Letters to the Editor for Tuesday, March 5

80

SHARES

Share on Facebook

Tweet

Follow us

Save

Share

More consistency in sidewalk clearing 

Several times a week, even in winter, I wheel my disabled wife down our pothole- and patch-strewn street toward Central Park for a walk/wheelchair ride. 

We don’t use our neighbors’ sidewalks, since they provide an even more bone-rattling ride than the street. The road, path and crosswalk improvements from last summer have made the in-park walking experience much more pleasurable.

In winter, I bring my snow shovel after any decent snowfall. City employees do a relatively good job of clearing the main sidewalks. But most crosswalks, the old casino sidewalk, the sidewalk around Tiny Tot Land and the new dog park handicap spots are either ignored or very poorly attended to. I have to shovel access in and out of the fountain pond loop trail.

It’s nice to dream of the city doing something citywide to help create a more winter-walkable environment for residents and visitors. Yet on Feb. 27, in Central Park, the city of Schenectady was in clear violation of Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Temporary interruptions in accessibility, caused by snow, are not a violation. However, the city is in violation since it allows conditions to persist indefinitely. It wouldn’t take much extra time to clear the remaining park sidewalks, crosswalks and parking spaces.
Jonathan Simms
Schenectady

No sympathy for dirty old man Kraft

Let’s not call Robert Kraft a “lonely” old man.

Here’s a man who supposedly has a 38-year-old girlfriend and a ton of money. What apparently is on video from the “spa” is an act being performed on him. I think we all know what that was. I’m guessing his girlfriend is not willing to do that, and he was looking for underage “companionship” to help him with his “loneliness.” Sounds like a dirty old man to me. If he’s lonely, why not ask a woman his own age out to dinner and a movie? No sympathy here.
Mary Baker
Perth

Steck will price for vote on health act

Having read Assemblyman Phil Steck’s Feb. 17 guest column, “Separate propaganda from reality on Reproductive Health Act,” and Kathleen M. Gallagher’s Feb. 19 guest column,”New abortion law is extreme and harmful,” I could not help but notice the contrasts.

Ms. Gallagher’s opinion was concise. In simple language, she  educated the reader on the content of the Reproductive Heath Act (RHA), thus giving readers an opportunity to draw their own conclusions.

Assemblyman Steck’s opinion was a history lesson — his coming to political awareness, Roe v. Wade’s birth and the debates that followed and changing viewpoints on abortion. While he points out that religious freedom is a constitutional protection, he concludes that those who oppose the RHA are “imposing their religious views on everyone.”

The Declaration of Independence states we are “entitled to life.” Medically, abortion means loss of the fetus, for any reason, BEFORE (my caps), it is able to survive outside the womb.

Freedom of speech is a constitutional freedom.

Assemblyman Steck takes umbrage that because he supports Roe v. Wade, he’s being called a murderer. You chose to support and vote for the RHA. You are now reaping the consequences.

The United States of America is a republic. Elected officials serve the “will of the people.”

Assemblyman Steck states “it would be a fraud on the voters to change my position.” “My support of Roe v. Wade will not change no matter what charged or offensive language is hurled at me.” Assemblyman Steck voted his will, not those of his constituents. He will be running for reelection in 2020.

As Ms. Gallagher stated “this outrage will not soon be forgotten.” Your voice is your vote.
Fran Underhill
Scotia

80

SHARES

Share on Facebook

Tweet

Follow us

Save

Share

Categories: Letters to the Editor, Opinion