Letters to the Editor: 04.14.16

Go, Nova!

East Hampton

April 5, 2016

To the Editor:

What an improbable yet spectacular win for the Villanova men’s basketball team! Congratulations to Coach Jay Wright and his amazing coaching staff.

Optimism is the only reality. Villanova’s optimism was on full display throughout the 2016 N.C.A.A. tournament. Go, Nova! 

And Mom and Dad were watching!

DAVID ASTORR

Villanova ’88

Great Local Athletes

East Hampton

April 11, 2016

Dear David, 

I wanted to thank Jack for writing and you for publishing the nice story about my swim from Ditch to Lazy. I did it to prove to myself that I could, but it’s nice to be acknowledged in a Jack Graves story in The East Hampton Star. 

In addition to the folks I mentioned in the article, there are a few other great local athletes and people who should also be acknowledged: Jim Arnold and all the East Hampton Ocean Rescue men and women, our Navy Seals, the football coach Kelly McKee for his “Kelly Workouts,” Evan Drutman, an all-around athlete who just gets faster, sillier, and better every year, Angelika Cruz “Missile‚”  who is such an amazing athlete and generous person, and UpIslander Geraldine F. Schneider, for all the endless weekends at Jones Beach and throwing us into Slate Lane Pool in Levittown — sink or swim. 

Looking forward to a nice and quiet summer.

Fondly, 

SPENCER SCHNEIDER

Good Memories

The Villages, Fla.

April 7, 2016

Dear East Hampton Star, 

Thank you for the nice obituary about Allan Lee. I’m sure he would have liked it.

He had good memories of East Hampton.

Sincerely, 

DIANE LEE

Help-a-Horse Day

East Hampton

April 11, 2016

To the Editor:

I live and work here in East Hampton, but one of the volunteer activities I am involved in is at the North Shore Horse Rescue & Sanctuary. This is a great not-for-profit organization that provides a place to live for at-risk horses.

On Saturday, April 23, at 10 a.m., they are holding their third annual celebration: A.S.P.C.A. Help-a-Horse Day. Families can come and see the grounds, meet the horses and see other animal rescue groups, and learn how to volunteer. Come have a fun time! Admission is $20 for adults, children under 10 free. 

They are located at 2330 Sound Avenue in Baiting Hollow (near Riverhead). For more information, email [email protected] or call (631) 514-5468 or go to northshorehorserescue. com. 

Thank you.

BILL SULLIVAN

East Deck Property

Montauk

April 10, 2016

To the Editor:

I feel the need to splash some cold water on the big love fest that has been going on lately among the local Montauk community organizations, the owners of the former East Deck property, and to some extent town officials. They are all commending one another for the unusually cooperative effort they’ve engaged in to work out a plan to subdivide the four-plus-acre property into four residential lots that will legally allow 5,000-square-foot homes.

The reason most cited for the exuberant celebration is that compared to the owners’ original theme park-like project for a beach club, the four-homes plan seems like a reasonable compromise to what would otherwise have been a catastrophe for Ditch Plain Beach and surrounding community. The problem is that everyone is so happy with having avoided a disaster that they are brushing aside the still negative ramifications of the current residential proposal.

Everyone should picture in their mind’s eye what the sight of four 5,000-square-foot homes, raised 17 feet up and huddled together on four acres, would do to the scenic vista of the Ditch Plain Beach area. Imagine if someone had proposed building a 20,000-square-foot house on a four-acre lot here, with four swimming pools, in a residential community whose average house size is 1,500 square feet. 

Yes, the community organizations negotiated a number of important restrictions, such as sand-only nourishment of the dunes, no hard surface revetments, and public access to the beach. And that is indeed commendable, but that doesn’t make the massive homes any less invasive or any less jarring to the character of the community. If Attila the Hun downscales his plan to rape, pillage, and decimate a village to one where only the first-born will be killed, no one is going to celebrate and thank him for his compromising efforts.

Furthermore, these homes will be built as far up to the dune crest as legally allowable. Even with this past winter’s lack of any significant storms, this recently renourished dune has had a large chunk bitten off by the relentless wave swells. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that severe heightened storm activity causing extensive property destruction is inevitable. When that moment arrives, and the owners come pleading to the town to allow them to do something to protect their aggregate economic investment of $40 million to $50 million, we will be put into the same dilemma currently facing the downtown motels. 

Yes, they’ve agreed to no hard-surfaced revetments, but there were also clear prohibitions in the downtown beach area, yet a loophole was found to build a wall. Someone explain the following paradox to me: It is universally accepted that sea level rise and its ensuing destruction is imminent. Retreat of Montauk’s entire downtown area up to the post office is being discussed as the only real solution. Yet we are allowing the construction of these homes right up to the dune, on a beach with a progressively encroaching high-water line. A town preservation purchase undoubtedly represents the best possible outcome for this property and should still be pursued aggressively.

I implore our officials on the town board, the zoning board of appeals, and the planning board to act with vision and foresight instead of officious expediency. You are the last stand against these projects, which come close to conforming to code but inexorably keep pushing the envelope of responsible coastal development. They test our ability to deal with the destructive powers of Mother Nature. Moreover, they persistently chip away at the character of our community and they increasingly overburden the capacity of our infrastructure.

Making what may seem moderate exceptions here and there, to grant variances and act sympathetically to developers’ appeals, leads to a kind of deal creep, which singularly may seem minor in its effect but in the aggregate will ultimately result in a degradation of our community’s image, character, and resources.

LOUIS CORTESE



 

Traditional Rights

East Hampton

April 7, 2016

To the Editor:

We have been called out in The East Hampton Star by the one and only Cindy Crain. Well, Mrs. Crain, or is it Miss Crain, one says a lot about the other. As for your understanding of the local traditions, you don’t have a clue. We were raised here in a time you don’t understand, nor can you relate. I’m just sorry you weren’t exposed to the love of community as I was. 

I have been around the world, I am a U.S. Marine, I have learned what it means to be a part of a family that is unbreakable. The love of my community that I call home is one you will never find with all the money that your counterparts have. This place wasn’t founded on money, but more on the will to survive and be happy, raise a family, and pass on the knowledge to carry forth the traditional rights of the people. 

Take heed: You and your cronies are embarking upon a crusade you will not like nor will you ever win. Regardless of what the courts say!

True local,

JEFF KIGER

Common Denominator

East Hampton

April 8, 2016

Dear David,

One can only hope that by now a majority of East Hampton’s taxpayers have come to realize that the issue of public access at Napeague Beach has little to do with the health and safety of our local beachgoers or the environment itself but instead has everything to do with money. 

A casual investigation of but a few of the 140 plaintiffs who are involved in the lawsuit against the town, the trustees, and several individuals will quickly make it obvious that money is their common denominator. So much money, in fact, that it would not be surprising to learn that, after combining their resources and leveraging all of their holdings, they were now prepared to acquire all of Mother Nature’s interests in the disputed beach, including title to the ocean as far out as the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.

Although it is a fact that the plaintiffs in the lawsuit do, in fact, pay local property taxes, it should be noted that the tax bills for only 7 out of 115 properties that are situated directly landward of Napeague Beach are mailed to an East Hampton address. This would appear to indicate that an overwhelming majority of the plaintiffs are only here to vacation or perhaps only to invest their money. 

A comparison of the list of the owners of the 115 properties with a list of the members of the Amagansett Fire Department, Amagansett Parent Teachers Association, and American Legion Post 419 might be useful in determining what else, besides their money, the plaintiffs may have contributed to the 368-year-old fabric that has been woven by the community’s year-round residents.

As impressive as their money may be (to them at least), it is not nearly as important in this issue as is “our” money, that of each and every one of the rest of East Hampton Town’s 20,000-plus taxpayers. Currently, a portion of every East Hampton Town taxpayer’s tax dollar is being spent on arguing the question of who actually owns Napeague Beach. Condemnation, also known as a taking, by the town, while also costing taxpayer money, will at least settle the argument of ownership and ensure that the beach remains accessible to all of East Hampton’s 20,000-plus taxpayers rather than just the 140 plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs would have us believe that the section of beach they claim ownership of is worth a great deal of money (in spite of the fact that they have never paid a dime of tax for it) and warn us then that a taking of the same would be an expensive proposition that could perhaps cost the taxpayers a lot of money. 

The town contends that the beach has no utility other than that of a beach. And as that is exactly what it has been. And, as that is what it would continue to be, it will appraise for a value that is far less than what the plaintiffs claim, bringing the cost of condemnation well within the reach of the taxpayers. 

This all boils down to a simple equation: Condemnation equals continued public access 24/7/365, which equals a win for taxpayers

G.A. COBB

Slave Labor

Dummerston, Vt.

April 9, 2016

Dear Editor,

I grew up in Sag Harbor and still surf on the East End. Surfers on the East End may be wearing wetsuits and clothing made by slaves in North Korea. Rip Curl, one of the biggest surf companies, earlier this year admitted to using North Korean slave labor but said it was a mistake and it would stop. 

The problem may extend to other surf brands. On their websites, Patagonia and Outerknown (founded and owned by the most famous surfer, Kelly Slater) make weak attempts to verify their claims about not using sweatshop labor. Billabong, Quiksilver, Hurley, and Rip Curl appear to not even make these claims. Patagonia and Outerknown use the Fair Labor Association as an “independent” monitor of conditions in their factories. But the association is not independent: Its board is dominated by industry officials. (The association’s website also lists “university representatives” as board members, but these are not professors; they are the people in charge of buying T-shirts and other clothing that is sold at college stores.)

The Fair Labor Association has other problems. In 2012, The New York Times reported on conditions at Foxconn, an Apple computer factory in China. The Times said workers were required to work unhealthy amounts of overtime. Some workers died due to exposure to toxic chemicals at work, The Times said. At least 18 Foxconn workers attempted suicide or “fell from buildings in manners that suggested suicide attempts,” The Times reported. Weeks before the Times article was published, Apple had joined the Fair Labor Association. The Association’s C.E.O., Auret van Heerden, at the time made more than $259,000 a year. In 2012, after he took a guided tour of Foxconn, van Heerden said, “The facilities are first-class; the physical conditions are way, way above average of the norm.”

The New York Times reported that “van Heerden’s apparent praise of conditions at Foxconn came despite previous reports of employees committing suicide, dying in factory explosions, and complaining of sometimes working more than 70 hours a week.”

If companies like Patagonia and Quiksilver want to make sure they don’t use slave labor they should seek verification from the Worker Rights Consortium, whose board includes professors and union leaders.

Slave labor is a problem at non-surf clothing companies too. In 2007, The Guardian newspaper reported that “child workers, some as young as 10, have been found working in a textile factory in conditions close to slavery, to produce clothes that appear destined for the Gap.”

EESHA WILLIAMS

Vote for Ted Cruz

Amagansett

April 8, 2016

To the Editor:

When April 24 arrives we can all breathe a sigh of relief, we’ve finished paying our taxes for the year! If you count annual federal borrowing and future taxes, it would be May 10. We pay more in federal, state, and local taxes than for food, housing, and clothing combined. New Yorkers seem to be paying the largest percentage. Government will soon owe more money than the economy produces. With national productivity not even reaching 2 percent, I’d say we are in stagnation again.

Who can we thank? Democrats, who put so many regulations and taxes on this country that we’ve lost our freedom, our incentive to produce, our ability to remain in business, thanks to such fine programs as the Affordable Care Act.

Ted Cruz has a great plan to reduce taxes and re-incentivize business. Details for his tax plan and other issues can be found on his website. Don’t be fooled by the non-answers of a businessman who knows nothing about the workings of this government. Please vote for Ted Cruz.

LYNDA A.W. EDWARDS

Next Court Appointee

East Hampton

April 10, 2016

To the Editor:

The most surreal aspect of U.S. politics is that it gives credence to the most mindless, absurd positions, mostly Republican, that would normally be too embarrassing to be associated with. The discussion around the nomination of President Obama for the Supreme Court is a prime example. It curls around some mindless posture that the voters should choose the next justice. The rationale that Democrats (if in the majority) would do the same thing further ridicules the theory. Because Democrats would subvert the political process of the U.S. government, Republicans are justified in doing it. In other words, our democracy and Constitution are mostly fabricated, and interpretations require no basis in reality.

It’s fascinating that this issue is all about replacing Justice Scalia, a bigoted, doctrinaire homophobe who was the court’s foremost political tool, an unrepentant hack who put his politics above the code of impartiality that is required as a condition to being on the court. The Supreme Court was conceived to be above politics, above the internal biases and prejudices of our political parties — rational, logical, and honest.

So when Republicans say give the voters a say in the next court appointee, they are again trying to subvert the intentions of our founding fathers. Slimebucket politics is not the sole purview of Republicans, but they seem to have a pretty strong grasp on the methodology. “Give the voters a chance” reeks of stupidity and a slight flavoring of fascism. The voters were never meant to have a direct say. The people’s idiosyncrasies are not part of impartiality. If one wants to make that argument, it is indisputable that the voters have twice appointed Obama. However, the argument is for cretins, who should be dismissed as such.

I’d rather have a justice more to the left, given that a conservative court has set our democracy on a downward trajectory. But the court is supposed to be above politics. At least some part of our system needs to function on that higher plane.

NEIL HAUSIG

Only John Kasich

Montauk

April 9, 2016

Dear Mr. Rattray: 

As an Independent voter, I am astounded by the route the Republican campaign is taking. It seems that the voters are backing the two divisive candidates and dismissing the one who has proven experience in working with both sides of an issue. 

In my view, only Gov. John Kasich has the credentials to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” But, you say, he will not have enough delegates at the convention. Doesn’t matter. Only 3 times in 10 conventions has the front-runner been chosen as the party’s nominee in the general election. 

And now they’re even talking about bringing in Paul Ryan! It looks like the Republicans are going out of their way to lose in November. Most exploratory polls have Kasich winning over Hillary Clinton. In the March 2016 NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, he has a favorability rating of plus 19 percent, while Trump is at minus 39 percent and Cruz at minus 18 percent. Only recently has Kasich been given the attention he deserves, having not engaged in the childish behavior of the others in the embarrassing debates. I don’t understand it. 

As for me, if Kasich isn’t the Republican nominee, and since I always vote, there is no question about who I’ll choose. 

EVA MOORE

On Sanders’s Side

Sag Harbor

April 11, 2016

Dear David, 

As you know, a while back I was almost alone to continue to be faithful to Senator Bernie Sanders. How things have changed. How often have I predicated, expect surprises! Even I did not expect the battle between Sanders and Hillary to feel the Bern, now both of them. Sanders’s campaign manager: “We are not going to give up to make Hillary our next president.” Time was always on Sanders’s side, but nobody knew who he was. Momentum is on Sanders’s side as of the moment. Wall Street has spoken out strongly. Fear!

Although Clinton is not a New Yorker, she arrived with over 700 well-known New Yorkers to create a tremendous impact from the past, so to speak. According to Hillary, she expected to win New York. Sanders will fight the fight of his life to capture New York. When he showed up in the Bronx 11,000 people showed up. 

In his hometown, Brooklyn, he will do the same. Sanders feels that he is on the way to be the next president of the United States. In his ongoing comments about her requirements he blasted her, saying, “What makes you think you have the qualifications for the presidency?” and went on to list her many weaknesses, which he has done for the past year. The truth is, whoever thought we would reach this hotly contested contention? I’m not surprised. No one wanted to believe me. Hillary has started to take Senator Sanders more seriously.

Expect surprises — there will be more.

In peace and hope, 

LARRY DARCEY

Vote for Hillary

East Hampton

April 10, 2016

Dear David, 

I am writing to urge my fellow East Hampton Town registered Democrats to vote for Hillary Clinton in the April 19 primary. I do so because I believe that she is much more qualified than Bernie Sanders and will not be defeated by the Republican candidate, and he will be.

First as to why he will be defeated, and second as to why she is qualified and he is not. First, Bernie has described himself as a socialist. That self-description is a death knell in American politics. It will be used by the Republican Party to pillory Bernie in the same way they did with George McGovern, whom they sold down the river of the fear of communism that lies in the hearts of most Americans. 

That self-description will be used to defeat Bernie in the same way that the release of Willie Horton, a murderer, was used to portray Michael Dukakis as soft on crime and untrustworthy. That self-description will be used to portray Bernie as a traitor to the core values of America in the same way that John Kerry was portrayed as a traitor when he served as the captain of a Swift Boat in Vietnam and came back from the war to testify against it before Congress.

All three Democratic candidates went down to defeat in unrelenting barrages of lies.

The Republican candidate, whoever he is, will combine with the super PACs to paint Bernie so badly that enough people will not even hear how he proposes to change our country for their own good. They will only hear that he is a socialist who will destroy the American way of life.

Hillary has baggage, but none of it questions her commitment to the American way of life or her patriotism. Voters will not vote against Hillary because she misused her email account or because she was involved in the mishandling of the American consulate in Benghazi. Hillary amply demonstrated her ability to handle that matter in the course of 12 hours of unrelenting questioning by a congressional select committee investigating Benghazi. 

Second. Bernie is not qualified and Hillary is. Bernie is short on policy details and long on rhetoric. A good example of this is his cry to “break up the big banks.” I commend your readers to an op-ed written by the liberal New York Times journalist and Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman, who points out that the big banks did not cause the financial collapse brought on by the subprime mortgage crisis, and that these mortgages were sold by small banks all across America, not big banks. When Bernie was pressed for more detail about why big banks should be broken up, he couldn’t.

Mr. Krugman makes the case that Bernie has engaged in sloganeering and lacks substance. Slogans about income inequality do not solve that problem either, and Bernie has not specified at all how he would deal with this situation.

Contrast Hillary’s positions, many of which have been committed to position papers dealing with women’s rights and equal pay, child care and family leave, years of involvement in the Children’s Defense Fund, expanding health care for kids, a plan to defeat ISIS, proposals for alternative energy, immigration reform, free tuition for all qualified students to attend public colleges, reduction of prescription drug costs, reformation of mandatory minimum sentencing, and ending private prisons.

Shortly after Hillary Clinton declared her candidacy, The New York Times published a lengthy editorial endorsing her and observing that she is the most qualified person to run for the office of the presidency in over a generation. We Democrats need to nominate her and work for her election.

DAVID J. WEINSTEIN