Can Kent Withstand Four More Years of This Leadership?

 

1. This Supervisor has repeatedly turned down offers of volunteer services from highly skilled professionals.

 

2. This Supervisor has appopinted friends and supporters to the Planning Board who must now recuse themselves from hearing the matter of Patterson Crossing as they were both public opponents of the development. Did the Town Attorney pass on this? Board member Karl Rohde spoke against these appointments, as did other citizens.

 

3. The Supervisor selected Lou Tartaro to fill her vacant seat on the Board when she was elected, ignoring requests to "reach across the aisle" and select someone from a different political party. When Mr. Tartaro was running for election, as required by law, in 2008, he publicly denied that there was any litigation against the town, and when asked again, repeated this statement. He has served on a number of previous boards, and had to be aware of the Kent Manor litigation, as was Supervisor Doherty.

 

4. This Board, a group fo four who WITHOUT EXCEPTION VOTE THE SAME ON EVERY RESOLUTION, plus Karl Rohde, the only opposition, has removed cameras from the Workshops where most of the discussion of new legislation and other town matters begins, so that citizens watching from their homes will not see or hear alternative approaches, disagreement, or new ideas. Further, the rules of behavior they have introduced have so minimized citizen participation that attendance is at an all-time low for Board meetings..

 

5. With the US tottering financially, with foreclosures at an all-time high, this Board voted themselves a 3% raise.

 

6. The folks of Southeast passed a referendum to allow their Supervisor to serve for four years. Now there is more than a little regret. Some are meeting to consider changing the term back to two years.

 

7. In New York State, if an elected official is not deemed effective, it is next to impossible to remove him/her from office. A two-year term can do less damage .

 

8. This Supervisor has maintained that she has spent most of her first term either completing or reversing the work of two previous Supervisors. Is this not an argument against four year terms?

 

9. Considering all of the above, it seems to this writer that if a Supervisor is performing well, obeying the law, guarding the assets of the taxpaying public, spending their tax revenues wisely and frugally, that that Supervisor will be re-elected without question. Elections will be held every two years anyway for the staggered boardmember terms. Let us all carefully ask ourselves, "Why does this Supervisor want to make this change?"