Concerns over Jay Street construction are being addressed
I was surprised to see Patricia Greenwood’s April 11 letter to the editor.
Her letter cites “a lack of concern or respect” for business owners on Jay Street due to construction at Center City. The letter goes on to say that more “bricks are being broken” as a result of the project.
The letter also says that a “large chunk” of Jay Street has been blocked off.
Here are the facts:
Ms. Greenwood contacted Metroplex and City Councilwoman Leesa Perazzo with her concerns. The concerns were immediately relayed to the owner of Center City, and instructions were given to the construction crews working in this area.
No bricks have been broken. The street has not been blocked off. If any repairs are needed following construction, they will be the responsibility of the building owner. Metroplex has invested considerable time, effort and funding to improve the Jay Street area with lighting, brick repair, signage and other upgrades.
There was never a lack of concern or respect shown to any of the merchants. Quite to the contrary, the minute we heard about a potential problem, both Councilwoman Perazzo and Metroplex took immediate action.
Downtown Schenectady continues to attract new investment and new jobs. The Center City project is a $30 million private investment that has transformed an empty soccer arena into a vibrant part of the new downtown.
The writer is the chair of the Schenectady County Metroplex Development Authority.
Rotterdam board will answer to the voters
Re: The April 11 article about the brush fee in Rotterdam — so 78 percent of residents paid the fee. They had no other choice.
Rotterdam is mostly older citizens — they have no trucks or are unable to get trash to the composting facility. It was pushed on us with no vote or discussion. And now the board is after REMS [Rotterdam Emergency Medical Services] again.
Residents, remember these things come election time.
Contrary to letter, we have many freedoms
The April 11 letter from Wallace J. Hughes entitled, “Too many laws, not enough freedom,” made me wonder what laws are impeding my freedoms or his.
Here in America, we have freedoms others can only dream about. We have the freedom to travel, express our views, vote and hundreds of others. Unlike what Mr. Hughes stated, we do have the power to control our government by our right to vote. And the only thing we have to fear, as put by President Franklin Roosevelt, is fear itself.
While I am disgusted with those in higher office who use their political might to stop programs that help the middle class and poor, I do not fear them. I use my right to vote, and at election time, I will cast it against them.
The letter from Mr. Hughes talks about returning to our original constitutional government, but doesn’t list specific rights that have been taken from him as an American. He states there are so many federal laws “no one is capable of living within the law.” I have to ask: What law am I breaking as I enjoy the freedoms every American has through the blood of those who served?
Our original constitutional government was made up of men with vision who made it possible to make changes as needed to serve the people. This being said, as citizens of this, the greatest country the world has ever seen, we abide by our laws, as they have kept us a free nation. The Constitution has written into it a clause to amend it as needed, and the notion that the federal government’s role should be curtailed is self serving.
God bless America and those who gave of themselves to protect tour freedoms.
Gary P. Guido
Maybe it’s time to replace school board
The Niskayuna School District did not act appropriately in terminating the contract of its superintendent [April 5 Gazette]. First of all, why would the district hold a meeting on a Friday morning to “buy out” a contract ignoring the Open Meetings Law?
In my opinion, some members of the school board wanted this over quickly without any community input involving a major issue. They apparently didn’t even want the press present. There was no notice given to the newspapers. The statement that it was on their website is ridiculous since most residents read the newspapers, not the district’s website. There are lawyers on the board. Didn’t any of them recognize the violation of the Open Meetings Law?
In addition, the board members have been “muzzled” so they cannot respond to the residents, who elected them, about this matter. Having a philosophical disagreement with their superintendent is not grounds to buy out her contract with taxpayers’ money.
As a resident in this community, I find their actions very disconcerting. There will always be instances when the superintendent might not always agree with the board. The superintendent is the educational leader of the district. Most board members do not have the educational experience and need to rely on their superintendent’s advice in some circumstances. In my opinion, some members of this board don’t want to hear any ideas that differ from their own.
This district goes from one crisis to another. The tax override failed last May; the recommendations of the strategic planning committee were ignored; $109 million is owed to the state because of a miscalculation; there is a $2.6 million deficit; and the Open Meetings Law was violated by having a Friday morning meeting. If this isn’t bad enough, they buy out the superintendent’s contract and feel no need to be accountable to the taxpayers.
Maybe, we need a new Board of Education in Niskayuna.
The Gazette wants your opinions on public issues.
There is no strict word limit, though letters under 200 words are preferred.
All letters are subject to editing for length, style and fairness, and we will run no more than one letter per month from the same writer.
Please include your signature, address and day phone for verification.
For information on how to send, see bottom of this page.
For more letters, visit our Web site: www.dailygazette.com.