Editor:

This is in response to a recent letter. Twelve people in a box works well unless those selected to decide the outcome are not truthful during the jury selection process.

A perfect storm would also include politically biased prosecutors and judge. The only saving grace in this case was the fact the witness list didn’t include Dr. Blasey Ford, Judy Munro-Leighton or Deborah Ramirez.

It seems to me the foreman of this jury would call for life in prison sentence for wearing a MAGA hat.

Ed Urbanik

Lyndonville

Editor:

The Green Light Law benefits farmworkers, farms, farm communities and society in general. Research shows that there are fewer hit-and-run accidents and fewer traffic fatalities after Green Light Laws have passed in other states.

Research also show that New York will reap $57 million per year from the Green Light Law. The claim that federal agencies will not have access to DMV records is just scare tactics used by Republicans. Federal agencies will have access if they have a court order, a judicial warrant or a subpoena.

This is in alignment with the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution which states that: “The rights of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized.”

Congressman Tom Reed and the Republicans are using this issue to stir up votes by fear and prejudice against farmworkers and foreigners. If Congressman Tom Reed was interested in solving problems he would study the issue and understand the problems and be knowledgeable of available research on the topic instead of using fear-based disinformation propaganda.

William Fine

Brockport

Editor:

To those who hate President Trump, there is a difference between illegality and immorality.

Illegality is defined by codified, man-made law and it is based on fact. Immorality is defined by a belief system and it is based on faith. Laws are created by government and are enforced and punished by government. Morals are created and enforced by individuals and are punishable only by a power that is much greater than man or government.

The U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits government from regulating or punishing faith, belief or morality. The articles of impeachment passed by the House did not allege violation of codified law. In the absence of a violation of codified law, any perceived “wrong” that may have occurred was perhaps a sin, but not a crime.

Since no crimes were alleged in the articles of impeachment, the articles were unconstitutional. The Senate acted correctly by acquitting the President. The Constitution specifically prohibits our government from regulating or punishing faith, belief or morality. It is called the First Amendment.

The government only has authority over crimes, not sins. Neither the government, Democrats nor Romney have authority to judge or punish sin.

In America, under the rule of law, guilt can never ever be presumed. Guilt has to be proven based on facts showing violation of a law. Since no one can ever know the true intent of another, intent is virtually impossible to prove as a matter of fact. This is precisely why intent is seldom, if ever, proven in a court of law. It is also why in America all men are presumed innocent until proven guilty in accordance with the rule of law. Impeachment doesn’t change these facts.

Although the government is prohibited from judging morality, the constitutionally guaranteed right to vote allows individual citizens to do so. If citizens believe a candidate is immoral, then citizens have the right not to vote for that candidate. Other than voicing their opposition to immorality via the right to vote, citizens have no authority to punish anyone for violation of faith, belief or morality.

When it comes to violations of morality, a very wise man once said, “Judge not lest you be judged.” That’s still good advice today.

Em Seefeldt

Medina

Editor:

I write with some questions, observations and a request.

Four career non-political federal prosecutors just resigned en masse from the Roger Stone case.  They had applied  Congress’s “Sentencing Guidelines” to his jury conviction for lying to Congress. Without following procedure those recommendations were thrown out and redone from the top.

The person who supervised that Division up to a few weeks before those recommendations were made was all set to testify in front of Congress at a confirmation hearing about her promotion to lead Treasury. The promotion was pulled the next day and Congress could not ask her questions about that and other pending matters involving, among other cases, similar perjury. Today she resigned in protest too.

Anything I write further about the facts may be given short shrift one way or another. But what is important here is the a old saying among judges and lawyers. It is “no matter what you personally think or the newspapers say, let the jury decide; the twelve people in the box always make the best and final decision!”

So I write to ask “Do we want to live in a country where the Justice Department and other Departments can be used to get back at critics and protect friends? I am, for example, no fan of H. Clinton but  “Lock her up” used to be a decision left to the Courts and not a crowd. Adhering  to the Rule of Law is the standard the world looks to when judging if a country is a democracy or strong man autocracy. We set that standard.

So I ask, where is that respect for the Rule of Law and the jury now? Have we lost it forever? And what happens now when a “connected” neighbor turns on you over, say, your dog barking or another political party is voted in? Should you live in fear you may lose your job or your freedom? Do losers at the ballot box go right to jail? Do winners get to release convicted criminals because they are a friend of a friend? In sum, is the “other” side trash to spit on and punish just because they disagree?

The Rule of Law and respecting juries were part and parcel of the country I grew up in. The country I cherish. I personally ask that we all be granted the right to be wrong.

Conrad F. Cropsey

Albion

Editor:

While my 33-year banking career here in Buffalo might paint a different picture to some, one of my passions is to serve people and my new role as president and CEO of Catholic Charities feels like a great fit, almost an extension or merging of both my years in finance and my desire to help others.

I am fortunate to have a reminder of my call to serve, as an ordained Deacon in the Catholic Church. The Greek word for Deacon, diakonos, means servant and that title provides me a constant reminder of my call. The opportunity to serve the people of Western New York in this new role is certainly yet another unexpected blessing from God. I feel blessed and privileged to be participating in my first Appeal. The Appeal and work of Catholic Charities are such an important ministry of our church and so vital to our community.

Since the recent launch of Appeal 2020, I have been meeting with both the people we serve through our programs and our supporters, hearing firsthand the impact that Catholic Charities has on our community’s most vulnerable populations.

This year’s $10 million goal recognizes the challenges associated with raising such a significant amount of money in today’s environment while also realizing the ongoing need for the critical programs and services that Catholic Charities provides. It’s why we chose “Think of Me” as the Appeal theme this year; think of our neighbors in need who rely daily on the support provided by Catholic Charities.

The annual Appeal helps fund 51 programs and services administered by Catholic Charities across dozens of sites in the eight counties of Western New York, along with a number of ministries that benefit parishes through the Fund for the Faith. Programs and services provided by Catholic Charities benefited more than 160,000 people in 2019, including more than 3,600 in Genesee, Orleans and Wyoming counties.

This year, donors will once again have the choice to designate their Appeal gift through three options: give to the Appeal as in previous years, which benefits Catholic Charities and the Fund for the Faith; give to Catholic Charities only; or, give to the Fund for the Faith only. Whatever choice our donors make, we want them to know that each gift is very much appreciated.

This is a new year and a new decade, and I feel a sense of anticipation – and hope! We hope our community in the coming weeks will think of the needs across Western New York and how supporting the Appeal can make such a valuable difference in so many lives. We have great faith that the community, and our supporters in our local parishes, will once again demonstrate their generosity. Appeal 2020 runs through June 30.

Deacon Steve Schumer

President & CEO of Catholic Charities

Editor:

As have so many others, Ambassador Gordon Sondland (once an avid supporter of our President) as well as Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman have learned that there is no room for truthfulness in “Trumpland.”

Congratulations to Senator Mitt Romney for examining his conscience and finding it intact.  Fellow Mormon, former Senator Jeff Flake, found it so disquieting to be around spineless people such as Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio that he decided not to run for the United States Senate again.

Is it possible that inheriting a vast estate, combined with not paying millions to contractors for work they completed on your casinos, and then hiring fellow con artists to help you avoid paying millions in federal and state taxes could make anyone wealthy?

We had all better pray that we come up with someone of real quality who is more committed to republican government than the current occupant of the White House in time for the 2020 presidential election.

Sincerely yours,

Gary F. Kent

Albion

Editor:

While the New York State Green Light Law provides undocumented aliens the opportunity to obtain New York State Driver Licenses, a less heralded – though perhaps more impactful – provision of the statute prevents the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) from sharing information with any agency that enforces immigration law. Unfortunately, this provision has a much broader adverse effect on law enforcement and public safety.

The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for protecting us from terrorism, securing our borders while facilitating lawful travel and trade, and combating a host of crimes that threaten our safety and security.

The Green Light Law impedes Homeland Security’s ability to conduct active criminal investigations involving citizens and non-citizens who are lawfully present in the United States, not just those who are undocumented.

On a daily basis, Homeland Security agents and officers – including sworn law enforcement officers who work for Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Customs and Border Protection, the U.S. Border Patrol, and Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) – use Department of Motor Vehicles information to assist them in stopping transnational criminal organizations, cybercrime, and offenses involving drug trafficking and money laundering; murder, sexual assault, and other crimes of violence; racketeering and extortion; the illegal use and possession of firearms; economic espionage, telemarketing fraud, and elder fraud; human trafficking; and child exploitation, as well as illegal immigration.

Like other federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement officers, DHS agents seek New York State DMV information for a variety of purposes, including: (1) to obtain identification, address, and vehicle registration information for individuals committing crimes; (2) to identify and apprehend dangerous defendants and fugitives wanted by state or federal authorities; (3) to conduct surveillance of individuals suspected or known to be engaged in the commission of crimes; (4) to establish the probable cause necessary to secure search and arrest warrants; (5) to identify crime victims and potential crime victims; (6) to identify the proceeds of crime to increase the amount of restitution recoverable for crime victims; (7) to make informed determinations regarding whether, when, where, and how to stop a vehicle, to minimize the risk to occupants, officers, and others; and (8) to assist in determining whether to grant individuals presenting themselves at ports of entry admission into the United States.

The disturbing truth is that under the newly enacted statute, the Customs and Border Protection Officers working today at New York’s 13 ports of entry – which include both the busiest port on the entire northern border of the United States (the longest land border in the world), and the busiest international air passenger gateway into North America – are unable even to check the registration or the driver’s license status of individuals presenting themselves for admission into our country.

Border Patrol Agents, who secure the border between the ports of entry, likewise can no longer check vehicle or driver’s license information.  Forcing officers who serve as our nation’s frontline defense against dangerous criminals entering the country to make these important determinations in the dark dramatically diminishes the safety of all. Ensuring that HSI Agents and ERO officers must blindly interact with people who may be terrorists or other violent criminals, drug dealers, human traffickers, or child predators likewise poses a grave risk to the safety of the officer, the person, and the public. In most instances, there simply is no time to pause the situation to obtain a court order or judicial warrant.

Prohibiting basic information sharing between New York State and federal law enforcement agencies means that more criminals will enter and roam freely in our state and nation; undermines the cooperative relationships between federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement; thwarts and curtails investigations into serious crimes; and jeopardizes the safety of all of the inhabitants of our great country.

Our citizens, lawful permanent and temporary residents, visitors, and undocumented immigrants deserve better, and so do those who serve and protect them. Restoring collaboration and information sharing furthers our effort to secure justice for all, preserve public safety, protect individual rights, and promote due process, bringing us ever closer to a sanctuary built on the rule of law and fairness for everyone.

James P. Kennedy, Jr., U.S. Attorney for the Western District of New York

Geoffrey S. Berman, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York

Richard P. Donoghue, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York

Grant C. Jaquith, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York

Editor:

In 2013 I retired and sold my farm and business because of New York State politics. I read the Hub on line and am wondering how you all can still drink the Kool-Aid these politicians are serving.

The infrastructure is crumbling and you have some of the highest taxes in the country. And you attack this president over nothing. Please examine the evidence from both sides of this argument in the transcripts in the House and Senate – no crime.

In reality the facts lead straight to the opposition’s door. Are you fake news like CNN …or do you get all your info from them?

And no I’m not a MAGA hat wearer but I do agree with most of what Trump has accomplished. There are criminal politicians on both sides of the aisle and Washington needs a severe cleaning! Schumer is at top of the list!

Ed Steuber

Former Albion resident now living in Erwin, Tennessee

Editor:

Last night on national TV I witnessed one of the most amazing performances ever by the world’s greatest scam artist.  Unfortunately, the “speech” will be interpreted by a large number of gullible viewers as having been presented by the most wonderful president we’ve ever had.

I’ll leave the number of misstatements spoken to the statisticians and record-keepers but I marveled at how the speaker capitalized on his audience by appealing to their emotions on subjects that are important to us all by having gathered citizens who have been affected on such matters.

He devoted a large part of his talk to the black residents, since they’re predominantly Democratic, and introduced at least four members of the audience who received special recognition and “favors.”

Members of the military in attendance seemed to react coolly to references about their bailiwick.

In my opinion, this presentation was a campaign speech, not a State of the Union address.

I pray that I’m mistaken about the number of witnesses who were “taken in” by this talk and that more voters are savvy enough to see through this charade and recognize the presenter for what he is.

Joseph A. Gehl

Kent

Editor:

The purpose of this letter is to express my concern about the lack of attendance at meetings for The Town of Ridgeway. Since learning about the proposal of a solar array and a large battery storage facility on Swett Road in Ridgeway, I have started to attend town meetings. The first town meeting consisted of only a few people. While the attendance has increased at each meeting, it is still mediocre, at best.

Perhaps part of the problem is the lack of communication from the town. Not having a local paper is quite a handicap. I have learned that the Town of Ridgeway utilizes The Daily News (Batavia’s paper) to print public notices. I have also learned that the Town of Ridgeway has not kept their website up-to-date. With it being 2020, such information should be readily available to the taxpayers. In fact, when asking why two years’ worth of board minutes were missing, I was brushed off. All of the board minutes have since been uploaded.

Nonetheless, this solar project should be very alarming to Ridgeway as it is just the first of numerous solar projects being presented to our community and neighboring communities. This project alone would consist of 11,000 solar panels and a 3MW lithium ion battery which is the size of a tractor trailer. There are numerous concerns regarding a battery of this nature being installed near our residences.

Perhaps the biggest concern for Ridgeway residents is that it may not be the only battery we have to risk living by. All one has to do is look up information regarding the battery that exploded in Arizona. That one was smaller than the one(s) being proposed here!

NextEra Energy proposed this project to the Town of Ridgeway Planning Board on Dec. 4. I attended that meeting after learning about this project one day prior. I can count the number of residents that were at this meeting on both of my hands.

At this meeting the company representatives asked for a variance to see if the town would allow them to be only 250 feet away from our residences as opposed to the minimum of 500 feet, which the local law states. Further, there is no local law for battery storage, yet this company was here asking to set up shop! The Planning Board indicated the next step for them would be to be heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

On Jan. 7, I attended the Zoning Board meeting along with only a handful of residents where we were told NextEra Energy withdrew their variance application. We were told that, instead, the company would be submitting a Special Use Permit. The Zoning Board indicated this would bounce back to The Planning Board pending an updated proposal, which has since been submitted.

Perhaps the largest turnout by residents has occurred at the Jan. 21 Town Board meeting where a battery storage law was to be adopted. This law would be the final piece necessary for NextEra Energy to come to Ridgeway and install this monstrosity. This would lay out the pathway for them, and other companies, to begin installing who knows how many solar arrays and /or battery storage facilities. At this meeting the residents voiced their reasons for the vote to be tabled, pending further review.

Since that meeting, a few residents have voiced requests for a moratorium to be enacted in order for the Town of Ridgeway to thoroughly research this topic and write a battery storage law that is appropriate for Ridgeway and its residents. Also, since that meeting, it is surprising how many residents still have no idea about what is transpiring.

I strongly encourage the residents of Ridgeway to start attending meetings and start communicating with each other about what is happening. It is imperative that people get involved for the sake of the future of Ridgeway!

The next Planning Board meeting is Feb. 5 at 7 p.m. and the next Town Board meeting is Feb. 18 at 7 p.m. I look forward to seeing more residents at meetings!

Heidi Marciniak

Ridgeway