|
|
|
|
|
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
|
Dear Editor Bob -
I have to admit, I'm surprised, if not appalled. A seasoned newshound, such as you, knows better than to listen to and repeat rumors without discussing them with the parties involved. I would never have expected an ambush like that from you. Of course, I'm referring to your article about the Phelps Community Center. Your editorial was a very dangerous and misleading piece of journalism. You have fallen victim to a very prevalent attitude of looking for problems where there are none or trying to start problems for no reason. That attitude needs to be corrected.
Let me respond to your questions, which had you asked, would have been answered before you printed them because the Village of Phelps Board of Trustees always keeps the public informed as best we can and are as open as possible. If you received my newsletters, you would know that.
First, why did the Town opt not to participate in the Community Center and is now purchasing a building? You'd have to ask the Town Board that question. The Village tried everything possible, including offering to allow them to use it for only their share of the operating expenses, to encourage the Town Board to consider putting the Town Court in the Community Center facility. We offered them the most cost effective alternative. They chose not to seriously consider it. If it has anything to do with a rivalry between the Supervisor and the Mayor, it would be news to me. Personally, I don't think their decision has anything to do with me. I think the decision was made the minute the suggestion was put forth.
Carmen and I have been friends for years and continue to be. The supposed rivalry that was so publicly featured in the Finger Lakes Times and Daily Messenger and is fodder at the coffee shops, from my perspective, has little basis in fact. He and I still talk and work together on issues on a regular basis. In fact, we've had many good laughs over the rumors and articles in the paper. When the Town Board's car stalled in the middle of the Memorial Day Parade last year, who was the first to be their pushing them forward … the Mayor and the Village Trustees!! We found it quite symbolic actually (humor intended).
By nature, (we both have very strong opinions and personalities) we are often going to strongly disagree with the other's position because we represent two different constituencies; but generally, we agree more than we disagree. The public jousting that goes on between us is our relationship and we have agreed that we have no reason to change it. We enjoy ribbing each other and we take it in the nature it is intended.
I did not agree with their opinion on the Community Center or on building a new Town Court that wasn't cost effective. I don't understand why you would build or buy a building that is going to be used so little and especially because it will be used mostly by people from outside the community. I really didn't think we needed a special building for two judges and a clerk. However, even if their decisions violated every ounce of common sense in my opinion, it was a decision they made a long time ago and is in the past. Obviously, they didn't agree with my opinion either. There are certain things you can't change and the collective mind of the Town Board is one of them - anymore than you could change the collective mind of the Village Board once we've finalized a decision based on what we believe to be the best evidence. I moved past this issue a couple years ago and will support what I can and work with them when I can. I refuse to dwell in the negative. You might find it interesting to note that my business partner and I had a first right of refusal on the building the Town is purchasing for their court, but declined to exercise it at the behest of the Supervisor. They need a Town Court and if that's the best they think they can do, so be it. That one will have to be someone else's fight.
If it is true, however, that "this feud supercedes other factors" and bad decisions are being made because of that, then voters should not stand for it, should attend meetings in droves, should demand better and will have their chance to vote in a new Supervisor in the fall and a new Mayor in three years. I would challenge anyone to prove, however, where a bad decision has been made by the Village to spite the Town or its Supervisor. We're human and I'm sure we may have made bad decisions for other reasons, but not that one.
In regards to your question about the funding for the Community Center, you're coming close to crossing the line of making unfounded accusations. When the Supervisor and the Town Board stood in the way of the Village receiving the $100,000 state grant committed to by Senator Nozzolio, Phelps Community Center, Inc. stepped in and showed their commitment to this project. They raised, through fundraisers and from very generous donors, nearly $100,000 in case the grant did not come through. Fortunately, an agreement was reached with PCC, Inc. The Senator showed his character, stood behind his commitment and with the Town Board's support, the grant was delivered. The money had to go through PCC, Inc. first and then to the Village. Therefore, the nearly $100,000 "kitty" you refer to had nothing to do with taxpayers' money and is being used to fund operating expenses and capital improvements for PCC, Inc. It is that organization's money and is controlled and used by them. It is offensive for you to suggest that the Village did anything underhanded and used taxpayers' monies. It is especially offensive to those who donated. Is it so hard for people to believe that there are enough community-minded, generous people in Phelps that we could raise $100,000? We had two donations of $10,000 each and several of $5,000. People wanted this project to succeed and they (including my wife and me) put their money behind it.
The Sauerkraut Festival story is not accurate either. While the Village Board's official position was that it would support the Festival in either location and would do whatever it could to help, certain members of the Village Board and the PCC board did not agree with it coming to the field at the Community Center. After a Sauerkraut Festival Committee meeting where those concerns were expressed, as I understand it, the Committee decided they needed to commit one way or the other, felt they had no other choice and decided to try to stay at the Firemen's Field. The Village Board's position never changed, (even if a member or two disagrees, the majority rules) and had the Committee had time to come back and ask, they would have found that the Village Board makes the decisions on the use of the facility and that they would have been welcomed if they could have made it work at the Community Center.
Now, to where you really get dangerous. There are reasons for executive sessions. One of them is when you are negotiating a contract and it would hurt either party if those negotiations became public. It is true that we have been discussing for some time the possibility of a tenant for the north wing of the Community Center. The name of the potential tenant has intentionally been kept quiet, not for the reasons you are assuming. It is because the business is a union shop and by revealing it, you may have just strained his relationship with the union and put his business in jeopardy. That potential tenants' history is well known and was discussed openly with the owner at the very beginning of the conversations. To make the statement that they have been "invited" to leave Geneva, with no personal knowledge of the veracity of that statement, is disgusting and libelous. Additionally, if the Village Board ever gets to the point of signing a lease with this potential tenant, there will be clauses in it to prevent problems and remedy them if they did occur, which the owner is well aware of, and it would have to be approved by the Village Planning Board. The Village Board will protect the public in any relationship as best it can.
On the subject of the sprinklers, the Village Board is complying with the laws as explained and enforced by Code Enforcement officials and our civil engineer. In fact, we are installing sprinklers in more of the building than necessary to make it more flexible for other users. The classification of use determines where sprinklers must be and where they aren't necessary. Neither of the spaces you mentioned requires them, and it probably is not desirable to have them (think soaked books - tough to read, computers with water pouring out of them - tough to use). Code Enforcement has been involved in almost every conversation we have had on the sprinkler system.
If you wanted an explanation of the re-zoning, you should have attended the public hearing, like about 30 other people did. It was publicized as required and was conducted very much in the open. The reason behind the re-zoning is simple; and, it was recommended by the Code Enforcement Officers and the chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals - and had the approval of the Planning Board. We want the properties (yes, properties - 15 of them, in fact) affected to have flexible uses, but remain under the independent, watchful eye of the planning board and the zoning board of appeals, without restricting these boards to the point they can't allow a use that is fitting for the properties. It is mostly recognizing the reality of the actual use of all the properties involved and a way to bring some oversight to them.
Finally, Bob, I apologize for being so long in my explanation, but your editorial crossed the lines in so many areas, covered so many subjects and was about as off base as anything I've ever read that I thought a thorough response was necessary. This Phelps Village Board of Trustees has demonstrated its integrity time and time again. While I am about as skeptical of government as anyone I know, I hope I live to see the day that a board that has been as successful, hardworking, open and honest as this one has been will be given the benefit of the doubt first before false assumptions are made. I know the character of each member of this board and am proud to serve our community with them. Some things are not too good to be true.
Before you make an accusation like you did at the end of your piece, you should be more careful to research it. This Board always follows proper procedure, as we understand it, and goes above and beyond in communicating with our community. So, the next time you have questions, ask away. We'll be glad to answer them in the proper forum - when they're asked respectfully. Over the years, I have come to expect more than this of you. To repeat you opening words … "I'm just wondering" who would have filled your head with such nonsense and why would you listen to it?
Sincerely,
James E. Cheney
Mayor, Village of Phelps
|
|
|
Click On Banner For More Information
|
