Editor:

In 1776 the Founders recited their grievances in the Declaration of Independence.

“…He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone…He has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their Substance. He has kept among us, in Times of Peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our Legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power…”

Americans fought against such tyranny then, why do we tolerate it now?

Gerard M. Morrisey

Gaines

Editor:

As a NYS Real Estate Salesperson, I would like to share a note as an opinion regarding commercial wind power plants and your duty, as a seller, to disclose. This is an opinion, only, and is not to be construed as legal advice. I always encourage sellers and buyers to seek legal advice from their attorney.

There are wind power plants and potential wind power plants scattered throughout NYS.  Most homeowners looking to sell their home know that NYS Real Property Law §462 requires residential sellers to disclose (in writing) any known material or latent (hidden) defects about their home (i.e. mold, structural, or water issues, etc.) to a buyer.

However, some homeowners in potential or developing wind power plant areas may be wondering, “Do I have to disclose that there are (or may be) wind turbines being constructed here?”

A wind power plant (wind farm) is generally not considered to be a legally binding “hidden defect” as pertains to a residence itself. It is, however, according to the attorneys at the New York State Association of Realtors, a material fact that should be disclosed once the project is approved and construction has begun.

A seller might have reservations about disclosing such a fact, because they may believe that to do so will deter some potential buyers from looking at their home and from making an offer to purchase. However, it is imperative for the seller to safeguard against possible lawsuits that could happen due to being negligent in their duties to disclose such an important material fact.

To be fair, there will be a few potential buyers who have strong negative feelings about wind power plants and are less likely to purchase a home located in such an area. But there will also be a few potential buyers that would purchase that same home, nonetheless.

Be aware, though, that if they do purchase, without being told, and later see or hear construction happening in their new backyard, an outraged buyer could take a trip to an attorney and further into court with the seller in tow. Therefore, even though making this type of disclosure may seem like a daunting task for a seller, it cannot be stressed enough…it is prudent to disclose.

What should a seller do?  Your skilled salesperson will know exactly how to help with such a situation and will make it easier to navigate. Remember, a commercial industry, such as a wind power plant, is not considered a “latent” defect on a home, itself, but it certainly could be considered a “midden material fact” if not disclosed.

Therefore, “Disclose, Disclose, Disclose…in writing.” Be honest and upfront. It could save you, as a residential home seller, a gigantic headache later, should a wind “farm” actually take “root”.  And, remember, always consult your attorney for advice.

Sincerely,

Cindy Burnside

Office Administrative Manager with Peter Snell Realtors in Albion

Editor:

Rather wade into the battles about who is ignorant about what, today I write about the math of our current economic problems and the upcoming Fed Chairman. Gold was soaring but fell dramatically as soon as Trump announced next the Fed Chair, Kevin Warsh, whose term starts in May.

Meanwhile we all know that other countries are entering into trade deals to circumvent doing business with the United States. They want to avoid the drag on their exports tariffs cause and the inherent instability tariffs introduce to their economies.

Households can balance their budgets at zero income versus bills. Governments deal with layoffs, firings, firings, building, emergencies, currency fluctuations, sales fluctuations, internal debt, external debt, borrowing, interest rates, exports, imports, trade balance and resultant adjustments. A fundamental accounting identity is that the sum of the Current Account, the Capital Account, and the Financial Account must be equal similarly be zero.

When the United States runs a Current Account Deficit (importing more than we export) in order to balance our accounts globally at zero (the Capital Account is negligible) the excess dollars we spend abroad must come back in the form of investment.

Other countries have been buying our debt which lets us afford our deficits. The raw numbers are that our federal budget deficit of $1.8 trillion is mechanically financed by a current account deficit of $1.1 trillion. Our trade deficit provides the foreign savings to bridge our deficit gap.

When other countries trade elsewhere we face a serious issue! Will they continue to finance our debt and keep our balance close to zero or will we, the country which is losing their trade, spin off into a crash. And if we are forced to raise interest rates to attract foreign investment to avoid that crash how many jobs will it cost if the job market is down and in need of lower rates?

Keep in mind that to the extent Congress does not fund job growth or pay government debt the rates the Fed sets fulfill three functions. It always pays our debt, can lower them to create a stimulus for job growth, and can raise them to put a damper on inflation.

If debt service means high rates to attract investors the Fed’s flexibility on the latter two suffer. Right now rates are being kept up as we are in an era which has a glut of national debt and the speed at which dollar inflows will drop due to reconfiguration of international trade is uncertain.

Importantly as trade shifts other counties still have to balance their accounts. As unlikely as it seems if rates are not high enough to service our debts the result would be temporary insolvency and mayhem to cover it.

(The alternatives are we could have a tax raise on the top 5% to let government invest in job production, sales of goods and services abroad to keep things in balance – supply side tax cuts have always made our account balance worse – or the raise in interest rates.)

Now for the strange part! Two Fed Governors just voted to lower rates and follow the Presidents urgings. One is the new nominee, Kevin Warsh.

On the one hand Trump thinks, and Warsh voted for, lower rates and a weaker dollar on the premise that sufficient inflows will continue as long as the dollar is used for trade. But on the other hand in 2008 Warsh (who holds to Chicago School theories of money) voted to increase rates and bail banks out to the detriment of consumers with TARP which he helped design. He believes in printing less money, keeping the dollar high, by letting interest rates rise. Looking at his history investors immediately dropped Gold thinking he will raise rates.

The thinking before his appointment was that gold was a solid way to protect each investor’s saving inasmuch as this government will not reverse its huge tax cuts and wildly increased deficits. The gold spurt was a hedge on a recession, depression, or even temporary insolvency as foreign support fled.

So Trump thinks the new Chairman will do what he wants. But investors think the new Chairman will follow the math and adhere to immutable relationships of what it takes to balance our accounts.

(Perhaps Trump and Walsh are thinking there is time to slip in a temporary rate cut for a pick up around the midterms. But already even enemies like China are shifting out of Treasuries. That risks a larger recession.)

What I can say with some certainty is that if our pocket books do not feel a lot better soon, in a year or so they will feel much worse no matter which way rates go. Our debts and deficit need to be financed. Now even our enemies, like China, are shifting out of Treasuries. Warsh was a strange pick in stranger times.

Conrad F. Cropsey

Barre

Editor:

The citizens of Orleans and Genesee County need to understand the big money behind the proposed Data Center at the Genesee County STAMP site.

In August 2025 Stream Data Centers was acquired by Apollo Global Management, one of the largest private equity firms in the world. Founded by three former investment bankers one of whom resigned as CEO (Leon Black) in 2021 after he faced abuse accusations and was found to have paid $158 million to Jeffrey Epstein.

Data Centers are the latest scam being foisted on communities. They will cause great harm to the environment, use millions of gallons of water, raise your electric rates, and for what? To make billionaires even richer? To collect more data?

They sell this as a money maker for the county for the next 30 years. It’s a short sighted investment as the scam unfolds data centers will be obsolete and Genesee County will have a big block of concrete sitting on land that once was farmland.

Do we really want this dystopian behemoth in our community? Do we even stand a chance in this fight against one of the world’s largest private equity firms?

Darcy Beeman

Kent

Editor:

Almost two hundred years ago the Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard said, “He who fights the future has a dangerous enemy.”  The future, he said, takes shape within us, from our individual and collective fears, and then appears outside of us as an enemy.

Those of us with legitimate fears about issues like the mad proliferation of data centers in our country can be so easily dismissed as prisoners of our fears (or NIMBY’s, or Luddites), regardless of the validity of our concerns.  We have to keep the philosopher’s words in mind, and be careful and thorough in our arguments.

The proliferation of data centers is a growing national concern. It’s all over the internet; you can’t swing a digital cat without hitting an anti-data center article. There’s a growing demand for a national data center moratorium. It’s interesting that the list of national concerns is mirrored almost perfectly by our local concerns about the proposed data center at the STAMP site in Genesee County.

We are facing a proposal for an $11.2 billion, 2.2 million square foot behemoth using 500 megawatts of electrical power, enough to power all the homes in the city of Rochester, plus all the homes in the 4-county GLOW region.

The proposed tax abatements: an unbelievable $774 million. That’s tax money that New Yorkers will never see. All this for 125 permanent jobs (“permanent” being a relative term, since the lifetime of data centers is typically in the 10-15 year range.). That works out to $6.2 million in tax breaks per job, a ridiculously high number.  Add to this the expectation that the data center will likely get cut-rate hydropower from Niagara Falls, and financially this looks like the mother of all one-sided deals.

As if all the above were not bad enough, the location of the data center, surrounded by protected, environmentally sensitive lands and abutting the Tonawanda Seneca Nation, is very problematic. Air, water, and noise pollution are the risks that the local population must bear (along with higher electric bills).

The fundamental problem is that data centers are extractive entities, sucking up resources (land, electricity), generating almost zero permanent employment, channeling the wealth from their operations away from New York State to some of the world’s richest corporations, and offloading the risks onto the locals.

There is a bigger picture. Data center madness is itself driven by the mad race by tech companies to develop AGI, or artificial general intelligence, a technology that has the potential to radically disrupt modern society. Fantastic riches and fantastic power await the corporate winner of this race.

Right now there’s an AI financial bubble, a mismatch between the level of investment (enormous) and the financial returns (tiny so far). The bubble may burst, which would be terrible for the US economy, or it may not burst and we will be thrust into a new, very different future. In either case, the technology will still be there and will eventually be adopted.

AGI offers fantastic upsides as well as terrible risks. It will lead to massive increases in productivity in areas like the service sector that currently dominates our economy. This could lead to massive white collar unemployment.

It will likely be instrumental in developing cures for terrible diseases like Alzheimer’s and cancer. It could also lead to a massive surveillance state, a precursor to a totalitarian state.  It may revolutionize education, especially in underserved areas. Over the next five to fifteen years it will hit our society like a freight train.

The drivers of this grand game (Musk, Altman, Cook, Bezos, Pichai, and others), all brilliantly intelligent people, seem to lack the will, motivation, or wisdom to provide a coherent vision of a decent future for all human beings. They apparently cannot escape our current economic culture, where amassing riches and power is the only goal.

Capitalism is the greatest system ever invented for generating wealth, but it is truly bad at distributing wealth. Uncontrolled, it breeds savage inequalities. We’re on that road right now, and it’s safe to say that the lives and livelihoods of  Western New Yorkers are of little to no concern to the cash – and power-hungry tech bros running the show.

Returning to Kierkegaard, we need not fear the future, but we do need to act in ways to ease the shock.  We need to build a society that places more value on all human beings, a society with greater empathy.

Some time ago Bruce Springsteen was on tour, and he sang the Woody Guthrie song, “This Land is Your Land.” He said that he wasn’t sure if the message of the song was still true, but he knew that it ought to be true. Then he said the song reminded him “…with countries, just like with people, it’s easy to let the best of yourself slip away.”

Don’t let the best of yourself slip away.  The proposed local data center is a bad idea. Oppose it.

Also attack the root of the problem: Do what you can – read, learn, discuss, argue, and make your voice heard – to help shift the inevitable but currently aimless AI paradigm onto a more humane path. Easy? No. Doable? Maybe.

Dave Giacherio

Kent

Editor:

I am writing to express my strong appreciation for the leadership of our County Legislature Chairwoman, Lynne Johnson, and her commitment to look out for the best interest of the community.

At a time when large development projects often move forward with little regard for the long-term consequences, Chairman Johnson has shown the courage and integrity to stand up against the proposed data center in our neighboring county—a project that would have serious environmental impacts on our own community. From increased strain on water resources to potential harm to air quality, wildlife, and our rural character, the effects of this development would not stop at county lines.

Chairman Johnson understands that protecting our environment is not anti-progress—it is pro-resident. Her advocacy reflects a deep respect for the people who live here, work here, and want to preserve this county for future generations. She has demonstrated that responsible leadership means asking tough questions, demanding transparency, and refusing to sacrifice our quality of life for short-term gains elsewhere.

Our county is fortunate to have a legislative chairman who listens to constituents and is willing to stand firm when our environment and well-being are at stake. Lynne Johnson’s actions remind us of what true public service looks like, and she deserves recognition and thanks from the community she serves.

Sincerely,

Stephen Songer

Medina

Editor:

Once again, someone is killed by immigration officers in Minnesota. Once again, the official account of what happened is not supported by video evidence.

According to the government, Alex Jeffrey Pretti “approached U.S. Border Patrol officers with a 9 mm semiautomatic handgun,” and Border Patrol tried to disarm him. Kristi Noem, Secretary of Homeland Security, has issued a statement claiming that Mr. Pretti intended to “kill law enforcement” and calling him a “domestic terrorist.”

Video of the incident shows a completely different story. In the video, Mr. Pretti is directing traffic in an area with agents around. Then he tries to help another protester who federal agents pushed to the ground. Mr. Pretti is then surrounded by six or seven heavily armed agents in full military gear and body armor; he puts his hands up, showing a phone in one hand and the other hand is empty.

The federal agents spray Mr. Pretti in the face with pepper then they pull him to the ground.  An agent appears to take a legal firearm out of the back of Mr. Pretti’s waistband. It is important to note that Mr. Pretti had a legal permit to carry that firearm.

Then shots are fired and Mr. Pretti stops moving. So, it appears that Mr. Pretti is disarmed, on the ground with at least six agents in full combat gear on top of him when he is killed. It appears to be an execution.

It appears, at the very least, that federal agents violated Mr. Pretti’s First Amendment rights to protest, his Second Amendment rights to legally carry a firearm, and his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Associated Press and other organizations have analyzed the video and concluded that it contradicts what the Trump administration is telling us. Is the administration lying to us?  Mr. Trump and his Republican enablers have demonstrated a willingness to lie when it is in their interest.

Normally, the FBI investigates these types of shootings. But once again neither the FBI nor local law enforcement officials will be allowed to investigate the incident. The Department of Homeland Security, which has already passed judgment that Mr. Pretti was a terrorist and the killing was justified, will investigate. Why won’t they allow independent investigations? What are they afraid of?  What are they hiding?

Once again there is no accountability and no transparency from this administration or the Republican enablers. Finally, I want to remind everyone that Representatives Claudia Tenney and Nick Langworthy are silently acquiescing to this administration’s violation of our Constitutional rights and the lack of accountability.

William Fine

Brockport

Editor:

As conversations continue about potential cutbacks to the Village of Medina Fire Department—even hints at dissolving it from the ever loud minority—I urge our community to consider the real costs of such decisions.

Our county’s health data show that Orleans County consistently ranks near the bottom among New York’s 62 counties for key health measures. In the 2023 County Health Rankings, Orleans ranked 55th for overall health outcomes and 57th for health factors, reflecting challenges in length and quality of life as well as risk behaviors and clinical care access.

Our residents face higher rates of adult smoking and obesity than many parts of the state, and access to necessary medical care remains difficult. These health vulnerabilities underscore how critical timely, skilled emergency response is to our community.

Yet the local EMS system is already under strain. Response times across ambulance providers in the county have increased from 2018 to 2021, and dropped calls—that is, emergency service requests where no unit was available—have risen significantly.  The Medina Fire Department, with its 14 paid firefighters cross‑trained for EMS and fire response, serves the western end of Orleans and is the only career department in the county.

In emergencies, a few minutes can mean the difference between life and death. With major trauma hospitals at least an hour away, local response capability matters. Reducing staffing or resources at Medina FD not only weakens fire response, it directly jeopardizes EMS coverage when our neighbors are at their most vulnerable. Rather than cutting crucial services, we should be strengthening support for emergency responders who already contend with rising demand and a fragmented system.

Maintaining a fully staffed fire and EMS department is not optional—it’s essential for a county that already faces significant health disparities.

Sincerely,

Hannah Lee, MPH

Lyndonville

Lee is a firefighter’s wife and a public health professional.

Editor:

The recent protests in Minnesota have been a far cry from peaceful. The most recent fatality could have been prevented as an active immigration takeover was in progress before the protester (armed with a gun and magazine) entered the space.

Why would a peaceful protester come armed? Jose Huerta-Chuma, an illegal immigrant, with a history of assault for deliberate bodily harm, disorderly conduct and driving without a valid license was being sought.

Governor Walz  has encouraged protesters to record ICE which not only impedes the operation but prevents the agents from completing the criminal immigration removal. He and Frey have heightened the violence by encouraging the protesters to obstruct federal law enforcement.

Frey: “Get the F… out of our city.” – certainly not a peaceful connotation. This type of language fuels fear and anger and puts their constituents in dangerous situations. This obstruction is not only a federal crime but a felony as well.

The ongoing doxxing of ICE has definitely affected the integrity of the operations there. Leaks of personal data have increased the threats and violence against law enforcement and their families.

Walz falsely asserted that his state is at “war” with the federal government. War implies violence, not peace. Josh Blackman, a constitutional law professor at South Texas College of Law-Houston is quoted as saying “… unless there’s a court order saying ‘ICE get out of Minnesota’… they’re allowed to be there.”

No one wants a protest to turn ugly, but this is exactly what has unfolded in Minnesota. Some conservative protesters have been beaten by counter protesters. Physical altercations  have been reported. Profanity has been hurled continually at the agents. Protesters have spit in their faces, taunting them and impeding the assigned directive.

Think of it this way, when we see police tap around an area, that means “stay out” – that space has been reserved for law enforcement only, so a probe, investigation or arrest can be made. The public is not allowed to enter that area because they can impede the proceedings. However, this is exactly what has happened in Minnesota. Why would anyone put themselves in this uncertain position?

The rowdy crowd has vandalized agents’ cars and smashed in windows. DHS has reported incidents of protesters pouring water on the pavement which then freezes; purpose is to obstruct the agents and cause harm. Rocks and fireworks have been thrown, as agitators surround ICE agents.

Minnesota is in chaos and these events run parallel to the massive fraud happening there.

There’s nothing peaceful about this protest at all.

Mary Mager

Fairport, formerly of Albion

Editor:

A recent letter writer made several statements that were flat out wrong. ICE agents have not been attacked by protesters, period.

The first Amendment to the Constitution gives people the right to peaceably assemble. This right extends to taking pictures and videos of immigration officers in public places. There is no factual evidence of immigration officers being physically attacked by protesters, and protesting is legal under the Constitution.

The writer also blames the entire community for criminal activity committed by some members. Yes, there was fraud and that is being investigated; there have been arrests. But the entire community was not involved in that fraud. Blaming the entire community shows the writer ignorance and prejudices.

Minnesota State Senator Omar Fateh did not state he wants to open a no-go zone where no white people can go. What he did say was he wants to make the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood a no-go zone for “white supremacists.”  The writer’s implication was far different from what was actually said or even implied.

With all the false statements and obvious intolerance and bigotry the letter writer displayed it is insulting that the Orleans Hub published the letter.

William Fine

Brockport