|
Dear Gene:
Your letter published in Ulster County Press (Takes Rochester Republicans to Task, March 7, 2007) and Daily Freeman (Damaging Strategy in Rochester, March 15, 2007) is just the latest in a series of attempts to do everything possible to divert attention from my case by blaming the Republican Club for whatever you come up with.
You, like all other letter-writers speaking their collective mind (Marlene Shaver, Donna Davids, Don Dunn, Max Finestone, and 'Concerned Republicans') abuse the same leitmotifs: respect for elected officials and the democratic process, potential for violence, mailer is offensive, Republican Club created the issue, the cartoons are partisan...
You write: "with this latest town issue, the Club has stepped over the line." Excuse me?! What the town officials did to me is the latest town issue and I cannot understand what you are blaming the Club for... Usually, the Democrats want to discuss issues. Why are they avoiding the issue now? Let me state as clearly as I can: I am the issue, not the Republican Club.
The Democratic Town Board doesn't want to talk about the so-called "interview." As stressed in the Daily Freeman editorial (Feb. 10, 2007), "There is nothing in the Open Meetings Law or any other law that forbids them from discussing it. What they're really saying is 'We don't want to talk about it.'"
You consider that "the Republican Club demonstrated their destructive strategy when they issued postcards" demanding the resignation of town board members "because of a skewed version of what happened to a candidate for the Historic Preservation Commission in a closed meeting of the town board." Take a look at Times Herald-Record editorial of Feb. 5, 2007: "Time for the guilty parties here to apologize, confess and perhaps resign if there is no real explanation." Asking for resignation didn't come only from the Republican Club's mailer...
"Skewed version of what happened to a candidate?" For God's sake Gene, I am that candidate. If the Town Board doesn't talk about it, and my version is the only one out, how do you dare to call it "skewed"?
You believe that "the postcard itself was offensive and filled with indignation and rage." If the postcard was "offensive," try to imagine how I felt in that room. The feeling was that of a rape; emotional, psychological, mental, but nevertheless a rape... If the postcard was filled with indignation and rage, that was my indignation and my rage. Because, as I underlined in the statement read at the March 1 meeting, "there is no justification in the world" for what the Town Board did to me.
You write that "the Republican Club seems to think that they can get what they want by screaming the loudest." Let's back up a little... All I wanted was a position on a commission for which I believe I'm fully qualified. What was wrong with that? I didn't shout, I wasn't part of a mob, I just made an application to volunteer my time and skills. Getting such a position never seems to be a problem for your husband, Walter Levy. By the way, I expected to see him coming for an interview as everybody else whose term expired. Miraculously, on the Town's website, his term expiration date was extended by two years.
Your letter ends with praising the Pam Duke's administration for opening "the door to controversy and conversation." In my case, the controversy was created by this administration and the conversation did not exist.
You say that "The door is really open to you to get what you want without having to scream and holler." Really?
It is true that you continue: "...but you must enter into the conversation with respect for elected officials and the democratic process." I'm still confused... Did I do anything wrong when applying to be a volunteer member of the HPC? I showed respect for the elected officials at all times but I didn't get the most basic form of respect, respect for the human being.
Obviously you're trying to do damage control. The frequency of using the word "strategy" proves to me that you speak mostly as a consultant, not as a neighbor: "destructive strategy," "strategy seems to be," "result of this kind of strategy," "objective of the Club," "reconsider your strategy". I simply think you are over-estimating the Club! What I saw in people's eyes and I felt was in their hearts - no matter of their political affiliation - was simply overwhelming, not part of any strategy! Your expertise in cross-cultural diversity and interpersonal behavior failed you this time...
You state that "the objective of the Club is not towards a better community." Totally false, for many reasons. A community which discovers the truth is going to be a better community. A community in which I and my husband would be accepted for who we are and what we can bring to the table — not rejected because we are Romanian-Americans or members of the Republican Club — it's going to be a better community. Hiding behind the "laws," discriminating, harassing and humiliating people will never make a community better.
To use your words, please, "reconsider your strategy. Past behavior is unacceptable to many of the Town of Rochester citizens." It is too obviously unfair, too discriminating...
Manuela Mihailescu
Kerhonkson
|
