Emphasize similarities

To the Editor:

It’s true that there is sometimes an ethnic connotation to the term “Upper West Side,” even though my neighborhood has become greatly diversified in the 50 years I’ve lived there. But I don’t expect the whole world to know this and I certainly don’t think that the editor of the Reporter, when he quoted that remark, set out to offend the Jewish residents of Shelter Island, no matter where they live. I have no idea what the originator of the comment intended.

Mr. Boody probably didn’t set out to offend all absentee voters either but it would be nice to see more emphasis on the many things all Shelter Islanders share and less reference to our differences. We can’t all be locals, much as we might like to be.

MARY HOLT ALLEN, Shelter Island Heights

Bad loser

To the Editor:

I just read Art Barnett’s letter in the December 8 Reporter criticizing the paper’s November 24 editorial which grudgingly recognized Supervisor Dougherty’s election to a third term. Mr. Barnett should lighten up — it’s clear that the editor was not happy with the result of the election, having endorsed one of Dougherty’s rivals. But when losers behave badly, as our editor did in blaming people from “the Upper West Side” (where I live) for his loss, and saying that we “love the Island in their [our] own way,” as if year-round residents have a purer appreciation of the place, we should not rub it in.

Mr. Barnett is right in pointing out that, “it was a decisive plurality” of voters that determined the election outcome and this is what the editor may find hard to face. But we do “all drink from the same well” as Barnett aptly states in his letter and next time around there may not be enough “Upper West Siders,” as the editor would say, to turn the tide.

ROGER CUMMING, New York, New York

Politics of inclusion

To the Editor:

The right to vote is important to American democracy — it is one of our most cherished rights, along with freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The history of our country is one of increasing access to the ballot so that now we have almost perfect universal suffrage. I say “almost” because there are still some who would impede access to the vote for supposedly neutral reasons such as providing multiple layers of identification or imposing residency requirements; but these restrictive attempts invariably have political motivation and are basically variations of the poll tax once used so effectively to limit voting rights.

In New York State, every American citizen has the right to vote in a location to which that citizen has a reasonable connection. This includes the soldier in Afghanistan, the college student away at school and those who spend less than a total of 180 days per year on the Island.

To suggest that there are certain classes of people whom we might not want voting in “our election” is divisive and something that we need to put behind us. We have an obligation to preserve this beautiful and precious Island but in a democratic fashion; we will do better with the politics of inclusion, not the politics of exclusion.

JOEL S. HOFFMAN, Shelter Island

Stirring the pot

To the Editor:

In my opinion, we have not yet gone far enough in our analysis of the “fifth district” results. If a biologist were examining muscle tissue samples from a carcass for something, and came upon this concentration in but one place, they would definitely not ignore it or pass it off; they would seek an explanation for it.

I know this: I was there, I saw the voting patterns and I was stunned at the disparity, though, particularly in the supervisor’s race, it was not simply partisan, since the Democrats and Republicans were nearly evenly represented in the mix, making up well over 80 percent of the total. Had it been a partisan thing, Mr. DeStefano would have done much better. Instead, I think the divide could be seen as more of a cultural one.

We are seeing people who feel their vote can carry more weight here than it does in their other place of residence use that power. And they used it to choose a supervisor who they felt they understood, who better represented them. Is that perception fair, realistic, or healthy?  It doesn’t matter, politically speaking. What matters is what people think. If you’re going to change that, you need to know the who, what and why of that thinking.

A good chili has just the right balance between sauce, beans and meat. If the bowl you get is dramatically different than others from the same pot, you don’t blame the beans or the meat. They are where they are for a reason … someone didn’t stir very well. As a community, this is something worth thinking about. We all have to eat it.

PAUL SHEPHERD, Councilman-elect, Shelter Island

Common sense 

To the Editor:

There is a 2005 book by Phillip K. Howard called “The Death of Common Sense.” Quite a stir was caused by the premise stating that America has lost her common sense as experts, lawyers and bureaucrats hide behind rules and regulations so complex that they defy all logic.

I am reminded of this book as the fight over the Chequit’s request for major zoning variances for a pool, decking, and building relocation takes shape at the ZBA this week. There are two aspects of this process that defy all common sense. One is the pool noise issue; the other, the character and nature of the would-be operators, Cape Resorts Group out of Cape May, New Jersey.

First, pools are very noisy. Kids scream and whoop at the top of their lungs. They yell, splash, have water fights and generally exalt in the fun of water play. That’s what I did when I was their age. That’s what all kids are supposed to do. But that is not what the Cape Group and some members of the Heights community want to hear. So “sound control experts” have been hired by both sides to tell us scientific absurdities. The Chequit/Cape Group hired an engineer who miraculously will tell us that little or no noise will emanate from this pool, either because of a fence or the anticipated age of bathers. The decibel level will be this or that. The Heights’ expert will disagree and claim it will be that or this. So silly. Such a waste of time and money.

Accept the truth that the pool will be…a pool! On hot summer days, families and kids will use the pool and scream, whoop and yell. Don’t believe a word to the contrary.

Second, the character and the nature of the owners and the type of establishments the Cape Resorts Group runs is irrelevant for the purposes of the ZBA. I am sure they are nice people. That is not the point. They are not guaranteeing they will own and operate the Chequit for the rest of their lives. They are not going to put in writing they will even own the Chequit one year after buying it. Their lives may change, the economy may change, their financial picture may change. They may get an offer to sell that they cannot refuse. All verbal promises or assurances to the contrary are worthless.

What if another group from the Jersey Shore is the new buyer? What if Snookie and the Situation want to own a cute country island resort with a pool? What then? What if the next owners are into alcohol, loud music, late night skinny-dipping and frolicking? Once the variance for the pool is granted, it goes with the deed and our Island loses all control as to the nature and character of the new owner’s intended use. Just ask the Montaukians how that Surf Shack thing is working for them.

This is a recipe for disaster and sows the seeds of the ruination of a relatively quiet residential neighborhood in an historic zone. The Chequit owners have the right to sell their property to whomever they want. If the Cape Resorts Group wants to buy an inn with a pool or develop one, that is their right. Everybody has rights and the one right the nearby neighbors and the Heights and the Town of Shelter Island have is to say no to an unnecessary pernicious variance.

JONATHAN RUSSO, Shelter Islands Heights

Making ‘cents’

To the Editor:

Having recently read the December 12 article about Heights Hardware installing solar panels, I can’t resist the opportunity to again call attention to the many direct and indirect benefits of such projects (as well as “going green” in general). The most obvious and direct gain is the near-term financial savings, beginning immediately. As an investment, it certainly seems safer than the stock market and provides a better return than the traditional savings account or CD. Several people have told me that their monthly savings on their electric bill was more than enough to offset the interest on the home equity loan. In some respects, this is almost “something-for-nothing.”

About two years ago, the Mattituck/Cutchogue School District did a major installation without any out-of-pocket expense (via a guaranteed performance contract coordinated by Johnson Controls).

If that’s not sufficient incentive to consider solar, let’s look at the less obvious, but very real, indirect benefits: (1) as a nation, it will be another step towards energy independence; (2) it will, ever so slightly, reduce a variety of geopolitical and environmental problems; (3) our local economy will be helped; (4) it lessens our use of fossil fuels (which the vast majority of the world’s climatologists agree is critical for our planet).

In addition, as our town has just adopted legislation that facilitates the solar application process, maybe this is a good time to take a comprehensive, community-wide look at such related opportunities. Perhaps some sort of “Solar Initiative” could provide extra advantages to those interested in participating. For example, maybe because of multiple installations, costs and other fees would be reduced, a community-spirited local bank might offer a special interest rate for such “green” projects and the basis for other grants/projects may be developed. An educational program at our school could also be designed. But right now, this potential seems to be somewhat dormant.

The rooftops of many Island homes, as well as numerous municipal buildings, have favorable south-facing positions. (Take a look as you travel around town.) Ground-mounted installations also work well, and some even pivot and follow the movement of the sun during the day.

A brighter future, for generations to come, may just be a few phone calls away. With some coordinated leadership and community spirit, we could become “the little island that went solar.”

One critical concern remains: who is willing to step up to the plate and get the ball rolling? A few people could make a significant difference and that would only be the beginning!

HERB STELLJES, Shelter Island

Mr. Stelljes is chair of the town’s Green Options Committee. — Ed.

Gitlin case

To the Editor:

I think the Town Board will be reckless if it denies a repair permit to Mr. Gitlin for reasons that don’t exist in the town code. To specify a material for repair is quite different than specifying for new construction. This truly looks arbitrary for the other issues with Mr. Gitlin, which I won’t address and should be separate from the “emergency” that faces his property. Does the town really want to tie the hands of all waterfront property to eliminating in-place, in-kind repair? Additionally, the six WMAC members who oppose an in-place, in-kind repair for Mr Gitlin are equally misinformed.

BERT WAIFE , Shelter Island

Access for disabled

At the last Town Board meeting, I requested the town consider allowing the disabled to have access to Fresh Pond. Although there is one handicap parking space designated, it was blocked all of last season by a picnic table. This one-and-only public pond town landing was redesigned in 2007 to discourage fishermen and those with small trailer boats from parking on the road and disturbing bathers who sit and play on the landing.

The 18-inch-high berm that was installed drops into a steep rut and might just as well be a 10-foot-high wall to those with a handicap. I was told that the disabled can use all the other saltwater town landings but not the only landing that leads to the fresh water of Fresh Pond. This is absolutely disingenuous of the board. The “Americans with Disabilities Act” provides that a community does not need to provide multiple access points to every beach or every lake in the area. But they must accommodate the disabled by having at least one accessible path to a bay beach and a path to the lake: in our case, Fresh Pond.

Most people will agree that Fresh Pond is a major tourist attraction and unique public property, unlike any other waterfront on a bay or creek. The handicapped, the disabled, the physically challenged, however classified, are not second-class citizens. They are full- fledged American citizens, residents, tourists and taxpayers. They are men, women and children who have every right to enjoy Fresh Pond and are only as challenged as we create barriers for them. Some are veterans and should not be denied access to any public facility here. When we thank veterans for their service, is it only in words and dedications?

I recently met a young man at the VA hospital in Northport. He told me how he and his buddy, who is a double amputee, plan to finish their therapy, get out on the road and go kayaking. We talked about fly-fishing for both small and large mouth bass. I told him about the great fishing on Fresh Pond, completely forgetting that these two disabled veterans would find Fresh Pond impossible to access.

While living next to Fresh Pond Road, I have seen many people disappointed and several mishaps. The old guy who drove in from Islip and thought he could get his johnboat into the pond, finding that he could only get within 30 feet of the water’s edge. The couple with walkers who had to park at the far end of the road and found the pond too crowded and noisy to enjoy. The fisherman who recently bounced his bass boat off the trailer trying to pull out of the pond. The man who left his wheelchair at the berm and tried to crawl down the rut into the pond. The guys who had to push their boat uphill on PVC pipe rollers to get it close to their truck. The many others who got stuck in the rut trying to use this landing as the boat ramp that the town’s own website legally defines it as. I try to help when I can but I don’t see it all.

My own personal agenda is to get the town to allow the Fresh Pond landing to be used as a boat ramp and access point for all — not the exclusive picnic area and illegal beach built right outside my windows. There was never any public discussion on this. The real solution is to take a tract of land from one of the open space properties on Fresh Pond and build a proper public park. I believe that this could be done with a minimal effect on any of the homeowners on Fresh Pond. We should initiate a feasibility study.

Beyond all of this, the disabled must be enabled to access Fresh Pond. I hope that the Town Board will have a change of heart and find a way to accommodate these citizens. Until then I will be glad to assist any disabled American veteran with access and egress to and from Fresh Pond. Please contact me at 749-4009 or [email protected] I wish that I could extend this help to all of those with disabilities.

VINCENT NOVAK, Shelter Island