Don’t Give Up on Talk

 

Dear Bryan,

 “Simply talking” is never very simple, of course, and this was evident at the immigration forum in Hampton Bays a few weeks ago. I believe your editorial identified the problem well and made a constructive suggestion. You said that the usual structure of a forum for community dialogue needs to change and that we find “alternative ways of presenting forums that actually results in some headway being made…”.

Alternative ways do exist. Some examples were demonstrated in Southampton this past weekend at The 1^st Woman’s Conference on Sustainability at Stony Brook Southampton. World change expert Margaret Wheatley was there to speak and inspire, and her ideas contributed to a uniquely designed conference format that included techniques known as World Café and Open Space. The large group attending the full conference heard expert presentations, but dialogue took place in small groups, and even the topics to be discussed were suggested by participants. It was successful in many ways, and talk will lead to action.

How future immigration forums will be conducted is important. We need thoughtful dialogue and meaningful action. Our leadership, Tim Bishop, Fred Thiele and Anna Throne-Holst, responded to that need, but the community must do this together. Elected leaders cannot solve the immigration issues for our community alone. We all have a role. We all need to remember that real dialogue includes listening as well as talking, and that it is not always going to be easy.

Important issues arouse strong feelings and raised voices. Let’s welcome that we certainly did have that as our beginning in Hampton Bays. Let’s go forward to continue the work together. Let’s keep talking and figure out what we can do for our community and our nation.

Having spent most of my professional life helping people engage in conversations about difficult issues, I am not ready to give up on the value of talking. Talking and being heard can go a long way toward resolving important issues and lead to action. It may be the only way.

Sally Pope

Remsenburg

Councilwoman, Town of Southampton

 

Proud of School and Students

 

Dear Bryan

As surely as the daffodils begin to rise in our harbor village, so too does the discussion begin to turn toward the upcoming school board election on May 19th.

Many of those who have the singular view that our schools are too expensive, taxes are too high and children spoiled, have been busy writing letters to The Express and stirring up chatter around town. There are important issues; the budget, the teachers contract, the new superintendent and the job the current board has been doing. Much of this talk is highly misinformed and usually filled with hyperbole and exaggerations.

Take the notion that Sag Harbor has high property tax rates, … false. On average our property tax rates are about 0.7 % of assessed value. If you go to the middle of Suffolk county they average about 1.5 % of assessed value, (100% higher) or go to Westchester 2.5 % of assessed value (350% higher). In fact our property tax rates are some of the very lowest in New York State. We have a great school system, our test scores are high and our graduates are admitted to the best universities. I wish some of the good folks who complain on and on at school board meetings would take an equal amount of time to attend the school plays, performances, morning program, and athletic events to see the spirit and character of our students. It is something we should all take great pride and enjoyment in seeing.

In my view, public education, one that offers a diversity of programs and opportunities, is the essence of the American ideal. We live in a country that affords everyone the chance to pursue their dreams and achieve greatness. It is the public education system that provides the basis for the American dream. As our world gets smaller and the challenges and competition increase, we need to make sure we give our kids the very best programs to thrive and take America on to the next level of greatness.

This year the school budget will ask for a modest increase in taxes. This means your taxes will go up $50 for every $500,000 of assessed value. For the average homeowner we are talking about a $75 increase next year. With this we can keep all of our rich programs, like kindergarten and athletics. If the budget is voted down, these types of non-mandated programs will surely be on the chopping block. I believe that $75 is a great investment in the future of country.

We must remember that after all of the discussion and talk is over, there is one constituency in our community that does not get to vote, and that is the children. We each bear the burden as custodians of their future. Think deeply not just about your tax bill when you vote this year, but think about your town, and the nation as a whole. We have seen heroes emerge from the halls of Pierson (Jordan Haerter) and I believe there are innovators and leaders that will surely follow. Vote for the children, for in the end, they are trusting us to do what is right.

Sincerely,

David Diskin

Sag Harbor

 

Law Protects Property, Not People

 

To the Editor:

As members of the American Institute of Architects – Peconic Chapter, we are engaged in an ongoing effort to improve the NYS Building Code.

We propose the following critical change:

 

The Council should delete from the Code the requirement to protect windows against ballistic impact (by strengthening glass, panels, shutters or other devices), as a protection of contents, instead of a protection of the health, safety and welfare of the occupants.

 

In 2003, our region was designated part of the 120 MPH wind zone. This designation required all new residential construction in our area to comply with ‘opening protection’. New windows had to be protected from flying debris by one of several methods: use of temporary plywood panels, strengthened glass windows, or rated ‘hurricane’ shutters

What is the purpose of window protection? It is supposed to prevent wind-borne debris from penetrating window openings in winds up to 120 MPH. But what happens if the windows are penetrated by debris? Interior contents may be damaged, but will the occupants be threatened? In all likelihood, no. There are almost no deaths on record in the continental US attributed to wind-blown debris, and the statistical evidence of injury due to glass penetration by debris at winds under 120 MPH is insignificant.

So what can be the purpose of window protection? It can only be to protect interior contents. But is that the purpose of the Building Code? The Residential Code says on its first page that its purpose is ”to safeguard public safety, health and general welfare …” but the ‘opening protection’ provision in the code actually leads to an unintended result: it is potentially a threat to the lives of the occupants.

Homeowners face an important safety issue when plywood panels or shutters are installed. Panels or shutters – through which firefighters cannot see – may well become a hazard for occupants. In our area, where power outages are not uncommon during wind storms, the use of combustible devices to provide light or heat, is the usual first response. (Who has not lit a candle to illuminate a room during a blackout?) If the egresses are securely covered, the occupants on the inside cannot exit. In any emergency, whether or not a storm leads to a fire, rescuers on the outside will have difficulty locating the occupants within, or getting them out if needed, if it is enclosed by panels or shutters.

Strengthened windows are of course transparent, but rescuers cannot necessarily identify strengthened glass. Outwardly these windows appear to be little different from conventional windows, but they may be lethal in an emergency, since rescuers can lose valuable time trying to determine which tools are needed to break them. Strengthened windows require a diamond-bit chainsaw to break through. They are in fact so strong that standard 2×4 and 2×6 walls around them have reportedly failed the missile test that the windows themselves were required to pass.

The code does not now require paneled or shuttered houses to be vacated, but if it did make this law, it would be safeguarding unoccupied (hard to verify) houses. Therefore, it would be once again affirming that its purpose is to protect empty property, not the public. We have to ask, if ‘opening protection’ is supposed to prevent damage to the contents of a structure, is this really not a gesture to the insurance industry? A large part of our community resides here seasonally and a portion are in retirement: they may not be physically or fiscally able to erect protection in time for a storm. Will failure to install the temporary panels, required by code, be grounds for an insurance claim rejection?

Our July letter to the Residential Code of New York State Technical Subcommittee has met with limited response. In the meantime, we note that the NYS State Residential Building Code is about to be amended this year. We have been told that the comment period for current revisions has ended and that our position will not be examined until the opening of the next round of revision comments in approximately three years, c. 2012. We hope that publishing this letter will help inform the public and will lead to their support for more timely action.

A copy of our position letter – which addresses other issues in the code – and contact information may be found on our website: http://AIAPeconic.org.

Very truly yours,

Stephen A. Lesser, AIA

Chairman, AIA Peconic Chapter Codes Committee

Popularity: 7% [?]