CLOSE
Tags Posts tagged with "letters to the editor"

letters to the editor

by -
0 454

Denying Suffolk voters input is undemocratic

Newsday, yet again, reports that our water quality in Suffolk is hitting an all-time low.

When many of us moved to Suffolk after the establishment of the Suffolk County Legislature in 1970 — to be more representative after 200 years of the Board of Supervisors — the Legislature took a lead in protecting our land and water.

We were proud of its ability to “work across the aisle” for the good of our county community. We were proud to have a government that put the well-being of people and our treasured island ahead of any hint of partisan politics. 

The case has been made over and over again that septic discharge is the culprit. Now there is a major proposed funding mechanism to make it all work — a sales tax increase of 0.125% to generate an estimated $3.1 billion through 2060 to expand sewers and offer grants to homeowners for new septic systems. It’s the culmination of a 10-year campaign and part of a referendum authorized by the state Legislature in April to be placed on the ballot as early as November. This mechanism is IR1573. 

The county Legislature’s decision to table IR1573 and remove it from Suffolk voter input is undemocratic and suggests their underlying distrust of voters to educate themselves when the referendum would be voted on in November. Objections to details of IR1573 should not be the issue now. 

Arguments that we have enough money to make a difference in water quality are beside the point. Work is already in progress — for 10 years — and there can always be more money allocated if we have fiscal windfall. We need to do much more, and only allowing voters to take personal responsibility and decide on the $0.125 increase to the sales tax is the first step. 

The science is clear, our economy is paying the price, our children’s health is at stake.

Last week, both the Republican and Democratic candidates for Suffolk County executive supported putting the referendum on the ballot. If they can agree, why can’t the Legislature? 

The League of Women Voters’ mission is making democracy work through informed and active participation in government. Let the voters decide, not individual politicians in an election year.

Lisa Scott, President 

League of Women Voters of Suffolk County

Republican majority is failing its homework

Ironically, in the very same week we learned that the water quality in Suffolk’s waterways is at an all-time low, the Republican-led county Legislature effectively turned down billions of dollars in time-sensitive state and federal grants that would have paid for the needed interventions to clean our waters. 

They blocked residents the opportunity to vote on a .125%  tax increase, essentially 12 cents per $100 that would have funded the expansion of sewer projects and updated septic systems leaking nitrogen into our waters, the culprit of our poor water quality. The tax funds collected were to be matched by New York State and would have allowed us to access the grant funds. These monies will not be waiting for Suffolk County in a lockbox until this can be revisited next year. The waters which deteriorate in quality with every passing day have also now become much more expensive for us to clean thanks to the actions of the legislature. 

In a recent letter [“Voters deserve legislators who do their homework,” July 20], Legislator Stephanie Bontempi [R-Centerport] asserted that the legislators are keeping the water quality referendum off the ballot this November because they want to “do their homework” before bringing the initiative to the people. Anyone with knowledge of the water quality project knows that this plan, which has wide bipartisan support, has been years in the making with ample opportunity to raise concerns, propose changes and “do their homework” rather than waiting until the 11th hour. It was in  fact the legislators’ responsibility to do their homework long before they claimed they needed time for further exploration. Interestingly, the Presiding Officer [Kevin McCaffrey (R-Lindenhurst)] had given every indication that the Republican caucus would be supporting including the referendum on the ballot on Election Day.

Reversing course now with contrived concerns shows utter disregard for the bipartisan group of policymakers, scientists and legislators who have been dedicated to this work along with every credible environmentalist group who implored the legislature to move forward with the referendum. 

Either they did not do their due diligence when they should have or are concerned that having water quality on the ballot will risk bringing out voters who might not be voting for them. In any case, their decision has effectively lost the county a window of opportunity to affordably address one of the greatest environmental challenges faced by Suffolk County. They have failed “their homework” and have failed the people of Suffolk County.

Eve Meltzer-Krief

Centerport

Democratic candidate, Suffolk County Legislature LD18

Intervention on water quality is long overdue

Contrary to what County Legislator Stephanie Bontempi [R-Centerport] claims, the environmental record of the Republican majority does not “speak for itself.” [Letter, “Voters deserve legislators who do their homework,” TBR News Media editions, July 20.]

What does speak volumes is unanimously blocking voters from deciding for themselves in a general election whether the Suffolk County Water Quality Restoration Act, 10 years in the making, should be implemented. All Suffolk state legislators from both parties support it. Ditto Suffolk congressmen. And ditto both candidates for Suffolk County executive.

Legislator Bontempi refers to “a false sense of urgency.” Last summer and this summer, there have been record fish kills, algal blooms and other water quality impairments. According to the Gobler Laboratory at Stony Brook University, “Excessive nitrogen coming from household sewage that seeps into groundwater and ultimately into bays, harbors and estuaries or, in some cases, is directly discharged into surface waters, is a root cause of these maladies.”

So, should we continue to allow this problem to fester as it has for decades. Or should we finally do something about it? What will it take to give Bontempi a true sense of urgency?

She promises that it’s the “intention” of the Republican majority to “ultimately” allow voters a referendum. Why should we believe this? Excuses for inaction are a dime a dozen. As they say, get it in writing.

In another letter about the same issue, Peter Akras complains about cost [“Proposed sales tax a blank check for developers”]. Implementing this plan would unlock state and federal matching funds. That’s free money for the benefit of Suffolk. He claims our water quality is as good as that of Nassau County. In fact, Suffolk County has more lakes with blue-green algal blooms than any of the 64 counties in New York state. Most water quality impairments in Long Island — brown tides, algal blooms, fish kills, hypoxias — are in Suffolk. 

He also asserts that if homeowners want to install advanced septic systems, the cost should be on them, not “on the public dime.” This is fundamentally wrongheaded. The benefit of installing these systems doesn’t go to the individual homeowner no more than does the benefit of lugging disposed toxic chemicals to a recycling center instead of simply dumping them in the garbage. The benefit goes to the public — to all of us — in the form of cleaning up the environment in which all of us live and finally doing something about the toxic algal blooms and hundreds of thousands of dead fish in our bays and estuaries.

David Friedman

St. James

Let voters decide

Thomas Paine said something like, “A body holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.” The majority in the Suffolk County Legislature is blatantly exercising the evils of “legislature-ism,” stealing the residents’ ability to register their vote on their own drinking water and claiming to know more than the voters. 

The Republican majority in the Suffolk Legislature cannot be trusted. What choices will they deny next?

Joan Nickeson

Terryville

Legislature appropriately nixes sewer tax

Kudos for the Suffolk County Legislature for not enacting another tax — that always increases over time — for sewering the county by closing cesspools and septic tanks in homes and small buildings, while building and expanding sewer plants and laying the large and numerous pipes needed for connections. This is no small change as $2.1 billion is mentioned arising from this initial tax.

 Sewering is the landowners’ and developers’ dream. Lack of sewers prevents them from increasing building height, numbers and density, hence more rent, profits and value. If they could get the Legislature to have the public pay for sewering, they hit the lottery.

Regional sewer plants are concerning. Huntington has one as does Northport, for example. They discharge into the harbor and even with “upgrades,” high nitrogen and other components flow into the harbor and beaches. In stagnant conditions, the water is deoxygenated, fish die and green and brown tides of algae proliferate. Would you swim from a town beach in a harbor with a discharging sewer plant?

But are cesspools contaminating groundwater? They have been used since Roman times and work for single homes and structures. Waste goes into a perforated cement cylinder buried in soil and bacteria digest it. The effluent flows through the dozens of feet of sand and soil and is cleansed before entering the water table.

Sewering may be useful in coastal and near-coastal areas to prevent pollution. The rest of Long Island is doing fine with cesspools and septic tanks, and is quite happy that high-rise offices, housing, commercial structures and density are not blighting their communities.

Mark Sertoff

East Northport

Maryhaven is not just a facade

The July 13 article, “Port Jeff village board cans code changes for Maryhaven,” states that the proposed changes “were an effort by the previous administration to preserve the historic building.” That’s not entirely the case.

While the preservation of the building’s facade was touted as a concern, the proposed code change was, as former village attorney Brian Egan explained, a “proactive” step to clear the path for developers. And because that change in code, from Professional Office to Moderate-Density Residence, would have allowed developers to construct nearly 200 condos — a significant increase in density — it came under strong opposition from the public. 

Many residents urged the board of trustees to consider alternative uses for the property that would not only be in the best interests of the village as a whole, like moving our Fire Department and EMS there, but more in line with the legacy of a building once known as the Center of Hope.

We thank Mayor Lauren Sheprow and the current board of trustees for rejecting this code change and allowing us the opportunity to explore those other options. A building, which for generations was used to help those in need, should be repurposed for something greater than expensive condominiums that would only serve the few at the expense of the many.

Ana Hozyainova, President

Kathleen McLane, Outreach Officer

Port Jefferson Civic Association

Official newspaper of the Northport-East Northport school district

It is with great pleasure that I notify you that at the Annual Organization Meeting of the Board of Education of the Northport-East Northport Union Free School District, held on Thursday evening, July 13, The Times of Huntington-Northport was designated as the official newspaper for the district publications and legal notices for the 2023-24 school year.

We thank you for your support and extend our best wishes for the new school year.

Beth M. Nystrom

District Clerk

Official newspaper of the Village of Belle Terre

At the Organizational Meeting of the Board of Trustees held on July 18, The Port Times Record was designated as the official newspaper for the Village of Belle Terre for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2024.

Louise Smit

Deputy Village Clerk-Treasurer

by -
0 248

Not a resignation

I would like to take this opportunity to make a correction to a statement which appeared in the July 13 edition of The Port Times Record [see story, “Port Jeff village board cans code changes for Maryhaven, tensions flare amid reorganization”].

 It was reported that at the Port Jefferson Board of Trustees reorganization meeting that I resigned from my position as village clerk. This is not fully accurate, as I was unceremoniously informed by newly elected Mayor Lauren Sheprow that I would not be reappointed to my position in her administration.

I love this community where I have raised my family, and was honored to have served and worked tirelessly for the last 13-plus years. I consistently performed my job duties with integrity, honesty and professionalism, attributes I will bring to my next job, which regrettably will not be in the Village of Port Jefferson.

Barbara Sakovich

Port Jefferson

Voters deserve legislators who do their homework

The notion that Suffolk County Republicans “don’t care” about the environment is, of course, absurd [letter, “Suffolk County Legislature neglecting wastewater infrastructure,” two directors from League of Women Voters of Huntington, July 13]. 

We live, work and raise our children on Long Island just as much as Democrats do. Creating a false sense of urgency, some have suggested that all opportunities to improve our water quality will be lost if we do not act today. Hardly. 

Suffolk County’s Subwatersheds Wastewater Plan’s goal of restoring and protecting the waters of Suffolk from the impacts of nutrient enrichment-related water quality degradation is a 50-year plan. I am very proud of our pro-environmental record to date, which speaks for itself.

The Republican majority and Democratic minority, in a bipartisan fashion, have approved more than 200 resolutions, resulting in the appropriation of more than $155 million for sewers and other infrastructure projects, clean water initiatives and open space preservation. 

To be clear, at the June 21 general meeting of the Suffolk County Legislature, we did not “vote down” two important pieces of legislation that came before us; both in accordance with the Suffolk County Subwatersheds Plan’s goal of reducing the nitrogen level in our groundwater and surface waters. 

We simply voted to recess the public hearing, as we need to work out some concerns we have with the proposed legislation, one being that it allows for 10% to cover administrative costs and 75% for Innovative/Alternative Wastewater Systems. 

Let’s do the math. Once 10% has been deducted for administrative costs, 67.5% remains for I/A systems, not 75%. And there is no set amount set aside for sewer infrastructure — zero dollars could be used for sewers.

It is our full intention to ultimately allow the voters to decide, via a referendum, whether this legislation should be adopted or not. However, it would be irresponsible to rush through this important work as it is our responsibility to put forward financially viable, sensible and fully transparent legislation. Should a referendum not take place in November, there will be another opportunity during primary elections in the spring, at no additional cost to the taxpayers.

I don’t need to “score political points.” What I need to do is serve the residents of Suffolk County with integrity, responsibility and transparency. And yes, once the voters have all the facts, it will be up to them to decide — of course.

Stephanie Bontempi (R-Centerport)

Suffolk County Legislator

18th Legislative District

Proposed sales tax a blank check for developers

I must respond to the letter to the editor in the July 13 edition regarding the proposed 1/8% sales tax increase that was recessed by the Legislature on June 21.  

The estimated $3-to-4 billion additional tax is in addition to the 1/4% sales tax already in place for sewer expansion and septic system replacement. The building industry is strongly in favor of additional sewer expansion, which will permit further development, increase density and traffic and ultimately result in more pollution. If anyone thinks that Nassau County, which is mostly sewered, has better water quality than Suffolk, then I have a bridge to sell you.

If developers desire to connect to sewers and if homeowners desire to install $25,000 so-called advanced septic systems in their front yard (really underground sewage treatment plants with blowers, pumps and continuous electrical and maintenance costs) then they should pay for it themselves and not on the public dime.  

The county is already losing population to lower taxed areas. If this wrong-headed proposal does appear on the November ballot, it should be voted down as a blank check to developers to build, build, build at an exorbitant cost to the public and the environment.

Peter Akras

Wading River

LIRR fare hikes needed to improve services 

How many Port Jefferson LIRR riders remember that in July 1947 the LIRR increased fares by 20%?

MTA NYC Transit Bus, Subways and Staten Island Railway, MTA Bus along with Long Island Rail Road and Metro-North Railroad have been required every few years to exist on much smaller rate increases. Fare hikes are needed if the MTA operating agencies are to provide the services we count on. The rate rises are inevitable due to increasing costs of labor, power, fuel, supplies, materials, routine safety, state of good repair, replacement of worn-out rolling stock, upgrades to stations, yards and shops.

In 1993, 30 years ago, MetroCards were introduced. These provided free transfers between the subway and bus. This eliminated the old two-fare zones, making public transportation an even better bargain. It has been eight years since the $2.75 base fare was adopted.

Purchasing a weekly or monthly MetroCard, OMNY card or LIRR commutation ticket reduces the cost per ride and provides virtually unlimited trips. Employers offer transit checks which help subsidize a portion of the costs.

The quality and frequency of service is dependent upon a secure revenue stream. MTA management, MTA unions, riders, taxpayers along with city, state and Federal Transit Administration — that provides both capital and operating assistance — all must do their fair share. 

This is necessary to ensure a safe and reliable service that millions of daily riders count on. We all have to contribute, be it at the farebox or through tax revenues generated by different levels of government redistributed back to the MTA. 

TANSTAAFL stands for “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch” — or, in this case, a free ride. 

Larry Penner

Great Neck

WRITE TO US … AND KEEP IT LOCAL

We welcome your letters, especially those responding to our local coverage, replying to other letter writers’ comments and speaking mainly to local themes. Letters should be no longer than 400 words and may be edited for length, libel, style, good taste and uncivil language. They will also be published on our website. We do not publish anonymous letters. Please include an address and phone number for confirmation.

Email letters to: [email protected] or mail them to TBR News Media, P.O. Box 707, Setauket, NY 11733

 

by -
0 571

Thank you, TBR

After reading the story in the June 22 edition informing the community about the Guide Dog Foundation in Smithtown, I would like to share as a volunteer — both as a puppy raiser and presently breeder-caretaker — the joys and fulfillment over the years of seeing first-hand people helped by assistance and service dogs.

The Guide Dog Foundation truly helps people “live life without boundaries.” After seeing its flier stating so in a local supermarket, all staff members in various departments helped me through my different roles of training and preparing these special dogs in lives of service. As a volunteer, I have always been treated with courtesy and appreciation in visits, contacts and calls.

Thank you TBR News Media for publishing in detail the mission I am myself living each day, which is close to my heart.

Anna Fisco-Aubree

Ridge

Port Jeff needed change

One must sympathize with Mr. William Snaden’s “broken heart” considering his wife’s loss to Mayor Lauren Sheprow’s remarkable win through a write-in ballot [Letter, “My heart is breaking for Port Jeff,” The Port Times Record, June 29]. 

Mr. Snaden cannot bring himself to understand his wife’s loss in terms of her apparent efforts on behalf of the Village of Port Jefferson. What he fails to recognize is that the people of Port Jefferson needed a change from the same old approach to problems that were pursued by the Garant-Snaden administration. 

Let us face the future with fresh ideas and with the guidance of Mayor Lauren Sheprow. I anticipate that the Village of Port Jefferson will rally in supporting Lauren and her new administration.

Herb Herman

Port Jefferson

WRITE TO US … AND KEEP IT LOCAL

We welcome your letters, especially those responding to our local coverage, replying to other letter writers’ comments and speaking mainly to local themes. Letters should be no longer than 400 words and may be edited for length, libel, style, good taste and uncivil language. They will also be published on our website. We do not publish anonymous letters. Please include an address and phone number for confirmation.

Email letters to: [email protected] or mail them to TBR News Media, P.O. Box 707, Setauket, NY 11733

by -
0 384

Slippery slopes

The Village of Port Jefferson and the Village of Belle Terre need to get together about the views from Port Jefferson Harbor. The views to the west side of the harbor are of busy commerce while the east side has historically been a beautiful natural bluff, with houses discretely sited, until the advent of the McMansion. The new buildings are becoming an eyesore, but worse, the steep slopes are eroding.

 

Michael Schwarting

Port Jefferson

Earth Day is every day

Celebrate Earth Day, April 22, every day. Besides recycling newspapers, magazines, glass, plastics, old medicines, paints and cleaning materials, consider other actions which will contribute to a cleaner environment. 

Leave your car at home. For local trips in the neighborhood, walk or ride a bike. For longer travels, consider public transportation. MTA NYC Transit subway, bus, Long Island Rail Road, the buses of Suffolk County Transit, Huntington Area Rapid Transit (HART) and Nassau Inter-County Express (NICE) offer various options funded with your tax dollars. They use less fuel and move more people than cars. Many employers offer transit checks to help subsidize costs. Utilize your investments and reap the benefits. You’ll be supporting a cleaner environment and be less stressed upon arrival at your destination. 

Many employers allow employees to telecommute. Others use alternative work schedules, avoiding rush-hour gridlock. This saves travel time and can improve gas mileage. Join a car or van pool to share commuting costs. 

Use a hand-powered lawn mower instead of a gasoline or electric one. Rake your leaves instead of using gasoline-powered leaf blowers. Pollution created by gas-powered lawn mowers or leaf blowers will surprise you. 

A cleaner environment starts with everyone.

Larry Penner

Great Neck

Silence on upcoming school bond vote

Did you hear that? No? Neither did I.

I’m not hearing much about the Port Jefferson School District’s nearly $16 million bond that’s up for a vote soon. It’s the same day as the budget vote on Tuesday, May 16, from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. in the Earl L. Vandermeulen High School cafeteria.

School tours? Not a word.

Postcard in the mail? Nope. But it must be coming. It’s the law.

Robocall? My phone’s not ringing.

Why the different tactic from last fall’s failed bond proposal when the rusty pipes and other wanted design changes were highlighted for the public? 

Even a recent Facebook post about the school district presenting at a coming Port Jefferson Village public board meeting mentioned the budget and omitted the proposed bond. The district, I was told, must present the budget at the village board. But, apparently, not so much the bond. Further inquiries were being made.

You see where this is going.

You say budgets? Boring! 

You say $16 million bond and some folks might be interested in attending … and voting.

So what is going on here? What’s the secret? Why the silence?

Silence works.

Silence is the sound of a harried resident with no student in the district unaware and uninformed about having their voice heard and their vote recorded on an issue directly affecting their increasingly strained pocketbook. Silence is the enemy of a fair and open government and process. Silence should never be condoned.

Omission, too, is a form of silence. A laryngitis. And it’s happening right before our ears.

I’m reminded of the school district administration’s postcards sent last fall announcing an important meeting for residents that conveniently omitted the then bond proposal. Remember? The district omitted the word “bond” on the postcard, I suspect, to not rally budget-strapped residents. The district, I’m sure, will deny my interpretation but optics matter.

Rinse. Recycle. Repeat. It’s happening again.

Now, the school district is presenting its school budget to the village board and public attendees on May 2 at Village Hall. The proposed $16 million bond should be given equal time, public discussion and attention and not just passing mention as a part of an annual budget presentation. The bond amount, time and date of the vote should be plastered across the village including on a banner across Main Street.

When the district is purposefully transparent, it will have rightfully earned my vote, and maybe yours too. I hope they do.

Until they do, sign up at www.myvillagemyvote.com to be reminded about upcoming important budget votes and elections. If they won’t do it, residents can.

 

Drew Biondo

Port Jefferson

Legitimate issues with wind and solar power

The letter by George Altemose [TBR News Media, April 13] raises some very legitimate issues with wind and solar power. Politicians are often happy to say that power will be 100% carbon free by a certain date. Such claims as Sunrise Wind providing power for about 600,000 homes as Altemose recounts makes clear the claim is about making electricity generation carbon free; the much more difficult issue is to make all energy use carbon free. Currently, electricity generation amounts to one-third of the energy used by New York state, and of that, about half is already carbon free, coming mainly from nuclear and hydro sources. The other energy uses are about one-third for transportation and one-third for everything else, such as heating buildings and industrial uses. The national goal is to decarbonize electrical generation at the same time that other energy requirements are shifted to electricity, for example, electric vehicles and heat pumps. 

Electrical power generation has to be matched with the demand. As Altemose points out, wind and solar are intermittent sources and there are times when more power is needed than they can produce. It is important that the system includes sources that provide a baseline power such as nuclear, and also power that can be turned on when needed such as hydro. Altemose mentions several forms of energy storage systems that would need further development to address the shortfall in renewable energy. Another key component is the ability to import power from other regions where the wind may be blowing or the sun shining, and for this the grid must be modernized and upgraded. The Inflation Reduction Act includes $65 billion to upgrade the grid and make it more resilient. Once the grid is improved then market forces for electricity should help to distribute energy from the whole country to where it is needed. A high voltage DC line can carry power 1,000 miles with only a few percent losses. 

Additional power will need to be added to the electrical system, to account for electric vehicles and heat pumps. Estimates are that this is comparable to the percentage increase in electrical demand that happened when air conditioning became more widespread. It will happen over tens of years and all systems must be improved over that time scale.

This transition to green energy will not be easy, and the fossil fuel companies will continue to fight it tooth and nail, but we must do it to keep the Earth a good place for humankind. The U.S. has put more CO2 into the atmosphere than any other country, including China, so we must lead the solution of this worldwide problem, and it is good for business to do so. 

Peter Bond, Stony Brook 

Gene Sprouse, South Setauket



by -
0 631
Pixabay photo

I want to hear from you 

The political campaigns have started for the November 2023 elections. In the next few months, you will be inundated with flyers, phone calls and literature about those of us who are running to represent you in some office. 

We will be telling you who we are, why we want to be elected, what we support, what we don’t support and everything in between. And yes, I will do all these things so that you will know who I am, that you will recognize the name Dorothy Cavalier. 

But now I want to know who you are, what your concerns are, what your issues are — what is important to you and in your life?

My name is Dorothy Cavalier and I am asking you to send me emails, visit my Facebook page, stop me in the street to let me know your name, what your life is like, what you need to make your life better, what you support, what you do not support and everything in between.

So, email me at [email protected].

Visit my Facebook page and comment at Dorothy Cavalier for Suffolk Legislative District 6. I want to hear from you.

Dorothy Cavalier

Democratic candidate for Suffolk County’s 6th Legislative District

Mount Sinai

Waiting for Rinaldi to be made LIRR president

Just over 12 months ago, Long Island Rail Road President Phillip Eng retired effective Feb. 25, 2022. Metropolitan Transportation Authority Chairman Janno Lieber immediately appointed Metro-North President Catherine Rinaldi as interim LIRR president.

After 12 months on the job, she has developed a good working knowledge of the agency organization, staff, operations, facilities and customer needs. She is familiar with ongoing capital projects in the LIRR portion of the $51.5 billion 2020-24 Five Year Capital Plan. 

If Lieber is happy with Rinaldi’s performance to date, why hasn’t he made her the next permanent LIRR president? Is there something we don’t know? 

Remember that Lieber, just like his predecessors, will need the blessing of the governor. Just like past history, Gov. Kathy Hochul [D] will play a behind-the-scenes role in the selection of a permanent LIRR president.

Larry Penner

Great Neck

New York State’s bail reform is a success

Under the law, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Under the law, every person is guaranteed the right to a speedy and fair trial by jury. These tenets are the bedrock of our justice system.

Unfortunately, our system has too often failed to live up to these premises. In New York, almost three out of every four people incarcerated are people of color, which is disproportionate to the population. Many of these people are poor, and until the 2019 bail reform law, too many sat in jail awaiting trial because they could not afford bail. 

The most tragic example is that of Kalief Browder, who as a teenager was incarcerated at Rikers Island for three years, two of those years spent in solitary confinement, for allegedly stealing a backpack. His family could not afford to bail him out. He committed suicide after his release. The young man’s story, and the families who are impacted by the overlap of incarceration and poverty, are why the 2019 bail law was enacted. The criminal justice system failed Browder and countless others.

As soon as the 2019 bail reform law was enacted, before there was even any data on the impact of the law, the Republican Party began a campaign of fearmongering. Former U.S. Congressman Lee Zeldin [R-NY1] made this the theme of his failed 2022 gubernatorial campaign, and other candidates like freshman Assemblyman Ed Flood [R-Port Jefferson] followed suit. It was a campaign that was deeply racist in rhetoric, never addressing the root causes of crime and how to correct these causes.

A recent study refutes the lies of the Republican Party. The results of the two-year study show the opposite of the Republican talking points to be true, with recidivism and re-arrest rates dropping. “Fundamentally, we found that eliminating bail for most misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies reduced recidivism in New York City, while there was no clear effect in either direction for cases remaining bail eligible,” said Michael Rempel, director of John Jay College’s Data Collaborative for Justice, in a statement. 

The data is clear: Bail reform is a success. The tragedy is that too many elected Democrats refused to push back against the Republican lies and fearmongering. In that vacuum of leadership, misinformation has taken hold. 

We must demand leaders and candidates who will stand up for justice. We must also call out politicians like Zeldin and Flood who built their campaigns on lies and ensure they never hold elected office again. We deserve a system of true justice with moral leaders, and Republicans have utterly failed the electorate on the issue of public safety.

Shoshana Hershkowitz

South Setauket

WRITE TO US … AND KEEP IT LOCAL

We welcome your letters, especially those responding to our local coverage, replying to other letter writers’ comments and speaking mainly to local themes. Letters should be no longer than 400 words and may be edited for length, libel, style, good taste and uncivil language. They will also be published on our website. We do not publish anonymous letters. Please include an address and phone number for confirmation.

Email letters to: [email protected]

or mail them to TBR News Media, P.O. Box 707, Setauket, NY 11733

by -
0 463
Pixabay photo

Correction: Good Energy is New York-based

First, thank you for the in-depth March 9 article about Community Choice Aggregation in Long Island. It is a well-written article that shares much important information about CCA programs. 

Long Island residents and businesses can benefit from such programs for years, so the more information, the better. Such CCA programs will enable Long Islanders to secure stable, low energy rates and also feature renewable energy options. That is, indeed, important news for Long Islanders.

As a media contact for Good Energy, I would like to add a small — but important — correction and a clarification to that article. 

Good Energy is mentioned as being a London-based company. It’s an understandable error because there is a United Kingdom-based company with the same name as ours. However, Good Energy LLC is based in Manhattan, with employees on Long Island and has been helping New York and other states create CCA programs for more than 20 years. 

 For our company, it’s important that residents of the Town of Brookhaven and the rest of Long Island know we are a New York-based business working for New Yorkers. We look forward to serving Brookhaven as the energy consultant for their CCA program. Part of that service is providing Brookhaven with new, exciting renewable energy options. 

 I would also request that your publication clarifies the scope of Good Energy’s CCA program: The Town of Brookhaven’s Community Choice Aggregation Program is for gas, electricity and renewable energy. 

In fact, Good Energy is currently working with Brookhaven officials to develop such renewable energy projects. More news about that will be coming soon.

Doug Donaldson

Media Representative

Good Energy LLC

New York

Fund the state’s new campaign finance program

In a representative democracy, money should not be the determining factor in whether a person can run for public office. When working-class people run and serve in public office, our government works better for working families. Yet too often, the process is dictated by wealthy donors and special interest groups, making it difficult for the average person to run for office and win. The New York State Public Campaign Finance Program would help to change that.

This new state program would eliminate barriers and level the playing field for good, qualified people to run for public office. Under the new system, individual contributions of between $5 and $250 would be eligible for public matching funds, enabling candidates — incumbents and challengers — to spend their time fundraising among more of the people they seek to represent, as opposed to wealthy megadonors. This makes it easier for ordinary people without access to wealth to run for office, with the support of our communities.

Instead of officeholders who are beholden to corporate donations, special interests and megadonors, they would be listening to constituents who built their campaign, one small donation at a time. Furthermore, these small donors would be engaged in the process to a greater degree, as they have a personal connection with the candidate who represents them and the community. This is what a government of, by and for the people is all about.

Unfortunately, no one will be able to make use of public campaign finance if there is no funding allocated to the program. Our legislators must take bold action and fully fund the Public Campaign Finance Program this year, so that candidates can begin using it in the 2024 election cycle, as the law intended. This funding must be a part of our fiscal year 2024 budget that is currently being negotiated in Albany.

We in Suffolk County know all too well that special interests dominate the process. Special interests who hold power with our Republican and Conservative county legislators that killed Suffolk County’s public campaign finance program before it began. We cannot let this happen again at the state level. I urge you to let your state legislators know that you support New York’s Public Campaign Finance Program, and that you want your government to represent you, not the special interest groups. That is the leadership and democracy we deserve.

Shoshana Hershkowitz

South Setauket

Friendly, generous people

I would like to share how my wife and I have twice been the recipients of little acts of kindness.

The first occurred when we were dining in a Port Jefferson restaurant with another couple. The man, John, was telling us that he had fought in Europe in World War II. A few minutes later, our waitress informed us that the people in the next booth had paid for John’s meal. A thank-you for his service. We, of course, went to their booth and thanked them. 

More recently my wife and I had finished lunch at Outback Steakhouse in East Setauket, and the check arrived. The total appeared to be wrong, and I asked our waitress about it. She explained that the couple at the next table had some money left on their gift card and requested that it be applied to our bill. Unfortunately, they had left before we learned this, and we could not thank them. Whoever you are, if you read this: A profound thank-you for your generosity. I will pay it forward.

Steven Perry

Rocky Point

On the road again

March 12 was the 101st anniversary of East Northport resident Jack Kerouac’s birth.

It made me reread one of his best writings, “On the Road.” His works remind me of the more adventurous spirit of youth.

Sadly, as we get older, with more responsibilities and less free time, there are fewer journeys to take, but the ideals of Kerouac continue to live in all of us.

Larry Penner

Great Neck

WRITE TO US … AND KEEP IT LOCAL 

We welcome your letters, especially those responding to our local coverage, replying to other letter writers’ comments and speaking mainly to local themes. Letters should be no longer than 400 words and may be edited for length, libel, style, good taste and uncivil language. They will also be published on our website. We do not publish anonymous letters. Please include an address and phone number for confirmation. 

Email letters to: [email protected]

or mail them to TBR News Media, P.O. Box 707, Setauket, NY 11733

by -
0 364
METRO photo

To our readers: We appreciate your weekly letters to the editor. Writing a letter enables vital communication and contributes to a meaningful community dialogue. It is also a safety valve for expressing different, equally passionately held opinions in a civil fashion.

Letter writing can be powerful as the writer broadcasts opinions to the wider public. Here at TBR News Media, our editorial staff shoulders responsibility in channeling that message appropriately.

We hope writers and readers can regard our letters page as a community forum, a place to express themselves and potentially influence their peers and neighbors. But by necessity, this forum must be moderated to function. When a writer expresses a thought as a fact, we do our best to confirm the information is accurate. If we cannot find the information on our own, we go back to the writer and ask for a source. As journalists, we have an obligation to ensure that the facts cited are verified, that we are not allowing someone to use our letters page to spread misinformation or vitriol.

Often we are asked why our letters do not focus squarely on local matters. It’s simple — we don’t receive as many localized letters as we would like. 

Our editors aim to choose letters that represent a mix of local, county, state and national topics. We also look for a mix of opinions from conservative, liberal and moderate points of view. Letters serve as a form of public debate, and people from various sides of the political spectrum should be heard.

Moderating our letters page, we view ourselves as mediators for the various interests and opinions of the community. By sharing diverse perspectives on a range of topics, we arm our readers with the information and give them the freedom to make up their own minds.

We are asked why certain writers appear regularly on the opinion page. It’s because they write to us often and thoughtfully, and contribute to the public dialogue. We welcome and encourage letters from readers, and we hope to continue seeing new names each week.

Sometimes, we don’t receive a substantial number of letters to choose from each week that gives both sides of an issue.

If readers feel something is missing from our paper — whether from the news or editorial sections — we urge that they write us. We welcome readers’ thoughts — including criticism — regarding our content. Please feel free to react to a recent article or reflect upon life in our hometown. You can comment on an entertaining festival or even chronicle a delightful day spent at the park. The opportunities for letter writing are endless, so don’t be shy. Let your thoughts be heard.

We edit letters not to censor, but to catch grammatical mistakes, for consistency and to protect the media outlet and letter writers from libel suits. We edit for A.P. style, which is the standard in most U.S.-based news publications. We also edit for length and good taste. If a letter runs longer, we may print it as a perspective piece along with the writer’s photo.

As for good taste, our letters page is not the place to bash a neighbor or a fellow writer. There are plenty of instances when one writer will reference another person and their letter, addressing specific ideas in the other’s writings, and that’s acceptable. However, name-calling or denigration are not helpful.

In the past, we have received letters using derogatory nicknames for presidents and other officials and political figures. We do our best to edit out uncivil language.

The letters page is not a place for one to spew animosity or insults. If blanket, hateful statements are made about a group of people based on the color of their skin, ethnicity or religion, they will not be published. Our letters page is designed to add to, not detract from, a healthy public discourse.

So, please send us a letter — see address and formal policy statement to the right of this editorial. We are always interested in your thoughts, especially regarding what goes on in our coverage area.

by -
0 265
Pixabay photo

“Never be afraid to raise your voice for honesty and truth and compassion against injustice and lying and greed.”                           — William Faulkner

The founding of this nation would have been impossible without letters to the press. 

In 1776, Thomas Paine had captured the spirit of his times and wrote the most influential pamphlet of the American Revolution, “Common Sense.” Paine was not writing to the powers that be. Rather, he addressed his essay “to the inhabitants of America.”

The Revolution was fought and won because ordinary Americans — people like Paine — had ideas they believed were worth reading. They wrote down their grievances of British rule and shared them with their countrymen. Through these revolutionary writings, a common folk resurrected an ancient principle: unearthing democracy from the ashes of antiquity.  

So what happened? Why have we lost touch with this uniquely American tradition?

 In this Information Age, we find that access to information has become, paradoxically, severely limited. With the introduction of the internet, we were sold the hope that new technologies would educate the masses, that instant messaging and social media would create a wider forum for democratic participation. While this has happened, our era also is marked by censorship and misinformation.

Americans no longer trust their institutions. Everywhere we look, we find politicians who disregard our interests and tech executives who monitor and monetize our activity online. Globally, powerful interests invest billions every year to restrict access to information and keep the people in the dark. Our technologies have become the instruments of autocrats, used to subvert democracy rather than promote it. 

To the readers of TBR News Media and the people throughout this community, do not put your faith in tech moguls to represent you fairly. Regular people are left not knowing what to believe and what are the facts. This is why letters to the editor in newspapers are so crucial. 

Democracy depends on ordinary Americans speaking truth to power. We must remember the example of Paine and be unafraid to let our opinions be heard. We must present our own unique ideas to our fellow Americans, reopening the robust political exchanges of the past. The staff of TBR News Media welcomes letters. Write to us because our democracy requires it.

by -
0 6599

A reader recently called the office and asked a member of the editorial staff why social media companies like Facebook and Twitter have been shielded from lawsuits over the content users post on their platforms, while newspaper editors usually take extra precautions when publishing letters to the editor.

Social media platforms have been covered by Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, as they are not considered moderators of content provided by their users, but distributors. The same act protects distributors of books, magazines and newspapers.

It is a law that has become controversial, as The New York Times has pointed out, since it also covers websites that propagate hate speech. Websites can effectively set their own rules for what is and what is not allowed.

However, regarding newspapers, readers will often find that letters to the editor pages in many publications such as ours stress that the opinions of columnists and letter writers are their own. They do not speak for the newspaper. We also edit letters for length, libel, style and good taste,  and the editorial department vets them to ensure factual accuracy. While social media companies and internet service providers are protected under Section 230, newspapers, radio and television stations are held to a higher standard, allegedly due to their ability to moderate content and maintain editorial control.

At the same time, more social media sites are expressly moderating people’s posts. Facebook recently cited that it’s detecting and removing most hate speech before anyone sees it. If the argument was these sites didn’t have the capacity to moderate all its content, it is in the strange spot of arguing at the same time that it effectively can.

While outside content across the worldwide web is innumerable and almost impossible to keep track of, with a newspaper the content can be reviewed by an editor. Although most newspapers, including ours, are open to printing readers’ opinions no matter what side of the political aisle a person may take, as a privately owned business we have the option to decline to publish anything that comes across our desks. Based on our standard of ethics, letters can be declined if they include racist comments or defamatory statements — such as accusing a person of a crime, a breach of ethics or professional dishonesty. Newspapers can potentially bear the responsibility of being held accountable under libel laws if a letter claims something about a person that is known to be false or should have been known by the editorial staff. Of course, it’s hard to litigate libel in New York state, as one has to prove the defamation was made with actual malice.

Local newspapers like ours don’t always have the luxury of having numerous letters to choose from and, being familiar with the different viewpoints of community members, we have the right to decide not to publish letters that express extreme views. Still, we do our best to provide an outlet where everyone feels they can express their opinions and exercise their freedom of speech. However, unlike most posts on social media, we also understand the importance of protecting our community members as best as we can from hearsay.

Regarding Section 230, it may be time to hold social media accountable for the content that pops up in a person’s newsfeed. Let’s not forget which accounts have been suspended by Twitter or those who have been thrown in “Facebook jail.” It seems as if the technology is out there to decipher false claims and what is otherwise hate speech. The fact that these corporations seem to want autonomy while displaying they have the capacity to monitor their users’ messaging is untenable — the general political divisiveness and the proliferation of so much mistruth are reasons enough that laws need to change.

Considering how many rely on social media for information, it may be time for these platforms to step up to the plate and verify what their consumers read or risk government reform.

by -
0 1605
Stock photo

There’s something brilliant about a letter. In fact, one of the best ways to test one’s writing skill is in the art of correspondence. Try reading “A Life in Letters” by Eric Blair, aka George Orwell, to see the unique power of the written word. 

Each and every one of our readers letters has power and each and every word counts. Just like news stories, your letters might be capable of prompting change, or inspiring another individual, typically in 400 words or less.

With that power, every letter writer also has a responsibility to readers, and we at TBR News Media would like to clarify just what is at stake when you send in a letter to us. 

As journalists, we are the community’s closest connection between people and government, covering news and events that impact people’s lives on the local level. We especially welcome letters that touch on recent articles, even if it’s something as seemingly benign as roadwork near your house or a neighbor down the road setting off fireworks well past July 4. 

We edit for A.P. style, which is the standard in most U.S.-based news publications. If you were wondering why we only use a person’s last name after the first reference, for instance, that is why. It helps maintain coherence over the many thousands of words contained in each and every issue.

But we also edit for length, libel and good taste. These last three items that have especially been a bone of contention for some of our writers. Lately, many of our letters relate to national issues and the policies of President Donald Trump (R) and include incessant squabbling between the two major political parties. We would never alter your opinion, but we do have an obligation to make sure the facts you cite conform with the truth.

We ask that our writers provide sources or backup information with letters, so we can fact-check the information. 

We’ve received letters using derogatory nicknames for Trump, former President Barack Obama (D) and other legislators and political figures. We have done our best to edit out this potentially defamatory language. Some writers might disagree with this. But, we have also received letters berating other letter writers, and we have looked to soften that language to invite more civil discourse. 

Our view is the “Letters to the Editor” page serves as a form of public debate. Its purpose is to argue the issues, not personally attack an individual. Yes, please send us letters on what you think about the issues of the day, but when letters cross the line, they cheapen or even invalidate their arguments to knock at a supposed rival, or to drag people who live close to us through the mud.

We make a conscience effort to fairly represent opposing views to avoid discrimination. In fact, we find it most interesting and useful when we include letters from people on multiple sides of an issue. 

The majority of letters we get today concern the national discourse, and are essentially a mirrored reflection of the tirades and proceedings we see from people who are supposed to represent the best of us, the majority of us. 

Let’s raise the bar.

Instead of parroting the rhetoric of politicians and pundits, who regularly resort to insults, rely instead on the laws of logic and critical thinking. Analyzing arguments in the free marketplace of ideas is one hell of a responsibility. We the people hope we all take that responsibility seriously. Since accountability is the basis of democracy, let’s give it the gravity it deserves.

Prev1...789Page 9 of 9
TBR News Media is your local news and entertainment website.
We provide you with the latest breaking news and information for your community.
Contact us: [email protected]

Most Viewed

©