Letters to the Editor: 09.18.97

Cost Of Primary

East Hampton

September 11, 1997

Dear Editor:

Primary Day (Sept. 9) arise at 4 a.m.: morning ablution followed by a light breakfast. Out the front door, into the car, and reach assigned spot at Election District #4 by 5:28 a.m. There, my other five co-workers and I readied the voting machine, placed appropriate papers on tables, and waited. We waited until 8:30 p.m. for two eligible voters to enter.

Not that we were without visitors. Fifteen ineligible voters crossed the doorstep: registered Democrats and Republicans. Two who said they were registered independents but weren't "in the book." They were offered affidavit ballots. And one voter who couldn't remember most recent party affiliation.

All in all, 20 prospective voters.

Do I perceive a problem? Yes, I do.

I can only begin to estimate the financial cost of this primary election at E.D. 4: And the cost is borne by "we the people."

- +/- $700 for six people to sit at E.D. 4, 5:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m.

- $$ to move one voting machine from Yaphank to E.D. 4 (and back again).

- $$ for sheriff (plus driver) to ride the circuit of E.D.s in East Hampton Town: at least two visits in 16 hours.

- $$ for the physical space of the voting machine.

Do I have possible solutions? Perhaps.

1. Prominently display advertisement of election (not necessarily of persons involved) describing election intent and who is eligible to vote, especially for primary voting, not only in newspapers, but at food stores or other places visited by the electorate in the course of daily activities.

2. Shorten number of hours of primary election: noon to 8 p.m.

3. Reduce number of persons assigned to one voting machine (i.e., two inspectors and one coordinator).

4. "Split" shifts for inspectors and coordinators to four, six, eight, or 16 hours.

Finally, in closing, on a personal note: I really enjoyed the company and conversations that engaged us six over 16 hours. The time was well spent.

Sincerely,

MARILYN JOHNSON

Combating Voles

Amagansett

September 12, 1997

Dear Star,

In last week's Star, the garden section had an article about clematis, by Ellen Samuels. In the article she related that an Ipswich, Mass., nursery had found that a product called Mole-Med had been successful in combating voles (a type of field mouse) that had been eating the roots of their plants.

This is good news, because in my correspondence with Horticulture magazine last year, they reported that in their research some experts had reported it to be "not effective at all," while others reported it "works pretty good." The problem is that it doesn't kill them but merely diverts them to other parts of the garden. Even so, it could be valuable in protecting individual plants or beds of valuable bulbs.

Mole-Med is expensive, but Horticulture gave me the formula. (Six ounces castor oil, two tablespoons liquid dish detergent, and one gallon of water.) Mix one ounce of this in a gallon of water and drench the soil once a month around the plants to be protected, beginning in late spring.

It seems that the scent of the castor oil gets on their fur and makes them repellent to their mates so they don't cohabit. (Maybe members of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals could use this to spray on people wearing fur coats instead of red paint?)

Sincerely,

HOWARD PURCELL

Train Dog Owners

East Hampton

September 14, 1997

Dear Mrs. Rattray,

I read with interest the article titled "Would Extend Dog Ban" in your Sept. 11 issue. Insofar as the reason for wishing to instigate this ban was prompted not so much by "dogs per se," but by "what they have left behind," it is understandable that the public wants a remedy. However, the problem is not with the dogs themselves, but rather with their owners, who should indeed be responsible for tidying up after their pets. That would be the remedy.

As was mentioned in the article, some beachgoers have inquired as to whether a "pooper-scooper" law such as the one in place in New York City might not work. This idea was rejected as not being "practical or enforceable here." In New York City, let me assure you, it has proved practical, not because it is possible to enforce it by an already overworked Police Department, but through peer pressure.

One of the great pleasures of going to the beach in the summer is to see children romping in the surf and playing with their pets. In the evenings I have watched entire families picnicking around a campfire accompanied by their pets, who are an integral part of their life. Are we becoming so mean-spirited as to deny these pleasures to our neighbors? Larry Cantwell correctly said that "you do see a lot of dogs on the beach before 9." This is because a lot of people take pleasure in bringing their dogs to the beach. Are we going to deny our neighbors this pleasure because less than a dozen have complained?

Let's make an effort to train the dog owners to act responsibly and not penalize the rest of us for less than a dozen complaints.

Sincerely,

WILLIAM P. RAYNOR

Please address correspondence to [email protected]

Please include your full name, address and daytime telephone number for purposes of verification.