Editor:

I would like to respond to the recent downsizing at CRFS where more than 60 people were let go of their jobs by phone calls on Saturday and Sunday.

First of all the employees were not just employees of Aerotek some were CRFS. Secondly, a lot of the employees were not hired by recruiters for Aerotek but recruiters for CRFS. They were sent through Aerotek because CRFS had to finish their contract with Aerotek. Aerotek handles payroll. CRFS recruiters did the interview, set your pay, position and platform.

We were also advised within 90 days we would officially become CRFS employees because of the contract with Aerotek. That is the way CRFS had to hire a person. The only people that didn’t have to go through Aerotek were management.

Yes, CRFS may have finished the contract with Aerotek but there is another reason CRFS did not want to further comment on releasing so many in what some consider a blindsided way: because a client did not renew the contract, therefore there was a lack of work.

The employees were told everything was OK and told to be ready for the move next door by Feb. 28. I don’t think they thought they were out the door again permanently.

Tammie Davey
Albion

Davey was one of the employees to receive a call on Saturday that she would no longer be employed at either CRFS or Aerotek.

Editor:

In response to the letter “Community can celebrate ‘Heritage Heroes’ while history is under attack,” I must agree with many of the points that the writer brings attention to.

The writer points out that overall, public value of an education in the field of history seems to be becoming ever more undervalued. The letter said, “History, it seems, does not matter in modern society.”

The sad realization is that there is much truth to this statement. In a world where science and technology are praised and seen as the most valuable occupations, we often forget the usefulness of the humanities. As a soon-to-be graduate of Allegheny College, I have been afforded the opportunity of a liberal arts education for the past four years. I am a proud History major, and an American Studies minor. History, like many other humanities disciplines, seems to be increasingly devalued.

Even at the collegiate level, many students of the sciences seem to reject the study of history as a relevant or rigorous undertaking. This could not be farther from the truth. While I do not spend time in labs, or conducting experiments, I have spent countless hours reading primary and secondary documents and books to learn how our current society has been shaped by past events.

The common assumption is that history is unimportant, that it holds no true purpose in our lives. But if one looks at our nation today, would he or she understand the implications of the past as a pathway to our current state? Culture, politics, economics, environmental issues, racial and ethnic tensions and regional disparities have all culminated over the past hundreds of years to create the America we live in today.

Therefore learning about our shared past will not only afford us with insight as to the evolution of the American experience, but it allows us to progress toward the future without repeating mistakes or failures from the past. History is everywhere – it’s in our backyards here in western NY, and it’s as far away as California and Alaska, and it is time that all of us recognize the implications history has had in our own lives.

Furthermore, a degree in history – something I will graduate with in May – is not as limiting as people like to believe. History majors can go on and have just as much of an influence in the world as science majors or engineers. History majors can be more than only museum workers or curators; they become lawyers, government employees, teachers, writers, journalists, archivists, movie and documentary producers, national park educators and much more.

As the writer mentioned in his article, “By subordinating history to lesser status than other disciplines, or eliminating it entirely, we are placing our young people at a significant disadvantage.”

Scientific disciplines are important and very valuable, but disciplines within the humanities are just as important. We must be cognizant that all disciplines are given equal treatment and standing, and should place no greater emphasis on one discipline than another.

Kristina Martin
Holley

The writer is a student at Allegheny College in Meadville, Pa.

Editor:

Judging only by a “press release,” those charged with selling our Orleans County Nursing Home appear to have found a promising operator. Of course, things aren’t always what they appear to be. The sale will come at a cost to “hard to place” county residents. But, in this case, the LDC Board may have made the best of a questionable decision to sell “The Villages.”

LDC board member Richard DeCarlo called selling the “only responsible” thing to do. Only now and then does the County Legislature do what is clearly responsible. In fairness to the LDC Board, they didn’t create the mess in the first place, and it was a mess.

The run-up to last week’s announced sale was littered with actions that can hardly be termed “responsible.” Was it “responsible” to sell The Villages for $7.8 million when over $20 million has been invested in it in the past 20 years? Was paying a realtor nearly $200,000 to sell what another agent would have sold at a cost to the taxpayers of $50,000 to $100,000 “responsible?”

Was letting occupancy slip to 92 percent in 2012 – with the resulting cost to the taxpayers – “responsible?” Was using the Office for the Aging newsletter to deceive the public “responsible?” For that matter, was it ethical? Was consistently exaggerating nursing home losses “responsible?” It certainly wasn’t truthful.

How “responsible” was it not to have CGR (The Center for Governmental Research) do a feasibility study before deciding to sell The Villages?

Is selling something for much less than it is worth “responsible?” Yes, I read the $6.5 million figure. I’m just not sure where it came from and how real it is. Remember how the $2.1 million dollar “audited loss” in 2012 turned out to be $295,000? Was washing our hands of an obligation written into statute 183 years ago – without first rescinding the statute – “responsible?”

It may come as a revelation to some legislators, but services cost money. Caring for the elderly and infirm costs money. Public safety and emergency response costs money. Prosecution and incarceration costs money. Public/mental health services cost money. Taking care of our buildings and grounds and maintaining our roads and bridges costs money. Even assisting the indigent costs money.

As we pick winners and losers, it is interesting that counting losses becomes more of an issue when the service has to do with long-term care of the indigent elderly and infirm. Recall the immortal words of our Legislative Chairman, “We cannot make money (caring for the elderly).”

Sincerely yours,

Gary F. Kent
Albion

Editor:

The Orleans County Economic Development Agency is about to give the Wegman Group, developer of the Cottages at Troutburg, a tax incentive. Based on some very dubious assumptions, the agency is claiming a 53:1 return on the taxpayers’ investment.

Assumption No. 1: The developer will build 400 cottages.

Consider the following:

You would not own the property, but would pay $495/month site rent.

Rent plus $2,500 tax = an effective tax rate of $8,440, for a small three season cottage!

What is to prevent future rent hikes?

What if the development is sold?

What if the development fails?

What if the development is a success? At 400 cottages, the development is highly congested and no longer a peaceful lakeside getaway.

Future resale value of a home in this development?

With sales of even the prime lakefront lots progressing slowly, I have to assume that potential buyers are asking these same questions.

Assumption No. 2:  The cottage owners will spend $9,100 a year and they will spend 100 percent of it in Orleans County.

The Cottages at Troutburg is sited on the Orleans/Monroe county border. My home is half a mile from this site, and from my own experience I can verify that at least 90 percent will be spent in Hamlin and Brockport, i.e. Monroe County.  The $9,100 figure also assumes “full time” seasonal residents, but many will be weekenders.

It is corporate welfare at its worst when a rich developer receives an unnecessary handout on the backs of taxpayers. Such a give-away is a slap in the face to the taxpayers in general, but especially to the poor and the elderly that need and deserve such a break, as well as to the students of the community that will lose school tax revenue.

The Orleans County Economic Development Agency needs to hear from taxpayers before their meeting on Feb. 14.   Please contact James Whipple, CEO of the EDA, at 585-589-7060 x105 or e-mail him at jwhipple@orleansdevelopment.org.

Sincerely,

Sean Harnett
Kendall

Editor:

Recently the Orleans Hub carried a story updating the work of the committee to dissolve the village of Medina. As a member of the Conservative Party committee in Orleans County, looking at government spending at the local and county levels, I have several questions and comments.

This story stated “the sense of the committee is we want to continue the existing services.” Given that statement, on the surface, it would seem the end result would be a shifting of some of the expense of these village services to the taxpayers in the towns of Shelby and Ridgeway residing outside the village.

What other advantage would there be for the village of Medina? Town residents in Shelby and Ridgeway, please get involved and find out what the village has in mind!

In addition to the question above, it was stated the village received a $50,000 grant from the state to “pay for nearly the entire cost of the dissolution plan.”

First, it seems to us Conservatives that $50,000 is a lot of money to pay for “nearly the entire plan.” Second, how muchis that part of the plannot covered by the state grant going to cost the local taxpayers? Third, it seems, again on the surface, not only are the residents of Shelbyand Ridgeway going to help pay, but thetaxpayers across New York are going to pay as well. Any and all money any level of government has or spends is tax (our) money!

Finally, town officials in the towns of Shelby and Ridgeway stated they are not obligated to follow a dissolution plan put forward by the village, which makes this whole exercise, should it take place, a waste of time and more importantly a waste of our money.

Please, everyone, get involved, attend your local and county meetings. Make sure our representatives truly are working for us. We understand the village of Medina has financial problems. We also agree they are real and severe but the Conservative approach to these financial problems is to cut spending, which does mean a cut in services.

The alternative is to increase taxes, but that increase should be for those folks who receive the services and only after a vote is taken.

Ken Longer
Kendall
Orleans County Conservative Party Committee

(Editor’s note: The Center for Governmental Research is being paid $55,555 to work on the dissolution plan. Click here for a previous article about that.)

Editor:

Your editorial regarding the inequities of aid to villages was spot on (Click here to see “State shortchanges villages with aid, leading to their demise.”) I read the article and was in disbelief.

The current move in Medina towards dissolution of the village shows that this is reaching epidemic proportion. At the same time the state is offering incentives to remove layers of government.

I feel that the move is directly an attempt to give more control to Albany and less to the citizen. Other events and actions from Albany seem to back this up. For example the governor’s comments on “upstate,” and state infringement on the U.S. Constitution’s right to have guns.

While I do not want to sound like an anarchist or revolutionary, perhaps the layer of government that needs to be reduced lies at the state level.

Thank you,

Dayton Hausman
Medina

Editor:

Judging by my conversations, our somewhat “old-fashioned” winter has raised the level of concern about our winter birds. After all, they cannot seek refuge in front of a woodstove! They are dealing with “it” 24/7, and many have to do a lot of feeding to maintain body heat under the conditions we have been experiencing.

Many of us don’t worry about bluebirds in winter, as it is assumed they have migrated. That wasn’t the case with the ones seen at five different locations in Orleans County during the past month. In two instances, males were taking advantage of the break in the weather to inspect potential future homes. Just before our latest wave of single digit days, one was singing as though it were spring.

The nest box survey results for 2013 recently arrived from the New York State Bluebird Society. Region 1 (one of the largest, including a large part of western New York ) led the 10 regions with a reported 1,688 bluebird fledglings. Region 1 includes Genesee, Niagara and Orleans counties. The next closest region was Region 8 (the Capitol region) with 905. Orleans County accounted for 384 of the 1,688 (down about 75 from 2012). We also reported 209 tree swallows.

These numbers are far below the number of birds that actually fledged, as most are likely not reported.

For bluebirds that make it through winter, a new nesting season may begin in our area in early March, depending on the weather. April is normal.

The Orleans Bluebird Society meets in April and October each year.

Sincerely yours,

Gary Kent
Albion

Editor:

People use electricity in their homes and businesses every day and, since electrical power has been available to most of us for our entire lives, we also tend to take it for granted. Most people only think about the energy that powers their home once a month when they pay their utility bills, and in that case their typical question is, “Why is my bill so high?”

One reason that your bill is so high is New York’s antiquated and inefficient electrical transmission system that is badly in need of an upgrade. The last major transmission project in our state was completed in 1988 and 85 percent of our transmission infrastructure was constructed before 1980.

Due to the problems inherent in an older system, we cannot transfer power effectively from abundant upstate generation resources to the New York City market, where prices and demand are high. This scenario threatens upstate generation jobs and causes massive system congestion that increases energy rates across our state by $650 million a year. This means higher utility bills for individuals and businesses.

In 2012, the governor announced his Energy Highway initiative to address this problem. The goal was to develop transmission improvement projects that would ease congestion charges, allow the transfer of an additional 1,000 megawatts of power from upstate generators to New York City, and create thousands of additional jobs in the process.

As a part of this process the Public Service Commission initiated the AC transmission proceeding in order to vet various transmission proposals. As of this writing the PSC has whittled down the list of possible developers to just four and it is moving forward with the RFP and Article VII process on a dual track. I fully support this initiative and have expressed that support on the floor of the Senate, in press conferences, and in continuous filings before the PSC.

Let me be clear about the positive impact that the implementation of a successful transmission upgrade proposal would have in terms of our economy: This would be the largest statewide economic development driver that has been seen in decades. Here are just a two of the high points:

The implementation of a successful transmission upgrade proposal will generate more than $7 billion in economic activity in the state and will create 12,000 direct and nearly 38,000 total jobs.

The proposed transmission projects will facilitate the development of renewable generation. This, in turn, will generate almost $4.6 billion of economic activity and create an additional 8,000 direct jobs.

The benefits of completing these projects are not just economic, as there are also significant benefits for our environment. Emission of CO2 and NOX will be reduced by 370,000 tons and 200,000 tons, respectively.

These transmission projects are good for the economy, good for the environment, and good for working men and women in our state.

However, time and again steel-in-the-ground economic development projects that would benefit our state have been stymied in the regulatory process or succumbed under pressure from special interests. We simply cannot let that happen this time.

In upstate New York, we have seen industry after industry leave as jobs were outsourced to other states or other countries. Our power generation industry has been the one glaring exception. Upgrading transmission will allow this industry to continue to thrive, while reducing energy rates for all consumers and improving our environment. It is the kind of win-win scenario that we are always looking for.

The PSC should implement the governor’s streamlined siting process for transmission lines in existing right of ways and move forward on these upgrades as soon as possible. The stakes are too high for them to do otherwise.

State Sen. George Maziarz
Newfane
(Maziarz is chairman of the Senate Energy and Telecommunications Committee.)

Editor:

So much of the news in the past year has had to do with the state’s new gun law that I wonder if the subject of the repeal is newsworthy any longer.

Anyone who reads the HUB or the other local newspapers is well aware there is opposition to the law. For the most part, regular readers and those interested in the issue would be familiar with the positions of those speaking out against the law which hasn’t changed much over the course of the debate.

The repetitive nature of the repeal message may be good strategy in an effort to change the law and good copy for the news outlets but it sends a terrible one-sided message to those concerned about gun violence (which I would like to believe includes everyone in Orleans County). The message it sends is gun violence is not an issue, is not important, and is not a part of the debate.

I don’t believe for a minute that anyone who opposes the law intends to deliver this message. It nevertheless is what one can conclude in the absence of any additional or clarifying information. During the course of the debate about the N.Y. SAFE Act, I have often wondered where the discussion about preventing gun violence is taking place in Orleans County. To my knowledge, there is none.

It would seem to me that gun owners and officials who oppose the law would also include in their message something about what they are doing to help prevent gun violence, if anything. I believe the prevention of gun violence cuts across all our deeply held opinions and positions on this matter and could be the one place to begin a county-wide discussion.

Time will tell whether the law is repealed or upheld. Whichever way it goes, we know that gun violence will continue to impact everyone in our county and country. It will take every one of us regardless of our positions on this law or gun control to help prevent gun violence.

Reverend Thomas E. Gardner
First Presbyterian Church of Holley

Editor:

Getting an LDC “Board” to handle the sale of our County Nursing Home was “perfect.” None of the Board members could possibly have much understanding of how services provided by “The Villages” are financed. They might not even know the actual bottom line cost. But the decision to sell was not theirs. They were just executing a directive without public scrutiny.

Whether the decision was a good one, or not, was not for them to decide. Managing the sale would be just another “public service.” They could do the Legislature’s “hatchet” work with a relatively clear conscience. The actual decision to sell our county nursing home had, after all, been made by Orleans County “leaders.”

Just as the rest of us, the LDC Board members have been led to believe selling this particular county nursing home makes “business sense.” Does it?

In what was arguably a good business decision, Orleans County borrowed about $10,000,000 to “renovate” “The Villages of Orleans” about seven years ago. The “renovation” was really more new construction than renovation. As promised and anticipated, this legislative decision resulted in a massive increase in Medicaid reimbursement (about $2,000,000/year) to Orleans County for an indeterminate number of years. That reimbursement has helped offset a $900,000 annual bond payment due through 2026.

The decision to sell “The Villages” deprives the county of at least $4,500,000 in annual Medicaid reimbursement. It makes the 2007 renovation seem foolish. Selling “The Villages of Orleans” will send even more public money – earned at taxpayer expense – to a private owner of a facility we no longer own.

Making the decision even more costly is the fact that Orleans County is eligible for Intergovernmental Transfer program funds because it currently owns a public nursing home.This is our compensation for accepting Medicaid-eligible and other “hard-to-place” residents.

Once our Legislature-created LDC Board sells it, the million or more of Intergovernmental Transfer dollars Orleans County receives annually because it owns a county home will “go away.” Even if the program as currently constituted ends, a preferable, performance-based alternative would work to our advantage (if we retained ownership) because our County Nursing Home has long had relatively few shortcomings/deficiencies and is very highly rated. Advocates are pressing for a performance-based alternative to the unrealistic IGT program.

Do you have an idea why you haven’t heard what the complex known as “The Villages of Orleans” is appraised for? Certainly it must have been appraised. Could it be that we haven’t heard what it is likely worth because the selling price of your property is likely to be, perhaps, 50-60 percent what it is worth – if we are lucky? Of course, some may naively think it is worth whatever it sells for.

Finally – and this is especially hard to swallow – our LDC Board chose to spend a minimum of $100,000 more taxpayer dollars on realtor fees (than necessary) by choosing the realtor it chose (based on an assumed selling price of $8,000,000)! Figure that one out.

All this comes with assurances by legislators who insist that they prefer to run the county in a “businesslike manner.”

Sincerely yours,

Gary Kent
Albion