Dissension is jeopardizing the future of Ballston

Sunday, February 24, 2013
Text Size: A | A

Dissension is jeopardizing the future of Ballston

The little town of Ballston, like others in close proximity to GlobalFoundries, is experiencing growth and the pressure from developers that comes with such expansion.

Judging by the public behavior from a developer at the most recent Town Board meeting, it is certainly understandable that an encounter with this individual might be considered unpleasant and prejudice one’s opinion. For this reason alone, Supervisor Patti Southworth wisely stated she was abstaining from voting on the developer’s proposal.

Obviously confused by such a display of integrity, Councilwoman Mary Beth Hynes used her attorney skills, questioning the supervisor about her reasons, receiving only a comment about the potential for the supervisor’s vote to be prejudicial.

Now, even little schoolchildren know enough not to shout “fire” in a movie theater. As adults we know our First Amendment rights, but we also know enough not to hurl accusations without proof. One would hope that lawyers are taught that discretion is the better part of valor. Single words have been the focus of legal action, but that did not deter Ms. Hynes from her goal — to smear the supervisor. So putting aside any sign of judgment, Ms. Hynes stated that, “I have heard the word bribe thrown out there,” and challenged the developer to comment.

In your Feb. 15 Gazette editorial [on the sale of the Cappiello farm], you noted that, “The Town Board almost screwed things up,” referring to the “offensive comments” from the council. You would think those most guilty would heed the warning that loose lips sink ships.

Councilwoman Hynes has stated that she is not running for re-election. Given her most recent performance and utter disregard for propriety, let alone the laws against slander, I’m calling on Councilwoman Hynes to resign now before her lack of judgment further jeopardizes our town.

Polly Windels

Ballston

SAFE Act only protects the criminals

All Hummer owners be advised — they may be outlawed because they look like military vehicles. Don’t laugh at this because the fact is, the governor’s SAFE Act outlawed a gun (assault weapon) that is responsible for less than one-half of 1 percent of violent crime in New York state, just because it looks like a military gun.

Did you know that hammers and blunt instruments are responsible for more deaths than rifles and shotguns? So, if you have a baseball bat in the house, lock it up, because you are at greater risk of being harmed than someone with a gun (assault weapon) in the house.

Do you approve of our state government spending millions on nothing? Well, that is going to happen again with the so-called SAFE Act. Remember CoBIS (Combined Ballistic Identification System)? It cost New York taxpayers $44 million. Yes, that’s 44 million with no effect in preventing or solving any gun crimes. None!

We already had adequate gun laws in New York state before the SAFE Act, so it seems to me that the governor wants to give the criminal the edge by telling me I’m allowed to have only seven rounds in my clips. The SAFE Act will make working in New York state safer for criminals.

I just hope the governor doesn’t make New York state as “safe” as Chicago.

Donald Kingsley

Ballston Lake

 

comments

Log-in to post a comment.
 

columnists & blogs


Log into Dailygazette.com

Forgot Password?

Subscribe

Username:
Password: