Town Board disingenuous about transparency concerns
In a March 23 letter, Freddie Costello’s cousin Paul Rinaldi wrote that I “would be happy if our (Town) Board was suffering from a partisan divide, getting nothing done and finger pointing until the next election.” He concluded, “This is Saugerties, we all care about…the responsible growth of our town, so, Mr. Roberti, either get on board or out of the way because this train is not stopping.” After reading last week’s attack article on Supervisor Kelly Myers, it appears the train has derailed.
I chuckled when Costello, Leanne Thornton and Bruce Leighton claimed the previous supervisor was more “transparent” than Kelly. The Democrat-backed trio also complained about executive sessions. Maybe they don’t realize it, but they control the Town Board. Without their votes, there can be no executive session. If they believe an issue is not appropriate, it’s their duty to vote to end the executive session. In fact, town officials tell me that nearly half of the executive sessions held this year were held at Costello, Thornton or Leighton’s request.
If Costello is so worried about transparency, then why did he threaten to vote against Kelly’s Town Hall naming compromise unless the vote was held before public comments? Could it be he didn’t want to face the heat from the many veterans who attended the meeting to voice their displeasure with his, Thornton and Leighton’s disgraceful handling of the issue?
How’s this for transparency – when the previous supervisor left office in January, he removed every file and had his computer completely erased! Kelly had to deal with the mess he left behind. This includes dealing with a state audit that found the town was awarding no-bid contracts and improperly approving the payment of bills.
Rather than whine to the press, Costello, Thornton and Leighton should heed Rinaldi’s advice and “put their differences aside and continue to work for the people of Saugerties.”
Joe Roberti, Jr.
Chair – Saugerties GOP
Surveillance cameras on village streets are unnecessary
There is an idea being floated around these days about putting video surveillance cameras in the Partition Street/Main Street shopping area. This is not a good idea.
But first let’s ask the question – what is the need, where is the justification? There is no local terrorism, no gun-toting insurrectionists, there is no crime wave, no armed robberies, no brawls and street fights, no gangs waging turf war on the streets of Saugerties.
As I read the papers, most of the crime being reported in the area is for low level pot busts, various DWI violations, and occasional domestic disputes. Of course some stores might have petty thievery and pilfering going on, but putting cameras on Partition Street is not how to deal with those kinds of issues.
You can understand it happening in New York City, in Newburgh, maybe even in parts of Kingston where some streets might be dicey. But, please, this is Saugerties. One of the ten coolest, etc. The idea that you couldn’t walk down the street without feeling that a camera is watching you is an intrusive assault on personal liberty and freedom. It’s like having drones flying overhead and watching you. And it seems to me to be so unnecessary.
It requires questions to be asked. Where does the idea come from? Does it come from out of the police department, from the changing of the guard at the Saugerties Chamber of Commerce, because of some misguided political enthusiasm, or just because there might be a grant you can tap into to let you do it? The example cited of a video camera solving an unrelated accident on Partition Street is misplaced.
Let’s call it what it is – unjustified paranoia, and downright unpleasant. This is not a good idea.
Ernie Mortuzans
Saugerties
Join the family! 
