The Suburban News recently published a letter from disgraced former mayor Connie Castaneda which was a personal attack on former Village Trustee Carol Hannan. Carol replied by sending a letter to the editor of the SN, but the SN didn’t publish it. So here it is.
Some people who read the personal attack on me by our former mayor might just believe what she was purported to have written, but in my opinion, name calling means you don’t have facts on your side. In fact, 88% of the people who carried dissolution petitions are village landlords. Let me repeat, just one more time; if dissolution passes, landlords would get an end to EFFECTIVE code enforcement, an end to community policing and an end to the village court, over which they have no political influence. We’re talking lucrative, multi-million dollar rental empires. Do you think these people care about the rest of us, or do they care about their profits? No wonder they’re calling me names!
When I was a Brockport Trustee, the Town of Sweden assured Brockport Volunteer Ambulance Company members that as soon as they separated from the village, BVAC would, once again, have the ambulance contract. I asked ambulance members repeatedly if they “had that in writing.” No, they didn’t, so if the Village of Brockport goes, the BVAC will fold. That would be a tragedy for people who might receive special hardship consideration for their bills. It would be a terrible blow for the sports teams who rely on no-cost “stand-by” coverage at sporting events. Everybody, absolutely everybody who has a for-profit ambulance called for them, will pay a bill.
As for police coverage – we now have the very best; known as community policing, with patrol officers familiar with the village, the streets and the people who live here. They use their experience to keep us safe and solve crimes. You don’t have to take my word for that. The following explanation of what constitutes effective law enforcement was written by Lawrence W. Sherman, Ph. D, Distinguished University of Maryland Professor (etc.), author and expert in the study of deterring and preventing crime. “Eight Major Hypotheses About Policing and Crime: Other things being equal:
- Numbers of Police (more police mean less crime).
- Rapid Response to 911 (Brockport about 2 minutes; sheriffs about 30 minutes).
- Random Patrols (random patrols give a perceived “omnipresence” of police and deter crime).
- Directed Patrols (patrols in “hot spots” deter crime).
- Reactive Arrests (more arrests to solve offenses deter crime).
- Proactive Arrests (higher arrest rates for offenders lowers violent crime).
- Community Policing (with quality and quantity of policing, less crime).
- Problem-Oriented Policing ( more police can minimize causes of crime patterns, the less crime there will be)
Are you a proponent of more crime in your community and the “fallout” it will bring? Brockport has an urban population density. Seneca Falls, when it was a village in 2010, had 6,700 residents. We had 8,300 residents; not including the 7,000 undergraduates, of whom, according to the 2016 US News & World Report Education Rankings for 2016, 62% live off campus. Neither Lyons nor Seneca Falls have a SUNY College. We are not and never will be the same as either of those places. There is no other situation comparable to what we would face without the Brockport Police Department and people who tell you otherwise are making that up off the top of their heads just to get your votes.
Crime affects insurance rates. Companies assess premiums on a number of factors and location plays a large part in calculating costs, because some areas are safer than others. From Ameriprise Home Insurance: “Your neighborhood can also affect your homeowner’s insurance policy. Living in a high crime area will probably raise it (your premium).” I bet there isn’t a person in the village who thought, “I’ll live here because it looks like a high crime area.” None of us can pick up our home or apartment and move it. If push comes to shove, we’d leave. Who would be here, waiting, to purchase your property for a pittance? Would it be the same people who want you to vote for dissolution?
During my first year as a trustee, the village board passed a sewer fee. It pays the municipal bond used for the Main Street reconstruction project and other water related expenses. However, if the village is dissolved, we will pay more — substantially more — as Monroe County Water Authority users, plus the remainder of that bond. Forget about any “water rate” argument. It’s a lie. Landlords opposed the sewer fee because they were saving money and passing expenses off on the rest of us.
I’m voting against landlords and their false promises. I urge all voters to do the same. Without your votes, they have no power, just sticks and stones — and name calling.
Carol Lee Hannan