Maybe 2 towns should first merge, then village dissolve

Writer also sees benefits to proposed quarry

Editor:

The past few months have been, for lack of a better term, enlightening. I am a person that likes to keep in touch with what is happening in our Orleans County region. In order to do that I have tried to make sure that I pull my information from more than one source, review, and come to my own conclusions.

Two issues of late have come to the forefront, urging me to put my thoughts to paper. The first is that of the dissolution of Medina into the local townships. I agree there is nothing clean about this process.

How often do you have a village established on top of a township border? From what I am reading I see that people thought it a good idea at first. Why not? It reduces redundancies in the local infrastructure that tax dollar is paying for.

The problem is that there is no clean way of “sharing services.” Reading the editorials and reports, it reminds me of two siblings arguing over who got the biggest piece of cake.

Instead of being Negative Nancy’s maybe the local leadership should think outside the box so that everyone come out ahead. What if instead of trying to dissolve Medina into two townships the two townships first merged and then absorbed the Village? After all a local Country Club (Shelridge) has already paved the way by supplying a name that captures the essence of both communities.

Quite possibly this has already been explored and there is a plethora of reasons why this would not work. However, on the chance that it has not, I would challenge the local leadership to explore this option, with an open mind.

The second issue that I see cropping up is that of the new stone quarry that is proposed on the Fletcher Chapel Road. “Saturday Night Live” did a skit that the key word was “REALLY” and I think that this is very fitting in this scenario.

So you want to drive down taxes and have more local employment but you want to complain about a business expanding in your community? REALLY? You complain about the unemployment figures and yet you don’t want a business expanding in your neighborhood. REALLY?

You complain about the number of people on welfare but you don’t want a business to expand, allowing the potential of taking people off welfare? REALLY?

I understand that there is the STAMP project that may, or may not, be affected by the ground tremors. The only thing is building a business park does not mean realized business and jobs.

In both cases listed I think that George Carlin said it best. “People suffer from NIMBY.” He went on to say that “people want things to happen but ‘NOT IN MY BACK YARD.'”
How is it that as a society we have taken on this greedy, self-centered arrogance? Think about this: Had the soldiers taken on that fore-mentioned attitude in fighting for our freedom, our surroundings would be much different than they are today.

Dennis Warriner
Lyndonville