What's likely to be a turbulent political season in Woodbury began this week with party endorsements of candidates for three Town Board seats.
Republicans endorsed Michael Queenan and Henry Sullivan for two council positions Tuesday night, declining to support incumbent Councilwoman Geraldine Gianzero, who came in third. GOP Committee Chairman Ralph Caruso said the votes were: Queenan, 15; Sullivan, 12; Gianzero, 10.
His committee refused to endorse Republican Supervisor Sheila Conroy or any other supervisor candidate. Conroy, who had asked the committee for its endorsement for a second four-year term, got eight votes of support, Caruso said.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Committee met Monday night and endorsed John Burke for supervisor and Darlene Reveille and Amidee Haviland for the two council seats.
Conroy and Gianzero may still circulate petitions to run as Republicans, which means Gianzero could wind up in a primary with the two endorsed Republicans. Conroy, who has the Conservative Party endorsement, said Wednesday that she hasn't decided whether to run and with which party or parties.
All five current board members are Republican. But this year, tangled allegiances among the candidates and their positions on two controversial housing proposals are likely to mean more than party affiliation.
Chris McKenna
Saturday, April 30, 2005
Friday, April 22, 2005
Board does good job
Board does good job
The Gardiner Town Board has handled the current rezoning effort in an exemplary fashion.
First, board members appointed a Zoning Advisory Committee that included representatives of all views in the community. After the members held extensive meetings and public hearings and issued a draft report, the board also held three public sessions to allow additional public input. Then in response to the public's concerns The board decided to extend the moratorium on subdivisions so that it could respond to these concerns and enact a law that will reflect the community's values on land development issues.
We do still need to improve the draft law with provisions for larger lot sizes in the three tiers in the Ridge Protection Zone, 5-15-30 acres as we go higher, and driveway lengths limited to 1,200 feet (except when necessary to allow a property owner access). These changes will help ensure that we protect our town's most valuable resource.
It is wonderful to have a board that listens to its citizens. Thank you for your diligence.
Steven Levinsky
Gardiner
Take a look at what this town does to listen to the people!
SECTION 3 PURPOSE AND FINDINGS
A. The Town Board desires to implement a procedure for applications for land use approvals and zoning changes to the Town Board, Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals to ensure that neighboring property owners are appropriately apprised of the fact that an application has been made for a land use approval or zoning change and that thereafter the neighboring property owners and the public are made aware of the date of any public hearing scheduled for such an application.
B. This law is an effort to increase opportunities for dialog in the land use process; The Town Board believes that the land use approval process will benefit from the receipt of public comment on land use applications and zoning changes and that public comment will provide additional information to the various boards to consider in making a decision on an application.
C. Accordingly, the Town Board finds that the implementation of additional notice
and posting requirements are in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the Town of Gardiner.
The Gardiner Town Board has handled the current rezoning effort in an exemplary fashion.
First, board members appointed a Zoning Advisory Committee that included representatives of all views in the community. After the members held extensive meetings and public hearings and issued a draft report, the board also held three public sessions to allow additional public input. Then in response to the public's concerns The board decided to extend the moratorium on subdivisions so that it could respond to these concerns and enact a law that will reflect the community's values on land development issues.
We do still need to improve the draft law with provisions for larger lot sizes in the three tiers in the Ridge Protection Zone, 5-15-30 acres as we go higher, and driveway lengths limited to 1,200 feet (except when necessary to allow a property owner access). These changes will help ensure that we protect our town's most valuable resource.
It is wonderful to have a board that listens to its citizens. Thank you for your diligence.
Steven Levinsky
Gardiner
Take a look at what this town does to listen to the people!
SECTION 3 PURPOSE AND FINDINGS
A. The Town Board desires to implement a procedure for applications for land use approvals and zoning changes to the Town Board, Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals to ensure that neighboring property owners are appropriately apprised of the fact that an application has been made for a land use approval or zoning change and that thereafter the neighboring property owners and the public are made aware of the date of any public hearing scheduled for such an application.
B. This law is an effort to increase opportunities for dialog in the land use process; The Town Board believes that the land use approval process will benefit from the receipt of public comment on land use applications and zoning changes and that public comment will provide additional information to the various boards to consider in making a decision on an application.
C. Accordingly, the Town Board finds that the implementation of additional notice
and posting requirements are in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the Town of Gardiner.
Saturday, April 16, 2005
KJ homes, outside KJ
KJ homes, outside KJ
Space so tight, adjoining land could be developed
By Chris McKenna
Times Herald-Record
cmckenna@th-record.com
Monroe – New homes for Kiryas Joel residents are being proposed just outside the village boundaries in significant numbers for the first time.
At least three projects on the outskirts of the booming community are pending before the Town of Monroe Planning Board – two of which have come to the board's attention since the beginning of the year.
The three projects call for a total of 94 single-family houses, although the board is counting on as many as 188 homes in its review, because builders could theoretically include "accessory apartments" – better known as "mothers-daughters" – with each house.
Until now, most new homes for the Hasidic community have been built inside the village borders, where much denser development is allowed and residents can walk to synagogues, stores and essential services.
But with 17,000 people living in 1.1 square miles and development proceeding briskly, space is running short. Village Administrator Gedalye Szegedin told the Times Herald-Record in February that 989 housing units were on the drawing board.
The biggest and most recent of the three projects proposed in Monroe is Forest Edge, which surfaced in February. It calls for 49 single-family houses on 24.7 acres off Forest and Mountain roads, a property virtually surrounded by Kiryas Joel.
The owner, Ziggy Brach, confirmed that the village has offered him municipal water – which is surprising, since Brach, a Brooklyn electronics mogul with a house in Woodbury, is prominent in Kiryas Joel's opposition movement.
He'd been counting on individual wells for the 49 proposed homes. But he'll entertain the village's water offer, he said, once he hears the details.
"If it's reasonable, we'll do it," he said.
Forest Edge and a 29-lot proposal nearby are both on parcels that Brach and other land owners have asked be annexed into Kiryas Joel – part of a pending request that involves 184 acres in Monroe and Woodbury.
The Planning Board's water consultant has expressed concern about Kiryas Joel offering to supply all three projects with water, in spite of its water shortages.
"I question whether the wells for the village would meet the demands of this project and the other units that are coming in," Tom Cusack, a hydrogeologist, said Tuesday.
He urged the developer to hold off for two months to see if the state approves a high-producing well that Kiryas Joel has dug in Monroe. That well, along with another that just got approved, would boost the village water supply by 800,000 gallons per day, he said.
Space so tight, adjoining land could be developed
By Chris McKenna
Times Herald-Record
cmckenna@th-record.com
Monroe – New homes for Kiryas Joel residents are being proposed just outside the village boundaries in significant numbers for the first time.
At least three projects on the outskirts of the booming community are pending before the Town of Monroe Planning Board – two of which have come to the board's attention since the beginning of the year.
The three projects call for a total of 94 single-family houses, although the board is counting on as many as 188 homes in its review, because builders could theoretically include "accessory apartments" – better known as "mothers-daughters" – with each house.
Until now, most new homes for the Hasidic community have been built inside the village borders, where much denser development is allowed and residents can walk to synagogues, stores and essential services.
But with 17,000 people living in 1.1 square miles and development proceeding briskly, space is running short. Village Administrator Gedalye Szegedin told the Times Herald-Record in February that 989 housing units were on the drawing board.
The biggest and most recent of the three projects proposed in Monroe is Forest Edge, which surfaced in February. It calls for 49 single-family houses on 24.7 acres off Forest and Mountain roads, a property virtually surrounded by Kiryas Joel.
The owner, Ziggy Brach, confirmed that the village has offered him municipal water – which is surprising, since Brach, a Brooklyn electronics mogul with a house in Woodbury, is prominent in Kiryas Joel's opposition movement.
He'd been counting on individual wells for the 49 proposed homes. But he'll entertain the village's water offer, he said, once he hears the details.
"If it's reasonable, we'll do it," he said.
Forest Edge and a 29-lot proposal nearby are both on parcels that Brach and other land owners have asked be annexed into Kiryas Joel – part of a pending request that involves 184 acres in Monroe and Woodbury.
The Planning Board's water consultant has expressed concern about Kiryas Joel offering to supply all three projects with water, in spite of its water shortages.
"I question whether the wells for the village would meet the demands of this project and the other units that are coming in," Tom Cusack, a hydrogeologist, said Tuesday.
He urged the developer to hold off for two months to see if the state approves a high-producing well that Kiryas Joel has dug in Monroe. That well, along with another that just got approved, would boost the village water supply by 800,000 gallons per day, he said.
To Run or Not to Run Part 3
Well now I hear we have a third person running for town council. Three Republican candidates and I am sure we will have two Democrats. That leaves the Republicans with a primary, not sure if that’s good or bad. One thing I do know is it’s going to be a hard election for anyone to win. With all the issues it’s going to be a very close vote and I don’t see this an easy time for anyone. As for supervisor race I have yet to hear anyone come forward. I wonder if we will get an independent person this year like the last election.
Thursday, April 07, 2005
If you build it they will come
Woodbury
Car stuffed with stolen goods at mall
A Queens man seen stuffing merchandise into a booster bag at Woodbury Common Premium Outlets has been charged with helping steal more than $14,000 worth of goods from the shopping center, Woodbury police said yesterday.
Orlando Arroyos, 41, was arrested Tuesday afternoon after fleeing from the Ecko store and running to a vehicle stuffed with clothing stolen from several stores at the upscale mall, Detective Lawrence Menkens said.
Arroyos was charged with third-degree criminal possession of stolen property, a felony, and sent to Orange County Jail in lieu of $17,500 cash bail.
That same day, town police arrested a Newburgh woman accused of pilfering more than $10,000 from a different Woodbury Common store where she worked.
Sharon Matyka, 42, pocketed the money from Loro Piana instead of depositing it in the bank over four months, Menkens said. She was charged with third-degree grand larceny, a felony, and sent to Orange County Jail in lieu of $2,500 cash bail.
Car stuffed with stolen goods at mall
A Queens man seen stuffing merchandise into a booster bag at Woodbury Common Premium Outlets has been charged with helping steal more than $14,000 worth of goods from the shopping center, Woodbury police said yesterday.
Orlando Arroyos, 41, was arrested Tuesday afternoon after fleeing from the Ecko store and running to a vehicle stuffed with clothing stolen from several stores at the upscale mall, Detective Lawrence Menkens said.
Arroyos was charged with third-degree criminal possession of stolen property, a felony, and sent to Orange County Jail in lieu of $17,500 cash bail.
That same day, town police arrested a Newburgh woman accused of pilfering more than $10,000 from a different Woodbury Common store where she worked.
Sharon Matyka, 42, pocketed the money from Loro Piana instead of depositing it in the bank over four months, Menkens said. She was charged with third-degree grand larceny, a felony, and sent to Orange County Jail in lieu of $2,500 cash bail.
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Where have you all gone?
I was thinking the other day every two years there is an election and where have all the past Candidates and board members gone? So I started to think if you win and you get to sit on the board is it that bad that you never come back? To put in so many hours of your time and never come back. Why it that? So many have ran and we never see them again. Is it like that in other towns or it just Woodbury? I mean you serve your time and never come back to be heard from again so I ask where have you all gone you where once the leaders of this great town.
Sunday, April 03, 2005
To Run or Not to Run Part 2
Well he have a runner, Hank Sullivan just threw his hat in the ring for Town Councilman. I guess he is putting his money where is mouth is. Since I have been going to the meetings he has been there, always well prepared and does his homework. It’s nice to see one of the so-called six people who come to the meetings run. So now we have one new person in the race and one sitting member. Who else will come forward and try for the two seats? Will it be any of the so-called six. Will one of them step up and run for Supervisor (can you imagine) I must say this is now going to be a fun next couple of months. Will Bo be back or any of the past candidates try again. Or maybe some of the old sitting board will try to make a run again. Stay tuned for part 3.
Friday, April 01, 2005
Catskill
Even holding an empty hand, Orange County officials weigh in on the impact of Catskill casinos
By David Gordon
GOSHEN-Casino opponents cited the nightmarish traffic jams, increased air pollution and lung illnesses created by exhaust fumes from that traffic and the potential increase in crime that has historically followed gambling centers.
A handful of proponents stressed the need for the jobs casinos would provide.
They also asserted that the casino workers and the casinos themselves would spark Orange County's economy.
Most of the 20 or so people who spoke at a public information meeting at the Orange County Government Center in Goshen Monday night were strongly against building casinos in Sullivan County. The forum, called by the Orange County Legislature, drew about 60 people.
Legislature Chairman Alan Seidman stressed that the meeting was not a public hearing. The New York State Legislature has sponsored several public hearings on the casino issue, but none has been held in Orange County and none has allowed open participation by the public. However, a tape and transcript of the comments would be forwarded to state legislators, he said.
Harry Ross of Orange Environment, speaking on behalf of OE's President Michael Edelstein, predicted some 25 million additional automobile trips per year.
"There is no room on the roads for five successful casinos," he said. "And there's no room on the landscape for any additional lanes (on Route 17)."
As Route 17 becomes jammed, gamblers and commuters will look for alternative routes, Ross said.
"I think some of those clever drivers are going to find Goshen Turnpike."
Montgomery Supervisor Susan Cockburn agreed that the problem is not just Route 17. Her major concern was Route 17K, which she said could catch overflow traffic. She listed a half a dozen intersections that are now traffic nightmares and predicted far worse conditions to follow.
Several studies produced by the casino industry emphasized the advantage of being close to a major market like New York City, noted Woodbury Supervisor Sheila Conroy. None mentioned the traffic bottleneck Route 17 would create, and none recommended major improvements, she said.
Constructing the casinos will employ some 10,000 workers, said Josh Sommers of the Catskill Coalition. That's good news for workers in the construction trades in Sullivan, many of whom are unemployed, he said. But it's also good news for Orange County businesses, he added.
"That's a $2 million payroll for each casino. Where will those people shop? Sullivan County doesn't have a single major mall. Resort casinos will need millions of dollars worth of goods and services, and they will buy a lot of them in Orange County."
Sommers said he agreed with the speakers who emphasized the need for improvements to Route 17. The coalition is pressing for these improvements because not only it is in the interests of Orange and Sullivan counties, but also because it is in the interests of the casino operators, he added.
Todd Diorio, the President of the Hudson Valley Construction and Building Trades Council said the workers he represents are behind the casino project. Many are unemployed as the building boom and the economy slow down, he said. And, he noted, the Sullivan County Legislature voted in favor of the five-casino plan.
"They are trying to present this as environmentalists versus labor," said Goshen attorney Michael Sussman. "But labor lives in the county, and they have to live with asthmatic kids and not being able to get where they want to go."
Sussman also called for improvements in Orange County that would help add jobs, such as infrastructure improvements and possible a major medical center. He also claimed the Orange County Legislature had failed to take a lead role in opposing casinos when they were first proposed.
Goshen Supervisor Honey Bernstein acknowledged that jobs are important, but what kind of jobs?
"Do we want such uses as landfills and nuclear power plants? They also produce jobs. Surely we can seek better jobs than casinos; activities that add to the quality of life can also produce jobs."
While traffic and the environment were major themes among the speakers, potential increases in crime and the moral aspects of gambling were also on people's minds.
After 23 years with the New York State Police, eight years of which were in the gambling unit, Jerry Voss said he's convinced that gambling is associated with other crimes.
"They like to use the word ‘gaming,' he said, naming a litany of organized crime figures that had been involved in gambling over the years. "It covers gambling's sordid past."
Bob Lawrence waxed biblical, citing "the demonic trilogy of alcohol tobacco and gambling." Governments that become involved in these sins are bound to fall, he asserted.
"We believe God will always bless our country. I think the people of Sodom and Gomorra felt the same way."
But few thought the public meeting would change things.
"We in Orange County won't decide whether there will be casinos in Sullivan County, or whether it will be one, three or five," said Woodbury Councilwoman Lorraine McNeill. "But it will have a serious impact on our County."
County Executive Edward Diana did not see the public meeting as a waste of time.
"This was an open public discussion of concerns. The official public hearings were by invitation only. Any time people can be heard in open discussion, I would support that," he said.
By David Gordon
GOSHEN-Casino opponents cited the nightmarish traffic jams, increased air pollution and lung illnesses created by exhaust fumes from that traffic and the potential increase in crime that has historically followed gambling centers.
A handful of proponents stressed the need for the jobs casinos would provide.
They also asserted that the casino workers and the casinos themselves would spark Orange County's economy.
Most of the 20 or so people who spoke at a public information meeting at the Orange County Government Center in Goshen Monday night were strongly against building casinos in Sullivan County. The forum, called by the Orange County Legislature, drew about 60 people.
Legislature Chairman Alan Seidman stressed that the meeting was not a public hearing. The New York State Legislature has sponsored several public hearings on the casino issue, but none has been held in Orange County and none has allowed open participation by the public. However, a tape and transcript of the comments would be forwarded to state legislators, he said.
Harry Ross of Orange Environment, speaking on behalf of OE's President Michael Edelstein, predicted some 25 million additional automobile trips per year.
"There is no room on the roads for five successful casinos," he said. "And there's no room on the landscape for any additional lanes (on Route 17)."
As Route 17 becomes jammed, gamblers and commuters will look for alternative routes, Ross said.
"I think some of those clever drivers are going to find Goshen Turnpike."
Montgomery Supervisor Susan Cockburn agreed that the problem is not just Route 17. Her major concern was Route 17K, which she said could catch overflow traffic. She listed a half a dozen intersections that are now traffic nightmares and predicted far worse conditions to follow.
Several studies produced by the casino industry emphasized the advantage of being close to a major market like New York City, noted Woodbury Supervisor Sheila Conroy. None mentioned the traffic bottleneck Route 17 would create, and none recommended major improvements, she said.
Constructing the casinos will employ some 10,000 workers, said Josh Sommers of the Catskill Coalition. That's good news for workers in the construction trades in Sullivan, many of whom are unemployed, he said. But it's also good news for Orange County businesses, he added.
"That's a $2 million payroll for each casino. Where will those people shop? Sullivan County doesn't have a single major mall. Resort casinos will need millions of dollars worth of goods and services, and they will buy a lot of them in Orange County."
Sommers said he agreed with the speakers who emphasized the need for improvements to Route 17. The coalition is pressing for these improvements because not only it is in the interests of Orange and Sullivan counties, but also because it is in the interests of the casino operators, he added.
Todd Diorio, the President of the Hudson Valley Construction and Building Trades Council said the workers he represents are behind the casino project. Many are unemployed as the building boom and the economy slow down, he said. And, he noted, the Sullivan County Legislature voted in favor of the five-casino plan.
"They are trying to present this as environmentalists versus labor," said Goshen attorney Michael Sussman. "But labor lives in the county, and they have to live with asthmatic kids and not being able to get where they want to go."
Sussman also called for improvements in Orange County that would help add jobs, such as infrastructure improvements and possible a major medical center. He also claimed the Orange County Legislature had failed to take a lead role in opposing casinos when they were first proposed.
Goshen Supervisor Honey Bernstein acknowledged that jobs are important, but what kind of jobs?
"Do we want such uses as landfills and nuclear power plants? They also produce jobs. Surely we can seek better jobs than casinos; activities that add to the quality of life can also produce jobs."
While traffic and the environment were major themes among the speakers, potential increases in crime and the moral aspects of gambling were also on people's minds.
After 23 years with the New York State Police, eight years of which were in the gambling unit, Jerry Voss said he's convinced that gambling is associated with other crimes.
"They like to use the word ‘gaming,' he said, naming a litany of organized crime figures that had been involved in gambling over the years. "It covers gambling's sordid past."
Bob Lawrence waxed biblical, citing "the demonic trilogy of alcohol tobacco and gambling." Governments that become involved in these sins are bound to fall, he asserted.
"We believe God will always bless our country. I think the people of Sodom and Gomorra felt the same way."
But few thought the public meeting would change things.
"We in Orange County won't decide whether there will be casinos in Sullivan County, or whether it will be one, three or five," said Woodbury Councilwoman Lorraine McNeill. "But it will have a serious impact on our County."
County Executive Edward Diana did not see the public meeting as a waste of time.
"This was an open public discussion of concerns. The official public hearings were by invitation only. Any time people can be heard in open discussion, I would support that," he said.
Friday, March 25, 2005
Bending zoning rules in Woodbury might have benefits
Bending zoning rules in Woodbury might have benefits
By Chris McKenna
Times Herald-Record
cmckenna@th-record.com
Woodbury – The controversy du jour in a town full of them is known as "the zoning changes," in the shorthand of some of the people arguing about them.
It refers to requests by two developers to loosen the town's zoning rules to increase the number of homes they can build in two gated communities they want to erect on opposite sides of town.
Among the purported benefits offered in return are large tracts of dedicated open space and improvements to the town's water and sewer systems.
Since the requests surfaced in November, the Town Board, which must decide on them, has held hearings to field initial concerns and begun overseeing environmental reviews for each project that could take months, if not years, to complete.
Officially, the board has no position on the projects, which would total 731 homes. Supervisor Sheila Conroy assures residents the reviews will be thorough and open to the public and must answer any major concerns, such as traffic.
"This is going to take time, and it guarantees input from the public," she said at the end of the board meeting last Thursday. "Let's go through the process and see what it says."
But critics have been flaying the board.
In their view, the board has already signaled its support and is rushing toward a foregone conclusion. They've called for more public hearings, a referendum, a delay while the town revises its master plan – anything to stop the process trudging forward.
"It smacks of back-room politics," said Aimee Fitzgerald, who lives in Central Valley near one of the projects involved – 450-home Woodbury Suburban. "And the public was never consulted about whether it wanted high-density changes in their master plan."
The Woodbury Suburban developer asked for a zoning break to allow 450 homes, instead of the 175 allowed under current zoning. The developer behind the Legacy Ridge project in northern Woodbury wants to build 281 homes instead of 164.
Conroy said in an interview yesterday that the board had no legal obligation to consider the requests but saw enough potential benefits – such as senior-citizen units in the Woodbury Suburban project and open space in both – to go forward.
"We said we were willing to look at these projects because there were some things we liked about them," she said.
She pointed out that, on a personal level, she lives near one of the proposed communities – Legacy Ridge – and would prefer to keep the unblemished view she's had for 26 years.
And she emphasized that the projects could shrink as the developers go through the environmental reviews and adjust to various limitations.
Critics, meanwhile, are unmoved by the perceived benefits, especially open space.
"Land you can't build on," Fitzgerald said with disgust. "You put it behind a gate and call it a gift to the people of Woodbury."
By Chris McKenna
Times Herald-Record
cmckenna@th-record.com
Woodbury – The controversy du jour in a town full of them is known as "the zoning changes," in the shorthand of some of the people arguing about them.
It refers to requests by two developers to loosen the town's zoning rules to increase the number of homes they can build in two gated communities they want to erect on opposite sides of town.
Among the purported benefits offered in return are large tracts of dedicated open space and improvements to the town's water and sewer systems.
Since the requests surfaced in November, the Town Board, which must decide on them, has held hearings to field initial concerns and begun overseeing environmental reviews for each project that could take months, if not years, to complete.
Officially, the board has no position on the projects, which would total 731 homes. Supervisor Sheila Conroy assures residents the reviews will be thorough and open to the public and must answer any major concerns, such as traffic.
"This is going to take time, and it guarantees input from the public," she said at the end of the board meeting last Thursday. "Let's go through the process and see what it says."
But critics have been flaying the board.
In their view, the board has already signaled its support and is rushing toward a foregone conclusion. They've called for more public hearings, a referendum, a delay while the town revises its master plan – anything to stop the process trudging forward.
"It smacks of back-room politics," said Aimee Fitzgerald, who lives in Central Valley near one of the projects involved – 450-home Woodbury Suburban. "And the public was never consulted about whether it wanted high-density changes in their master plan."
The Woodbury Suburban developer asked for a zoning break to allow 450 homes, instead of the 175 allowed under current zoning. The developer behind the Legacy Ridge project in northern Woodbury wants to build 281 homes instead of 164.
Conroy said in an interview yesterday that the board had no legal obligation to consider the requests but saw enough potential benefits – such as senior-citizen units in the Woodbury Suburban project and open space in both – to go forward.
"We said we were willing to look at these projects because there were some things we liked about them," she said.
She pointed out that, on a personal level, she lives near one of the proposed communities – Legacy Ridge – and would prefer to keep the unblemished view she's had for 26 years.
And she emphasized that the projects could shrink as the developers go through the environmental reviews and adjust to various limitations.
Critics, meanwhile, are unmoved by the perceived benefits, especially open space.
"Land you can't build on," Fitzgerald said with disgust. "You put it behind a gate and call it a gift to the people of Woodbury."
Thursday, March 24, 2005
To Run or Not to Run
Rant: Its that time of the year again when we can throw our hat in the rink and run for office. This year Woodbury has two Council seats, Highway Superintendent, Town Clerk, Tax Collector and Supervisor. In the county Woodbury now has three County Legislators, yes three. www.co.orange.ny.us/orgMain.asp?orgid=3&storyTypeID=&sid=&
So the race is on, who is running, who may be thinking of running and who is running again? It’s that time again when people come out to the Town Board meeting just to be seen. To make positive comments because they support someone and make negative when they don’t. But now is a good time for Woodbury to see where the future will take us. Will new faces and new names surface to run, or will it be the same old faces with the same old issues. But for some of us in our mid term we have nothing to lose. When you are in your mid term you can test the waters take a set up and still keep your seat. So who will it be this year, we know the issues there is really just one. If there was ever a time to run now is the time because it’s going to be a one-issue race. This time around its not going to be about party it’s going to be whom do you want to lead the town? The board we have now and the road they have put new leadership or us on and take us off that road? For me it’s a midterm so I have options …
So the race is on, who is running, who may be thinking of running and who is running again? It’s that time again when people come out to the Town Board meeting just to be seen. To make positive comments because they support someone and make negative when they don’t. But now is a good time for Woodbury to see where the future will take us. Will new faces and new names surface to run, or will it be the same old faces with the same old issues. But for some of us in our mid term we have nothing to lose. When you are in your mid term you can test the waters take a set up and still keep your seat. So who will it be this year, we know the issues there is really just one. If there was ever a time to run now is the time because it’s going to be a one-issue race. This time around its not going to be about party it’s going to be whom do you want to lead the town? The board we have now and the road they have put new leadership or us on and take us off that road? For me it’s a midterm so I have options …
Friday, March 18, 2005
Camp Rez
Rave: We just signed up for Cam Rez again and my daughter was so excited. One of the reasons we moved back here seven years ago was the Pond and The Rez. Growing up in Central Valley some of the best times where summers at the Pond. This is her second year going to camp and wanted to thank the Park commissions past and present for their work on this. The parks are the why Woodbury is a great place to live and with Summer coming I am looking forward to the bands on Saturday night. Its nice to know that some of my childhood memories and my kids will be a the parks of Woodbury. No other towns have what we have, two great parks to spend the summer at with your family.
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Woodbury 2005 better then 1979?
As I drive from the now Famous Wal-Mart sign to Trout Brook Road , I cant help but to think back to when I just starting driving. I would get gas at Richie's Mini market where BTW he knew me and everyone else by our first names. Across the street was Brushes where I bought my baseball cards, Big Buddy gum and candy. The lawn across now fenced in would be and group of teens hanging out . Well Brushes is gone the lawn is fenced in and no one knows my name at the Mini Mart. Does anyone remember the Pontiac dealer across from the sunoco which has become Bergs. BTW I always like Bergs he was one of the good guys! There was Rockies P to get a hero and a costa soda. That's right Costa Cola all for $2.10 . Ah the good old days when he would write down your order and send it threw that little window to Mrs P. It would take a lifetime to get your order but that's the way it was. He had newspapers with names written on them and he made sure you never took one of them.! The small little liquor store right next to the Drug Store by the circle. Then there was the Central Valley Diner that never seemed to make it, I even worked their washing dishes for 2 bucks a hour and played pinball in the back! If you wanted Pizza it was Rennes , your car was fixed by Pat or Duke. We had a Grand Union, now the Post Office. I can go on and on the way it was now we have Shopping Centers, Big Box Retailers, Fast Food, restaurants. So I ask you which do you prefer the Woodbury of today or 1979? Please click and answer http://mikeaforwoodbury.com/questions/survey.php?s_id=6
Saturday, March 05, 2005
If your 55 and older please let me know.
Rant
The question I keep asking mysel if I where 55 or older living in Woodbury would I sell my house and buy a active adult home . I may if my kids lived here but then again with a new home my taxes would most likely increase so why move. What if my kids moved here would I relocate here to be close to them, maybe but why pay MW school taxes which are a Mortgage payment that would buy a nice home down south. Looking at the current make up of the town now:As of the census2 of 2000, there are 9,460 people, 3,117 households, and 2,546 families residing in the town. The population density is 101.0/km² (261.6/mi²). There are 3,358 housing units at an average density of 35.9/km² (92.9/mi²).
There are 3,117 households out of which 46.7% have children under the age of 18 living with them, 69.9% are married couples living together, 8.9% have a female householder with no husband present, and 18.3% are non-families. 15.0% of all households are made up of individuals and 4.8% have someone living alone who is 65 years of age or older. The average household size is 3.03 and the average family size is 3.39.In the town the population is spread out with 30.9% under the age of 18, 5.8% from 18 to 24, 31.4% from 25 to 44, 24.5% from 45 to 64, and 7.4% who are 65 years of age or older. The median age is 36 years
With only 7.4% of the town 65 and older would adding active adult homes fly? Please let me know your thoughts?
The question I keep asking mysel if I where 55 or older living in Woodbury would I sell my house and buy a active adult home . I may if my kids lived here but then again with a new home my taxes would most likely increase so why move. What if my kids moved here would I relocate here to be close to them, maybe but why pay MW school taxes which are a Mortgage payment that would buy a nice home down south. Looking at the current make up of the town now:As of the census2 of 2000, there are 9,460 people, 3,117 households, and 2,546 families residing in the town. The population density is 101.0/km² (261.6/mi²). There are 3,358 housing units at an average density of 35.9/km² (92.9/mi²).
There are 3,117 households out of which 46.7% have children under the age of 18 living with them, 69.9% are married couples living together, 8.9% have a female householder with no husband present, and 18.3% are non-families. 15.0% of all households are made up of individuals and 4.8% have someone living alone who is 65 years of age or older. The average household size is 3.03 and the average family size is 3.39.In the town the population is spread out with 30.9% under the age of 18, 5.8% from 18 to 24, 31.4% from 25 to 44, 24.5% from 45 to 64, and 7.4% who are 65 years of age or older. The median age is 36 years
With only 7.4% of the town 65 and older would adding active adult homes fly? Please let me know your thoughts?
Friday, March 04, 2005
Last night
I would like to hear some feed back from lasts night meeting. For those of you who not do have channel 22 you should go to the library, get copies of the tapes and watch the last few town board meetings to get caught up on what has been taking place. Let the truth be told I am not happy with last nights agenda and do not like when town board meeting are used for work sessions. So now that I have become a blogger please get used to hearing rants and raves from me. Some rants no reason to leave off last nights agenda Discussion - Dunkin Donuts Fire Lanes /Discussion - BOCES Agreement Discussion /-Women of Woodbury Request / Discussion - Terms of Offices for Committees/Commissions and add Discussion/Review - Conservation Cluster Law / Discussion/Review - Senior Housing Law . Raves Camp only $360.00 per session
Thursday, March 03, 2005
Meeting 3/3/2005
I hope to see everyone at tonight's meeting. If you know anyone who would like to run for office please contact me. Its that time of year and we need to find good people to run. I will have a few thoughts after the meting tonight and will post them Friday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)