Letters to the Editor

Not going to mend fences

To the Editor:

Well, dip me in honey and throw me to the bears. For once I agree with Dana Thynes. In last week's Pilot, she took the newly elected borough assembly to the woodshed for not appointing Bob Lynn to one of the vacant assembly positions. Her point was that Mr. Lynn was a good candidate, but the elected assembly members rejected him in favor of appointments intended to preserve a uniform perspective on the assembly.

Ms. Thynes also theorized that there was a “secret handshake” imbedded in a question that the assembly posed to candidates. She felt the question was designed to ferret out those (including Mr. Lynn) who don't think like the existing assembly members. I don't subscribe to this conspiracy theory, nor do I share her disdain for government spending. However, I do see a reluctance to embrace a diversity of perspectives on the assembly, just as on the city council.

Mr. Lynn looks like he would be an excellent assembly member, in part because he's an outlier who opposed borough formation. He would bring different ideas to the table. The assembly seems to think different ideas are ideological cooties.

In the same issue, the editor chided Mr. Lynn for seeking appointment to the assembly rather than running for office. In other words, even though Mr. Lynn opposed borough formation, he should have hedged his bets and run for a seat on the borough assembly in the same election. That would have sent the counterproductive message, “I think I'm on the losing side, so it's probably pointless to vote against the borough.” Mr. Lynn rightly waited until after the election before coming forward. Further, the editor's overall tone was quite patronizing to people who hold passionate views that differ from his own. Patronizing those who disagree with the status quo is not going to help mend fences either.

Lynn Escola

Some of us have values

To the Editor:

Ron Loesch, publisher, has the ultimate “Bully Pulpit” and has used it to his benefit and support of pro-borough establishment from the start.

Yes, Ron, everyone had the oppurtunity to run for an elected office as did the two “rubber stamps” that got appointed. Some of us have values. Running for office would only show support for the very government we so vehemently oppose. Many of us thought the borough issue could well fail.

Anyone who believes the two assembly appointments were anything but “good ole boy” politics Petersburg style probably still believes in the tooth fairy.

And that “hand of reconciliation' you speak of, from our point of view, sure appears to have the middle finger extended.

Kenneth Howard

Keene Channel

Doubt that it's changed

To the Editor:

In your editorial you said that the criticism from Dana Thynes and others should fall on deaf ears.

Well, it appears to me that any comments that were ever made by anyone outside the city have fallen on deaf ears and I doubt that has changed any.

Sigrid Medalen