Letters To The Editor

Email: editor@ gcnews.com


Civil Discourse

To the Editor:

I am responding to Trustee Daughney’s letter to the Editor of the Garden City News on January 30, 2011 entitled “King Tom’s Law.”

I served four years as a Trustee and was Chair of the Mayor’s Committee on St. Paul’s. I never mocked, ridiculed or insulted a resident who criticized me no matter how they expressed themselves. Personal attacks by Trustees on residents who criticize them have no place in our civil discourse. For Trustee Daughney to call me King with “disciples” is beneath the dignity of his office.

Debate

In that edition, Manny Velez wrote a letter stating that Tadross, Rudolph and Trypuc have no right to run for office outside of the Community Agreement. He claims that for them “to run in the Village-wide election….will result in an unequal distribution of representation on the Board of Trustees.” Is that claim valid? The Community Agreement provides for selection and nomination of two Trustees from each section. Forty percent of the residents reside in the Eastern Property Association and approximately twenty percent in each of the other Property Associations. Is that equal representation? The Community Agreement provides that the Mayor be selected and nominated by each section in rotation. The Mayor receives two votes in case of a tie. Is that equal representation?

Should not the debate be on the issues and not the manner of candidate selection? Our state law gives citizens the right to run for office in a Village-wide election providing they file a petition with at least 100 residents’ signatures. That right is a part of our democracy. Should the exercise of that right be held against those who exercise it? Isn’t democracy best served when there is a Village-wide debate on issues. When there is only the Community Agreement Party, there can be no Village-wide debate.

Conduct of Our

Government

In last week’s letter Trustee Daughney criticized me for objecting to the Board of Trustees (“Board”) going into executive session to consider an opinion of Counsel. He is correct that the Board may do that based on the attorney client privilege to preserve confidential information. However the scope of the privilege is limited. Once the attorney’s advice is given the privilege has ended and the Board is required to return to public session to discuss the policy issue. Further, there is no attorney client privilege if there are outside parties in the room when the attorney’s opinion is given. (Opinion from the Committee on Open Government OMI-AO-4622 May 5, 2008)

While I was Trustee the Board frequently went into Executive Session using this privilege as a pretext. Let me illustrate;

1. Meeting with Garden City Hotel owner and/or attorney to discuss changes to the Village Code to provide for additional apartments.

2. Meeting with LIRR officials to discuss the Third Track proposal

3. Meeting with the developer and/or his representatives regarding the proposal to develop the “Hub”

4. Meetings to consider changes to the Zoning Law regarding;

a) the apartment house and townhouse development on Stewart Avenue,

b) the assisted living proposal on the Cathedral property,

c) the development of the Texaco gas station site on Seventh Street.

5. Meeting to consider the Village’s response to Mineola’s apartment house proposal on Old Country Road.

These were among the many meetings the Board had behind closed doors, at which policy discussions were had, many of which were attended by outside parties. I objected to these meetings. However, Counsel advised the Board that they were lawful because the Board could seek an opinion of Counsel. He was wrong, as policy discussions were held and outside parties were often present.

The School Board meets monthly in “work sessions” to discuss policy issues in public. Why doesn’t the Village Board give our residents that right?

Thomas M. Lamberti

Lack Of Understanding

To the Editor:

I have a state pension. However, there is such gouging. Superintendent of schools “retiring” and then working full time for another school district / sometimes the same one FULL TIME, as an interim.

Lawyers whose firms were on retainer, were paid by their firm, some how were paid on paper by the district and end up with a state pension on top of everything else.  Loop holes and corruption draining the finances of the state. This is true. Attorney General, now Governor Cuomo went after the school districts, the lawyers as well as the school districts.

Garden City was never in the mix.

Governor Cuomo, while Attorney General for the State of New York went after a lot of people who were milking the system. They were not the  regular Joe and Mary fireman, teacher, etc. These were outsiders doing work that they were paid via contracts made with the Village or the School Board. Garden City and other school districts have checked their files and they have not been sucked into that hole, as those of less enlightened leadership   New York State has offered incentives for higher tier employees to retire.

The layman may look at these news items and think that Garden City is a fool not to use this to clean house and encourage many experienced workers to leave.

Triple Edged Sword:

The state is offering the incentive. The school district and Village have to meet a certain amount of that incentive. This costs the local governments $$$.  The cost of encouraging employees to depart form their working positions may cost more than the savings. Waiting a few years might enable the Village to dovetail the replacement in a slower fashion without putting out large sums of cash. Another point found out by the places who have ascribed to this method of quick decrease of higher paid employees / problem of training replacements. The proverb “haste makes waste” applies to this.

In addition: New York State has offered incentives for veteran employees to retire. About ten years ago, New York State passed an incentive law that gives a state employee with twenty four years experience, an additional two years credit. That means that the school district has to chip in 4% of the three or five year final average salary. Did Garden City have a say in this? No. It was all New York State. If Garden City refuses to follow these guidelines, they would be in very serious trouble and perhaps lose, whatever small amount of school aid that is given to them.

I feel particularly frightened  by the people being attracted to individuals who are publishing statistics that they do not comprehend. They portray themselves as be super knowledgeable on certain subjects. Name dropping and smoke and mirrors seem to be more part of their art.  The Garden City trustees have spent YEARS in the trenches on various committees really getting to know the residents and citizens of Garden City as well as their needs. Living in Garden City does not do that.

Linda Wangner

Fight Abortion

To the Editor:

On Monday, January 24th, 23 parishoners and friends from St. Thomas the Apostle and St. Joseph Respect Life groups braved the bitter cold and traveled down to Washington D.C. to participate in the 38th Annual March for Life. Over 250,000 dedicated souls from various parts of the country, including Colorado, Nebraska, Texas, Kansas and Wisconsin traveled great distances to witness to the truth that life begins at conception and is entitled to the full protection of the laws of our society.

Once again, Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy refused to meet with anyone from her District, except while the March was going on. Even then, the meeting would only be with a representative from her staff. Congresswoman McCarthy continually argues that abortion should be safe, legal, but rare. However, her voting record consistently supports the expansion of the holocaust of abortion.

In fact, on October 19, 2010, Congresswoman McCarthy appeared at a press conference sponosored by NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League), a group whose sole purpose is to expand the availability of abortion at every opportunity. At the press conference, New York State Senator Craig Johnson wanted to re-emphasize his support for abortion and that voters should re-elect him on this basis. Congresswoman McCarthy expressed her support for the candidacy of Mr. Johnson and also for the NARAL agenda- the killing of the unborn child for convenience sake. Fortunately, Mr. Johnson was defeated and his efforts to obtain votes at the expense of the unborn child’s life proved futile.

We will continue our fight against abortion for however long it takes to put an end to it. We will also expose all politicians who seek to intensify the plight of the unborn child for political gain. Hopefully, Congresswoman McCarthy will follow in the footsteps of former State Senator Craig Johnson and be voted out of office for her persecution of the unborn child.

Robert L. Dougherty



Leave a Reply