Unequal Protection

To the Editor:

Since the school tax bills were received last week, I have had several phone calls and heart to heart conversations, which may be summed up as follows:

1) The School Board’s statement that the average rise in taxes would be approximately 61¼2% was not manifested in what actually occurred.

2) The average rise seems to have been 111¼2% except for those who fall within the STAR Enhanced Program. There it was 61¼2%.

3) The position that is being heard more often in Nassau and even Suffolk Counties is that the public school’s system of allocating taxes violates the equal protection clause of the 14 th Amendment. Specifically, the 14 th Amendment’s equal protection clause may be violated because property owners who have no children in school pay the same amount as those who do; that the property owners who have one child in school pay as much as property owners who have two, three, four or five children in the schools.

Several years ago I commented in a letter to the Editor that it was time for the State of New York to pay for public education by way of the income tax. Interestingly, the new comptroller of Nassau County now advocates an income tax approach.

Perhaps contemplated law suits based upon the Equal Protection Clause could be cut off by this approach. In addition, the controversy between poor school districts and more affluent ones might be eliminated by such an approach. What do you think?

Joseph A. Calamari

Thanks To Officer Hudak

To The Editor:

I wanted to take a moment and recognize the extra effort of Police Officer Hudak of the Garden City Police Department. Officer Hudak was extremely helpful in assisting my husband and myself in the proper installation of our child car seat. He took the time to not only install the car seat, but to explain certain safety measures that can be taken to avoid or minimize damage to anyone should we be in a car accident. He showed compassion, not only as a police officer, but also as a father himself, concerned about the safety of another child.

This service is currently being offered to anyone with children (or grandchildren), free of charge. It is my understanding that unfortunately more and more places (police departments, car dealerships and county facilities) are declining to offer this type of service. As a result, Garden City has been overburdened with requests, leaving more individuals frustrated than desired. It is a real possibility that this service could be eliminated like it has been in so many other places. If you have benefited from the car seat service (or any other service from the police department), let them know. They deserve the positive recognition!

Greta Besendorfer

Listen To Majority

To The Editor:

I want to make three points about St. Paul’s fields:

1) When residents voted to acquire the fields, the majority of the people voted for park AND playing fields – not just playing fields. Why aren’t the fields at Stewart and Stratford being used with greater efficiency for our children’s sports?

2) When residents voted to acquire the fields, they were to be for public use. Yet, several bordering homeowners have extended their backyards significantly into the public land. When does the Village plan to enforce the boundaries of this public land?

3) With fencing being planned to contain the St. Paul’s fields, the land now becomes exclusively playing fields – not open parkland. Yet, this fence does not include the encroaching, bordering homeowners’ extensions, only along the sides facing the roads. Balls and children don’t run into neighboring land? Only streets?

When is the Village going to listen to the majority of its residents, and not just a vocal, influential few?

Cynthia D. Brown