Getting involved in Greenwich

A Stamford resident recently commented to one of my blog posts about the pricing of access for non-residents to our beaches.  Another Stamford resident (quite possibly the same person, because the points raised were very similar) wrote a letter to the editor on the same topic.  I’d like to examine some of the points raised, this isn’t the first time I’ve heard them.

In both the comment and the letter to the editor the Stamford resident indicated they would be re-thinking their shopping in Greenwich because of our beach access attitude.

First, the letter writer referred to the $20 parking fee as “unreasonable.”  That’s exactly what Stamford charges to park.  

Also worth noting is that Stamford, just like Greenwich, had a history of not allowing non-residents to use their beaches.  Prior to the infamous Stamford resident suit against Greenwich, Stamford would not allow non-residents to park in their beaches.  Oh, you could walk in, but you couldn’t park there.  And forget parking just outside the beach and walking in, the neighborhoods all had their own parking permits.  Unlike Greenwich, however, Stamford took Federal funds for beach cleanup after storms.  And “opened” their beaches to non-residents as long as they could walk from, say, the Stamford train station over to the beach.  

Yes, yes, yes our policies are designed to regulate the non-resident visitors.   The only reason visitors are allowed in at all is to exercise their free speech.  That was the court ruling.  It’s the same reason Stamford changed their regulations and now allows non-residents to park.  

I’m sorry the letter writer won’t be spending any more money here.  I know I shop a lot in Stamford because there are still stores there (e.g., Target, Macy’s) that you can’t find in Greenwich.  I’m betting a lot more Greenwich residents shop in Stamford than vice versa.  It would be a shame if we all stopped shopping in Stamford because of Stamford’s unreasonable beach parking fee and the fact that, for years, I could never visit Stamford’s beach unless I drove in with a resident (Greenwich used to allow guests to bring in their cars, for free).

Stamford didn’t want non-residents using their beaches any more than Greenwich did so please stop bashing Greenwich.  It’s getting old.

The Town website announcement about late tax bills (linked here) and the newspaper articles about it (here) mentioned that “paper bills” were going or went out late.  I don’t think everyone knows what that means, so I called the Tax Collector’s office to find out.  It’s good news for most of us. 

 I was very concerned about the tax bill because, while I’m sure I could get the check in the mail with only 1 day’s notice if I had to, my mortgage servicer probably could not.  Would I be liable if they didn’t make the payment reasonably expeditiously? (That’s the regulatory term, pretty sure that doesn’t mean they have to do it in a few days.)

According to the person I spoke with at the Tax Collector’s office, the major mortgage servicers get the tax bills electronically, and those went to them on July 6^th.  The smaller, local banks that don’t get electronic bills got those mailed July 6^th and 7^th.  

Sounds like most of us, who have mortgages and mortgage servicers paying our tax bills, have nothing to worry about.  

It probably would have made sense for the notices to and press articles to mention this, since it basically says 90% of us have nothing to worry about.  

 Oh well, all five of my readers now know.

There’s been a lot of talk about the decision to put a police officer on Island Beach on the weekends following what I’ll call overcrowding-related complaints.  The GT editorial even suggested studying the issue before instituting the change.  For as long as I can remember, and that’s back to the 60’s, there’ve been police at Greenwich Point, including those special summertime bicycle police.  Why wouldn’t we also have police at Island Beach?  I should think that the fact that it’s an Island, and depending on where the ferries and police boats are it could take 1/2 hour for police to get there in an emergency, would warrant a police presence at Island Beach more so than at Greenwich Point.  

It’s about time we had a full-time police presence on Island Beach.  And I certainly support efforts to ensure Island Beach is not home to loud music and beer bottles.

No, raw  and unchained aren’t my descriptors for Jane Condon’s one-person show, that’s the title SHE gave it.

Jane Condon: Raw & Unchained opened this evening at the Mint Theater in New York, Third Floor, 311 W. 43rd St.  Call 212-315-9703 for tickets.  There are four shows, the first was tonight, May 2^nd.   Three more shows on Sundays May 9th, 16th, and 23^rd.  I guess this info usually goes at the end of theater reviews, but I’ll leave it here because you better hurry if you want to see this show, tonight the small theater was packed.  I bought a ticket at the door, but I think only because I got there very early.  And yes, you should go see this show, especially if you’re a Jane Condon fan, as I am. 

I pulled this from Jane's website, I think she wore the same blouse tonight.

First off, this isn’t an hour and 20 minutes of Jane Condon stand-up.  I like to make fun of Greenwich as much as the next guy, but that would really be too much.  Jane Condon tells us the story of her life and what lead her to be a comedian.  She starts with her youth in Brockton, Mass and explains how she got to Greenwich, making most of the story funny.  Not LOL funny like her standup, but funny.   And anyone who knows a comedian very well knows that they probably had some unhappiness in their lives that led them to this most thankless (and payless) of careers.  Jane’s no exception.  There are family problems she talks about in fairly good detail.  I won’t go into what those not because I’d be giving away anything, but because it wouldn’t seem right for me to tell her stories.  I’ll just say that at one point during one of the tougher stories, she couldn’t hold back her tears.  That was an interesting moment.  She peppered the sadder stories in her show with jokes to keep the mood just above water.  When Jane broke, I purposely looked around at the audience, and I didn’t see anyone else crying; that story told by another person who didn’t care about the audience’s mood would have had most of us crying.  Amazing that she could keep it light enough for us, but couldn’t save herself.   This was a very special night for all of us there.

I’m not a fan of one-person shows like this.  Probably the biggest one in recent history was Carrie Fisher’s Wishful Drinking.  I saw it and I couldn’t wait for it to end.  This was much better.  And she does tie-in “Raw and Unchained” during the show in a particularly funny bit.  Go see it.  I definitely recommend it.

 Jane Condon: Raw & Unchained

 Raw and Unchained ese fue el titulo que le dio Jane Condon a su presentacion, la verdad es que estas  no son las descripciones que daria a la actriz solista.

Jane Condon: Crudo y Desencadenado dio lugar a su primera presentacion el dia Domingo 2 de Mayo en el Teatro de Mint en New York, tercer piso, 311 W. 43^rd St. Llamar 212-315-9703 para boletos. Habran cuatro  presentaciones, la primeroa fue el dia domingo, 2 de Mayo. Todavia quedan cuatro presentaciones que seran presentadas los dias domingos de las siguientes fechas, el 9, 16 y 23 de Mayo. Esta informacion es usualmente sacada despues de la revision del teatro pero lo dejare aqui para las personas que quieran asistir a la presentacion. Tienen que apresurarse si quien ver esta presentacion porque el dia domingo el teatro pequeno estaba lleno. Yo compre el boleto en la puerta pero fue de suerte porque paya mayor seguridad asisti al teatro muy temprano y fue asi como consegui mi boleto. Bueno y ahora les recomendaria que asistieran a ver esta presentacion especialmente si usted es un fan de Jane Condon como lo soy yo.

 Saque esta foto de la pagina de internet de Jane, me parece que uso esta misma blusa el dia de la presentacion.

Esta no fue una comedia de una hora y veinte minutos. Me gusta burlarme de el pueblo de Greenwich pero eso seria demasiado. Jane Condon nos cuenta la historia de su vida y lo que le llevo a ser una comediante. Ella empieza con su juventud viviendo en Brockton, Mass y explica como llego a Greenwich, hacienda su historia mas divertida. No divertida en el sentido de que la gente se rie a carcajadas pero es divertida. Cualquier persona que conosca muy bien a un comediante sabe que la persona puede tener sus tristezas en la vida que les lleva a pensar menos acerca de sus carreras. Jane no es la exepcion. En la presentacion Jane habla de sus problemas familiares muy detalladamente. No voy a entrar en detalles y dar informacion no apropiada porque no es correcto dar informacion de otra persona en este caso Jane. Lo unico que puedo decir es que hubo un punto durante la presentacion de sus historias que ella no se pudo contener y lloro. Eso fue un momento interesante. En medio de tantas historias tristes ella le puso algo de humor para mantener el ritmo de su presentacion en su lugar. Cuando Jane se hecho a llorar, yo apropositamente mire alrededor para mirar a la audiencia y me di cuenta que nadie sintio pena porque nadie estaba llorando. Esa historia contada por una persona a la que no le importa las emociones de la audiencia nos hubiera tenido llorando. Sorprendentemente ella pudo mantener el ritmo de su presentacion para toda la audiencia pero no se sintio bien con ella misma. Esta fue una noche muy especial para todos nosotros.

The public access on Church St. Ext. in Byram is finished.  There’s going to be a dedication ceremony in May.  Here’s some pictures of the finished product

 Barry Montgomery has filed a lawsuit because he doesn’t like the Cos Cob power plant park plan.  In many ways, this lawsuit is more offensive than the beach lawsuits.  At least in those cases, the plaintiff’s had an argument and there were others that felt the same way.  This park site has gone through extensive debate and has had tons of public input.  But that’s not enough for Barry; HE has decided HE doesn’t want this plan, so he’s suing. 

 It’s ridiculous.  Let’s look closer at what he said in the Greenwich Time article (see it here).  Quotes from the article are in italics. 

 “I want to stop this. This is too dangerous for kids here,”

 Radiation emissions from cell phone antennas on three towers near the site pose a health threat, Montgomery said.

 “There are cell towers here beside where the field is going to be. The town is violating its own 1,500 square feet,”

 Well, if it’s too dangerous for kids then I suppose their parents can keep them away.  Why is it Barry Montgomery’s business?  The 1,500 foot rule is for SCHOOLS, where kids are required to sit, all day every day.  A park, where they might play for a couple of hours, is different and not covered in the RTM resolution.  Finally, the RTM resolution was a sense of the meeting resolution, not an ordinance or law.  Barry Montgomery is obviously not well-informed.

 Though Montgomery isn’t opposed to the site being a park, he said it should be developed as little as possible and there should be no playing field.

 “If people want to walk around, they do it at their own risk; it’s not the same as children standing in the (soccer) field,” he said.

 “I think the town of Greenwich has intimidated their agencies not to look at it and it’s like the emperor’s clothes — they dare not say anything, they dare not object,” he said.

 Again, why should anyone care what Barry Montgomery thinks should be done with the site?  And I’d love to know how he intends to show that Greenwich’s boards were intimidated.  That’s hilarious to anyone who knows how the boards in Greenwich operate.  This sounds like the rantings of a lunatic. 

 He’s open to compromising with the town, but only if officials agree to remove the soccer field and the seawall from the plan.

 “I want court-supervised mediation — get to negotiate what they do and not do,” Montogomery said. “I would like to see the ballpark removed. I would like to see the seawall removed and leave the park in a more natural state.”

 Who cares what you want Mr. Montgomery?  Just because you have the means to file a lawsuit doesn’t mean you get to dictate, or have any say, in what the Town does.  You get your say the way every other citizen get’s theirs: at public meetings and by writing letters to officials.

 “I am the only person in town who seems to be (excited about) the development; everybody else just spoke about lights, he said”

 This last quote really sums it up, he is the only person and that’s why this lawsuit is ridiculous.  The Town is doing what the majority of people want.  This guy should just get lost and stop wasting the Town’s money on lawsuits.  I wonder why his brother is encouraging him, you’d think he would counsel him against making a fool of himself.

 I really hope that no one in Town gives this guy even a meeting on the subject, and we certainly shouldn’t consider negotiating any compromise with him.

 Yes, I’m really annoyed about this lawsuit.

How sad is the news about Bernie Yudain’s passing.  I can only share a couple of personal remembrances. The first is that it was he, and Pike Johnson, who inspired me to do this blog about Greenwich local issues.  And if I am so lucky that

Bernie Yudain (from Greenwich Time's article)

someone notices any style similarities between my and Bernie’s writing, it’s no accident.  I’ve tried to copy his style in this blog and even in some of my lighter letters to the editor.  His was the best column I’ve ever followed, and certainly the one I’ve followed longest.  I hope the Greenwich Time can find someone good to take his place, even though I’m sure he won’t be matched, ever.

One story I recall with moderate pride was when he wrote a column that included some controversial words.  In the next column, he lamented all the letters he received about it and suggested that he didn’t quite understand the uproar.  I wrote him a note dissecting the sentences in question, explaining why people might be offended, and finally suggesting wording that would have made the point without offending.  He wrote back to me that he understood and that I should consider pursuing a career as a newspaper editor – I had a good understanding of language and avoiding misinterpretation.  Now I didn’t correspond with him enough to know if he was someone who over-generously heaped praise, but I recall being absolutely thrilled to read those words from Bernie Yudain.

So thanks Bernie for that, and for all those wonderful columns I couldn’t wait to read.  I look forward to reading your column about goings-on and politics in Heaven.

Qué triste es la noticia de la muerte de Bernie Yudain. Sólo puedo compartir un par de memorias personales. La primera es que fue él, y Pike Johnson, quienes me inspiraron a hacer este blog sobre los asuntos locales de Greenwich. Y si tengo tanta suerte que alguien note algún estilo en común entre el estilo de escribir de Bernie y mío, no es un accidente. He trato de copiar su estilo en este blog y hasta en algunas de mis cartas al editor. La suya fue la mejor columna que he seguido, y ciertamente la que he seguido más. Espero que el Greenwich Time pueda encontrar a alguien bueno que ocupe su lugar, aunque no creo que pueda ser comparado, nunca.

Una historia que recuerdo con orgullo fue cuando él escribió una columna que incluía algunas palabras controversiales. En la siguiente columna el lamentó todas las cartas que recibió sobre ella y sugirió que no entendía el escándalo. Le escribí una nota disecando las oraciones en preguntas, explicando por qué las personas pudieran estar ofendidas, y finalmente sugiriendo una organización de palabras que hubiese explicado su punto sin ofender. Él me volvió a escribir que entendía y que tal vez debía considerar una carrera como editor de un periódico- tenía un buen entendimiento de palabras y de evitar malinterpretaciones. No correspondía con él para saber si él era alguien que elogiaba con exceso de generosidad, pero recuerdo estar absolutamente emocionado por esas palabras de Bernie Yudain.

Así que gracias Bernie por eso, y por todas esas maravillosas columnas que no puedo esperar leer. Espero con ansias leer tus columnas sobre los aconteceres y la política en el cielo.

Drew Marzullo is frustrated that the BET can cut funds from Greenwich’s budget even though he and the other Selectmen want them appropriated. (See Neil Vigdor’s excellent article on this here.) Join the club, pal.  Forget the $20,000 you’re annoyed about, what about the hundreds of things citizens want that never make the budget because the Board of Selectman, or, say, the Parks & Rec. dept., don’t want them?  Where’s the recourse for us? I don’t think we need to discuss changing the whole Greenwich system of government just because a selectman, or even all the selectman, are unhappy about a decision.

I’ve testified before the BET, oddly arguing for something to be deleted from the budget.  Not confident that my public meeting speech would work, I organized a protest. Made all the papers, interviewed on WGCH, the whole bit.  I didn’t get enough people out, not even those directly affected.  Lin Lavery didn’t stop by, even though she was supportive. Peter Tesei didn’t come by (as far as I know) even though he was certainly aware of the protest and discussed it with me at length.  (I’m not suggesting either should have been there.)  I’ll tell you who did stop by, without being asked, BET Chair Steve Walko. We chatted for a while, he was supportive.  I knew I didn’t have a crowd gathered that would (or should) make a difference.  But I had my shot, and Steve was there.  I’m fairly confident that if there was a big enough crowd, it, would have made a difference.

So despite losing, I’m a big supporter of our system.  Mostly.  In the same article, Steve Walko rightly pointed out the big problem with our BET: the ridiculous mandated 50/50 split between Republicans and Democrats.  It’s time to change that. My suggestion is we make the BET, like the RTM, a non-partisan board.  Let people run for that like they run for RTM, no party affiliation.  And whichever 12 get the most votes win.  I would also be happy if both parties nominated 12 candidates, but I think the RTM tradition is one worth mirroring – it has served us well.

I’ve served on RTM and my father is still on RTM.  The commitment there was too much for me so I dropped out.  BET is a lot more time consuming and , for that matter, Board of Selectmen is a huge commitment.  Attacks on any of these groups should never sound like Drew Marzullo’s obnoxious remarks in the Greenwich Time, “major policy decisions shouldn’t be left to a board whose members are picked by the two political parties.”  Everyone should be as proud of the BET members as they are of the Board of Selectman, all of whom have better, more productive, things to do with their time but choose to serve the public.  This rhetoric is disgraceful.  If you want the system changed, put your money where our mouth is and support open BET elections.  Otherwise my suggestion is take your lumps and don’t make comments alluding to incompetent or otherwise inappropriate people serving on the BET.

Drew: no siempre ganas

Drew Marzullo está frustrado porque la Junta de Estimación y Fiscalidad (BET por sus siglas en inglés) puede recortar los fondos del presupuesto de Greenwich aunque él y otros miembros lo quieran consignado. (Lean el excelente artículo de Neil Vidgor en este asunto aquí). Únase al club, amigo. Olvide los $20,000 que le molestan, y los cientos de cosas que los ciudadanos quieren que no llegan al presupuesto porque la Junta de los elegidos, o, digamos, el Departamento de Parques y Recreación no quieren? Dónde están los recursos para nosotros? No creo que tengamos que discutir que cambiemos todo el sistema de gobiernos de Greenwich sólo porque un elegido, o hasta todos, estén infelices sobre una decisión.

Yo he testificado ante la BET, argumentando que algo sea eliminado del presupuesto. No seguro de que mi discurso en la reunión pública funcionara, organicé una propuesta. Llegué a todos los periódicos, me entrevisté en el WGCH, todo. No llegué a movilizar suficientes personas, ni siquiera aquellos afectados. Lin Lavery no pasó, aunque ella fue un gran apoyo. Peter Tesei no pasó (hasta donde tengo entendido)aunque él estaba claramente al tanto de la propuesta y la discutió conmigo a profundidad. (No estoy sugiriendo que alguno debió haber estado allí). Les diré quien asistió sin haber digo preguntado, el Presidente de BET, Steve Walko. Charlamos por un momento, él fue de apoyo. Sé que no tenía un grupo reunido que haría (o debió haber hecho) alguna diferencia. Pero hice el intento, y Steve estuvo allí. Estoy seguro de que si hubiese habido un grupo lo suficientemente grande, hubiese hecho la diferencia.

Así pues, a pesar de haber perdido, apoyo mucho nuestro sistema. En su mayoría. En el mismo artículo, Steve Walko acertadamente resultó el gran problema con la BET: el mandato ridículo de dividir 50/50 entre los Republicanos y los Demócratas. Es hora de cambiarlo. Mi sugerencia es que hagamos la BET como la RTM, una junto no-partidista. Dejen que las personas sean elegidas como la RTM, sin afiliación a un partido. Y los 12 que reciban más votos ganan. Sería feliz también si ambos partidos nominan 12 candidatos, pero pienso que la tradición de la RTM es una que vale la pena imitar- nos ha servido bien.

Yo he servido en la RTM y mi padre todavía lo está. El compromiso que había era demasiado para mi así que lo abandoné. BET toma mucho tiempo y, para el caso, Board of Selectmen es un gran compromiso. Ataques a cualquiera de estos grupos no debe nunca sonar como el odioso comentario de Drew Marzullo al Greenwich Time, “las decisiones de política mayores no deben ser dejados a una junta cuyos miembros son elegidos por los dos partidos políticos”. Todos deben estar tan orgullosos de la BET como están de la Board of Selectmen, quienes tienen mejores y más productivas cosas que hacer con su tiempo que elegir servir al público. Esa retórica es vergonzosa. Si quieren el sistema cambiado, pongan su dinero donde está su boca y apoyen las elecciones abiertas de la BET. De lo contrario, mi sugerencia es tomar sus grumos y no hagan comentarios aludiendo a personas incompetentes o personas inapropiadas sirviendo en la BET.