As has been repeatedly pointed out to Mr. Oliverio, by his own political party and others, the growth of this plan to include the road up to Adams Corners was NEVER the  topic of public review. The only public hearing ever held concerned work at Oregon Corners. Significantly, what was presented then bears no relation to the current plan. The first time the public had access to the current plan was when the Friends of Peekskill Hollow finally overcame the many obstacles presented by the County to our request for it.  It was the Friends of Peekskill Hollow Road who put a copy in the PV Library, not the County, not the Town. The Adams Corners extension came to us as a surprise, even as Mr. Oliverio, who had earlier sworn that “over his dead body” would anything be done to the road which the residents didn’t want, was referring to it as a “done deal”.  Additionally, the saga of the stonewalling–by both county and town government–when the Friends of Peekskill Hollow attempted to get the plans is all anyone needs to recall when the issue of transparency comes up!  So, “nonsense” the charge of is not. And Mr. Oliverio’s repeating the word won’t make it so. We have the facts to back up our charge. He does not.

As Mr. Cusano’s article made very clear, the plan to widen and straighten Peekskill Hollow Road does NOT  have the safety issue on its side. Emergency services personnel are the best observers of that, and both Ms. Keating and Mr. Luongo have given the lie to Mr. Oliverio’s  breast beating about safety. Anyone who wants to do their own fact checking should FOIA the records of accidents on Peekskill Hollow Road.  The Sherriff’s office is required to produce these records which indicate the number, severity, and circumstances of  county accidents.  Again, the facts do not back up the supporters of this project.

Mr. Tendy’s charge that the opponents of the project are a “small number ” of “politically motivated” people is equally disingenuous, and he should be held accountable to explain what he means by that.  First of all, the Friends of Peekskill Hollow Road does not represent a “small number of people”. We have had over 400 people at all of our meetings. We obtained nearly 500 signatures on our first petition.  Is “politically motivated” a code for  anyone not in Mr. Tendy’s political party?  When it comes to my front yard, my real safety, the character of my town, I don’t think about my party affiliation.  Nor, I suspect, does anyone else who lives on this road, or cares about our way of life. Among the hundreds of people who met to protest the original project, and who signed petitions  were people of every and no party. Politics has nothing to do with it. Opposition to the project is based on sound reasoning and verifiable facts.  Hopefully, Mr. Tendy’s cheap shot will not go unchallenged. Let him present his evidence for political motivation as the rationale for our opposition. It would be refreshing to engage with our representatives in a true dialogue about this important issue, without throwaway lines like “nonsense” and “politically motivated”  which are calculated to discourage honest inquiry, to inflame rather than inform. With this kind of shabby history, it’s no wonder the Oregon Corners “meeting” was kept under wraps!

Sincerely,
Dr. Kathleen O’C. Hoekstra