Editor:

We, being the attorneys residing and practicing law in Orleans County, wholeheartedly support and endorse Sandy Church for Orleans County Judge.

Sandy has the knowledge, experience and qualifications necessary to fill this crucially important judicial post in our great County.

As a lifelong resident, he has deep roots in Orleans County and has been outstanding in his professional and community service.  He has earned, and enjoys, the highest respect from both his fellow attorneys and from the community at large. Sandy has dedicated the entirety of his 32 years at the practice of law on behalf of the children, families, and good people of Orleans County.   He is highly qualified to serve as judge in County Court, Family Court, Surrogates Court and Supreme Court.

In Sandy’s early career, he served in the District Attorney’s Offices under then District Attorney James Punch, and with the current District Attorney, Joseph Cardone. Sandy has served the past 20 years as the Orleans County Public Defender and continues to have a great working relationship with the District Attorney’s office as well as all Judges and Magistrates in our County.

We are confident that the residents of Orleans County can trust and rely on Sandy Church to fairly and honorably protect them as our County Judge.  We strongly urge all of our Orleans County neighbors and citizens to give this exceptional and worthy candidate their full support and their vote in the upcoming election.

Hon. James P. Punch, retired

Thomas C. Mack, Esq.

Nathan D. Pace, Esq.

Douglas Heath, Esq.

Lance Mark, Esq.

Jeffrey Martin, Esq.

Dana A. Graber, Esq.

Conrad Cropsey, Esq.

Michael O’Keefe, Esq.

John Gavenda, Esq.

Edward Grabowski, Esq.

Andrew Meier, Esq.

David Schubel, Esq.

Kim Hinkley, Esq.

James Bell, Esq.

Joanne Best, Esq.

Kevin Allen, Esq.

Larry R. Koss, Esq.

Editor:

Formal collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians? I have my doubts. Russian meddling in the 2016 election? Absolutely!

The question not being focused on enough is why they wanted so badly for Trump to become President. It is the elephant in the room. Our intelligence services agree that Putin wanted Trump to become President.

Why? Why did the Russians see our Presidential election as an irresistible golden opportunity to advance Russian interests at our expense? Face it, folks. They did. Intelligence experts from republican and democratic administrations have admitted it.

So what motivated Putin and company? Why were efforts made by Russian meddlers to sew suspicion and discord in swing states such as Wisconsin and Michigan? Hyping racial tension and a distorted picture of the threats presented by refugees and immigrants helped elect a person who promised to protect America by banning Muslims and building a border wall Mexico would pay for.

Even before the election, candidate Trump did everything he could to demonize the media, those evil people who cannot be trusted to be truthful. The press that our third President and the author of the Declaration of Independence felt was indispensable to a republican form of government could not be counted on, according to the man who said John McCain was a war hero only because he got captured. If you think the Russians didn’t—and don’t—love that stuff, you may be delusional.

Confidence in the independent judiciary considered so vital to a free society, was another casualty of the new master of disinformation. Whenever he disagrees with a judicial finding, the man who knows so little about the Constitution that he can rationalize pardoning Joe Arpaio—a man who thinks you can tell who the Constitution applies to by looking at his/her physical characteristics—takes issue with a judge’s ancestry or dismisses him/her as too liberal or too conservative!

Why wouldn’t the Russians think a President who seriously—though often baselessly—undermines public confidence in the validity of our election outcomes is their kind of guy?

Lately our President has sought to stoke the public’s feelings of resentment over the Federal tax code.  While it certainly can be improved, the desire to pursue making it more equitable need not be achieved at the price of fanning the flames of public distrust in the “evil doers” in Washington, D.C.

Unfortunately for President Trump—who certainly inherited every bit as much mess as any modern President—winning is what it is all about. Ethics?  Smethics! Whatever it takes to win is justifiable.  The end justifies the means, and the chips can fall where they may.

Before dismissing the above as “fake news”, ask yourself to honestly explain what his comments to Billy Bush revealed about him. Explain his disrespect of John McCain and Gold Star Father, Khizr Khan. What did his comment about shooting someone and not losing a vote suggest? The tax returns we haven’t seen are shorthand for, “I don’t really care what you think, folks.” The list goes on, and on, and on.

Admittedly, there may be a method in his madness at times. But when a deficit hawk like Republican Senator Bob Corker can question his stability and competence, and Senator Jeff Flake likens him to the Biblical Flood, it may be time to begin rethinking the narcissist in chief.

Which of the Constitutional grounds for impeachment applied to Bill Clinton? Which of the Constitutional grounds for impeachment might Trump be impeached for? When Presidential historian Douglas Brinkley said months ago there was a certain smell in the air, what was he referring to? Collusion, though possible, is not a pre-requisite in the case of a President who is in way over his head.

Sincerely yours,

Gary Kent

Albion

Editor:

Will New York State learn from  mistakes made in other areas or will we continue to fall into the same trap?

The small town of Glenmore sits near the other end of the Niagara escarpment in Brown County, Wisconsin. I’ve followed their story from the time Apex “Clean” Energy invaded our beautiful countryside and divided our peaceful little towns.

Duke Energy-owned, Shirley Wind, with just eight 492’ foot turbines, has been nothing short of a nightmare for numerous families living near the project. Ever since the blades on these 2.5 MW industrial turbines began turning, life changed dramatically for at least 20 families. Initially unaware of the correlation between their symptoms and the low frequency noise and infrasonic by-products of wind-generated electricity, more than 50 residents have pleaded to the Brown County Board of Health for help.

Three families have been forced to abandon their homes to seek relief from the incessant noise and related illnesses. What possible reason, other than inability to live among the turbines, would prompt these families to flee and bear the financial burden of two mortgages?

In 2014, after many studies, including sound and infrasound monitoring, the Brown County Board of Health declared the Shirley Wind Project a “Human Health Hazard.” Valiant efforts by some elected officials and Duke Energy to overturn the ruling have failed, and the declaration remains today.

I wonder how many more complaints would have been registered, had 60 percent of the population within the project not been paid for their silence through “Good Neighbor” agreements with the wind company? What are the chances that residents within these targeted, rural communities could win a battle against a multi-million dollar industrial wind investment, subsidized by the government, yet funded with taxpayer dollars?

The lack of justice in Glenmore is a travesty, and it is not isolated to this small, rural town, but reported in communities around the world where industrial wind projects are sited too close to homes.

Impacted residents, with the support of the Brown County Board of Health, continue to educate lawmakers and Wisconsin State Health officials to increase awareness of the causation of human suffering at Shirley Wind. A nearly four-hour forum recently took place and is available on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bpc-pYMu48.

New York State needs to look at Wisconsin when considering such projects as “Lighthouse Wind,” the Apex Clean Energy project targeted for a narrow swath of land along the southern shore of Lake Ontario in Niagara and Orleans Counties. Emplacement of up to 70 industrial wind turbines, suggested to reach heights in excess of 600 feet, could not possibly fit in this residential and farming community without causing extreme hardship on its residents.

I hope lessons learned from Wisconsin, as well as projects worldwide, will prevent New York State from making the same mistake.

Cynthia Hellert

Town of Yates

Editor:

Mr. Capurso of Gaines is running for an at-large position on the Orleans County Legislature. His July 4th letter, which took aim at Frontier Stone’s quarry project in Shelby, illustrates he is uninformed on the issue yet has no hesitation making unsubstantiated claims and misleading statements to the community about a project with over a decade of unrestricted documentation that is available to the public.

The importance of fact checking “often,” as suggested in a July 19th letter by Ms. Fisk, was never more important than it is today when the facts surrounding critical issues facing communities require substantiation.

We offer:

Mr. Capurso: “…it has been shown we have ample existing stone quarries to satisfy future needs.”

Mr. Capurso has offered no proof of this claim. Mined Land Use Plans and public documents will show this statement is factually inaccurate.

Mr. Capurso: “Another quarry would literally undermine the existing ones, hurting their bottom lines and causing a loss in local jobs.”

If the candidate would have you believe this is true than his prior statement as to there being “ample existing stone quarries” would have to be false. Both statements made by Mr. Capurso are intentionally misleading.

Mr. Capurso: “Keep in mind, Frontier Stone typically does not hire locally.”

This statement, made by Mr. Capurso in the present tense, would have readers believe Frontier Stone is currently a local employer, which it is not. Corporate records for the 14 years Frontier Stone was an active employer in the area reflect every member of the workforce was a local hire (1983-1997).

Mr. Capurso: “The DEC is not the failsafe protector of our environment we hope them to be. DEC regulations, in many instances, actually allow for a deterioration in wildlife habitat – very true in this case.”

If the Department of Environment Conservation is not tasked with protecting the state’s natural resources, then what are Mr. Capurso’s credentials as compared to those of the staff at the DEC?

A DEC Administrative Law Judge noted the USFWS “which has the responsibility for the Wildlife Refuge” did not submit objections to Frontier Stone’s quarry project, oral comments or file a petition for party status. He confirmed the DEC and Frontier Stone “have coordinated with the USFWS and addressed the USFWS concerns.”

The judge presiding over the project’s permit proceeding ruled both the Town of Shelby and Citizens for Shelby Preservation “did not provide any evidence, proposed testimony, or other offer of proof to support” their claims of error on the part of Frontier Stone or the DEC. The town and CSP made no “significant or substantive” offers of proof of any negative impacts. Nor could either party disprove the data supplied by the DEC or the verifiable data, studies and expert witness testimony submitted by Frontier Stone.

The candidate’s concern for the potential deterioration of the INWR habitat at the hands of Frontier Stone is hypocritical, considering his lack of concern for same at the hands of Shelby’s Town Board who, unlike Frontier Stone, did not coordinate with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The town’s New Local Law #3 of 2017 restricts land use for property owners near the refuge but does not limit uses the USFWS already deems destructive to the habitat and prohibits in the refuge.

In a June 19th Facebook post Mr. Capurso wrote: “The Shelby Town Board just passed the Wildlife Protection Overlay District. Kudos. Let’s stop the destructive quarry.”

Without any questions or objections from Mr. Capurso, the sole private citizen in attendance on June 19th, the Shelby Town Board voted unanimously to enact Local Law #3 of 2017. LL3 prohibits mining, other commercial uses and activities in Shelby’s newly-formed “Wildlife Refuge Overlay Protection District” (WROPD). LL3 further outlines two very specific uses the town board will not regulate or limit – ATVs and snowmobiles. “Nothing in this definition shall be read as limiting or regulating the use of snowmobiles or ATV’s on public or private trails” (townofshelbyny.org/Notices/Public Notices/Creating the Wildlife Protection Overlay District, pg. 2).

In direct contrast, the INWR’s website, hunting regulations and permits clearly state the USFWS prohibits the use of ATVs and snowmobiles. This is the case not only because of the “audible and visual disturbances they cause to wildlife but because ATVs, in particular, destroy necessary vegetation.” (Telephonically 7/7/17)

As written, Shelby’s LL3 prohibits numerous uses under the guise of protecting the refuge so “uses allowed in and near the Refuge are consistent with its goals and protecting the habitat within and outside the Refuge that are essential to the Refuge’s viability” (pg. 2).  Review of Negative Declaration documents for LL3 show the Shelby Town Board states the law will have no “impacts on any significant habitat area or any impacts on wildlife” nor will there be any “destruction of large quantities of vegetation.”

In the board’s haste to prohibit mining activities and other uses, without restricting the use of snowmobiles and ATVs, Shelby’s LL3 is contrary to its own stated purpose. The law blatantly fails to protect the habitat from uses previously identified as destructive by the federal government agency dedicated to managing the Iroquois National Wildlife Refuge.

Meeting Minutes reflect Mr. Capurso had no questions about the rights and restrictions under LL3 and its potential environmental impact on the refuge. He expressed no concern for Shelby property owners or how LL3 would affect future economic development in the gateway to Orleans County. Is this the type of representation residents of Gaines can anticipate?

Mr. Capurso: “…this quarry is based on the notion that Frontier Stone would attempt to mitigate to the best of their abilities, any negative impacts.”

Mining operations are not notions. They are highly-technical operations monitored by a state regulatory agency. Frontier Stone’s application was analyzed, modified and vetted by experts for over a decade. While there are many opinions by those not credentialed in any field, there were no negative environmental impacts identified for Frontier Stone’s planned mining operation. View FrontierStoneWNY.com | News & Information “7/27/16 DEC Ruling.”

Mr. Capurso: “Blasting …will reverberate…Nesting birds…eagles, ospreys, hawks will be disrupted… Migrating Canadian geese would avoid the sanctuary and suffer”

It has been established, noise from mining operations would reduce to ambient levels within 350 feet of the Wildlife Refuge boundary. See also DEC Draft Permit Conditions 18, 19 and 21 viewable online at Dec.NY.gov, FrontierStoneWNY.com or the Agency of Record –  Shelby Town Hall. Additionally, “Wildlife” and “7/27/16 DEC Ruling” at FrontierStoneWNY.com and the audible sound level data below against Mr. Capurso’s claim that this quarry’s blast would be disruptive.

Permit conditions 18-19 are the result of Mr. Mahar and a team of credentialed experts working in conjunction with the DEC, GCEDC and Vibra-Tech to design a blast in accordance with nanotechnology and semiconductor standards to accommodate the STAMP project. Condition 21 restricts the quarry’s blast to a maximum 133 decibels, which in audible sound levels is 62.5-dBA.

To the human ear, the noise made by a vacuum cleaner or kitchen blender is louder than this quarry’s 62.5-dBA blast. This blast is less noisy than a 103-dBA leaf blower or a lawn mower at 95-dBA, both of which can be heard in use daily on properties surrounding the refuge.  At 62.5-dBA, Frontier’s 30 annual blasts lasting two seconds each would be less frequent, jarring and disruptive than the dozens of shotgun and rifle blasts fired all day in and around the refuge during hunting season. Compare the audible sound level of 62.5-dBA to:

Dishwasher 60 dBA                                                    Snowmobile 73-78 dBA

Food Blender 88 dBA                                                  Bulldozer 93-96 dBA

Vacuum Cleaner 88 dBA                                                         Leaf Blower 103 dBA

Lawn Mower 95-120 dBA                                                       Chain Saw – up to 116 dBA

.22 Caliber Rifle 132-139 dBA                                                12-Gauge Shotgun 150-165 dBA

Mr. Capurso: “A landowner adjacent to the refuge who sells to Frontier Stone will reap thousands.”

There are not now, nor have there ever been, any offers made by Frontier Stone to buy anyone’s land in Shelby. Further, the “landowner adjacent to the refuge” has no interest in selling his land. Those of us born in Orleans County, and agricultural communities like it, know farmers generally prefer not to sell their land.

Mr. Capurso: “But don’t buy their story that this will be a recreation area.”

There is no story. However, there are requirements in the form of a DEC permit, a Reclamation Plan and a Reclamation Plan Map. Frontier Stone must abide by the requirements outlined in the permit and supervised by a regulatory agency to lawfully operate in the state. The permit includes “Mined Land Reclamation Permit Conditions” which outline the area that must be developed and reclaimed.

Mr. Capurso: “Their other water-filled quarries are deemed too dangerous and are off limits to the public.”

Another present tense statement crafted to intentionally mislead people who may not be aware Frontier Stone does not own or operate other quarries. There are no “other water-filled quarries” which are “deemed too dangerous and are off limits to the public” – none whatsoever.

Candidates should be held accountable for the information they present to the public.

As elected officials, they are ultimately expected to be informed on the issues and to administer the law in good faith. If they are so biased they refuse to accurately present verifiable data about a project with over ten years of public documentation, it brings into question their fitness to fairly represent all constituencies as required by the office.

Andina Barone

Mindful Media Group for Frontier Stone, LLC

Editor:

I just wanted to let voters in the Town of Shelby know that I’m not out of the race for Town of Shelby Supervisor. I’m going to run as a write-in candidate.  I have several reasons for this decision.

The proposed stone quarry is one of the biggest issues to hit the town in a very long time and it has strong implications for our residents and the future of the Iroquois National Wildlife Refuge.

I think that after nearly 12 years of information sessions and public forums on the quarry, the candidate for Shelby Town Supervisor should have a solid opinion on the issue. My opponent does not.

I believe that the discussions regarding shared services and taxation in the village deteriorated too quickly due to politics, and I believe there is progress that could be made on that front. I believe that my experiences with shared services between the Lyndonville and Medina schools over the past 7 years could help in that area.

I don’t necessarily think that a career appointed public servant is the best candidate for the job. I believe that my administrative and research-based work experience, along with my service on the Medina School Board for the past 8 years is more than relevant to the job of Town Supervisor.

I believe that the Town Board needs new blood who are willing to be transparent and forthright with the public.

The town has over 2,900 registered voters, but only 351 voted in the primary. I’d like to give the rest of the registered voters a chance to voice their opinion about these issues and others that face the town.

I’ll be circulating information on how to vote for a write-in candidate in the coming weeks and I would welcome your support on November 7.

Sincerely,

Wendi Pencille

Shelby

Editor:

I am writing to inquire about the status of the old Crooked Door Tavern. Last we heard – back in May of 2016 – it was purchased by the owners of the Village House with the intent to open it as a “sports bar with finger foods.” That was 18 months ago and since then radio silence.

The most prominent rumor in the community is that the VH owner’s real agenda behind buying it was to leave it closed to avoid competition for the Village House. To me that would seem like a disingenuous thing to do to a community that has supported the proprietors’ first restaurant for over 30 years.

As Mr. Mitrousis stated here on the Hub last May, the new restaurant would provide a different experience than the Village House. I concur and furthermore, I believe that local residents would benefit from a place where they could go catch a ballgame and some chicken wings. That has been sorely missing since the Crooked Door closed and would be welcomed and utilized by the community. I don’t think anyone would argue that the job creation and tax revenue wouldn’t be helpful to the community either.

My intention is not to be accusatory, but rather to ask the owners what the current status is and when we can expect to see the restaurant open. Rather than simply embracing the rumors as truth I would rather hear from the owner what is going on. There could be a reasonable explanation to the delay, but I feel the community deserves to hear it.

Steve Hicks

Albion

Editor:

We need a fresh outlook on the bench and Tonia Ettinger is the person to accomplish that. She was born and raised in Orleans County where her family roots go back several generations.

She is familiar with the people of our county and is vastly qualified for the job. Tonia has over a decade of diverse legal experience involving litigation of complex cases. I have no doubt that she will be unbiased and treat all people with fairness and respect.

Tonia is the best candidate for the job of our next County Court Judge which is further evidenced by the endorsement of both the Democratic and Conservative parties. She is not part of the establishment, and Orleans County needs a change.

I hope you will join me in supporting Tonia Ettinger on November 7th.

Jeanne Crane

Chairwoman of the Orleans County Democratic Party

Editor:

I was going to write about Sandy Church in support of his personal and professional qualifications to be County Judge.  Then I read Cindy Downey Troy’s letter here in the Hub extolling him.   Anyone who has any questions or reservations about Sandy should read it.  It is stunningly accurate and I will not repeat it.

However, there are two additional observations that I can make as an attorney. First, Sandy does not jump to final conclusions. He grasps things immediately! Nothing gets by him. But he is also wise enough and concerned enough to keep an open mind until all the facts are in and weighed. People want and need that in a Judge. They deserve to be heard out and he is careful to do that.

Second, Sandy already has experience in all the relevant Courts to do the job – Supreme, County, Surrogate and Family Courts.  People generally do not realize how important experience is for an attorney. In the few years we have in law school we do not have opportunity to read the tens of thousands of cases that one might need have at their fingertips in a Court situation.

In fact, it’s required that Supreme Court Judges have 10 years extra to study and learn after law school. They need that extra time to acquire the depth of knowledge needed to handle the intricate situations they see in a sound and legally principled manner.

Sandy Church has the gamut of knowledge and experience required to serve as our Judge covered –  in Aces and Spades.

Conrad F. Cropsey

Albion

Editor:

New Yorkers will have the opportunity to vote next month on whether or not they would like to have a state constitutional convention. This is an important decision that could dramatically change agriculture, as we know it in New York.

New York Farm Bureau has long valued individual rights and limits on governmental power. Delegates could diminish both of these priorities at a constitutional convention.

A majority of the delegates would be from New York City. New York Farm Bureau is concerned they would be unfamiliar with agriculture and our rural way of life. Why cede control from our elected officials to random convention delegates who have their own agendas, philosophies or axes to grind? Changes made at the convention could alter private property rights, labor laws, agricultural land use, and conservation management. A Pandora’s Box is awaiting to be opened.

In addition, it could cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

I understand the frustration that exists over inaction and ethical problems in Albany, but a constitutional convention is not the answer. It could make things worse.

Please vote NO on the constitutional convention.

Sincerely,

Alan Panek, President

Orleans County Farm Bureau

Editor:

I want to add my endorsement of Sandy Church. Who am I? I am Cindy Downey Troy – recently retired with over 30 years as an Orleans County in a variety of social service positions as well as serving the CSEA union for many years as secretary, president, and grievance representative.  All that said, I believe I am also very much a conservative and very pragmatic (although it sure looks like polar opposites).

Now I am working part time for Orleans County as a case manager for the Public Defender, of which Sandy is the department head. Laughably my experience with legal issues and terminology was limited to whatever I learned on TV or reading books. I think that is the case for most people. Now, after working here several months I am far from expert but can see the nuances and the trials of public defense as well as private practice.

I hope my variety of experiences is relatable for you to see Sandy Church from my point of view.  This is a point of view about the man who will be one the greatest judges for our people in this county. He is homegrown and of good stock. I won’t go into his work capabilities and qualifications because there are folks who can relate those with more credibility. I believe those are all true as well.

Mind you, Sandy is several years younger than me and while we were growing up he was pretty forgettable (as older kids think of their younger peers) but I did admire his sports competitive spirit in representing our Alma Mater, Albion Central Schools. Years later, he was someone who I followed rather loosely as the son of Ted and Joyce Church – both whom I really liked; the grandson of Katherine Church – who I really admired, what a classy lady; and brother of Julie Church (Sanford) who I grew to know working at Orleans County DSS and Kathy (Church) Lalonde who I knew from reputation (SUNY Brockport). So, all in all, he was around and seemed pleasant.

He served on the Orleans County Youth Board along with his son, Ben, with me. For whatever reason I always wanted to sit next to him because he would impart some piece of wisdom or humor that if you weren’t right there, you might miss. Yep, he was getting on my radar as somebody who was pretty handy to have around. I liked the way he thought.

So, I started working for Sandy post retirement and very quickly ascertained that he has got to be the most modestly brilliant person I will ever know. He is also gracious and giving in his actions toward us employees, to his peers, and to his customers/clients. I have learned so much from him. While I sometimes might falter and not feel capable of the task, through his tutelage I strive to make sure that I (try to) come up to his standards of work ethic, modesty, and representation of our department. He is also probably the most ethical person I will ever know.

But I have also learned that his most important attribute is that he is passionate. Yes, passionate … about the welfare of youth in our county. He has quietly (because this is his way) volunteered as a basketball coach for middle school kids at basketball camp, baseball coach for little leaguers, and little league baseball treasurer for probably over 30 years.

Do you know how much time he dedicated to these efforts? Months and months of weekends and evenings for many years away from home. His wife must be an angel. He started before his own kids could participate and continued long after they were gone. He told me that he really likes to mentor new attorneys to help them build their confidence. He also has enjoyed being an “attorney for the child” (formerly known as a “law guardian”) as part of his legal practice to many kids throughout the years. In discussing their pathways, he is so caring about their challenges, their successes, and disappointments. He believes mentoring youth and new attorneys is a privilege that should be taken deeply and whole-heartedly. How can you not admire that?

I know he has volunteered in various ways for the Albion Rotary and Lions Clubs, Hospice, and his church. He is always quick to donate to good causes or people who he thinks he can mentor and support. But he really dislikes attention. I imagine this is because he does these things for those people or those organizations to become successful in and of themselves.

He recognizes that he received support from family and friends, as well as ancestral examples in his legacy of being the 5th Sanford Church, attorney at law. He is proud of this as well as humbled. He also has extremely nice, smart, and humble friends who obviously think he is pretty wonderful as well. That speaks for a person.

So what can I say objectively less admirable? He is too modest. Yes, he irritates me because he doesn’t toot his own horn like he does for others he admires. So here I am telling all of you that I believe that Sanford Church brings to the Judicial Bench brains, ethics, loyalty, honor, modesty,  and passion, as well as a lifetime of legal experience that encompass all that is needed to represent us proudly.

Get out there and vote on November 7th, 2017, and vote for Sanford Church.

Sincerely,

Cynthia Downey Troy

Albion

Editor:

In life, there are prolific seeds that sprout for the common good. They produce virtues that have stood the test of time and reaffirm our value systems. In some cases, these seeds even steady us and bring us together in times of crisis and uncertainty. They emerge, as seen in the recent Mexican earthquake and Puerto Rico’s hurricane aftermath. People coming together to help others.

However, we also have the seeds that germinate into unfathomable hybrids of pessimism. Those who plant these seeds of doom, disrupt the common good and suddenly the balance of unity is fractured and the very core of our belief systems is shaken. This recusancy has gained momentum in our world and has woven its thread of destruction into the very institutions that use to embody the spirit of valor and honor in America.

It is said that when Francis Scott Key penned our national anthem, he did so as he witnessed the night bombing by the British Royal Navy on Fort McHenry during the War of 1812. He was awestruck when, during this bloody battle, he saw the American flag soaring high above the fort as a sign of triumph. Being so inspired by the valor and honor of the American soldier, he wrote the “Star Spangled Banner.” This was not a tribute to anyone other than the soldier who demonstrated his loyalty, duty, and selfless service to the cause of preserving America.

Today someone has planted a rogue seed which is taking an alternate route and creating havoc and division among the American people. Apparently some misinformed ‘football celebrity’ has taken it upon himself to parallel his political distaste for leaders and events and use our national anthem as his protest bench. His ‘sitting down’ is his statement to what’s wrong in America. What people see instead is a total disregard for a song that was meant to honor the soldier. This act is a disgrace to the integrity of the American soldier – the soldier who fights for us, our freedom, our country, our way of life.

When a player refuses to stand for the national anthem, it is a slap in the face to the soldier. Such a player’s own personal, selfish agenda has overridden any and all obligation to someone who should be held in the highest regard. Making a statement in America has become paramount to morality and honor. Offending someone is no longer a problem. We are losing our sense of empathy.

Like most Americans, we have someone in our family who was or is a soldier. As soon as these men and women took their oath of loyalty, they exhibited courage. They respected something that some people have lost: the common good.

It appears from recent events in the NFL, that loyalty, respect, selflessness, honor, and integrity are taking a backseat to someone’s personal agenda.

Thank a soldier today. Although the NFL may have abandoned these virtues, they are forever etched in the hearts and minds of the American soldier.

Mary Bannister Malican

East Aurora

Editor:

A recent letter to the editor, authored by a former Town of Yates Councilwoman, displays the very behavior she so adamantly decries, and understandably so. Emotions run high when one is faced with loss, whether it be quality of life or loss of income.

As a leaseholder with Apex Clean Energy, she no doubt stands to lose a small fortune if Lighthouse Wind does not proceed. Surely the dismantling of the MET tower she has hosted for over two years has also resulted in loss of income. I am sorry for her financial loss, just as I will mourn the loss of my quality of life if turbines are erected on neighboring property.

While the leaseholder has the freedom to express her opinion, I feel she crossed the line with her latest attack. I am disappointed that the editor of the Orleans Hub has continued to print the rude remarks made, not only by this woman, but other Apex supporters. These have been direct assaults on the character of our elected officials.

It is one thing to display this behavior in a public hearing, where one might expect emotions to surface, but publishing such blatant and erroneous accusations is slanderous.

Two years ago, Mr. Riggi received 529 votes, far exceeding the incumbent’s 438 votes. He ran on a platform that left no doubt about his position against the divisive and invasive manner in which Apex entered our communities. It was, however, only one plank in his platform; appropriate economic development, waterfront revitalization, and attracting new families, received equal emphasis, resulting in his overwhelming victory.

I, too, have attended most Yates Town Board meetings, and feel the presentations made by supporters of Save Ontario Shores have been civil, professional and informative. Presenters have attempted to assist the Town Board by sharing their extensive research that might aid them in making decisions.

Apex Clean Energy has been denounced repeatedly, as evidenced by surveys, elections and a long list of agencies that oppose, not only their presence in our communities, but their attempts to proceed with an inappropriate project.

The town submitted numerous questions to Apex regarding the MET tower, and Apex chose to not answer them. If Mr. Riggi showed his frustration at the referenced Town Board meeting, it was not toward his fellow townsmen or any individual present; it was directed to Apex, an out-of-state company that arrogantly assumes authority they do not possess.

Apex’s inconsistent and confusing statements were evident in a series of quotes read by Supervisor Simon, before he granted permission to the company to resubmit their application for a special use permit, after they respond to these questions.

I certainly hope that personal attacks will be considered carefully in the future before they are published in the Hub. Allowing this to continue may appeal to some readers, but does it really benefit our ability to work together for the betterment of our town?

Anne Smith

Lyndonville

Editor:

Orleans County. I have to admit, I drive through Orleans County, New York, a few times a week and I never really thought much about it. That is until today.

As I drove east on Rt. 31 out of Medina I was catching a wonderful late sunrise at around 7:30 a.m.  The skies were almost purple, orange and blue. The very first of the fall leaves were just starting to turn. The corn must be 10 feet high. As I looked at the cabbage fields I could not nail down the color of the cabbage. It looked a bit purple, a bit aqua, a bit green and a bit blue. It was great.

I also realized I love the farms and barns of Orleans County. You almost get a feel that family is an important priority here and neighbors watch out for each other. Great cobblestone homes and small family cemeteries also dot my drive of Rt. 31. I see tractors, trucks and family farm food stands on my drive. It makes me think Orleans County is full of hard working people where life isn’t always easy.

I started thinking about all the bars, Christmas parties and functions I DJ’ed for in Orleans County throughout the years and all the fun I had. Tube floats on the Oak Orchard, prime rib at the Village Inn, Sandy’s Cafe, Lake Alice and Waterport.

Then I started thinking about all the 1812 War history. The Medina Sandstone, the waterfall park in Holley and how much I like the quiet town of Lyndonville. I also like the Lake Ontario Parkway, although it needs a lot of help. How about some of that toll, gas tax and vehicle registration money ending up fixing that Parkway in Orleans County.

The population of Orleans County is roughly 42,000. If everyone came out for a Bills game, it would only about half fill New Era Stadium.

As I got near Brockport I started thinking on how I would of liked to see the Erie Canal being dug right through the middle of Orleans County. I would of really loved to see the engineers as they tried to build the Culvert Road Canal overpass.

When I got to my first customer in Brockport this morning, I sat in my car for a moment and thought, Orleans County is awesome.

John R. Lang

Lockport

Editor:

A letter was read, by Mr. Riggi, at the Town Board meeting, August 3, 2017 and posted in the Orleans Hub on August 12, 2017. Mr. Riggi said, “I am incensed by the injustice that APEX visits on my fellow Yates residents by their continuing refusal to cooperate and answer substantive questions regarding the Austin Met Tower Special Use Application and related documents.”

Another statement by Mr. Riggi, “APEX, answer our questions.”

I have attended several board meetings. Mr. Riggi and Mr. Simon ask the same questions at just about every meeting. Several of your questions have been answered and you just don’t like the answers. You want all the test results, but you have delayed the Austin Met Tower again and again for over a year. Sounds like you don’t know what you want. Approval of the Met Tower seems like a good place to start.

Let me just say, Mr. Riggi, you don’t give a hoot about the Town of Yates. You do not represent all of the Town of Yates residents. If you did you would find hundreds of us who support the wind project. You have a one-sided objective: to stop the wind project.

You, Mr. Riggi and SOS supporters, have been rude to friends of mine who do not agree with the false information you are spreading throughout our town. We have been accused by you, Mr. Riggi, that the wind project is dividing our town, and could be sued by our neighbors. Neighbors do not have to sue neighbors – only you, Mr. Riggi, did that.

You, Mr. Riggi, had a letter posted in the Orleans Hub, August 6, 2017, stating Lighthouse Wind shows a delay of almost 3 years from the original COD. What could the reasons be for the delay? Could it be because of the senseless reasoning of SOS, you and Mr. Simon? Snowballing the Town Board? Unwarranted lawsuits? Putting off approval of the Austin Met Tower for over a year?

As you were reading your letter, Mr. Riggi, your conduct is not the conduct of a person supposedly representing the Town I love and live in. You were rude and your actions were that of someone out of control. You are not someone I want to represent the entire town.

Mr. Riggi, former President of SOS, you are out of control. You should resign your position as Councilman of our Town Board.

Governor Cuomo, are you listening?

There are Lighthouse Wind supporters and land owners who want this project to move forward to bring tax relief to our residents and growth to our town.

Donna Bane

Yates, a former Yates councilwoman

Editor:

The tide has turned in Albany. The massive outcry of The People against unwarranted, unwanted and destructive industrial wind turbine emplacement projects has finally reached the hearts, minds and ears of Albany’s powerbrokers.

One after another upstate, rural New York towns joined the chorus of discontent and anger and it has finally paid off. Two significant events in the last week have signaled a significant shift in Albany’s public position on the imposition of industrial wind turbine emplacement projects against the will of the people.

Article 10 is the New York State statute that allows companies like APEX Clean Energy to use the map of New York State as a “dartboard” with which to impose their destructive, unwanted product on a populace that has been excised from the decision-making.

I am now happy to report that, although Article 10 is still in place, the Albany decision-makers are no longer eager to impose these projects on an unwelcoming populace. For example:

Last week, Public Service Commission Chairman John Rhodes addressed the Independent Power Producers of New York Inc. Fall Conference in Saratoga Springs. During the presentation, the Manhattan Institute’s Robert Bryce, asked Mr. Rhodes if the state was going to force large-scale wind projects on communities and if the Article 10 siting process was stacked against those communities. Mr. Rhodes responded: “No it’s not a stacked process and no, not under this Governor are we going to force people in a police state mode to do anything.”

Hallelujah! The words we have all been waiting for! New York State and Governor Cuomo are now saying that they are NOT going to force the Lighthouse Wind Project down our throats and it’s because we’ve stated loud and clear that we don’t want them!

Also, Lieutenant Governor Hochul spoke at the North Country Regional Economic Development Council Meeting at SUNY Potsdam.

A councilmember informed Ms. Hochul that the council unanimously supported keeping Fort Drum a regional priority when siting industrial wind turbine projects. “We are aggressive in protecting our bases,” Lieutenant Governor Hochul said. “It’s the jobs, it’s the impact on the community and also … it’s protecting our nation’s defense.”

Ms. Hochul was also asked about industrial wind turbine projects elsewhere in the North Country. Lieutenant Governor Hochul confirmed that addressing community needs was important. “We’re committed to clean energy and reducing our reliance on outside fossil fuels, but we’re also very sensitive to the needs of the communities, and we’ll always strike the right balance,” she said.

Again, a clear indicator from Albany’s most influential powerbrokers that New York State is not a “dartboard” for Industrial Wind Turbine purveyors such as APEX Clean Energy and that the lives of the people of New York State are more important to Albany than any industrial wind turbine emplacement project.

Bravo Governor Cuomo!

Our next steps are to remain vigilant and vocal in ensuring that Albany continues to appreciate the unwavering defense of our community.

So, the next shoe to drop is APEX Clean Energy.

To APEX principals, Mr. Mark Goodwin, Mr. Sandy Reisky, Mr. Jim Trousdale and Mr. Steve Vavrik:

We have been telling you, for years, that you are not wanted here and now Governor Cuomo and Albany have seen the light.

You need to take your intrusive, destructive industrial wind turbine emplacement project and LEAVE US IN PEACE!

Thank You,

John Riggi

Councilman, Town of Yates