised doubt whether there will be any substantive gains derived from the study.“It’s a million dollars to pay for this consultant and there hasn’t been one stop sign put up in 10 years,” Cortlandt Supervisor Linda Puglisi said during her Town Board’s work session Monday night.The remark came as the board was reviewing its progress from the updated Comprehensive Master Plan, passed in 2004; however, it highlighted some of the frustration regarding the lack of progress in each of the three communities.About seven years ago Yorktown, Cortlandt and Peekskill joined in a regional study that examined land use and transportation patterns, among other issues, in an attempt to solve mutual obstacles facing each of the communities.The ultimate goal was to come up with a consensus where there would be short- and long-term solutions and funding to match, according to Yorktown Supervisor Linda Cooper, the study’s most enthusiastic supporter.Cooper agreed that many of the short-term solutions have been slow to materialize but said that each one of the municipalities must pass three separate resolutions to have any chance of securing hundreds of millions of dollars for either a Route 6 bypass and/or a linking of the Taconic and Bear Mountain parkways.Next Tuesday Yorktown is prepared to take action supporting the diversion of truck traffic onto the Bear Mountain Parkway to address Peekskill’s largest concern of uncontrolled numbers of trucks rumbling through the city’s downtown.It is also expected to agree to generic plans supporting both the bypass and the Taconic/ Bear Mountain Parkway link.Unless all three municipalities do the same there is no chance to receive funding, Cooper warned.“The goal for us is to get these resolutions passed so we can get on the state TIPS (Transportation Improvement Program list),” Cooper said. “Otherwise, no one will get the funding to do the plan.”
Skepticism aboundsAlthough Peekskill passed the resolution last year supporting putting trucks throughout the day on the Bear Mountain Parkway, Mayor John Testa said, it has yet to act on the other two matters.This week another Cortlandt council member strongly indicated that there is little chance of him agreeing to the concept.Councilman John Sloan said he was fed up with the lack of progress and did not expect to be voting for the resolutions any time soonHe said the study has not produced the results that were expected and did not anticipate any major improvements.“If I can’t get a traffic light and a sign over all these years I’m not going to agree on a $100 million bypass,” Sloan said. Puglisi said she wanted to schedule a meeting with Yorktown officials to discuss issues surrounding the study. Despite the harsh comments, she and Cooper appeared optimistic that meeting could be arranged.
MY COMMENTS ON THIS
Dear Readers:
Am I the only one who noticed that there is no mention that it was OUR hundred million they are talking about? These town heads did not print this money in their basements, no, it was our confiscatory property taxes that paid for this useless study. To think that this study has gone on for seven years!!!!! Had these heads actually asked those who drive on these roads what they thought could be done to improve travel, they would have gotten the same answers and then some. I guess the thought of actually saving taxpayer dollars never crossed their minds. No, it was easier to pay some outside source one hundred million dollars to tell us what we should have already known. If we study it, if we talk it to death, if we throw money at it, the people will think we care and are doing something.
Now there is no denying that the connecting of the Taconic to the Bear Mnt. Pkwy. is a must. Yet there is this Cortlant Councilman saying that if he doesn't get his traffic light, he will not vote for the connection. How damn parochial can one get? The hell with the needs of the commuters, the need of the Councilman comes first!!!!!!! After seven long and costly years it is time for the respective local governments to put this high on their agenda and move this forward so that we who paid for this could at least get something for our money.
************************************************************************************
THIS WAS N THE COMMENTS SECTION OF MY LAST BLOG
At 8:28 PM, John Q. Public said...
I am bothered that the Peekskill City Council moved forward with a request for proposals for the Washauer plan for the construction of 15 story buildings in the downtown. I, along with many of my neighbors, attended the public meeting at the Paramount Center where there was unanimous opposition to a 15 story building. We were also told at that presentation that our concerns would be incorporated into the study that would eventually be sent out as an RFP to developers. The plan that was sent out for proposals is the same plan, with no modifications, that was presented to both the business community and the general public. I can't help but feel a little duped here, again.When the Ginsburg project for the waterfront was presented at the Paramount almost two years ago, we were told the purpose of the meeting was to get community input into the planning process. There as well there was unanimous opposition to the parking garage. Yet those concerns were not incorporated either and a garage is going to be built. I would really like to see both areas of our town redeveloped, but I don't like being patronized. I care too much about this town. It's almost as if we are being fooled into believing there is a community planning process underway, yet at the end of the day, none of our concerns get incorporated into any of the plans. I point the finger at everyone in city hall for this, both parties. I blame the Republicans for ignoring the public and I blame the Democrats for not making more noise about the fact that the public was ignored. I have heard everyone argue over simpler things and with the exception of one comment by Claxton at a work session, there has been no action taken to make Washuaer bring something back that the public was more supportive of. I know the politicians will respond that this is "a study" and that the proposal process will help provide more clarity on the point of the height. If that's the case, why did the politicians waste my time and money in inviting me to attend the meeting at the Paramount Center? Was it because they wanted to send me the impression that cared what I thought? The public made its voice heard and that voice was ignored. One of the things that this blog talks about the most is the need of our government to work for the people. In the case of the downtown redevelopment plan, the people made their voice very clear on the issue of the height of those buildings. How can anyone expect us to support our local officials if they don't care about what we have to say.
MY COMMENTS ON THIS
I know that height has been a concern to the public. Let me point out that the Brown Street Apartments are about that tall and also the Senior Housing at 801 South Street is also comparable. Public meetings are for input, even advocacy, however there is no obligation to enact these concerns. This does not mean your time was wasted. The issue of the parking garage, there is not enough parking available now for the people who wish to use mass transit. No matter how parocial you may feel, this garage is a must. This is an example of why we are a representative republic where the elected leaders look at how the picture affects ALL the people and the future of the city. As I was not at that meeting at the Paramount, maybe one of the attending politicians will respond to your comments and I will print that response. It is in that hope that I incorporated your comments into this blog entry, as you are correct, the government needs to work with the people, and getting information out is part of that work.
************************************************************************************
SITE TO LINK TO:
PLAN PUTNAM: planputnam@yahoogroups.com/PLAN PUTNAM BLOG: http://planputnam.blogspot.com/PEEKSKILL GUARDIAN: http://peekskillguardian.blogspot.com/NORTH COUNTY NEWS: http://northcountynews.com/THE JOURNAL NEWS: http://thejournalnews.com/PEEKSKILL DEMOCRATS: http://www.peekskilldems.com/PEEKSKILL REPUBLICANS: http://peekskillgop.com/
BAZZO 02/03/07
No comments:
Post a Comment