For Dougherty

To the Editor:

Having known Jim Dougherty (and Nancy) for the last 35 years, I am delighted that he continues to run for supervisor and work to protect our Island and our aquifer. Some folks forget that Jim and some far-sighted Islanders, Alice Knight, Barbara Olton, and others, suggested and worked on the Comprehensive Plan many years (1992) ago in spite of the reluctance of many.

Look at his record. The Island has many areas of wilderness protected through his guidance, the support of the 2-percent plan and the vision of others. A few of these areas are the Westmoreland property, the Brandenstein acres, Sylvester Manor, the Esther Hunt acres in Dering Harbor, the Barney Ryan Hampshire Farm, Cackle Hill, etc.

Also he is working toward protecting St. Gabe’s 19 acres from development. Surprisingly, it seems no good deed goes unpunished. His reward is to be unfairly criticized for trying to do the right thing. It’s beginning to sound like Washington politics.

In light of the recent storms and erosion: did you see damage at Shell Beach? Fortunately it’s already been repaired but next time that could be anyone’s beachfront. It makes sense to rethink our laws and zoning requirements. They should not be writ in stone. Jim has been elected, an honor, as chairman of the East End Supervisors and Mayors Association of the five East End Suffolk towns. They think he is doing something right. So I hope we will continue to support his work. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

JANET CULBERTSON, Shelter Island

 

Team player

To the Editor:

I was senior vice president of Pathmark Supermarkets and had the pleasure of working with Jim Dougherty for 18 years from 1971 to 1989.

Jim was a consummate team player who made a big contribution to the tremendous success our company enjoyed during the 1970s and the 1980s. Supermarkets General’s Board of Directors gave him increasing responsibilities over the years and he always performed his duties well.

Most of us left soon after the Wall Street group took over our company — Jim in 1989 and I in 1990.

If Jim is offering his services to Shelter Islanders, in my opinion you are fortunate indeed.

GENE LEAR , Summit, New Jersey

 

Hired Dougherty

To the Editor:

I was with Supermarkets General Corporation (“SGC”) for 24 years and was its chairman, president and chief executive officer from 1982 until I retired in 1987.

I had the pleasure of recruiting and hiring Jim Dougherty in 1971 and it was one of the best moves I ever made in my corporate career.

Jim served superbly as general counsel and then in increasingly responsible management positions until he retired in 1989. He contributed significantly to the tremendous success SGC and Pathmark enjoyed in the 1970s and 1980s.

In addition to being effective and intelligent, Jim was always a team player, well liked and respected by his colleagues.

After a leveraged buyout in 1987, most of us left SGC — I in 1987 and Jim in 1989.

LEONARD LIEBERMAN, Hoboken, New Jersey

 

A little research

To the Editor:

The Shelter Island Reporter needs to take greater care to check the veracity and completeness of information contained in letters it prints, especially if that information reaches the level of slander. The letter I refer to pretends to use factual information but instead relies on inference and innuendo to falsely link Jim to an event that took place 11 years after ending his employment with Supermarkets General (SGC). The letter writer does acknowledge that its content is based on “little research.” In other words, it is based on very little and incomplete research. For those who are interested in the truth, consider the following:

1. Jim was employed by SGC, a food retailer with annual sales of over $6 billion. His successful tenure there ended with him as president in 1989.

2. In 1987, SGC was the target of a hostile takeover. To protect itself from an unwanted buyer, the company’s Board of Directors decided to take the company private and thus solicited financial support from investment banks to accomplish this goal. In order to buy back the company’s shares, a great deal of debt was incurred. In other words, this was a leveraged buyout (LBO).

3. Jim, who was not happy with the LBO, was nevertheless forced to accept a two-year employment contract. Upon the contract’s expiration, he was free to move on and did so in 1989.

4. Eleven years after Jim was no longer associated with Supermarkets General, the company filed for bankruptcy protection. Eleven years is a lot of time in life and business and many thousands of decisions were made by SGC management during that time but most importantly none of these decisions was made by Jim Dougherty. It is specious reasoning to link Jim to the company’s ultimate failure.

It should be also noted that Jim has always had a keen interest in limiting debt of any type, whether corporate or municipal. This principle has been a keystone of his role as chief fiscal officer for the Town of Shelter Island for nearly four years.

Inference is not fact but it may appear to be and result in slander and defamation. What motivated the letter writer to submit this opinion should be viewed as a patent political smear. The intent is bad enough but the Reporter’s disgraceful abandonment of journalistic responsibility should be all our concerns.

SAM LEBOWITZ, Shelter lsland

 

Toxic soup

To the Editor:

It’s sad to see signs of Shelter Island slipping into the toxic soup that is national politics. Let’s try to prevent this from happening.

Regarding Bridgford A. Hunt’s letter, I had a very successful business career.

I joined Supermarkets General Corporation, a retailer with about $6 billion in sales and 52,000 employees, in 1971 as a lawyer, becoming General Counsel. The Board of Directors of this New York Stock Exchange Company, which operated Pathmark Supermarkets among many retail formats, liked what they saw, giving me more and more responsibility and electing me successively to vice president, senior vice president, executive vice president and ultimately president during my 18 years at the company.

The late 1980s, like today, had some corrupt Wall Street firms, such as Drexel Burnham, using since discredited leveraged buyouts to loot successful companies (Bridgford A. Hunt seems familiar with this device, referring to them as “LBO’s”).

Supermarkets General fell victim to this device in 1987 in an LBO led by a Wall Street investment banking firm, with many other Wall Street cohorts in the background.

When we ceased being a NYSE company in 1987, our stock price was about $40 a share. (I am very proud of my team-building during the prior years, widening the stock option net to welcome critically important Pathmark store managers for example, a few of whom still communicate with me at the holidays, thanking me for the financial security they enjoy today.)

Over the next 12 years, the Wall Street investment bankers destroyed our wonderful and successful company, taking the stock price from $40 to $0 and bankruptcy in 2000. I had nothing to do with this sorry period other than an enforced two years through 1989, performing unhappily under an employment contract the Wall Street bankers had slapped on me.

JIM DOUGHERTY, Supervisor, Town of Shelter Island

 

Wondering aloud

To the Editor:

After being given more information, it is clear that the absence of better budget numbers for ambulance corps operations going forward was largely due to the fact that the structure of those operations was going to change sufficiently so as to make any numbers offered more conjecture than anything else. I apologize for wondering aloud if this was somehow an extension of other budget anomalies present at the time of writing, as there is no evidence that is true.

While the best eventual destination of the corps is still arguable, it is also evident that the negotiations with the Red Cross for the plant, equipment and residual fund balance were deemed fragile enough to warrant expediting the matter in the manner chosen rather than opening a public discussion that could have derailed the process and ended up costing us a lot more money.

Of course, I will be watching the progress of this issue as it develops and I hope you will too. It is a very important decision and well worth the time necessary to set it up in the best manner possible for the sake of the volunteers as well as the rest of the community.

As regards those budget anomalies, or “shenanigans” as I called them at the forum, I meant nothing other than that there seemed to be an agenda behind some aspects of the process that had less to do with transparency than politics. That they yielded so much controversy is actually the strongest argument one could make for not doing things that way in the future.

Lastly, I want to thank my fellow candidates for keeping things between us not only civil but actually pleasant throughout the campaign. It is encouraging to me that Shelter Island is still largely able to avoid the pitfalls of negative campaigning and personal attacks that plague our nation as a whole. Of course, as I write, the last blows have yet to be delivered. I hope I’m not speaking too soon.

PAUL SHEPHERD, Shelter Island

 

Asking for answers

To the Editor:

It seems many questions are asked but never answered. The one a few weeks ago concerning the School Board’s hiring of a “business leader” along with an aide for this person at $600 a day seems to have been ignored. What is the job description for a “business leader?”

I need to ask some questions and hopefully they will be answered by someone.

Why is it P.A.T. Hunt is constantly being berated for her timeless efforts to save and preserve Taylor’s Island?

Why does the receiver of taxes have to sit and beg for an update to her computer system?

Why isn’t the Shelter Island Ambulance an automatic line item for the 2012 budget? The entire town needs to thank Joy Bausman, Ben Jones, Bud Fox, Helen Rosenblum and Jackie Tuthill for working endless hours to keep the group viable. Not to mention the gracious donor of the first ambulance. Thank you to them a thousand times over.

When is the town going to stop hiring so-called consultants and experts at incredible amounts of money to make decisions for the town that any local person is more than capable of making?

When is the town going to stop spending millions of dollars in the name of “land preservation” when some of this land should be donated instead of purchased? How much money has the town borrowed for these purchases? What has this really cost the taxpayers?

If the county can dip into the 2-percent conservation fund, why can’t the town help various property owners associations maintain their open space areas?

Why did the town allow the Suffolk County Board of Health dictate what had to happen with the Senior Center and their kitchen? That one really is a doozie! Seems it was working just fine.

And now the MS4 program that has been mandated so that all rainwater runoff will be caught in new catch basins to be filtered back into the aquifer. So how come 300-million gallons of water were pumped into the sea at a great cost to the taxpayers when it could have been immediately pumped into Mashomack to eventually filter back into the aquifer? This only took the present Town Board three or four weeks to decide the fate of this water with the interference of outside agencies.

And that is why I will vote to hopefully change the present Town Board to people who will have the best interests of Shelter Island in mind with all of the above mentioned situations.

GEORGIANA KETCHAM, Shelter Island

 

Supporting Dougherty

To the Editor:

We have a very interesting local election at our doorstep; three worthy candidates for supervisor in addition to many of our other town offices. However, we have only one clearly defined experienced asset.

During the past four years, the door to Town Hall has always been open in a friendly, welcoming manner. We have a town supervisor who cares and listens to the residents, a valuable trait not always found in elected officials, especially after the election. Shelter Island has fortunately not suffered the financial turmoil of some of the neighboring towns, which resulted in horrendous property tax increases negatively affecting property values in an already horrible real estate market in those areas.

I distinctly recall the authentic sympathy Jim Dougherty felt for the victims of the flood damage during the March ‘09 rains and his immediate response along with the Town Board to remedy the distress of our fellow Islanders.

Jim Dougherty again displayed exceptional leadership in his decisive support for the 4-poster system in an effort to safeguard Shelter Island residents and visiting tourists from the disabling scourge of Lyme and its related diseases. Regretfully, we have witnessed only lately in these pages the persistent lack of understanding of the enormous toxicity of this disease.

Jim has consistently exhibited tireless devotion to all residents of our beautiful Island. We believe he deserves our wholehearted endorsement for his third term as Supervisor of Shelter Island.

ANGIE and HENRY AMANN, Shelter Island

 

Supporting Card

To the Editor:

I just wanted to take a moment to comment on what a terrific job Jay Card did as coach of this year’s Shelter Island high school golf team. His kids were competitive in League VII and they qualified for the county tournament with the third-place finish.

But statistics don’t tell the story of the impact Coach Card had on his students/athletes. They are gentlemen in a game that calls for honesty and integrity.

During our matches together, we talked about our young men and the influence we coaches have on them in their everyday life and it is so much more than coaching golf.

Not only did I want to comment on what Jay Card means to his athletes but also what he means to the sport, school and community.

It is my understanding that he’s a candidate for Highway Supervisor in the upcoming elections on November 8, 2011.

His computer skills, his background in landscape architecture, the way he interjects leadership and morale into those people he comes in contact with, as well as his dedication to his work, make him a fine candidate for the position.

I consider Jay a good friend and if I lived on Shelter Island, he’d get my vote. He is an asset to the Shelter Island area and his being highway superintendent would only enhance the impact he could have on your community.

CLAUDE BEUDERT

Golf Coach, East Hampton High School

 

Ram Island causeway

To the Editor:

To me, the present direction of Town Board policy toward the offensive salvaging of the causeways from the chopping block seems as perverse in its intended result as it seems potentially pernicious into its more likely long-term end result, not only for the causeway but for the Island as a whole.

It seems to me perverse in that it is likely to lead not only to the ruin (as already noted in the first instance in last week’s Reporter) of such a spectacular ensemble of coastal wild dramatic vista, contiguous habitat, but also to open the back door to other legal challenges to seek further future encroachments to the remaining low-lying coastal margins of the Island. What legal security remains now that the town seems reluctant to have sounded retreat on this most exposed of the coastal perimeter?

It seems pernicious in that it appears as a policy to take us toward a future completely opposite to the direction of those of the previous and present day efforts to preserve the most desirable open space for public enjoyment in some fashion or another, e.g. Section 9 (bond issue), the Mashomack Preserve (by eventual sale to the Nature Conservancy) and Sylvester Manor (by various more recently evolved legal and financial instruments). Thus, it conveys the impression that little better could possibly be hoped for, given the limiting condition of the town budget, the bonding capacity, the economy and the pervasive fear of legal challengers and litigation. Yet that position now seems to invite other future private challenges to the coastal “zoning” restriction generally.

Are there not a whole host of extra-governmental “assets,” e.g., friends of Shelter Island, who might respond with some alacrity to an overture — or an outright invitation — by the town to help them out? Not only might the town hope to draw upon the legal and institutional expertise of groups, like the Peconic Land Trust and/or the Nature Conservancy, but might not a few of the Islanders with very deep pockets be interested in some approach that might recognize a public benefactor in an outright purchase, trade, or buy-out? Perhaps memorializing such an individual as well?

Is it not preferable to narrow the focal point of debating zoning restrictions to deploy some town and other energies on this larger front as well with the goal of engaging a much larger actively interested group of resident, non-profit institutions and local property owners toward a more positive strategy and sharing with the rest of us, step by step, how the alternate paths might work? Why not start off with a town open-mike meeting so that a more broadly interested group could explain how and why the causeways are worth protecting?

N.B. HERMAN, Shelter Island

 

Defacing beauty

To the Editor:

The rebuilt Zagoreos home on Ram Island Drive was hidden from view by evergreens/cedars/cypress trees or whatever you choose to call them. They were a beautiful addition to the roadway serving a useful purpose, keeping the home secluded and hidden from view as well as lending a rustic landscape so endeared, thus allowing the property owners their rightful use of their property.

Step in governmental agencies to “protect” the people and the environment. Damn the people or the actual need for intrusion or interference regarding this project. Destroy the environment in order to protect it. Ha ha! The Board of Health, or is it the Board of Ignorance, in conjunction with the Department of Environmental Destruction, saw the need to deform the property in order to install an excessively large septic system to handle the needs of “one” home. The only “terrible” thing in cutting down the trees was the cause of this mutilation, a governmental agency’s stupidity and ignorance.

I would ask the Zagoreoses how they will like living in a “fish bowl.” Perhaps a very large picture window facing the road would add to the flavor of the views. In addition this might placate those upset Ram Island residents who stood idly by and allowed the perverse destruction of nature to evolve. At this juncture, to not allow the other adjacent property owners their right to build on their property, which at the time of purchase was allowed, would be, at the very best, unjust.

I for one don’t want to see any more building in the area but to say “no” to those who are, or should be, allowed to build would be a miscarriage of justice. The only fair and reasonable solution to this dilemma would be for the town to purchase, at fair market value, those properties involved, perhaps with county and state involvement. Something to be investigated by the board.

I would like to add at this point it appears the town had nothing to do with this disgraceful requirement brought about by the Suffolk County Board of Health and the New York State Department of Environmental “Protection.”

I think the time has come. Let’s think Nicolls Patent in earnest.

JACK KIFFER, Shelter Island

 

Vitriolic campaigning

To the Editor:

This year marks my 40th year living on Shelter Island. There is no time in these past four decades that I can recall a campaign season as partisan, ugly and sad as this current campaign season.

Sad, because I’ve developed friendships with long-time Islanders as well as summer people. As hybrid (neither a summer person or Islander) but an “In-Betweener,” I shepherded three sons through our local school, navigating the unique, wonderful diversity of our Island population. I’ve witnessed our small community politics work, particularly the camaraderie fostered and alive during the year of the comprehensive planning process, when all Islanders came together, agreeing to disagree, but with respect and purposeful visions regarding the Island’s future.

Ugly, because this year candidates and voters are mudslinging and spreading tainted information. Bridgford Hunt’s letter hit below the belt. I think the Reporter’s publishing of this type of letter is misguided and lacking in high journalistic standards. LBO instruments are complex transactions, not prudent to use in such a flaying manner.

Partisan: We are all inundated by the constant 24/7 news media sound-bites of the ongoing partisan wrangling in Washington. We have very complicated national problems that took a long time to develop and will require planning and thoughtful solutions, fair to all of our citizenry.

The current Island politicking is looking like a mirror image of Washington. It’s unnecessary. I suggest that all the name calling and slanderous innuendo stop and that the voters and candidates start respectfully talking to each other, negotiating well thought-out solutions, mindful of each other’s strengths as well as shortcomings and acknowledging the accomplishments of sitting Town Council members and department heads.

In this time of prolonged economic slowdown, I vote for governance from fiscally astute candidates.

KAREN KIAER, Shelter Island

 

Louder than words 

To the Editor:

It is the goal of most of us as residents of Shelter Island to preserve the environment and character of Shelter Island. Some of our residents may not be aware that Jim Dougherty, our current supervisor, has spent much of his retired life devoted to this goal. His actions speak for themselves.

Let’s take a look at Jim’s actions:

• Chairman, Community Preservation Fund (2-Percent Committee) 1999-2007

• Member, Shelter Island Comprehensive Plan Committee, 1992-1994

• Chairman, Zoning and Open Space Subcommittee, 1992-1994

• Chairman, South Fork, Shelter Island Chapter, The Nature Conservancy, 1992-1995

• A founder and chairman of the Board, The Peconic BayKeeper, 1998-2002

• Member of the Board of Directors, New York League of Conservation Voters, 1995-1998

As supervisor of Shelter Island, Jim has worked tirelessly to help prevent the development of Sylvester Manor and to encourage its return to its agricultural roots through the continued use of 2-percent open space money, private donations and not taxpayer money. To date, approximately 100 acres have been protected from development.

It is important that we vote for Jim Dougherty for supervisor so he can continue his efforts to protect Sylvester Manor from development and continue his efforts to preserve the rural character of Shelter Island.

GORDON VAN VRANKEN, Shelter Island

 

Two sets of rules

To the Editor:

As usual, Halloween night was so much fun. The costumes were terrific. A big thank you to the men and women of the Fire Department. The parade was great and the trick or treating was, as always, a blast. But then, we ran into the group of troublemakers. You know the ones, shaving cream on everyone and everything in their path.

I don’t care if that is how they celebrate Halloween. When they ruin my kids’ costumes, scare the little kids trick or treating for the first time or get shaving cream on the grandparents walking with the kids, then it’s a problem.

So what do you do when there is a problem? Well, you talk to a policeman. There were plenty of them keeping an eye on things … of course you get, and I quote, “It’s Halloween.” Seriously?! Detective, if my kids shaving creamed your house, car or you, is that what you’d say? [References to an individual youth have been deleted by the editor] …

Sorry. For me, Halloween does not mean trashing other people and town property. Nice when there are two sets of rules. I am glad my children are respectful.

I am not against kids being kids but they should do it elsewhere or after the bulk of the little children have finished doing their Halloween Smith Street run for the night.

GINA SHERMAN, Shelter Island

 

For Dougherty

To the Editor:

Jim Dougherty ranks among the best supervisors we have known in our 42 years on Shelter Island. In these troubled times, his prudent fiscal policies have enabled many of us to retain our homes here, while his farsighted environmental policies have determined that these homes will be worth maintaining well into the future. Shelter Island is a better place for his tenure.

ROBERT and MARY ALLEN, Shelter Island Heights

 

Backs Dougherty

To the Editor:

We were thrilled to hear that a zero-percent increase in the 2012 Shelter Island Town budget has been agreed to for the first time in the town’s entire history. This budget reflects the skill and ability of the supervisor/CFO Jim Dougherty to work with a team to fulfill a vision of responsibility in tough economic times. We need leadership with Jim’s experience and knowledge to continue this era of responsible town government.

BARBARA and CHUCK OLTON, Shelter Island

 

Favors 2-year term

To the Editor:

Last week’s editorial assumed that we will all vote unpopular town council members out of office should we be allowed to hold elections every two years instead of the current four year cycle. Not true. I will not vote someone out of office simply because of an honest disagreement or I lost the argument in Town Hall. As long as that councilperson is indeed honest and open-minded about issues, both large and small, I would want him or her to continue on.

Any competent councilperson should welcome an election every two years as a vote of confidence. A two-year election cycle is a real wake-up call for the town council and the citizens of Shelter Island. It will keep us aware and our officials sharp and on their toes. Four years between elections creates an atmosphere of bureaucratic complacency.

There are many reasons to vote for our candidates and few reasons not to. Their stand on the current issues are, of course, important. But integrity, maturity (not age) and self-discipline are more important qualities to consider when selecting those who tell us that they are the best suited to govern and represent us. Reasons to not elect would be if they proved to be dishonest, deceitful, inept or not true to the oath of office.

The supervisor’s job is to be the CFO and much more. He will set the tone and atmosphere for the Town Board. Will they, as a body, show the integrity, honesty and discipline needed for good government? Will the Pledge of Allegiance at each meeting be more than talking to a piece of cloth? Will the oath of office, “… to support the Constitution of New York State and the United States of America,” have real meaning in Town Hall? It is this local government that will ensure or deny our liberties and freedoms where we live. Too many have sacrificed too much so that we can have an Election Day. Whether it is every two or four years, it is our opportunity to improve our democracy, “to form a more perfect union.” We are lucky to have choices for supervisor and council members. Vote “yes” for a two-year council member term duration. Vote for a better town government. Vote on November 8.

VINCENT NOVAK, Shelter Island

 

Praise for supervisor

To the Editor:

I am writing this to add to the support letters for our present supervisor in the upcoming election. It has been an incredible time for me to have such a knowledgeable and trustworthy man at the helm.

As a former producer of films, dealing with budgets constantly, I am amazed at the complexities of budgeting for Shelter Island. The most important thing required of a film producer is to bring a hit in on budget (or under). Well, Shelter Island is to me a hit and what more do we want from our supervisor?

Jim Dougherty brought in a town budget for 2012 that contains no increase at all in expenses or taxes over last year. When I look at the national political scene and its anger and distortions, I feel we must not go down that angry road and be civilized and grateful for his past performances in office in this incredibly difficult job.

BOB MARKELL, Shelter Island

 

For Dougherty

To the Editor:

As a former public relations professional, I am constantly dismayed, disappointed or angry at the lack of good publicity our leaders receive. I don’t know who is responsible for this but this applies to President Obama and now, close at home, to our Supervisor Jim Dougherty.

How many really know what he has achieved?

In a time of global fiscal crisis, Jim Dougherty, as our chief financial officer, has guided our little Island on a level course with sound financial leadership and consistently created sound budgets while keeping our taxes the lowest on Long Island.

But Dougherty is known for far more than this: He has seen to the purchase of 125 acres at Sylvester Manor; organized the purchase of the Legion Hall for the Youth Center for a $1; supervised the construction of the Volunteer mini-park with volunteered time, expertise and grants; overseen the reconstruction of Shell Beach with grants from FEMA. He has constantly dedicated himself to the preservation of our Island environment.

And these are only part of his accomplishments for the Island. He is also the chairman of East End Supervisors and Mayors Association, no small achievement, and has outstanding connections with federal, state and county officials.

He is a strong, unselfish leader who cares deeply about keeping the character of the Island for both full-time and seasonal communities. And we should be grateful for his character and his leadership.

Someone said: “Be guided by his record when you vote.” I urge you to do this and vote for Jim Dougherty.

HILARY S-C. KING, Shelter Island

 

For 2-year term

To the Editor:

I have been talking to a few of my neighbors around town in regard to Proposition One (which will be on the flip side of your ballot this November 8). The concern I hear from some is, “What would we do if all five people on the Town Board were replaced at the same time?” Well, let’s ponder that for a minute … and let’s start with the why. Why would all five people on the board be replaced?

My fellow Islanders, in order for our entire board to get thrown out by the voters on Election Day, they would have to be doing a disastrous job. Hmmm … Something along the lines of East Hampton Township, where phony numbers were being submitted in the budget, which resulted in criminal investigations and a financial core meltdown of the town’s finances.

My response: Why would you want any of them for another four years if this was the kind of shenanigans going on? Hence, this is really an argument for the two-year term. The argument for a four-year term is weak and unsustainable. Some individuals have resorted to fear tactics, saying that the two-year term would be a “disaster.” If it is such a disaster, why is it working so well for the highway superintendent and the town supervisor positions? Both are two-year terms. Having the Town Board come up for a performance review by the voters every two years is an improvement; we will get a better return for our dollar and a more responsive government to its citizens.

Even without a “disaster,” it would be nice if we had the opportunity to vote so someone better could replace someone that might be only mediocre.

Let’s not forget that 88 percent of incumbent senators are reelected and 90 percent in the U.S. House, which has two-year terms. I just don’t understand all this panic if a 88-90-percent reelection of incumbents is happening in the U.S. government. Raising real estate taxes with a two-year term gets real tricky for the Town Board and, with these economic times we are living in, you might want to keep our representatives close to the ballot box

The opponents of this referendum say that I am the cause of putting it on the ballot. The Town Board voted 4 to 1 to put it onto the ballot. I submitted a petition with 162 names, which is completely non-binding, and they could have rejected it but they didn’t because Election Day was close at hand. (Their passage of it kind of makes the argument for the two-year term.)

Folks, we should vote for this referendum. When passed, it will improve the performance and responsiveness of our government. I advocated to get this onto the ballot. I am but one man and one vote. My job is done. It is up to you, the voters, to decide on Proposition One. I urge you to vote yes on Proposition One on November 8.

A clarification to Mr. Peter Boody, the editor, in last week’s paper. In our view, you wrote an editorial stating that “Running proposals up the flagpole — on the ballot or even at public hearings — just to test the reaction isn’t the way to get things done. Nothing should be formally proposed that a board majority doesn’t believe in.” Mr. Boody, the board does not believe in the referendum but the 162 citizens on the petition believed in it and that’s why it should be on the ballot.

During a Tuesday work session last year, I proposed to the supervisor, a couple of weeks after Election Day, that it would be a good idea to have a minimum number of names on a petition (e.g., 100 names) in order for a referendum to have standing in the arena of public opinion before the board could even consider that it go onto the ballot. This idea was rejected and never made it onto the Town Hall agenda.

RICHARD KELLY

President, The Coalition for Sustainable, Fish and Wildlife Habitat