Letters to the Editor

We’re All Journalists NOW
By Cathryn Cranston

Rethink Bridge Design
By Jane T. Holmes

Remembering Joan Hart
By Alynne Krull

The Birds and the Planes
By Richard Laster

Getting on the Ballot
By Jane Lindau

Keeping Informed with
NewCastleNOW.org
By Jeffrey Mester

Universal Health Care
By Barbara Offenhartz

Ahmadinejad Visits Columbia
By Anna Samel

We’re All Journalists NOW

Dear Editors of NewCastleNow.org,

Congratulations on the successful launch of http://www.newcastlenow.org. Its debut has made me reflect on the internet, the role of newspapers, and the hunger – all over the country – for local news. 
It’s fair to say that the internet is a “disruptive technology,” probably still in its infancy.  As I write this, it continues to change the way we get and process information, how we talk to one another, and how we structure our days.

Print media, newspapers in particular, have been caught flat-footed by the internet. They are dependent on an expensive “business model” – manufacturing, distribution and traditional newsgathering.  Until recently they supported this with advertising. The advertisers are now migrating away – many to the internet, where they can more easily measure who they are reaching and what they are selling. So newspapers are under a lot of pressure from owners and shareholders because the amount of money they make continues to decline. Advertisers are putting more and more pressure on newspapers about format, layout, and sometimes content.  Who ever thought we’d have ads on the front page of newspapers?
Meanwhile, here in our town, we’re wondering about traffic management, Reader’s Digest, speeding on our roadways, secrets to defend our gardens against deer, why our downtown seems to be struggling.Typically, how I find out is by asking around.

Enter http://www.newcastlenow.org – a non-profit community newspaper – a new entry into the growing trend toward citizen journalism.  In many ways, the site is on the vanguard of a trend across the country. In San Diego and Minneapolis, former journalists at the beleaguered papers in those markets have banded together and organized their own non-profit “dot org” to do just what NewCastleNOW is doing . . . well, NOW.

So join in, subscribe, contribute content, and participate in the community.

Cathryn Cranston

________________________________________________________________________
Rethink Bridge Design

Dear Citizens of New Castle,

Our town board and the NYS Department of Transportation are about to build a much bigger bridge in the center of our downtown. The new bridge as planned would bring cars from the west side of town into the village faster. We will still be left with traffic bottlenecks everywhere you turn – route 120/Douglas Road, Citibank/Pizza Station, King Street/Starbucks This construction will be a huge disruption of our downtown village life and will leave us with many unsolved problems and even less of our already inadequate parking.

Let’s not settle for a plan that does not attempt to solve these other problems. New York State Department of Transportation isn’t thinking hard enough about our town’s particular problems. These problems need common sense attention from New Castle town residents. Don’t let these plans go forward! There is a better way. Let’s educate NYS DOT and ourselves.

This is our chance as citizens to work with our representatives for creative change that will benefit everyone. Come to the next informational meeting—Thursday, October 18, 2007, from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. in conference rooms A and B at Town Hall.  Contact Chuck Napoli at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) with any questions.

Sincerely,

Jane T. Holmes
________________________________________________________________________
Remembering Joan Hart

Dear Editors,

        Congratulations to you on a really auspicious beginning! Today’s edition sets the tone for what will surely become a new, integral part of the New Castle community.

        It is interesting that the first piece I read through was the eulogy of Joan Hart. I hadn’t heard that she had passed away, and, with both sadness and fondness, I was flooded with recollections of her. We first met while she was a secretary at Roaring Brook School in the 1990’s.  One day, when I came in for one reason or another, she introduced herself to me: It seems that we were nearby neighbors. She lived right across Douglas Road from my children’s school bus stop. She recognized my son, Jeremy, from seeing him wait for the bus.

        That following summer, she befriended me at the Chappaqua Swim Club. She told me a lot about raising her children, particularly her sons. Her insight and kindness helped me become a better parent. She also knew that I was a “theatre person,” and we discussed her daughter, Roxanne, and Roxanne’s acting career. Years later, after Joan retired from Roaring Brook, I met her volunteering at the hospital in Mt. Kisco. I had no idea at that time that her husband had had a stroke. Yet, she persevered, was there for him, and was still an active volunteer.
        A few times, I also encountered her at music programs at Greeley HS or at Chappaqua Orchestra concerts. Her son mentioned that he and Joan took walks together. Significantly, the last time I saw Joan Hart, I drove by them, as they were walking. I had no idea that she was ill, although I did make note of her frail appearance. My family and I will miss Joan. She was an intelligent and caring person who reached out for all. Thank you for publishing the beautiful eulogy. 

Alynne Krull
______________________________________________________________________
The Birds and the Planes

Dear Editors:

        The Greeley Woods, Gedney Park and now even a soothing pocket park in the middle of our Village all contribute to the pastoral beauty of our hamlet. We even have a sidewalk that can be “pulled up” when the sun sets and that—during the day, to cut back on the traffic overload—has people happily whistling and walking to the railroad station.  But, then, VOILA!  A whole new setting as Chappaqua changes its image. Washington decides that we should be a “marker” on the flight path to the neighboring Westchester County Airport. If this happens as currently planned, the pastoral beauty of our town would give way to roaring engines overhead polluting the air and high decibel noise levels drowning out the chirping of birds that love our town as a happy resting place.

        But wait! This is just air traffic above. Now, there is also talk that the beautiful farm land known as the “Readers Digest property” might give way to a little village of its own, creating growing traffic to compete with the potential noise and pollution levels of the increased plane traffic up above.

        I know that our town’s mothers and fathers who run the town so effectively are busy dealing with the proposed Readers Digest “village,” but is it too late for them to intervene in Washington so as to alter the new flight path just enough to maintain the pristine environment that attracted all of us to this northern suburb— even a former President and (who knows) maybe a future President?

        Given all of the above, would you recommend that we proceed to schedule special train trips to the city for a quiet afternoon to Times Square? Please advise.

Richard Laster
________________________________________________________________________
Getting on the Ballot

Dear Editor:

On Tuesday, September 18, a little noticed Democratic primary took place in Westchester when New Castle resident Charles Devlin challenged Democrat Janet Jordan for her place on the Democratic ticket for Westchester County Family Court Judge.  This race was the only countywide race this September, and was the sole reason that the polls were open in New Castle and in most other municipalities in Westchester. What most of the Democrats who voted that day did not know is that Mr. Devlin already holds the ballot positions for the Conservative and the Republican parties for November’s election.

The process by which candidates are placed on the ballot is very important and little understood.  Each town’s Democratic (or Republican) Committee is staffed by volunteers (called District Leaders)  who are elected by their peers and undertake the months-long process of interviewing dozens of candidates who are interested in running for office.  Based upon the interview process and upon a thorough review of the candidates’ qualifications, District Leaders vote to endorse candidates.  All the committees in Westchester then vote to choose the candidates who will represent their party in the election.  Finally, District Leaders then carry petitions to collect the signatures of registered members of their parties to secure the candidates’ places on the ballot.  This process allows party members to have a say in which candidates are chosen.

Mr. Devlin never presented his qualifications and never asked to be interviewed Westchester’s Democratic Committees.  His petitions were not carried by District Leaders, but by people who never told the signers that he was not endorsed by the town or county democratic committees, and who did not inform the signers that he already is running on the Republican and Conservative lines.

By forcing (and losing) the only Westchester County wide Democratic Primary through his challenge to Janet Jordan, Charles Devlin did more than just waste hundreds of thousands dollars of taxpayer money.  He also sought to mislead voters into thinking he was a Democrat and to deny voters a choice of candidates.  By masquerading as a Democrat but not deigning to be interviewed by the County’s Democratic Committees (as Ms. Jordan and her Democratic challengers were) Mr. Devlin carried out a stealth campaign to try to take advantage of poorly informed voters.

I have heard Mr. Devlin’s supporters claim that he is the best qualified candidate for the job.  If this is so, why was he afraid to present his qualifications to the Democratic Committees of Westchester?  And why did he seek to deny the voters a choice of candidates by seeking the Republican, Conservative, and Democratic ballot positions? 

Luckily the political process prevailed in the primary, and Janet Jordan won.  Voters will have their chance to show what they think of these tactics on November 6 by voting for Janet Jordan or for Charles Devlin.

Jane Lindau
Co-Chair, New Castle Democratic Committee
________________________________________________________________________
Keeping Informed with NewCastleNOW.org

Dear Editors:

I want to congratulate you on your first edition of NewCastleNOW.org! I immediately started reading it upon its arrival in my inbox and was struck by its professionalism, by the scope of information presented in the newsletter and on your website, and by its stated goal.

Working all day in the city, I often miss what happens around our community on a day to day basis. Your weekly presents me with the to opportunity to know what is going on in town, besides with the schools, and to feel like I am more connected to the community. 

I was especially excited about the article on the Millwood train station. I too would drive by the station daily and wonder why this potentially classic structure was not being used.  I am glad to see the Nigro family is considering opening a restaurant that would serve the community and the bike path patrons.  Selfishly, my wife, children and I often dreamed of the station house becoming a homemade ice cream stand with a bicycle drive- up window.  That dream is on its way to fulfillment.

Good luck.

Jeffrey Mester
Chappaqua
________________________________________________________________________
Universal Health Care

Dear Editors,

I am one of those folks who believes that as a consumer of healthcare I should do all I can to understand its benefits/pitfalls and the marketplace—not just from personal experience but from people who are knowledgeable about its inner workings.

The League of Women Voters afforded me that opportunity this week at its Annual Fall Luncheon when it presented Lindsay Farrell, CEO of Open Door Family Medical Centers and Mary Ann Baily, Associate for Ethics and Health Policy at the Hastings Center. I was particularly interested in the work of Open Door with the indigent and uninsured population of Westchester, since my church, First Congregational of Chappaqua—from a humanitarian perspective—has decided to advocate for this very population. We will be holding an Art Auction on November 10 to benefit Open Door’s work. See http://www.fcc.org.

I came away from the afternoon with many new thoughts about the complexity that healthcare in America presents, but my overriding impression remains that the richest industrial nation in the world should have as a top priority the best health care possible for all its citizens. We have the talent and ability to make this happen and—simply put—it is the right thing to do.

Barbara Offenhartz
Chappaqua
_______________________________________________________________________
Ahmadinejad Visits Columbia;
Hot Debate Ensues

Dear Editor,

        The right to express our ideas and beliefs is one of the most valued freedoms in American society, and rightly so. We could not successfully maintain a healthy democracy without an open exchange of ideas and the ability to make our voices heard. But at what point does the free speech argument stop serving as a justification? When does simple common sense take over? We’ve all heard the example of yelling fire in a crowded theater. We know that free speech does not give us the right to put others in harm’s way.

        This same question was brought up last year when Don Imus made his controversial remarks about the Rutgers women’s basketball team. Of course his derogatory comments were condemned, but many people also criticized CBS for firing him, claiming his right to free speech was violated. I fully agree with their argument that he was protected by the first amendment guarantee of free speech. However, I do not see where it failed. Imus was not arrested or thrown in jail for his opinions. As a matter of fact, no legal or governmental action was taken against him at all. He was fired because his comments provoked a backlash and made him a liability. CBS, understandably, did not want to lose business. They have no more obligation to give Imus a radio station than to give one to a Holocaust denier.

        The first amendment is designed to prevent the government from infringing on people’s freedom of expression. Nowhere does it protect people from facing consequences. If Imus wanted to broadcast his offensive, arrogant, and racist views, he should have been prepared for the reaction that would follow. He had the right to voice his opinion, but everyone else had the right to censure him. And CBS had every right to fire him. This is not a question of free speech.

        Now, the debate over free speech has arisen once again. After inviting President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran to speak at Columbia University, Lee C. Bollinger, the president of the university, proceeded to bash Ahmadinejad as he introduced him to the audience. Bollinger called him “a petty and cruel dictator,” and later even had the audacity to predict that Ahmadinejad would not have “the intellectual courage to answer these questions.” There is no doubt that many of Bollinger’s statements were true. Ahmadinejad is an oppressive leader, and I do not support his policies nor his denial of the Holocaust. Still, I cannot help but agree with his response to Bollinger’s introduction. “In Iran tradition requires that [when we invite a person to speak], we actually respect our students and the professors by allowing them to make their own judgment, and we don’t think it’s necessary before the speech is even given to come in with a series of claims and to attempt in a so-called manner to provide vaccination of some sort to our students and our faculty,” he said when he took the stage.

        I am not questioning Bollinger’s right to express his beliefs. I am not even questioning his beliefs themselves; I agree with many of his statements. However, I cannot condone the manner in which he conducted himself. To invite someone to speak and then fail to treat him with even minimal respect is embarrassing. Also, that Bollinger would dare to accuse Ahmadinejad of lacking “intellectual courage” is astounding. Was it not Bollinger who invited Ahmadinejad to speak, and then as a result of the backlash, sought to appease angry students and commentators by denouncing him? Putting aside the question of whether Bollinger should have asked Ahmadinejad to speak in the first place, if Bollinger had any “intellectual courage,” he would have stuck to his original decision and defended his own point of view. Instead, he demonstrated nothing other than his inability to stand up for himself in the face of opposition. Ironically, Bollinger’s rudeness no doubt boosted Ahmadinejad’s popularity in Iran.

        As for whether or not inviting Ahmadinejad was a good idea, this is one of the few good decisions Bollinger made in this whole debacle. While giving a stage to an oppressive ruler seems inconceivable and was bound to inspire some outrage, the delicate situation of relations between the United States and Iran at this time demonstrated a need for Americans to see the Iranian point of view. Some of his beliefs, especially his Holocaust denial, place him under international scorn, but the truth is that these ideas are out there, and simply ignoring them will not make them disappear. As Bollinger stated at the beginning of his introduction, “It should never be thought that merely to listen to ideas we deplore in any way implies our endorsement of those ideas.” However, if Bollinger was so desperate to prove his disgust for Ahmadinejad’s policies and views, the correct way to do so would have been to challenge him to a debate. Instead, Bollinger chose to put ideas in his students’ heads, openly disrespect a guest, and ultimately embarrass his school and his country.

Anna Samel

Anna Samel is a senior at Horace Greeley High School and a co-editor-in-chief of its student-run newspaper, The Greeley Tribune. This letter to the editor will also appear in the next issue of the Tribune.