Letters

Published on December 22, 2006

Seewald flap distractsus from budget crisis

To the Bulletin:

Last week's letter about Alan Seewald from former Select Board members Eva Schiffer and Dolly Jolly was the latest in a barrage of cruel negative attacks that find fault with the new Town Hall team that replaced them.

Looking back at the long history of Amherst town counsels, it has been commonplace for town managers to choose lawyers. Looking sideways at about 50 cities and 300 towns, the turnover in municipal lawyers is brisk.

Current Select Board members have generously praised Mr. Seewald's service. But most people accept the idea that any new town manager should be free to choose the town's lawyer. Indeed, the Town Government Act and the Town Manager Act before that clearly provide this.

Legal services cost Amherst taxpayers about $160,000 last year. That averages $3,000 a week - considerably higher than any salary in Town Hall or the School Department.

Scanning other local newspapers, the extremist negativity of Amherst press coverage stands out as grossly unfair. We need a new media approach to the business of adequately informing the public about their municipal corporation that spends $60 million annually.

Right now, all the hurtful attacks are a wasteful diversion from a financial scenario that will place yet another menu of multimillion-dollar tax override questions on a ballot for the second time in three years, despite a growing statewide trend among voters rejecting two-thirds of the override proposals presented to them.

Let's keep our eyes on property tax dollars in this tight budget season and not on those who would bemoan a personnel decision that will not be undone. What constructive suggestions do these writers have in the selection of new legal counsel? Or how do we join with other communities to persuade the Statehouse to vote more uninterrupted and permanent financial aid to cities and towns? Or what new ideas are there to stem runaway local spending by obligating ourselves "to live within our means"?

Alan Root

Amherst

If he used child porn,shouldn't he get help?

To the Bulletin:

I have never met Ronald Garney and wouldn't recognize him if we bumped into each other on the street. And I do not condone child pornography. To me it is sick and illegal. What I find interesting is how Mr. Garney is being treated before he has even been convicted of a crime.

People have called him "odd." If that's the case it could cover a great number of residents. I wonder why the Bulletin sees it as new news to put a large write-up on its pages every week with almost the same information as the week before.

What would have happened if Mr. Garney was found to be an alcoholic or a drug addict? More than likely, people would feel badly for him and insist upon getting him help. If these allegations against him are true, shouldn't people be supporting him by getting him some help?

Dragging him, his entire life and career through the mud over and over again does not seem to be productive to me. If he was found guilty of having touched any child inappropriately, I would be the first person in line to ... well, we won't go there. If he was a good teacher, why ruin him and his life? Why not just get him some help?

Tom Doubleday

Pelham

International issues need Town Meeting action

To the Bulletin:

Recent letters have opined on the importance of discussing international issues at Town Meeting, if necessary at the expense of time for discussion of local issues of importance.

If Town Meeting really wishes to go down this road, please add the following topics to the agenda for discussion: 1) the obvious sensibility of eliminating U.N. Security Council permanent veto power votes from 19th-century world powers and replacing them with such votes for 21st-century powers Germany, Japan and Brazil; 2) possible negotiation by the U.S. of an environmental treaty directly with China and India addressing these three Kyoto Treaty objectors' various stakes in the global environmental quandary; and 3) a rational discussion of the position advanced by the Iranian prime minister that European criminal laws forbidding denial of the Holocaust violate accepted Western free speech norms.

If intensive and important discussion of critical local issues must be sidetracked for matters of global import (which is ridiculous), those who want to turn Town Meeting into a forum for their political rants would do local citizens an educational favor if they focused instead on grappling with really tough issues like these.

A. E. Harazin

Amherst

Mosakowski advocatedhousing solutions

To the Bulletin:

I would like to add my tribute to Kenneth Mosakowski's lifelong commitment to the Amherst community.

Ken served many years as chairman and member of the board of commissioners of the Amherst Housing Authority.

His advocacy for those in need of a decent and safe home was unwavering.

Although Ken and I disagreed, at times, on the method to achieve such a goal, we always agreed on the basic mission of the Housing Authority. Those who worked with Ken knew that he was willing to devote the time and effort to help those who needed it; we could count on him to champion the cause of renters, those who can never afford to purchase their own home in town.

Ken was a private person. I wish, along with many others, that I could have provided some comfort during his last days and been able to thank him for his many contributions to the community.

Donna Crabtree

Amherst

Select Board workshard for little money

To the Bulletin:

I want to thank the Select Board for all of their work in helping facilitate the opening of my business, the Cushman Market and Cafe.

I was impressed by their sense of judgment and ability to navigate through a wide range of town topics. Recent efforts by board member Gerry Weiss have focused on understanding the issues of prospective business owners and trying to address these issues within the context of town rules and regulations. Amherst is quietly becoming the vital town it always should have been, and I think we should give credit where credit is due.

So, the next time there is an article about a board member wearing the wrong shirt to a meeting, or some other relatively minor indiscretion, I think it is important to keep in mind that board members typically put in between 15 and 20 hours per week (that's 750 to 1,000 hours per year) and are reimbursed $300 per year for their efforts. They are public volunteers, and their tireless public service is critical to the well being and vitality of our town.

Pete Sylvan

Leverett