|
I was intrigued by Gene Moncrief's letter that appeared in the Ulster County Press (Takes Rochester Republicans to Task, 3/7/2007) and Daily Freeman (Damaging Strategy in Rochester, 3/15/07). Ms. Moncrief states, "over the past four years the Republican Club has become especially good at letting the Town of Rochester know what they disapprove of. Although negative, I was usually interested in what was on their minds."
She continues by stating "they have passed from legitimately voicing concern to inciting hatred." The very minds she claims to be "interested" in she referred to — in a Fall 2005 letter to the editor (Accord_Kerhonkson.com) — as "a band of school yard bullies," that exhibit behavior that is "unsocial, ill-mannered and unacceptable," "seem determined to ruin what's working about our town," "demonstrate no attempt or willingness to discuss and resolve differences," make "no effort to listen to another view or reconcile conflict" and have "no desire to include anyone other than those who think like them." Although this does sound familiar, it does not sound like a person that is truly interested in what is on the minds of the Republican Club.
In her current letter, Ms. Moncrief says the Club is asking for 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." According to the Town's statement, the Town's attorney, Rod Futerfas, Supervisor Pam Duke, Councilmen Alex Miller, Ron Santosky, Francis Gray and Tony Spano are obligated to remain silent due to the "confidentiality" of executive session. (Robert Freeman, executive director of the New York State Committee on Open Government, is quoted in the February 7, 2007 Daily Freeman article Rochester Board Members Still Mum on Private Meeting Despite Being Allowed to Talk: "There's nothing in the Open Meetings Law or any other law that forbids them from discussing it," Freeman said. "What they're really saying is, 'We don't want to talk about it'.") How is it possible that Ms. Moncrief knows that Manuela Mihailescu's version is "skewed"? Was Ms. Moncrief present at Ms. Mihailescu's interview, possibly hired by the Town as a consultant due to her expertise in communication and interpersonal behavior? Ms. Moncrief, I would like to know how you obtained the "un-skewed" version.
Surely, no one on our current Town Board would violate the "formal appointment procedure" that they established in January 2006. However, circulating around town is an email from a resident, Zali Win, to Supervisor Pam Duke, Councilmen Alex Miller, Francis Gray and Tony Spano, dated 1/24/2006 (you can view it here). What I found interesting is Mr. Win's comparison of one applicant with "the candidates under consideration." I do not understand how Mr. Win could be privy to who "the candidates under consideration" are, unless someone disregarded the same "confidentiality" of executive session that the Town Board is currently hiding behind in order not to talk about Ms. Mihailescu's interview. In Ms. Moncrief's 2005 letter she accused the Republican Councilmen of being puppets of the Republican Club. After reading Mr. Win's email it makes one wonder, is he the puppeteer of the current Town Board members?
I also do not understand how "residents" became aware of Ms. Mihailescu's application to the Town's Historic Preservation Commission. Is it possible that it's become the norm for "residents" to call our Town's elected officials to notify them of our neighbors' possible involvement with adult sites, "just in case" they apply to the Historic Preservation Commission?
Ms. Moncrief states, "The Republican Club seems to think they can get what they want by screaming the loudest." There have been NYS Troopers and/or Ulster County Sheriff Deputies at the Town Board meetings since the February 1st meeting. Has anyone been arrested? Has anyone been removed from a meeting? Not that I have seen. What I have seen is my neighbors, from all political affiliations and with no political affiliations, attending these meetings and trying to voice their concerns. Ms. Moncrief states that "the strategy seems to be: be offensive, don't compromise, don't think, compromise your opponent, just lash out" and continues by pointing out that "a far more disturbing result of this kind of strategy is the potential for violence." Is it possible that Ms. Moncrief was referring to herself? She did "lash out" at a reporter at the March Town Board meeting, apparently because she did not like the tough questions that he was asking the Town Board. Seated in the front row next to her husband, Walter Levy, Ms. Moncrief yelled "listen buddy" at the reporter while angry residents, none of them members of the Rochester Republican Club, surrounded the reporter. How ironic, Ms. Moncrief discusses the violence in our town and the "threatening, menacing tone" at the February meeting but was part of it at the March meeting.
Ms. Moncrief states that Pam Duke's administration has "open the door to controversy and conversation. In fact, she has invited it. The door is really open to you to get what you want without having to scream and holler, but you must enter into the conversation with respect for the elected officials and the democratic process." Supervisor Duke demonstrated this at the February Town Board meeting, not only when she locked residents out but when responding to a question from Carl Chipman, the Republican Club President. Mr. Chipman asked Supervisor Duke if this was really what she wanted to do, at which time Duke screamed "and who the hell are you?"
Thank you, Ms. Moncrief for being interested in what's on the minds of the Republican Club, the suggestion for the Club to "rethink its strategy," showing those present at the March Town Board meeting how to behave in a social, well mannered and acceptable way, educating the readers about "confidentiality" and Pam Duke's "open door." (Wink-wink)
After re-reading my first paragraph I realize it is ironic that Ms. Moncrief's 2005 letter, which was written prior to the elections, sounds like she was talking about our current Town Board. That letter questions "what kind of government will we have if these characters dominate." It was a good question and the answer can be viewed at the next Town Board meeting, April 5th at 7:00 pm.
Tricia Kortright
Kerhonkson
|
