Letters to the Editor: What’s the plan?
Riverhead
What’s the plan?
A three-to-two majority of the Riverhead Town Board has renewed the effort to grab the Long Island Science Center’s property on East Main Street. After I pushed for clarification at the meeting, it was acknowledged that a hearing must be held and a new resolution adopted before exercising eminent domain and spending more money in court.
However, board members Ken Rothwell, Joann Waski and Denise Merrifield and planning director Dawn Thomas did not answer my question about whether they already have a replacement project in mind. Given the scathing criticism of the current building’s condition, its demolition may be contemplated.
Is this another instance of the inside dealing that brought us Joe Petrocelli’s domineering hotel/condo project on the east side of the Square?
As I attended the bittersweet Forward Frame farewell reception at East End Arts on Saturday, the sun streamed through the west-facing windows of the 1840s Davis-Corwin House, past the early stages of Petrocelli’s construction. That natural light will never be seen again after his massive five-story building is erected.
Is it a hopeless dream to think of the construction halted to allow a green lawn from Main Street to the amphitheater and the river, like Mitchell Park in Greenport? If the board majority is determined to destroy the Science Center building, Petrocelli’s hotel should go there. It will not overshadow as much The Suffolk theater or hide the 19th century arts council buildings, which should frame the east side of Town Square.
John McAuliff
Riverhead Watch
Wading River
No ambiguity
Last week’s letter from Bob Bittner (“A no-win situation,” April 9) deserves comment. This writer alleges ambiguity in the wording at the beginning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, aka “Birth Right Citizenship.”
The amendment’s wording is quite clear: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States …” Who would not be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States? Foreign diplomats who are stationed here, for instance, or members of an occupying/invading army. Their children born here would not qualify as citizens.
In contrast, undocumented immigrants in our nation indeed are subject to U.S. jurisdiction, and thus their children born here are citizens. Likewise, the offspring of tourists in the U.S. who give birth while visiting our country are citizens.
Yes, those who wrote the 14th Amendment could not anticipate the modern concepts of “birthright tourism” or dual citizenship. But the Founding Fathers who wrote the 2nd Amendment likewise could not have conceived of AK-47 rifles replacing their muskets and proliferating throughout the U.S. population. So the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution to the best of its ability.
While the 14th Amendment in 1868 was primarily aimed at citizenship for former slaves, subsequent Supreme Court justices in their decisions have recognized that letting the federal government decide who is and who is not a U.S. citizen would be a path fraught with danger. The current Supreme Court is not faced with a no-win situation. A decision to uphold the 14th Amendment would be a win for freedom and for our nation.
Martin Skrocki
Cutchogue
Squeaky wheel
The squeaky wheel gets the grease – but is that what we need?
As I read these letters (I often do not read them, as they are hard to stomach) I realized the loudest voices are the ones that get heard, even if they are not original thoughts and just a regurgitation of someone else’s ideas and agenda.
But perhaps the voice of reason and common sense needs to be the loudest. When you look at the most inflammatory issues in any depth, you’ll quickly find that most have little to do with the Trump era. For example, deportations are not new. Look back for videos of your beloved Obama (or any other president for that matter) saying that illegals need to be deported, also check the number of illegals that were deported under Obama; it’s more than the current president has done. Obama was the one who put children in cages, not Trump. Perhaps check your facts before believing what you hear. Everyone — from Hillary to Schumer — wanted illegals deported.
I personally have no issue with immigrants, but if you come in Illegally, then you have basically cut the line and need to go back and come in the proper way. But because many of you (at least the ones who write to this paper) seem to have TDS in a big way, you fail to think.
Jennifer Mannino
Mattituck
Enforce real dark sky protections
We are in the height of spring migration, culminating in World Migratory Bird Day on May 9, making this a symbolic moment to call upon the Southold Town Board to update the town code on light pollution. The code must be brought into alignment with the clear priorities expressed by Southold residents in the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 5, Goal 10: Reducing Light Pollution.
Light pollution is not a minor inconvenience; it is a documented environmental threat. It contributes to the deaths of over one billion birds annually, as nearly 80% of migratory species travel at night and are disoriented by artificial light. Beyond birds, excessive nighttime lighting disrupts insects, fish, and other aquatic ecosystems, placing it squarely within the Trustees’ responsibility when reviewing permits.
Despite these realities, the current town code lacks enforceable clarity. Southold is described as “Dark Sky compliant,” yet that designation is not codified in a way that enables meaningful enforcement. After reviewing the code in detail with a member of code enforcement, it became clear that explicit, actionable standards are missing.
This regulatory gap has tangible consequences. A neighbor, whose land borders a farm preserved by the Peconic Land Trust no less, installed extensive lighting at his summer home, lighting more appropriate for a strip mall than a rural road. Multiple light poles illuminate the property nightly, even when it is unoccupied, which is often, in an area where surrounding streets have little to no lighting. This is fundamentally out of character with the neighborhood and contradicts the community vision outlined in the Comprehensive Plan.
It raises a fundamental question: Why should one individual be allowed to permanently alter a neighborhood’s character or take away the night sky from others?
The Town Board must act decisively: update the code with precise, enforceable standards; allocate additional funding to code enforcement; implement nighttime inspections; and establish meaningful penalties. Additionally, any lighting within 100 feet of the water should fall under the Trustees’ purview and be taken into consideration when considering permits.
Protecting Southold’s night sky is essential to preserving its wildlife, ecosystems and rural character.
Tami Loeffler
Peconic
ICE needs to change
We have an immigration problem on the North Fork. But it’s not because the immigrants are the “worst of the worst.” It’s because the Department of Homeland Security and its Immigration and Customs Enforcement unit are intimidating the immigrant population. We need to write our 1st District congressman, Nick Lalota, and tell him to have ICE act like regular policemen.
We need to tell him that he should use his power as a congressman to get ICE to be identified like regular law enforcement officers — Suffolk or Southold police. That means wear a proper uniform, wear a badge, wear body cameras, drop the masks, use warrants, ditch the brutality and remember that in this country, one is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
There’s a motto in New York Harbor that sums up with this:
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
Joel Reitman
Cutchogue
Chickens and eggs: Questions remain
Why is the Planning Board preparing to give a green light to build a barn by approving a site plan without even looking at a building plan? Shouldn’t they know how many doors the building will have and which directions will they open to? The Planning Board has a responsibility and a right to consider, and develop its own understanding of, the potential impacts of approving the proposed site plan.
Rejuvenate Farms’ plans call for six chicken tractors holding 1,000 birds each. Pictures of wooden and metal chicken tractors were submitted. Will the farm start with both? Where will they go? Maybe we should know. Having some experience with chicken tractors, they will have to be moved at least once per day. I wonder how. I doubt they will be very maneuverable. The electric fences — how high will they be?— will also have to be moved. It sounds to me like the Applicant and Planning Board are considering the 16 acres as if they are flat and 100% useful for growing a pasture.
For a farming activity to be protected from private nuisance lawsuits by Right to Farm laws, it must be deemed a “sound agricultural practice” by the commissioner of Agriculture and Markets. To be considered sound, the practice must be legal, safe, necessary, supportable and conducted in a reasonable way, often supported by expert guidance or research.
The proposed farm does not meet the criteria for large or medium Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations which would automatically require Nutrient Management Plans. And it clearly does meet the criteria for a “small” CAFO. The applicant could file a Notice of Intent to classify the operation as a “small” CAFO, thus demonstrating willingness to comply with environmental regulations for managing manure and wastewater — including implementing a Nutrient Management Plan.
Benja Schwartz
Southold
Egg farm casualties
On March 23, I attended what may turn out to be a funeral. This took place, not at a funeral home, but at the Southold Recreation Center. The officiants were those who hold positions on the Southold Town Planning Board. The deceased will be the community of Jasmine Lane, if that board’s decision stands. Cause of death: uncaring officials, callousness on the part of the perpetrator/owner and the total disregard for the lives of the residents in this community.
I found that one of the most frustrating aspects of this fight to save this community was the total lack of any compassion for those who stand to suffer so much at the hands of an uncaring Town Board. Not one elected official had the courage to even voice a modicum of support for us.
If the Agriculture Right to Farm Law is the basis for the destruction of this community, then it is time to amend this law. People’s lives, health and welfare should take precedence over the right to farm. This is simple common sense. The harm that will be done to Southold’s environment will affect every resident of this hamlet. You can ignore the consequences of this decision, but you will reap its results. When the value of our homes decreases, so will the tax revenue derived from them.
I do not intend to give up the fight. What I intend to do is to keep this terrible decision before the electorate every election cycle. Every politician who did nothing to mitigate this proposal should never have the opportunity to ever inflict this harm on our community ever again. Six thousand chickens in a residential area is a disgrace and an indictment of those responsible, who did nothing to protect their fellow citizens.
John Reichert
Orient
Global warming?
Once again, we need to listen to the “experts.” What will it take for people to admit that 90% of all the modern things that are available do not work?
It seems that most of the time these things don’t function unless the conditions are right, i.e., there is no sunlight at night, and you’re lucky the windmill things will work enough to make toast. Also, there seems to be a lot of concern about what the wind turbines are doing to the marine life around these ugly things. All that would (maybe) be worth all the negative things if they actually worked.
How could anyone trust the government when they are caught lying all the time, especially about the global warming scam?
Joey Pinter
