Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJan 9th Appendix A.pdf Given the fact that an injunction has issued, and therefore, the deer plan is temporarily on hold, and given the fact that the Village election is March 20th, this board and mayor should not enter into a contract with White Buffalo as it is premature to do so and could result in yet another lawsuit against the Village, or at the very least, a large financial cost for a breach of contract penalty. These are also the reasons why the board and mayor should not enter into any contract for the construction of the Marcham Hall addition at this time. To do so is fiscally irresponsible. Additionally, given the injunction, there is no need to rush through local law J allowing weapons to be used in the Village for deer culling. The board and mayor can allow the interim period until a decision on the appeal has been rendered to allow all Villagers who were denied the opportunity to speak, to do so. The board and mayor have repeatedly asserted that they have a mandate to go forward with the deer plan. If you actually believe this, then you should be sufficiently confident to wait until the appeal process is concluded and the results of the March election are determined before signing any contract. It is clear that even those who support a reduction in the deer population are not prepared for the Village to be turned into a hunting ground from before sunrise to 11 p.m. every day, possibly for the next ten years. Mindy Mindlin I and Richard Swedberg are out of town so we cannot attend the meeting . I am appalled however that anyone would even think of coming up with the idea to release shooters in a residential neighborhood with the houses so relatively close together, where people regularly walk and young children play . This program is an accident waiting to happen- -aside from accidentally killing somewone, a stray bullet can paralyze someone for life . Is the Village ready to deal with the law suits that will surely ensure-when the first bullet accidentally misfires ? If the stupidity of the project is not enough to stop the trustees, perhaps the idea of litigation and their pocket books will . I personally not pay one penny in tax increase to settle the inevitable law suits that this process will entail . Thank you, Mabel Berezin and Richard Swedberg Mabel Berezin, Associate Professor and Chair Department of Sociology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 I'm Karen Kaufmann, 110 Northway Road, and of course I remain opposed to the Board's plan for backyard deer slaughter on grounds of safety,morality and effectiveness. I'm grateful to the Appellate Division for the preliminary injunction that gives the Board time to reconsider its choices, or at least to ask critical questions about the devilish details that continue to dog its plan and have most recently come into focus around proposed Local Law J. I offer some questions that I believe it is incumbent upon the Board to consider before moving forward on Local Law J, its contract with White Buffalo, or other aspects of its plan. First, while we've recently heard and seen lots of assurances about police involvement in the process, why is there no express provision in Local Law J for promised police supervision? Is it because, early on in deer remediation discussions, our police chief advised the Board that his department could not assure safety if contract killers were involved? Or is the Board trying to minimize municipal responsibility in case of accident by relegating concerns about safety and oversight to matters for contract negotiation or the Board's sole discretion? Or is it that, in its rush to sign a contract with White Buffalo,the Board has become blind or indifferent to residents' safety and oversight concerns? It's worth noting that the firearms ordinance in effect until 1999, which included provision for so-called"woodchuck permits," expressly required police approval of woodchuch applications. Why no similar police oversight of hired killers? Second, whether police oversight is explicit or implicit in the Board's current plan, the scope of such oversight is unclear. It's worth noting, again, that other communities conducting culling operations have involved substantial safety precautions, including police helicopter flyovers, ground searches, barricades, and road or park closures before each shooting session and ongoing police presence during shooting operations. Will Village police likewise be present before and during contract shooting operations, to monitor safety and compliance with contract limitations and environmental laws, or will they simply approve sites, check contractors' licenses, and receive complaints from afar? In approving sites, will Village police advise site owners and 500- foot waiver signatories of legal and liability concerns arising from the Village's use of private property for contract operations? Will the police or other Village authorities notify site neighbors and users of Village roads and walkways of impending or ongoing operations? And will sharpshooters really be allowed to shoot from vehicles, as proposed in an early information- gathering release from White Buffalo? In the interests of transparency and public trust, the details of police or other oversight of the process should be vetted and explained. The pervasive safety precautions taken in other communities also raise questions about the adequacy of the Board's environmental assessment that Local Law J will have no significant impact on the character of the community. Helicopter flyovers? Ground searches?Police cordons and closure of roads? Add to these, contractors in trucks porting deer carcasses through the Village and the pervasive sound of neighborhood gunfire over the winter months, and it's hard for me to say that the character of life in the Village will not be altered for the worse. Should not a real environmental impact assessment be completed? Clearly,the devil in this plan is in the details. It's simply wishful thinking, and a betrayal of public trust, to assume that a contract with White Buffalo will magically or miraculously resolve residents' concerns about safety or community values, or that opposition to the Board's plan will diminish as the plan moves forward. I urge the Board to step back, and take a critical look at what it proposes, before committing the Village to a costly, disruptive, and potentially tragic course of action.