To The Editor:

On Wednesday, January 25th, I attended the Board of Education meeting during which many issues and business items were discussed. Of particular importance to me was the impending work session to discuss expanding kindergarten hours to five full days. The work session, scheduled for February 7, will debate the merits of this proposed action. I urge any parent who presently has a child in kindergarten or is about to enroll a student in kindergarten to discuss this issue with board members prior to this meeting. As you may know, while citizens are allowed to attend these work sessions, they are not allowed to express their opinions or ask questions.

At the heart of the matter is whether or not expanded hours for five year olds (who will be asked to jump on a bus at about 8 a.m. and return home around 3:30 p.m. on every school day) is excessive even in the pursuit of a higher academic standard. Given the quality of our teachers, it is obvious that they can use the additional time for instruction. The move to 3 expanded days this past fall seems to be indicating that kids are setting the bar a little higher. If we moved to 7 full days, I expect the results would be even better. Aren’t we missing something here? After just five months of a radical social/educational change for our kids, families and teachers, we’re ready to push forward again in pursuit of a higher test score. Let’s give the existing program a chance to be viewed over the course of a few years and measure its effect in less quantitative ways. Let’s examine whether kids are staying healthy while undergoing more hours in confined classrooms. We should try to find out what behavioral issues there are when an exhausted little child gets home only to find out he has homework. There is a huge impact on the family dynamic here. What about extra-curricular activity? Is there time or energy for dance or karate or soccer or piano? Heck, play dates for five year olds will become virtually obsolete. And lest I forget, what stresses are we imposing on a heavily taxed group of teachers. Classrooms now presently half-full in the afternoon will double in numbers lessening the relaxed atmosphere that seems to be relieving the burden of full days on our professional educators and kids.

Improved performance is to be applauded. Let’s not let it be the only standard in measuring a healthy, happy, well-adjusted five year old. Give someone a call with your thoughts and concerns before a decision is made for your family.

Mike Milbury

Dawdling

To The Editor:

If the 12 years or so of diddling and dawdling about the fate of St. Pauls should have taught us anything, it might be that any assumption by a self selected few, that they have, at last, found, independently, the right solution, would be both rash and reckless, and presumptuous as well.

In the very first category of the Adelphi poll, about 15% of respondents favored a library move. In the same category, 2 lines below, respondents favored demolition by 25%. In this context, the Board of Trustees has passed, by virtue of a double vote by the mayor, a motion to construct a new library at St. Pauls. If, at the end of the day, absent this resolution, the final taxpayer verdict would have been demolition, it would have been, effectively, preempted. So might have been other more favored but incompatible solutions.

Dare I suggest that, when coupled with the recent similarly questionable Parkland gambit, chicanery seems to be calling the shots? Why did we do the poll, if its’ inputs are dismissable? We should be leery of those who feel that their personal judgments are of an especially inspired and prescient quality. Even though the rest of us may have less inspired judgement, our collective opinions may be worth considering...

Frank Kiernan

“Comfort Station”

To The Editor:

After having read the letters in your paper for the past five years, opposition to raising taxes is clearly a central theme. Not one person, however, has expressed concern over a $432,450 “Comfort Station,” otherwise known as a bathroom, being constructed on St. Paul’s Field. Talk about flushing your money away.

Nicole LeFever

Mischaracterization

To The Editor:

I would like to respond to what I am sure was an unintended mischaracterization of residents from the Estates Section who have been opposed to the full perimeter path at St. Paul’s Field. In a letter written last week, these residents were depicted as being opposed because they feel the path comes too close to their property and would interfere with their peaceful enjoyment of their backyard.

Members of the Estate Community opposed sole objection has been to the security and safety concerns the full perimeter path poses to their families and to all residents of this Village. These residents’ efforts have been solely responsible for any dicussion at all occurring regarding safety and security as it pertains to the path and the activity it invites. Their points have merit. At a Village Board of Trustees meeting on December 2, 2004, the Trustees voted to send back the perimeter path for further review to the Recreation Commission for reasons pertaining to safety, security and budgetary concerns.

Perhaps these residents should be applauded as opposed to being negatively mischaracterized for their expressed concerns. Just maybe through their efforts they will make the Village a “Safer,” better place.

Tim Worstell

Crime Concerns

To The Editor:

James J. Furey, Jr. is the Recreation Commissioner for the Central Property Owners Assn. As such, his primary role is to represent the views of the residents of Central to the Recreation Board. In my view, and in the view of most of my neighbors on St. Paul’s Place, Mr. Furey has done a poor, and even dishonorable job in the matter of the proposed jogging path on St. Paul’s field.

From the time this issue arose in the Recreation Department, a year or so ago, Furey has been an arrogant, vocal and unabashed cheerleader for this path. In fact, he has NEVER solicited the views of the abutting homeowners. At a recent CPOA meeting he claimed that he notified abutting residents of various Recreation Board meetings. At the Recreation Board meeting in June 2004, Mr. Furey made the motion to build the jogging path without any mandate from central’s residents, despite fierce opposition from the St. Paul’s Place residents in attendance. Mr. Furey, also in June, then apparently heavily lobbied the CPOA Board to produce a strong vote in favor of the path. (At their January 2005 meeting, the CPOA Board was more mixed in its views regarding the path and a final vote will come in early February).

The ultimate outrage from Mr. Furey came in a January 28 letter to the Garden City News. In it he: (1) urges everyone in the Village to support the jogging path (he is supposed to represent Central Property Owners): (2) complains that not enough support for the path has been forthcoming from Village residents; and (3) then grossly misrepresents the views of the anti-path residents. As a member of Village government the very act of writing this letter was improper and unprofessional. Mr. Furey’s job is to listen - with an open mind - not to campaign.

In his letter, Mr. Furey states that opponents to the path (quote) “It comes too close to their property and would interfere with their peaceful enjoyment of their backyards.”

The truth is that St. Paul’s Place residents have placed increased crime risk as by far our number one concern. Estates residents (Hampton Road) have the same view. The potential crime we refer to is to children playing on the field, spectator children. Joggers and abutting properties by criminals and burglars. Police Commissioner Cipullo has publicly acknowledged the higher risk of “crimes of opportunity” - which Mr. Furey implied was not as big a threat as many believe. Furey stated this view at the January 2005 CPOA meeting. He obviously is downplaying and minimizing our police chief’s views.

After crime concerns, the St. Paul’s Place (and Hampton Road) residents believe (1) jogging has been occurring on the grass for decades so the new path is redundant. There has been no lobbying from joggers, seniors, or any groups, in favor of the path (2) it is a waste of roughly $100,000 to build the path. Finally, we do not object to one of the Recreation Board options, i.e., a path only on Rockaway and Stewart Avenues where the police can better patrol and there are no abutting homes.

In sum, Mr. Furey has betrayed his constituents in Central by never seeking their views and then voting against them. After all, those with the most at stake have to be listened to. With “friends” like Mr. Furey, who needs enemies. Mr. Furey gets an “F” from St. Paul’s Place residents, is a disgrace to Garden City government and should recuse himself from the future Recreation Board votes regarding the path.

George M. Salem

Safety Concerns

To The Editor:

This is in response to a letter by James M. Furey, Jr. printed in your newspaper on Friday, January 28, 2005. Mr. Furey asked the residents to “Tell Us What You Think” well this is what I think……

The residents of Hampton Road and St. Paul’s have been united and vocal in their opposition to the perimeter path. However, Mr. Furey has misled the residents of Garden City as to what the true concerns are. It is obvious that our opposition has not been fully understood by the Garden City Recreation Committee. Our primary concern has been and always will be about the safety and wellbeing of all Garden City residents, especially our children. At the December 2nd Trustee meeting, a resident asked Police Commissioner Cipullo, who has over 40 years experience in Garden city, what does he think is the safer path? A perimeter path (a path that can’t be seen from Stewart and Rockaway), or the one that is visible by patrol cars and would go along Stewart and Rockaway only. Commissioner Cipullos’ exact words were as follows: “Obviously, we need the ability to do the pass by. So if you have it up against the Hampton Road side, we can’t drive in there. You are correct in the deterrent factor by the presence of the police vehicle. The other thing is that the types of problems that we would probably have are crimes of opportunity.” The police chief goes on to describe what crimes of opportunity are. For more information you can go to village hall and read the minutes of the December 2nd Trustee meeting. Commissioner Cipullo last remarks were. IF YOU’RE DOWN ON HAMPTON ROAD, WE CAN’T DRIVE THERE. Why would we put a path where our police would not have direct access? St. Paul’s has been used by many different outside groups over the years. How are we going to monitor the use of the perimeter path by non-residents? As a parent of three children, I would not feel safe dropping my child to play at any Garden City park that is used by non-residents, let alone non-residents jogging on St. Paul’s. With the recent letters sent home by the Garden City school district to warn parents of the sexual offenders in our area, it has to be a concern of parents. While Garden City seems safer than most other Long Island communities, we are not immune to unfortunate incidents. Let us not forget the incident that took place at Grove Park in 1993 that involved eight Garden City children trying to enjoy a day at the park. To verify this incident check Newsday.com Guilty Plea in Sex Case (Nassau & Suffolk Edition).

So you asked what I think, St. Paul’s is absolutely the wrong place to put a perimeter path. Although it sounds like a good idea, it clearly has many safety and liability issues. A much safer option would be a path on Stewart and Rockaway. Our Police commissioner stated twice that he could not have a police presence on the Hampton Road and St. Paul’s Place part of the field. Let common sense be our guide and not put any resident in a potential dangerous situation.

Jackie Sprotte

P.S. Mr. Furey, while I certainly appreciate the time you have spent on the recreation commission, your comment that residents who border St. Paul’s are worried about the peaceful enjoyment of their backyards was erroneous. I am disappointed that you try to portray us as selfish residents, when in fact, we only have the best intentions. Having attended many estates, recreation, and trustee meetings I have no knowledge of any neighbor making those comments. Our concerns have always been about the safety of our children and all those who use the field.

Snowfall Hints

Dear Editor:

I read your article “Snowfall Helpful Hints” and would like to add another hint which would be very helpful to commuters and may prevent some serious accidents. Please remind residents and merchants in the Garden City area (including Garden City South) who are located on walking routes to the Nassau Boulevard train station (i.e. Kilburn Road, Nassau Boulevard, Euston Road, Wellington Road) to pay particular attention to clearing of their sidewalks and if they have a corner property, to take the extra time to make a path to the street. This would be very helpful to Village residents who choose to and non-Village residents who have no choice but to walk to the LIRR station. After the recent blizzard, while most sidewalks had a path, when one got to the corner, there was no way to cross over the mountains of snow which meant having to double back and take another route, walk in the street or try to climb over the snowpiles and risk falling. While I realize that plowing may have been responsible for the piles of snow, the mountains of snow remained untouched long after the plows stopped. Walking in the street presents the danger of not being seen by motorists, especially at night and one should not even consider walking on Nassau Boulevard as it would be a suicide mission due to the heavy traffic volume. All it takes is a few minutes with a shovel to cut a path to make it safer for everyone.

Karen Boldizar

Display Of Compassion

To The Editor:

On an icy cold January morning, there was a bad fire next door to my office and what I observed was amazing tenderness on the part of building coworkers. As the Executive Director of the Long Island Volunteer Center, I am located in space donated through the largesse of dear friends and fellow Garden City residents, Mary Ellen and Mike Cirrito. The building they own is a circa 1860’s house coverted to law offices at the corner of Hilton and Jackson in Hempstead. This very unique work setting (with fireplaces and original moldings) became a short-term safe haven for neighbors escaping an apartment fire on Terrace Avenue adjacent to the property on Thursday, January 20.

The law offices receptionist called me at home about 9:00 am to say there were at least 20 people in our building seeking refuge and was I aware of any organization that could help them. The office personnel witnessing the exodus of people shivering in 12 degree weather immediately invited them inside to get warm while they waited out the emergency in progress. By the time I arrived at the building, the attorneys and secretaries (in their own cars) were already shuttling the displaced residents to a temporary shelter set up at Salvation Army, holding babies while mothers attended to other children, showing people where the restrooms were or getting them something to drink, translating information for those who didn’t speak English, and providing good company to those in need during a very stressful situation.

I was so impressed by this heartwarming display of compassion by people who showed up for work just like they do everyday - only that morning brought a whole new set of circumstances causing them to rise to the occasion. Newsday reported on January 21 that 28 people made homeless as a result of the fire were being housed in temporary facilities organized by American Red Cross Nassau and that two firemen and a few residents had been treated by EMT and local hospitals. What didn’t make the news were the small, yet incredible acts of human kindness by people I always respected and now revere for their depth of character. It’s how we respond neighbor to neighbor that makes all the difference in building community. Volunteers truly are society’s glue.

Diana O’Neill

Note: The Long Island Volunteer Center is part of the Points of Light Foundation National Network of Volunteer Centers and has received program funding by NYS Senator Kemp Hannon.