PennDOT offers ignore the real issue

To the editor:

We are writing with regard to the continuing closure of Twin Lakes Road, as one of the property owners from whom PennDOT was having difficulty obtaining an agreement for a right of way. We have been approached by local officials seeking our cooperation to reach an agreement with PennDOT, as it has been insinuated that we have caused delay in having the road repaired.

When PennDOT cannot reach an agreement with landowners for the taking of property, PennDOT may have some added delay in pursuing eminent domain proceedings. Such delay may take several weeks. However, to blame the landowner for not agreeing to submit to an unsatisfactory offer, after years of delay by the state, is unfair. In this project, PennDOT will be repairing the roadway where it is washed out, and also will be diverting storm waters, which were a cause of the washout. Such storm water is to be collected from the roadway in seven new culverts and transported down the road to be discharged onto our property.

We have received three different offers from PennDOT, relating to three different sets of plans that we have seen for the road repairs. The offers relate to the value of the small portions of property, which are being taken, mainly for grading along the roadway, including part of a driveway that will be blocked during the construction.

Significantly, none of the offers addressed the value or the impact of the significant water discharge onto our property, which may have substantial effects, including washout and channelization (which are presumptively the very impacts requiring the water to be diverted from the washout site).

Until PennDOT agrees to pay for the value of the impact on our property, we will not agree to give up our property rights. PennDOT must proceed with the eminent domain proceedings if it will not offer just compensation for the purchase. The perceived urgency to have the repair completed does not move us to be uncompensated for the taking.

The ball is in PennDOT’s court

To the editor:

We are the “second property owner(s)” referred to in the last paragraph of the article “Stuck Bus” in the January 18-24 issue of The River Reporter.

To say that the “property owner refuses to sell,” as the PennDOT engineer Doble is quoted as claiming in the article, is nonsense. We have been in repeated contact with Kelly White, the PennDOT representative, for months, in an amicable and cooperative manner. Ms. White sat in our dining room for several hours, and was taken on a tour of the property in question—a 75-by 200-foot “scar” running from Twin Lakes Road to Shohola Creek.

The property PennDOT needs for road reconstruction will be theirs as soon as one issue is resolved: we asked that the damage area be stabilized with railroad ties and replanted using native plants to prevent further erosion. Ms. White got back to us, asking us to get an estimate from a local contractor for the work. We obtained this and sent her a copy. We are currently waiting to hear from PennDOT regarding this matter.

It might interest your readers to know that soon after buying our property in 2001, we spoke to a Shohola Township official offering to donate whatever land was needed to improve the horrible Twin Lakes-Route 434 intersection. We were told it was a PennDOT matter, and a few years ago made a visit to the local PennDOT district office in Milford and repeated our offer, but heard nothing further. We repeated this offer to Ms. White when she visited us, and anticipate some action regarding this intersection in the future.

Far from being obstructionist, we are anxious to make the roads that we, our family, and our neighbors travel as safe as possible. The ball is in PennDOT’s court.

Heidi and Zach Finkelberg
Shohola, PA

What’s the next step?

To the editor:

Mr. van Swol has done the area a great service by not letting dead dogs lie in regards to the Sullivan West school district financial mess. I think it would be great if his next letter outlined the concrete steps he and the rest of the board are making in the following areas:

1. Has the district attorney been contacted and followed-up with concerning possible fraud at Sullivan West? I believe incompetence and stupidity can become criminal if there was a deliberate attempt to mislead. This is necessary to encourage others to think twice before pledging our tax dollars for big projects.

2. Has a step-by-step analysis been developed and put into writing with regards to what must happen now at Sullivan West to move forward? If we closed the school, what would happen? If we open up the campuses that were closed, what would happen? How much money would be saved? What would be the result to the credit rating of the district? What would be the impact on the students?

3. What did the school board do in terms of lobbying the IDA about the tax breaks being offered to the pipeline? Were we too busy fighting and finger-pointing to analyze, lobby and fight for what could have been a source of new revenue? Is it too late to organize an effort? This was a great opportunity for someone on the board to demonstrate true leadership and bring the whole community and board together to study the tax breaks, and block them if necessary. Should a lawsuit be started to reverse them?

4. Does Gunther or Bonacic have the ability to use their discretionary member items to bail out this school district?

5. What is going to happen if the enrollment at Sullivan West continues to decline by four percent a year?

These are real questions that need to be answered. Mr. van Swol, can you get us some answers? You have repeatedly identified the problem and the culprits. What are our options, what are our solutions? The voters elected you to fix this mess and it would be great to see some progress. Nobody said it would be easy.

Trouble with contractors

To the editor:

Have you noticed that there are no listings for contractors, excavators, roofers etc. in “The River Reporter Readers’ Choice Best of 2006?” Why not?

My family and I have been involved in a two-year ordeal with a contractor who was supposed to build an addition to our house in Narrowsburg. We signed a contract in February of 2005, made payments, and the project was set to be finished by October of 2005.

We saved up to create a space that was meant to be the crowning element to our house, which we have been renovating, weekend after weekend, over the past 20 years. Little did we know how callous and deceiving our contractor would turn out to be. At the end of 2005, all we had was a shell. In the spring of 2006 we were promised that the building would be finished by May. As nothing happened all year long, it dawned on us that we have been taken for a ride.

When we tell people about our unfortunate experience, they usually reply by saying “Welcome to Sullivan County—it happens here all the time.” Why is it that these shady characters are able to roam this county and take advantage of unsuspecting customers?

We suggest that The River Reporter, to balance out the “The Best” list, also publish a “Reader’s Choice—The Worst” list. Such a list could save many people a lot of grief and money. Unfortunately, Angie’s List (an organization that collects and distributes detailed customer satisfaction reports on local businesses) does not cover this area yet. In the meantime, if anyone in this community has a story to share, write to me and together we’ll find a way to publicize our complaints against these ruthless characters.

(Editor’s note: there are categories for “builder” and “carpenter” in our Readers’ Choice awards. We are happy to accept suggestions for new categories.)

Defund the executive

To the editor:

I can almost understand why Congressional Democrats feel a little skittish either about starting impeachment proceedings or restricting funding for military operations in Iraq—despite the fact that such actions are absolutely in order, completely appropriate, and totally justified, not to mention their explicit Constitutional duty. I don’t agree with their skittishness, mind you, but I can understand its sources.

But there’s another, quite doable, course of action that I haven’t heard anybody talk about yet: if we can’t defund the war or impeach, maybe we can combine the approaches—and defund Bush and Cheney themselves.

This could take several forms. Congress can withhold their paychecks, or cut off funds for their staffers and the operation of their offices. Ground Air Force One, board up the Undisclosed Location, and eliminate all the other little perks and privileges that these gentlemen enjoy. This might be suitable sanction for their malfeasances and abuses of power while in office.

The money saved, by the way, should go straight to undoing the damage they’ve caused—to funding the needs of veterans, reconstructing Iraq (and I mean to the actual reconstruction, not just to lining some Federal contractor’s pocket), and, oh yeah, rebuilding New Orleans.

I invite your readers to contact their Congressional delegation—frequently—and urge them to have at least enough gumption to do this much. Make the people’s disapproval known to George and Dick in the language they seem to understand best: money.

Dick Cheney has said, in effect, “Nobody can stop us.” That kind of arrogant defiance from an elected official in a supposedly democratic country cannot be allowed to stand, whatever your place on the political spectrum.

Rein in their power. Cut off their perks. Dock their pay.