Letters to the Editor: 11.14.96
Overdue Fees
Amagansett
November 11, 1996
Dear Mrs. Rattray,
The beginning of the story:
In Suffolk County Supreme Court, a lawsuit was filed on Jan. 5, 1993, by the Town of East Hampton against Volk's Montauk Disposal Service Ltd. The suit maintained that the defendant had failed to pay the town, prior to Dec. 31, 1992, $296,363.35 in overdue "tipping fees" at the town dump.
On Feb. 12, 1993, the town notified Volk's Montauk Disposal's president, Tim Volk, that unless he executed a repayment agreement with the town, the town would deny Volk access to the dump. The letter referred to the "competitive advantage" Volk enjoyed by free use of "that which others are required to pay for."
Little progress was made by the town in collecting the overdue fees from Volk during 1993 and 1994. Volk's Montauk Disposal filed for bankruptcy in 1994 and immediately began accruing additional overdue fees of $33,105.05, according to documents dated Aug. 17, 1994, filed by the town attorney. Volk signed an agreement on that date to make "advance payments" for tipping fees to operate his business.
In May of 1995, Volk went on the offensive when he issued a letter to his "valued customers," in which he offered his views of the town's "voluntary experiment in the composting of certain municipal solid waste." In the letter, Volk explained that the recycling/composting program would ultimately increase costs to his clientele.
Volk's concern for additional costs to East Hampton residents, however, would not translate into payment to the town, and thus those same residents, of the balance of his vast sums in overdue fees. Immediately following Volk's letter, Peter Garnham, the town's recycling information officer, wrote the Town Board that Volk was "discouraging his customers from participating in the town program by telling them that he will charge them more."
By the summer of this year, the situation had worsened, in the view of certain town officials. Mike Haran, town budget officer, informed Cathy Lester in a memorandum dated June 19, 1996, that a complete default by Volk on his Chapter 11 reorganization agreement would be "a disaster which would require . . . a significant tax increase in the year following this action."
Lester then notified the town attorney, Robert Savage, that Volk was now unwilling to meet both his reorganization obligation and his "positive account" advance payments. With interest accrued, Volk's 1994 Chapter 11 filing listed his debt to the town at $443,489.25.
On July 17, 1996, Volk was informed that he must either pay in advance or be denied access to town facilities, according to documents filed by the deputy town attorney. On July 26, 1996, Supervisor Lester, in a Town Board memorandum, stated unequivocally her intention to "turn Volk (and Stanley) away from our facility by noon Monday, July 29, until full payment and reserve is established."
Volk was notified by Lester on Friday, Aug. 9, that he must operate on a cash-on-delivery basis beginning Monday, Aug. 12. Come that Monday, however, Lester's decision was overridden by Councilmen Len Bernard and Tom Knobel, in spite of the fact that revocation of the Supervisor's executive orders requires a resolution of the full board.
Volk produced two uncertified checks that ultimately cleared the bank and remains on a C.O.D. basis with the town today. Bernard and Knobel's folly backfired, embarrassing them and Volk sufficiently so that, since August, Volk has made his "positive account" payments and met his Chapter 11 obligation. But with winter approaching, a time that has usually seen Volk struggle with such payments, town officials wonder if this brief period of compliance will continue.
Volk holds an unstated threat over the Town Board, and by association, East Hampton taxpayers, that failure to bargain with him could result in a Chapter 7 filing and the loss of the remaining hundreds of thousands he is still on the hook for, the "disaster" that Mike Haran alluded to.
But Federal bankruptcy court is not Volk's only weapon. His allies on the Town Board, Bernard and Knobel, who not only have been unwilling to bring him to a restitution of what was at one time a nearly $450,000 debt but were also willing to [. . .] usurp the Supervisor's power on his behalf, will have no doubt other opportunities to help out their friend. Tim Volk has been a fixture in the Town Republican apparatus since the early 1980s.
But more on that later.
ALEC BALDWIN
Debased Politics
East Quogue
November 6, 1996
To The Editor:
Your characterization of my Congressional write-in campaign as "misguided" and a "low blow" to the Democratic candidate Nora Bredes illustrates what I believe is your failure to examine critically Ms. Bredes's record and campaign positions.
Ms. Bredes's claims to fame rest in two areas: her directorship of the Shoreham Opponents Coalition (which I initiated), which ultimately helped defeat the Shoreham reactor in the late 1970s, and her county legislative record, which demonstrated strong commitments to women's and social issues. But, while these are necessary, they are not sufficient, and the vociferous support of Ms. Bredes by women's groups and individual women was in some ways disturbing.
Why? Because women's knee-jerk support of Ms. Bredes, although spurred by Mike Forbes's onerous record on social issues, had two major voids. The first is the utter lack of any concern on the part of Ms. Bredes's supporters for environmental issues either on the East End, nationally, or globally.
The second, as witnessed by the angry resentment of my campaign by some women, is the failure of such women to recognize the need for and validity of alternative politics - called democracy - and alternative choices.
This failure is inexplicable, and, in light of women's charges in the past that they would change things when fully enfranchised, inexcusable. The campaign for Ms. Bredes showed that when women seek political power, they are no more willing to address broader issues or a dramatically changed political agenda than men are.
For example, Ms. Bredes, purportedly in favor of single-payer health care, publicly remarked that this was not feasible and that she would concentrate on regulating health maintenance organizations and managed care more effectively.
Why did she not assert that she would, if elected, put single-payer health care back on the table whence President Clinton, the leader of her party, swept it? (Answer: Because she would, if elected, have dutifully followed the Democratic Party's exhortations rather than striking out on an independent path; why else would the Democrats have chosen her?)
Then there is the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization (formerly GATT). With regard to these, Ms. Bredes was asked if she would favor U.S. withdrawal if the environmental side agreements were not enacted (they never were and never will be). She said, "I'm not about to fight monumental battles." She had the option of saying she favored NAFTA/W.T.O., or saying she would fight for the side agreements, but said neither.
As for biotechnology, the field in which her husband works, she made remarks about how biotechnology companies were carefully harvesting third-world rain-forest products without impairing biodiversity. But she neglected to address the social and ethical implications of genetic resource exploration: the exploitation of third world cultures for their plants, animals, and, now, even their human genetic materials.
Biotechnology seeks to own, control, and monopolize such resources to maximize profits here, not improve the well-being of tribal cultures. Moreover, biotechnology is attempting to force genetically engineered foods and growth hormones onto our food and milk supply and to take patents on life forms.
Ms. Bredes's husband's profession, public relations for biotechnology corporations, would severely compromise her in the U.S. Congress, where future votes on NAFTA and W.T.O., which benefit biotechnology firms, will undoubtedly take place.
As you are fully aware, my campaign, though hindered by a lack of funds and access to media, was broad, explicit, and progressive, not single-issue as you implied. While my decision to run was spurred proximately by Ms. Bredes's defense (!) of the Brookhaven National Lab nuclear reactors and her receipt of campaign funds from top B.N.L. executives, my chief reasons were to make a statement that Ms. Bredes's campaign, backed as it was by B.N.L., the stagnant Democratic Party, and kingmaker Newsday, was simply a continuation of the same kind of corporate-dominated political campaigns that have made voters cynical and nauseous.
There is no evidence whatsoever that this was not the case in the Bredes campaign. The shame of her campaign was not my entry but the fact that neither Ms. Bredes nor her women supporters saw fit to address environmental concerns, the stranglehold of corporations, the diminution of civil liberties and a free press, the huge gap between rich and poor, the catastrophic impact of globalization on jobs, productivity, workers, and natural resources - and more.
U.S. voters are clearly tired of the same Republicrat duopoly and its refusal to address the economic and political crises of this country. Without denigrating the need for progress in social issues and human welfare laws, I truly believe that the emphasis by campaigning politicians and the mass media on strictly social issues such as abortion, gun control, and affirmative action ends up being diversionary.
Both Republicans and Democrats are delighted to belabor the Federal budget deficit, immigration, and the like, because it means that the other crucial issues of the environment, corporate domination, and the decline of civil liberties will be ignored.
In the end, it is the women's movement that is self-destructing. As long as it narrowly restricts not only campaigns but public debate to the things that solely or primarily impact women, it will never succeed in reforming or restructuring our debased political process. It will simply be digging itself deeper into the hole of self-interested pressure-group politics, which seems to be the laughable hallmark of U.S. politics today.
If the statements of Ms. Bredes's supporters are any indication, gender politics will be the death of us all, democracy included. Truly, Ms. Bredes's supporters need to do some serious study and critical analysis instead of following the same knee-jerk "liberalism" that has doomed us all to four more years of neo-conservative rule in the White House and Congress.
Yours very truly,
LORNA SALZMAN
Food Stores Galore
Boynton Beach, Fla.
October 31, 1996
Dear Editor:
As a young boy in the late '20s and early '30s, I remember food stores galore in East Hampton. It seemed that grocery stores and meat markets were everywhere. Korsak of Sag Harbor delivered and prepared cuts of meat in his meat wagon as he went from house to house.
Scholz bakery and, later, Arthur Zanger's bakery, made house-to-house deliveries of baked goods. Duggan's from the island's West End made house-to-house bakery deliveries as well.
Torrence Bell of East Hampton and Dimon Conklin of Amagansett made grocery deliveries going house to house. Private stores and markets made home deliveries because a large part of their business was conducted over the telephone.
In those days, there were about 23 food stores and meat markets in the East Hampton and Amagansett areas, and all were more or less successful.
Commencing on South Main Street, opposite the library and just north of Guild Hall, Fred McCann, for many years, owned and operated a market which specialized in prime meats, fish, and shellfish. Later, in the years leading up to our entry into World War II, Tom Rose operated the former McCann market.
Farther north in the Main Street shopping area, Tom Gilmartin ran a successful meat market. His was the old-fashioned butcher shop with sawdust on the floor, and each butcher wore a straw hat as he carefully prepared each cut of meat. The store abutted the south line of the old Edwards Theater, now the site of the former Barn Book Shop. In later years, the butcher shop became Kelly's Liquors.
A couple of stores farther north on the west side of Main Street, Henry Danneman had a private food store, which was called the National Food Market. Later, it was passed on to Herman Flach, Louis Parr, and Fred Miller, who renamed it Maidstone Market and enjoyed a successful business, especially during the war years.
Still on the west side of Main Street, on the south side of the Osborne Agency at 35 Main Street, Thomas Roulston had a chain store which was managed by Elwyn Harris Sr. of Springs. Roulston's headquarters were in Brooklyn, and he had many grocery stores scattered throughout the Long Island area.
Only two doors away on the north side of the Osborne Agency, the A&P had a store which was managed by Howard Ott.
At the corner of Newtown Lane and Main Street, on the site of the former East Hampton Post Office, H.C. Bohack opened a grocery store and a meat department. During the store's early years, Charles Clark was its manager.
Around the corner, Joe Dreesen had a market which is still successful and is now owned by Rudy DeSanti. Prior to Dreesen's ownership, Andrew Cavagnaro had a very successful fancy fruits and vegetables shop. In 1923 he had a three-story brick building constructed at the corner of Pleasant and Newtown Lanes, where he continued his fruits and vegetables business. An added attraction was the soda fountain located at the rear of the store.
Adjacent to Dreesen's, Thomas Roulston had another store, which was managed by Harry Moylan of Sag Harbor. After the Roulston stores folded, Mr. Moylan opened his own store on the site; it became the Newtown Grocery. Today it is part of Dreesen's Market.
On the north side of Newtown Lane near the railroad crossing, Hugh Filer had a small fish market. Today the East Hampton Cleaners occupies the site.
In 1928, along the north side of Newtown Lane between P.C. Schenck's Fuels and the Odd Fellows Hall, a series of shops and stores were constructed. Among them were a new Post Office and another A&P, to which was added a meat department. The store, which was located opposite Dreesen's Market, was managed by Pete Stewart, and Al Schockett headed the meat department.
On North Main Street, below the railroad trestle, there were four more grocery stores. The area is called the Hook, but most folks back then referred to it as "below the bridge."
The railroad tracks formed a boundary which divided the village both literally and socially. The village area south of the trestle became known as the up-street area and its residents were called "Up-Streeters."
North of the trestle, which some Up-Streeters placed low on the social ladder, was often called "Freetown." Freetown actually is the area around Floyd Street and Springs Road.
Whenever Alex Sonberg left the up-street business area to go to his home at the corner of Collins Avenue and Lily Hill Road, he'd say that he was going down to Spain.
At the corner of Collins Avenue and North Main Street, on the current IGA site, John Collins had a small grocery store, and Peter Fedi had a private food and meat market. Later, in 1935, Mr. Fedi built a new and larger store across the street. He had a successful business for many years. Today, the former grocery store is the site of the Della Femina restaurant.
Across from Fedi's new store and on the north side of today's C&V Wine Cellars, Thomas Roulston added a third Roulston store which was managed by Burt Coleman.
Also, a third A&P store was located where Il Monastero restaurant is today. It was managed by Bob Crozier, who often remarked that he sold more canned string beans when he advertised them as "three cans for 25 cents" than when he sold them individually for eight cents a can.
Still farther north on the east side of North Main Street, at the junction of Three Mile Harbor Road and Springs Road, John Mulligan ran a successful business for many years. He called it quits when the store burned in 1935. The building was later converted into two apartments.
On the west side of Springs Road and south of Jackson Street, Agnes Rampe ran a mom-and-pop store until she passed away in 1943.
Finally, on the east side of Springs Road just south of the Cross Highway intersection, George (Brickie) King had a small food store.
On the way to Amagansett opposite Hren's Nursery, Thomas Lawler had a butcher shop for many years.
A short distance west of the Amagansett Library, the A&P opened a food store under the management of Nathaniel Petty.
A short distance to the east next to the Amagansett Post Office, Ted Hoyt owned and managed the Royal Scarlet Store. At one time it was the site of the Conklin and Company store.
A short distance farther east, Arthur Cozzens had a butcher shop. Joe Embro added groceries to the shop after he assumed the business.
Opposite St. Peter's Roman Catholic Church, Thomas Roulston opened a grocery store which was managed by Arthur Ryan. After Roulston closed the store, Mr. Ryan opened his own store on the site.
With the advent of the supermarket, the death knell tolled for the small chain stores. It was a great era, although at times there seemed to be more groceries available than there was money to purchase them, especially when the Great Depression arrived on the scene.
Sincerely,
NORTON (BUCKET) DANIELS
Sound It Out'
Amagansett
November 11, 1996
Dear Helen,
This letter is in response to Rick Murphy's article in last week's Star regarding a discussion on reading that took place at the last Springs School Board meeting.
I did not say that "whole language" is based on a total myth. I said that one of the points whole language advocates use to promote the program is a total myth: that New Zealand, the birthplace of whole language, has a 99-percent literacy rate and is a sort of Shangri-la of reading where a huge portion of the population reads voraciously.
The truth is that New Zealand has a large (apparently around 25 percent) and growing illiteracy rate and that, you guessed it, this problem coincides with the introduction of whole language methods. In fact, Marie Clag, one of the original gurus of whole language and the developer of "reading recovery" (a whole-language-based remedial program), admits that 30 to 50 percent of New Zealand's students need some degree of remediation by the end of the first grade.
Equally mythical and absurd is the implication by some whole language devotees that a phonics-first system consists merely of rote, routine drills and is therefore limited and boring. In reality, any good multi-sensory phonics program would, of course, include those parts of whole language that are completely admirable and worthwhile: encouraging children to write, reading quality literature, and using material that is appropriate to each child's level of skill and achievement.
In fact, the major difference in the reading materials used by the two methods would be that phonics would not use the big-picture-with-two-lines-of-print books so often seen in whole language programs. More important, a phonics-trained student will have a much higher chance of actually being able to read the material.
Since its introduction, whole language has not achieved what it has promised. In fact, the reverse is true. California, Texas, Wisconsin, and Ohio have mandated a return to a systematic, phonics-based program, and several other states have such legislation pending. They have also mandated the teaching of phonics at teachers' colleges, a practice that has not been common for many years.
Bill Honig, the California Superintendent of Schools who first implemented whole language in the United States, has now written a book called "Teaching Our Children to Read." In the book, he admits that the California Regents adopted whole language without doing any proper research or evaluation. He apologizes for this and urges a return to the teaching of systematic, structured phonics and language skills.
So what's wrong with whole language? First, it preaches that learning to read is just like learning to speak, that it's a "naturally occurring process," and that "immersing" the child in the printed word will eventually result in reading.
According to highly respected researchers in the field like Marilyn Jager Adams and Keith Stanovich (who is a whole language supporter in most respects), this is nonsense. "No serious linguist or researcher in the field believes this," according to Ms. Adams.
The second fatal flaw is that whole language teaches children that a "variety of strategies" should be used to decode words: context clues, picture clues, memorization, predicting, and guessing. In fact all the above lead to guessing - and sometimes pretty wild guessing - because grammar and spelling are not stressed. The children will "grow into it" as they become readers. Phonics, depending on the level of devotion of the whole language practitioner, is used incidentally, as a last resort, or hardly at all.
The sad truth is that there is absolutely no scientific or empirical evidence that the whole language approach to decoding methods is valid. As Mr. Stanovich warns his fellow whole language colleagues: "To stand, Canute-like against the tide of evidence [that phonetic awareness is the key to early success at reading], is to put at risk all the other hard-won victories of the whole language movement."
For those of you still reading, I will sum up. English is a phonetic language, i.e., it's encoded by sound. The primary method of decoding a sound-based language must be sound. In short, your mother and your grandmother and her mother were right, "Sound it out."
Sincerely,
REG CORNELIA