Both Hearing Aids East Hampton March 23, 2015 Dear Editor, Thank you for allowing me to post my letter about needing hearing aids. The response has been amazing. It will take a little while before I actually have them, but due to the kind responses and one very generous donation, I am getting both hearing aids in the near future! Thank you, East Hampton Star, and thank you to all who got in touch with me! Sincerely, LOIS M. WATTS Our Beautiful Swans Amagansett March 20, 2015 Dear Editor: Saw the swan article and, as always, Bill Crain, you have championed the cause of saving our beautiful swans. Thank you! The view of Town Pond without the swans would, I think, remove a great deal of the ambiance and beauty of East Hampton, especially as Route 27 sweeps into town. We hope upstate swans will receive the same respect and conservation. Thank you! ANNE WILLIS Lyme Disease Law Washington, D.C. March 20, 2015 Dear David: Late last year, Governor Cuomo signed a bill that had been unanimously approved by the New York State Senate and the State Assembly. The new law provides physicians who treat Lyme and other tick-borne diseases with additional legal protections against unwarranted harassment by the Office of Professional Medical Conduct. With more than 300,000 people contracting Lyme disease each year in the U.S., 70,000 of whom are in New York State, this law is welcome news to doctors and patients who are suffering from persistent or chronic Lyme disease symptoms. In most cases, a normal two or three-week course of antibiotics will treat Lyme or other tick-borne diseases. But in a significant number of cases, longer-term treatment is necessary. And without the treatment, patients can experience rapid deterioration and debilitating pain, resulting in permanent injury to the nervous system and other serious health consequences. Because of the prevalence of Lyme disease on the East End, many doctors have felt the need to prescribe long-term antibiotic treatment for their patients. And some — on Long Island and in other parts of the state — have been charged with malpractice by the Office of Professional Medical Conduct. By making examples out of a handful of the state’s best Lyme doctors, the O.P.M.C. created a chilling effect on hundreds of other doctors. This new state law, which amends Section 230 of the public health law, provides access to treatment for patients and protects doctors from persecution from overzealous bureaucrats. Recognizing that treatment for a disabling medical condition should be a clinical decision made by a patient and his or her doctor — not some government agency that acts with secrecy and intimidation — State Senator Ken LaValle and Assemblyman Fred Thiele worked quietly and effectively behind the scenes to make sure that the legislature acted on the bill before last year’s legislative session ended in Albany. They went on to negotiate technical amendments to the bill that were approved by both houses and signed by the governor earlier this month. I know that this bill would not have been signed into law without their direct involvement. The East End is lucky to have experienced and compassionate legislators like Mr. LaValle and Mr. Thiele, who know how Albany works and how to get things done. Sincerely, TONY BULLOCK Believe the Science Montauk March 21, 2015 To the Editor: The nice thing about science is that it is true whether you believe it or not. So if you are a climate-change denier, or if you think that humans have no role in melting the glaciers and permafrost and the Arctic ice, that’s okay. The rest of us will see you later. There are four paid lobbyists for every legislator in Congress. Let’s put some weight onto our side of the scales. Those of us who believe the science have an obligation to let our legislators know we have their backs if they make hard decisions — decisions that may cost money and shake us out of our ruts, decisions that favor long-term goals instead of short-sighted expediency. You don’t like to write? So give them a call. Senator Charles Schumer, 202-224-6542, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, 202-224-4451, Congressman Lee Zeldin, 202-225-3826, Assemblyman Fred Thiele, 537-2583. And let’s not forget our own terrific town board. Give them a little sugar, too. Best regards, JANET Van SICKLE P.S. It was Neil deGrasse Tyson who said that “the nice thing about science is it’s true whether you believe it or not.” I stole his line. Fun Terms to Fool East Hampton March 23, 2015 Dear Editor, With April Fools’ Day just around the corner, it appears that the meat, egg, and dairy industries have been playing us for fools all year round. Their more remarkable hoaxes include “California’s happy cows,” “free-range chickens,” “humane slaughter.” All lies. Less fun is the stuff they never talk about. Like the hundreds of millions of chickens crammed seven into a cage designed for one, unable to move or spread their wings. Or their hundreds of millions of male counterparts ground up live at birth and fed to other chickens, or just dumped into plastic garbage bags to suffocate slowly. Or the miserable breeding sows producing millions of piglets per year while trapped in tiny steel cages. All in the spirit of year-round April Fools’ Day, the meat industry has even developed a whole dictionary of fun terms to fool unwary consumers. Those filthy cesspools of animal waste that poison downwind neighbors with putrid odors? They call them “lagoons.” And to make sure that kids don’t confuse the pig flesh on their plate with Babe or Wilbur, they call it pork. Ah, those meat industry folks are such kidders. But they won’t be fooling American consumers much longer. Anyway, happy April Fools’ Day, everyone! Sincerely, ELIJAH HANNESBURG Jet Skis Oblivious Sag Harbor March 16, 2015 To the Editor It boggles the mind that East Hampton Town would even consider lifting the ban on Jet Skis. While significant improvements over their predecessors, these fast and nimble watercraft simply have no place in the inlets, bays, and harbors of Suffolk County. There is a reason the National Parks Service and many municipalities throughout the country have banned their use. How, in any stretch of the imagination, are these vehicles compatible with the marine environment? Effective as they are as joymobiles, they exhibit absolute disregard for their surroundings. Several times I have witnessed Jet Skis cavorting at high speed, deep into Northwest Creek, oblivious to the speed restrictions, the ban of their use in the creek, and their total disregard for the marine life that makes the creek the beautiful place it is. Most folks who frequent these bodies of water have similar Jet Ski horror stories. The delicate status of our marine environment warrants prudent stewardship by all of us. Allowing launching of Jet Skis into Northwest Creek, Napeague Harbor, etc., so that they can then access a larger body of water is to allow these sensitive areas to be significantly compromised. What say the diamondback terrapin, the osprey, the shore birds, the estuarine fish? All towns in Suffolk County require rigorous review and numerous restrictions before one can build on land, as part of an effort to maintain a balance between the natural and man-made environment. Similar scrutiny should be applied to watercraft plying the adjacent waters. East Hampton would do everyone a service by requiring that Michael Sendlenski, in his draft proposal, also provide a third-party environmental assessment of Jet Ski impact on the marine environment. Let there be fair representation by the indigenous occupants of the estuarine environment! WILL SHARP High Jinks, Jet Skis Amagansett March 20, 2015 Dear David, A friend of mine was recently reprimanded by an East Hampton Town Board member for trying to enlist a prominent Democrat to lend her voice in resistance to Republican high jinks in Springs. High jinks, as you well know, means excessive merrymaking, which, in my estimation, makes for a rather unique focus in the political arena. Some of the East Hampton Town Trustees are endorsing high jinks on our beaches, believing that unrestricted alcohol consumption is a civic right. Members of a recent Republican-dominated town board permitted the high jinks of a paint ball contest in an East Hampton public park during deer rutting season. And now we face the high jinks of allowing Jet Ski launching ramps. Oh, the excessive merrymaking of a flying Jet Skier intersecting with a paddleboarder, or boater, or shellfisher! Will the accident reports read in the “cause” column: High Jinks? All good things, DIANA WALKER Land Near the Airport Montauk March 17, 2015 To the Editor: Recently, I am noticing a frustrating trend whenever I open a local paper or magazine. We are continually seeing negative campaigns trying to stop something. This week, it’s East Hampton Airport. Apparently, it is located in a “noise sensitive” area. This one is really upsetting me. For anyone who has been around here for longer than 20 years, the airport was never in a “noise sensitive” area. It has always been a noisy area. There is an industrial park there, because that is where the founding fathers of the town deemed the best area for it to be at the time. Have people forgotten (or maybe are conveniently choosing not to remember) that land near the airport was priced lower than land in other parts of town for that very reason? Now that people have taken advantage of the lower-priced land and built homes there, all of a sudden they seem to want everything to go away. They expect the rest of the town to alter the way the airport is used because they got a deal on land but later realized the noise was disruptive? Are the people who own properties near the airport really hoping the rest of the population will sympathize with them so their homes can command an additional few hundred thousand dollars than they would actually be worth? Have they forgotten the cardinal rule of real estate, which is location, location, location? They bought land next to an airport. It seems like they didn’t think this out right when deciding where to purchase. This town is becoming the land of no. No hunting, no fishing, no dumping, no lights, no signs, etc. The airport offers a needed service and is a viable business asset to the community. Many of the frequent users of the airport support local businesses and pay a large share of taxes that help this town operate. We need to remember what is most important here. We need to start acting like a community again. Communities band together to save things, to support what they have created, to protect the survival of the community. Right now, survival of the communities here are in jeopardy. This is very important. We need to get away from the recent trend of each little area in town forming their own special-interest groups for their own advantage, and move toward thinking of the community as a whole, as a place to live. With all the problems we have here, we should try to repair and improve what really threatens our way of life: properly preparing our youth for the future, the lack of adequate affordable housing, the seasonal job market, the reputation East Hampton is getting for heroin abuse, not noise from airplanes. If you live in that area and find it too overbearing to live there, you should call a local real estate agent and relocate yourself, especially now that the property values are so high. Sincerely yours, MARSHALL PRADO No Alternatives East Hampton March 23, 2015 Dear David, In November, at a luncheon in New York City hosted by Arthur Malman, chairman of East Hampton’s business and finance advisory committee, airport finance subcommittee, all commercial operators at East Hampton Airport were invited to offer their ideas for addressing noise. I know, because I was there. They had none to offer at that time, stating that they needed time to consider. I personally urged them to offer whatever ideas they might have, while suggesting that they should endeavor to provide as much evidence as possible that their proposals would work. No concrete noise-reduction proposals whatsoever from these commercial operators have ever been forthcoming. Nor has the airport planning committee aviation subcommittee, representing local aviation interests, proposed any alternatives to the noise-reduction proposals of the East Hampton Town Board. The helicopter operators continue to claim in their orchestrated campaign of opposition that “routes and altitudes” can solve the problem, although these have been a demonstrated failure for years. Indeed, in 2014, which was the opportunity for the membership of the Eastern Regional Helicopter Council to demonstrate that its route and altitude management would be a solution, matters only got worse. There is simply not enough open space around the airport for this to work. The congested airspace will not permit helicopters to achieve sufficient altitude before departing or maintain sufficient altitude when arriving, even assuming that pilots observed the rules, which they do not. Claims that the town has not considered all the alternatives for noise reduction are the last-ditch effort by New Jersey-based helicopter operators to force their way into our airport, contrary to the will of the people who live here and own the airport. Over the course of the last year and more, every plausible alternative has been considered, from a “slot” system to regulate traffic volume, to price incentives, to, yes, routes and altitudes. The proposals made by the town to exclude the noisiest aircraft are by far the best alternatives available. Seventy-five percent of the noise complaints would be addressed by the proposed rules. In the absence of any alternative proposal, either from local aviation interests or commercial operators from outside East Hampton, it is time for the town board to move forward and adopt its proposals. If there were in reality any alternative to mandatory access restrictions, it would have been adopted years ago. Sincerely, DAVID GRUBER The Poster Child Sag Harbor March 23, 2015 Dear Editor, Decades of noise complaints (24,000 in 2014 alone), pages of petitions bearing thousands of signatures, years of videotaped pleas to former and current town boards from noise-weary residents, and scores of letters to editors annually attest to the widespread problems that commuter airport operations have caused for the Town of East Hampton. East Hampton Airport is now known nationwide as the poster child of noise-problem general aviation airports — a lousy reputation for a high-end resort area! The August 2014 meeting at LTV Studios was standing-room only, as residents and dozens of their elected representatives from towns and hamlets across the East End made known their misery from the increasing aviation assault above their homes. Hundreds again attended the March 12 public hearing on four airport access proposals, and, according to the report in The Star, of only 26 people who spoke against restrictions 19 were either airport businesses and their employees, aircraft owners, or outsiders attempting to interfere in local affairs, the aviation lobbyists New Jersey-based Jeff Smith of Eastern Region Helicopter Council and Jeffrey Gilley of the Washington-based National Business Aviation Association. That means only seven local residents, without obvious aviation interests, cared enough about the issue to speak publicly in opposition to the proposed airport access restrictions. Evidence of the adverse impacts on residents of noise from airport operations is overwhelming; health impacts from airport noise and pollution on humans and wildlife have been made known by the World Health Organization and many national organizations. To protect the future health and well-being of residents, the way forward is crystal clear: Pass all four proposals. Protect the people, not the profiteers. Thank you. PATRICIA CURRIE A Historic Decision Wainscott March 18, 2015 Dear David, As I sat listening to some of the opponents to the regulations for aircraft restrictions at the public hearing on March 12, I couldn’t help thinking they sounded like whining, spoiled, entitled, adolescent children. There are no guarantees in life. The Town of East Hampton owes no one a living at the airport. It is a privilege to use the airport. It is not a right. When I heard the baseless fear-mongering and doomsday scenarios about the regulations wreaking havoc on the local economy and real estate values, and chasing folks to Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket, I couldn’t help noticing not one shred of evidence was submitted on which to base these fears, no data was cited to substantiate these claims, no study was commissioned to corroborate the scenarios, and more astonishingly, not even one affirmative solution was made to reduce aircraft noise in our region. The town has done a fantastic job, made a heroic effort collecting many years of hard data of aircraft at the airport together with data from a noise complaint hotline run by an aviation interest group, commissioned several studies, heard expert testimony, convened community advisory groups, held two well-attended public hearings to listen to public testimony, and collected hundreds, maybe thousands of documents from experts and the public. The entire process was open and transparent. In my lifetime such a record can only be second to the adoption of the comprehensive plan, if my recollection is correct. In a couple of days the public input period will close and the town board will make a historic decision to give the people in the region long-sought relief from the torture and torment of dirty, noisy helicopters. I pray the town board stays the course with a firm hand on the wheel and finds the strength and courage to adopt all four regulations as proposed. The residents of East Hampton and the entire Peconic region will be eternally grateful and will fully support such a decision, including those who made it. God Bless America. Sincerely, FRANK DALENE Refuse to Be Bullied East Hampton March 21, 2015 Dear David, As we near the decision of the town board regarding the four proposals for our airport, I would like to weigh in once again on an issue that the aviation groups, specifically Jeff Smith, director of the Eastern Region Helicopter Council of Colonia, N.J., and Jeff Gilley, director of the National Business Aviation Association in Washington, D.C., continue to threaten our residents with. Their mantra is based on fear-mongering and is vacant of truth. The public is being led to believe that should the town board members vote to adopt the proposals, East Hampton would soon come to realize economic doom and gloom. Nothing could be less truthful. Instead, this is transparent Big Bully tactics at work. Fear is a dangerous premise on which to make decisions. We know fear can cause people to make irrational decisions that have long-term impact that may be irreversible. The issue of airport curfews and restrictions is a decision that must be made with the whole of the community in mind first and foremost. Serving an industry that will do more harm than good is not a good decision for anyone or any community. Our town board members are intelligent and astute. They have dedicated many months of study to the options and legality of the proposals. The town is within its right as proprietor to implement curfews and restrictions. The economy will only prosper as a result of fewer aircraft assaults and a diminished number of complaints from East End residents near and far. We believe the residents of this wonderful town do not take kindly to an organization from Washington, D.C., that feels it has the right to use strong-arm tactics and threats of lawsuits if it does not get its way. We also believe the residents don’t appreciate threats of lawsuits from a person who lives in New Jersey and whose position requires that he have as many helicopters in the air as possible, regardless of the negative impact on homeowners below. Since when do nonresidents have the authority to force our local government and residents to accept a lower standard of living so they can ruin our environment, all the while they reap great profits? These are but two organizations that are attempting to bully and ram down our throats what they want so they can continue to make huge profits as they ruin our environment and beautiful communities with incessant nonstop aircraft noise. In order to get their way, they promise the citizens of our communities that we will be left destitute, shops and estaurants will close down, people will sell their homes and move elsewhere where taxi helicopters, jets, seaplanes, and turbo-piston engines are welcome 24/7. We will lose our summer visitors and renters. No one will come here. We will all be sorry. The aviation groups go further and add more fear-mongering by claiming we will doom ourselves to higher taxes if we don’t accept Federal Aviation Administration funding. We all know we would forfeit ownership of the airport and be left without recourse to set curfews and restrictions of any kind, which is why the town board decided to let the grant assurances expire this past Dec. 31. Our town board members understand the need to implement rules and regulations, and they made a wise decision for the future of not only East Hampton but all the East End communities. Our zoning and planning laws are some of the best. Because the laws are strictly enforced we have a more beautiful and preserved town. Yet in the 1980s when they were created, opponents said the laws would prohibit a healthy economy. The community preservation fund has enhanced East Hampton through purchases of open land that would have otherwise been developed, thus destroying property and suburbanizing our community. Developers claimed the economy would flop. Instead it only increased the value of real estate, and people continued to flock to the Hamptons as buyers and renters. Some even became full-time residents, because the lifestyle was a dream come true: peace and quiet and a more relaxed environment. Our town paid over $200 million to purchase and preserve open land. Why would we do that and then allow aircraft traffic to operate nonstop 24 hours a day, thereby permitting the ruination of the tranquillity of our community? It doesn’t make sense. Our history has shown that the naysayers, the developers, the opportunists, and others who stood to profit but not for the town adoption of stricter zoning and planning codes, were completely wrong. East Hampton flourished and people came in droves, pleased with the preservation of open land by the efforts of our leaders and its affiliation with the C.P.F. The same is now true of the opponents of the airport proposals. They are the same single-minded opponents of the 1980s, but in a slightly different uniform. They want to own the airport and the skies above us. Their goal is no different from those opponents before them: to use and abuse our community while harvesting great monetary benefits for themselves. If a measly 1 percent (about 200 passengers) use the airport to taxi back and forth to the Hamptons, and the aviation groups and lobbyists are threatening lawsuits if the proposals pass, imagine how much they stand to lose in revenue if they get their way and take over our airport? The issue is simple for the aviation groups — they stand to lose millions if the proposals are passed. That’s not good for them. They don’t want that to happen, and the best way they can hope to get around this fact is to inject fear into our communities by repeatedly frightening us with predictions of economic doom. The aviation groups use fear-mongering by assuring us we will soon become a ghost town, people will desert the Hamptons and go to more friendly places where aircraft noise is welcome. If we don’t do as the aviation groups want us to, they predict that jobs will dry up and real estate values will plummet. If they can’t get their way, the aviation groups hold lawsuits over us like anvils. Well, they are absolutely wrong, just as the opponents of the 1980s were. Not only will people continue to flock to the Hamptons, they’ll appreciate it even more if there are no helicopters buzzing their homes at all hours of the night and day. They’ll especially enjoy the beaches and backyard barbecues without constant aircraft traffic drowning out their conversations. The renters will have greater summer home selection, as properties that have been deleteriously impacted by the noise of aircraft will realize a reprieve. Those homeowners will see the value in their homes competitively increase again. No, Washington, D.C., and Colonia, N.J., we don’t require or want your noise pollution to attract our summer shoppers, diners, renters, and buyers. The pristine environment and location of our beautiful communities is the only advertisement we need to draw people here. And come they will, as they always have for at least 100 years. Our economy will continue to flourish and grow, because we will remain far more quiet than you wish us to be. We prefer to keep our town free from the very thing that will drive people away: aircraft noise, accompanied by toxic chemicals from fuel spent over our lands. We offer no apologies to the 1 percent who choose not to come unless by helicopter or other noise-polluting aircraft at all hours of the day and night. I’d venture to guess they’ll find a perfectly suitable means by which to arrive to one of the most sought-after vacation areas in the world, and in a far more quiet way. In the long run, everyone will be forever grateful and highly appreciative of this town board’s efforts to continue to preserve what cannot be replaced once gone — our magnificent hometowns. Our many thanks to our tireless town board members for their careful planning and analysis of the four proposals and for their continued efforts to lead the town in a cohesive and sensitive manner. To save our economy, we must refuse to be bullied. Our communities and the quality of life we share is at stake today and forever. We stand with you! Sincerely, SUSAN McGRAW KEBER Business in Balance East Hampton March 23, 2015 Dear David, Opposition to the proposed aircraft access limits for East Hampton Airport, which will eliminate a large portion of the offending noise impacts now disturbing residents all over the East End, is coming primarily from outside business interests fighting any policy that might curb their profits. While we are all dependent upon business to provide necessary goods and services to our communities, it must be in balance with community needs. There exists a balance of trade that supports our lives in a variety of ways. But when business interests profit at the expense of the health, welfare, and ecosystems of the community, that relationship is out of balance. The access limits proposed at East Hampton Airport return a good portion of that balance to our communities by allowing those who wish easy access by air to do so by encouraging them to fly in quieter aircraft. Good government policy provides the necessary incentive for business to respond by setting acceptable community standards to protect the health and welfare of the public while providing business a framework within which to work. It should be noted that certain Stage 2 (very noisy) jet aircraft are no longer manufactured because the F.A.A. banned the noisiest jets. Policy can be a helpful stimulus. The access restrictions proposed do very little to curb the use of the airport by local pilots, which is appropriate. The noise-affected wish for this airport to return to its roots servicing small, local, recreational pilots. As decision-makers, the East Hampton Town Board will surely see through these claims, many made by outside business interests who wish only to exploit the natural beauty of our area to line their pockets. If the proposed access limits are adopted, East End residents can look forward to a summer of significantly reduced aircraft noise. We thank the East Hampton Town Board for making policy for the greater public good, rather than the interests of a select few. Most sincerely, KATHLEEN CUNNINGHAM Quiet Skies Coalition What Really Matters East Hampton March 23, 2015 Dear Editor, While waiting for the town board to announce its decision on airport noise, it’s a little like the old wisdom: “Whenever you’re called on to make up your mind, and you’re hampered by not having any, the best way to solve the dilemma, you’ll find, is simply by spinning a penny. No, not so that chance shall decide the affair while you’re passively standing there moping; but the moment the penny is up in the air, you suddenly know what you’re hoping.” And so it is that after all these years of working through the extraordinary complexities of the environmental crime that is airport noise, I suddenly have a sense of what really matters and what I most deeply hope will be addressed by the board’s action. First, the longstanding practice of sacrificing our preserved areas as dumping grounds for noise that no one wants must stop. In our sober moments, we all recognize that our greatest common asset is our truly magnificent environment. It is the preservation of that environment that gives special value to our community, to our homes, and to our lives. If we don’t want aircraft noise over our homes, then just do away with it, don’t sully our most precious and sustaining shared natural treasure. Second, there is a very real threat of injustice whispering in the din of this discussion. This is yet another episode in the very American tradition of the people versus the economy that sustains them. Indeed, the historically undeniable fact that sometimes the people don’t see what’s really in their best economic interest is the basis of the opposition to airport restrictions. However, this time that position is demonstrably dead wrong. The extraordinary number of registrations of public opposition to aircraft noise, the complaints, the petitions, the letters, the crowded meetings, the electoral votes — all of it completely and unequivocally overwhelms the small community of businesses and passengers that perpetrate this plunder of the quality of every life that their noise reaches. I deeply hope that the level of restrictions imposed will be fairly proportionate to the level of damage done. Third, when I think about what I care about, I can’t escape the thought that solving our aircraft noise problem might be at someone else’s expense. Indeed, those who live near area airports that might be alternatives to East Hampton Airport are right to be concerned that the restrictions could cause a redirection of traffic to their facilities. On the other hand, the situation at each facility is quite different and outcomes are hard to predict. Without a demonstration of actual trends in redirection, it would be total guesswork to effectively address any problems that may emerge. The East Hampton Airport restrictions should go ahead as proposed and traffic patterns elsewhere should be monitored closely from the start. Accommodations could be made as appropriate to the particular site and level of an emerging problem, but not until fears become facts. If restrictions at East Hampton Airport were relaxed in anticipation of completely uncertain overflow, the only certainty would be a painful loss by those now under the flyways. So as I wait for the verdict to be handed down, my concerns yield two competing thoughts: First, how wonderful it would be to watch the piping plovers return to the spit on the old Northwest Creek helicopter route. And second, how awful it would be if the forces that mutated our airport into the malignancy that it has become were to be ceded even a little more than their proper share. But spring has sprung, and hope abounds. Sincerely, T. JAMES MATTHEWS Their Private Club Wainscott March 19, 2015 Dear David: At the airport hearing Thursday it was once again apparent that the users and profiteers insist that any regulation at all is unacceptable. In their arrogance and ignorance, they tell one another that they are entitled to free rein, that a public municipal facility supported by taxpayer dollars and surrounded by 500 square miles of preserved forests, pristine waterways, bucolic villages, and expensive homes is but their private club. And they state this despite the entire region’s abhorrence at their selfish polluting behavior. The users are abusers, the profiteers are pirates. They are leaving the majority with no choice but to control their egregious excesses. Will they suffer? If so, not nearly as much as their despicable behavior requires. BARRY RAEBECK Democracy in Action East Hampton March 22, 2015 Dear David, At both well-attended airport meetings at LTV Studios, hundreds of East Hampton citizens along with dozens of East End elected officials urged the East Hampton Town Board to “hold the course” and ignore the financial fear-mongering and bullying. The previous board had personal proclivities that came into and distorted the airport discussion. Time was wasted and horrendous noise ensued. Under Larry Cantwell’s leadership, the board has been transparent, diligent, and rational. They are focused on what the taxpaying homeowners of East Hampton require to maintain the peaceful quality of life they have been used to living. This East Hampton Town Board formed airport committees with all points of view represented, had discussions and presentations of meaningful analysis, and invited the public to weigh in. Now the time is near for final proposals and a board vote. This is democracy in action in East Hampton 2015! LENI SALZ Off-Highway Vehicles Springs March 11, 2015 To the Editor, The Long Island Sports Committee is seeking to use 9.67 acres inside the major recreation facility currently held in total by the Maidstone Gun Club. We are seeking a de minimis taking of 10 percent as per the known contract language for off-highway vehicles and all-terrain vehicles, especially since the accident involving two A.T.V. riders in Montauk. It is long overdue that these users and residents of our town are given some dedicated land for their recreational use. The decades of discrimination are unacceptable. The society of today preaches respect, tolerance, and acceptance and assimilation of others’ lifestyle choices, yet this group is continually discriminated against, without a viable plan of action to find suitable resolution. Lisa Liquori, the former town planner, is on record as stating that our use would be suited to the airport property, where noise is generated via the aircraft industry, as a similar use for that site. One can use the airport for jet use, helicopter use, and private small-engine craft, even shooting of guns, etc. So I ask, who will recognize the efforts of several decades for the user group described? Will politics continue to deny we exist in our own community? We have been outlawed from the trails without a place to go — bad politics, not politically correct in today’s society. Be reminded we are having trouble passing a truck law because the political ideology is, if we outlaw them where will they go? Funny how we didn’t get the same consideration as a user group that in reality created the trails system over decades of use before the town became the foothold of the latest influx of second-home owners. State law defines an area of law that allows the control of these uses by towns, in a created, dedicated site — even so much as the town can charge a fee to the users. So, while all the complaints driven by second-home owners who bought near an airport now have created a controversy over noise, where do we stand? I live in Springs (not “the” Springs), and we don’t have airport noise problems at all. Also, most preservation fund purchases are made with the idea they are for open space and recreation, yet no space has been put forward in the last 30 years. The last legitimate location, in my opinion, is where Lisa Liquori stated it should go while Lisa participated in the several comp plan drafts — at the airport. Research also defines the Maidstone Gun Club as the major recreational facility in our town. So, with the de minimis taking, we could have a place to recreate, on a limited basis, for residents only. It’s time for politicians and community leaders to respect, tolerate, accept, and assimilate our needs and desires, just as they have for others in their lifestyle choices. We are tired of being ignored by obtuse politicos who have violated our basic liberties for decades. What will it take to find assimilation? We have rights, too — the right to be at liberty within lawful expectations. I have been active in all areas, been on many committees, yet for decades we go unserved. When do we get our slice of the pizza of life? I watch our citizen advisory groups plot and plan a takeover of our lands, our buildings, our natural resources, yet never is there an idea of bringing our user group into the fabric of the community. These shameful decisions are based in discrimination and political agendas being bought by insider political operatives and elitist ideology of how we are to live our lives. I was told, fear not speaking the truth in a real sense of voice and concern when our civil liberties are being continually violated and denied. We can only hope that we find the same respect, tolerance, acceptance, and assimilation others already enjoy in our society. I remain, MARTIN WILLIAM DREW JR. Chairman Long Island Sports Committee First Three Wives East Hampton March 16, 2015 Dear Sirs, Upon reading your obituary of Bill King, I was surprised that none of his first three wives were mentioned. When I first met Bill in 1960, he was divorced from the mother of his son, and I only heard nice things about her. At that time he was then married to Shirley King, who was the mother of his daughter. They were then divorced. Shirley was a good friend of ours. He then married Dane Robin, from whom he again divorced. Just wondering if you were aware of this. Best wishes, JUDITH E. MAKRIANES A Fallen Empire Sag Harbor March 23, 2015 Dear David, Before I begin to write on my topic of the fallen empire I’d like to recite my daily prayer. Free me, Lord, to reopen to others with love, free me to have inner peace, free me to have love and understanding for all peoples. To anyone who has read my last letter I promised to show evidence of our fallen empire. History already provided proof. Surely you have heard many say, are we the last superpower? Could this be a sign of arrogance or self-destruction or ignorance? Maybe the advice of the Rev. Martin Luther King can clarify the question, we are the most violent nation on the earth. Are we in the midst of a fallen empire? Evidence excerpted from the past and current events in The New York Times and elsewhere usually controlled by corporate powers. Our money still flows upward to the 1-percenters. More wealthy people have been affected, the reason for the slow recovery. Did you get a bonus? Or pay for the bonus? Taxes out of sight for the poor. Traditionally, when we go to war or are at war most of the time Congress takes benefits from the poor, a sick notion with no conscience or compassion. Class warfare, no politician dare say 57 percent of our budget goes to the military, 4 percent for educating our children. The average debt $30,000 and on the rise. Poor students can no longer afford an education. Original sin? Further evidence to follow; not enough space. Remember George Bush Junior? If we threaten Iran we will begin World War III. Are we there yet? Any nation spread too thin is a candidate for a fallen nation. Are we in process? G.O.P. senators send a letter to Iran on nuclear weapons clash. Obama outraged. Global action from the top down is not working for us. We are not masters of the universe. Maybe we can improve our domestic problems first. Minimum pay is an insult to humanity. Two members of the F.B.I. drove toward the White House while drunk. Becomes a whistle-blower versus a cover-up attempted by F.B.I. Surely the C.I.A. has created monstrous problems, held in secrecy still. Demonstrators around the nation are describing hundreds of issues ignored while injustices run rampant alongside corruption of the worst kind. Do we need change to survive? (One in four children live in poverty.) Foreclosures on the rise involving cars, too in debt and repossessed, money is the weapon when we need weapons of mass compassion. A rift imperils authorization to combat against ISIS. A dangerous game we play. Over 30,000 veterans have been fired from the military, called personality disorders. Does anyone think some were victims of post-traumatic stress disorder? Or did we run out of money? Actually we claim weapons are in short supply. From the poet Agee let’s get it right this time for an international monument. Poetry is a weapon too for peace. We soldiers of all nations who lie killed / Ask little that you never in our name / Dare say we died that men might be fulfilled. / The earth should vomit us against that shame. Some politicians may not like what I have written. Those who still believe in the glory of war have never heard from the dead. Children have no voice either. No vote, no hope. A reminder of the veterans with P.T.S.D. who actually committed suicide. Their numbers are in the thousands and rising each month. Politicians need to listen. So much to learn from the poor. Finally, be wary before we speak for the dead. No one among us possesses that truth. Bless all of our soldiers who have made the supreme sacrifice. The consequences are enormous. The fallout of war is more costly than the war itself, estimated at $4 trillion to $7 trillion. We are the biggest debtor nation in the world, a bad example. Keep the faith. We will rise from the ashes. LARRY DARCEY Intellectual Imbeciles East Hampton March 23, 2015 To the Editor: As the Middle East spins wildly out of control, it becomes imperative to try to understand why we understand virtually nothing about what’s going on and have even less of a clue about what to do about it. Obama’s reticence to take action is a normal function of reflecting upon a situation before acting on it. Reflection, however, is no longer a part of the U.S. political landscape, or any U.S. landscape for that matter. We lay under the enormous disadvantage of being a-historical. The past has been cleansed from our thought processes. But the biggest problem is that we have become addicted to sound bites: text messages, tweets, Facebook, etc. We live in a world of instant gratification, where time is neither a luxury nor valued as part of our decision-making mechanisms. We live in the moment, and if the moment is foggy, uncertain, beyond our capacity to understand it, we move on to another moment. We are intellectual imbeciles when a problem takes more than 30 seconds to solve. So, from the people who gave us the Iraq adventure with no plan, Citizens United, the war on terror, and Benghazi, we have ISIS. Who the hell is ISIS was the lament six months ago. We now have some idea, but what we do is another matter. Do we enter into another brain-dead adventure where we expose our military to something it can’t win? Do we decide that our experiment in Iraq had phony results and that nine years of beating a dead horse didn’t bring it back to life? All we really have are questions. But the most important question is really about ourselves. Do we have the intellect and the ability to concentrate for more than 30 seconds on a problem that has imperiled a huge piece of the world, and not pretend that we are in danger? Are we better off keeping a distance, given that we have screwed up virtually every adventure we’ve entered into in the past 30 years? Do we have any real capacity to lead? While ISIS was gathering steam, we focused, 52 times, on trying to repeal our national health care law. While Iraq crumbled we kept trying to repeal health care. And while museums and mosques were bombed in Tunisia and Yemen we took another go at the A.C.A. Maybe it’s time for the greatest country on earth to step down from its pedestal and think about what we’re doing. Give our weary brains and the rest of the world a break. We can re-ascend to the throne in 5 or 10 years once we’ve finished with our down time. It won’t be hard time. Could even be fun. And hardly a soul would know we were missing in action. NEIL HAUSIG Like Home to Me Southold March 16, 2015 Dear Editor, When I was a young teen I would get on the subway to find the Bogart home on the Upper West Side, couple of years after his death. A young man who seemed to be a butler with the family face let me in at the door and led me to the sewing room, where a girl friend was embroidering flags. Her work was just gorgeous. I took a try and couldn’t embroider the flag correctly, pulling too hard on the yarn, causing all sides of the flag to fold! The house was like home to me. Years passed and I returned. Inside it was empty, bare. A big white sheet folded over a folded line. Syringes were on the floor and bottles lay around like the room was just raided. I went back a long time later. There was a guy my age standing by the gate carrying liquid Mace, sprayed some at me! I felt violated. I couldn’t go in a place I would frequent a lifetime. Another time I just walked in. The place looked all gutted out, looking out to clear, wood, narrow beams. You could put your arm through to the next house, where I saw a guy my age sitting on the broken floor, drinking a beer. I left and walked up the street to the avenue to where the bus came, to go to my destination, Forest Hills. I was so surprised to see a big green sign way up on the West Side, with white lettering: To Forest Hills-Metropolitan, which made me feel I could walk home — close, but it took long. I ate lunch at the Seminole club in Forest Hills with Humphrey Bogart when I was 11 years old, a chicken salad sandwich, cup of fruit salad, a Coke, a year before he died. Five years later I went back to the club in Forest Hills to play tennis and uncontrollably cried out for him, remembering the last time I was there, but managed to hit the ball. In 1953, I doubled June Allyson in “Battle Circus.” It was good for me. ANITA FAGAN
Published 4 years ago
Last updated 4 years ago
Letters to the Editor: 03.26.15
March 25, 2015