I have posted comments about the up coming Cape Vincent primary and election. Marty Mason is running against Michelle Oswald
for a town board seat. Since I have
already expressed my opinion about Mr. Mason in a previous post, I will now
have some comments on Ms. Oswald.
First of all nothing I am saying here about Ms. Oswald and
her record on the CV board should be taken as support for Mr. Mason. Mr. Mason in my opinion has already demonstrated
beyond a shadow of a doubt his lack of judgment and leadership during the past
industrial wind issue. So for those of
you who still cling to some deluded fantasy that I am helping Mr. Mason or the
Democrats…so be it. I can’t change that nonsense.
And those of you who persist in that nonsense you probably have noticed your
comments were not posted.
As far as the choice we have now, Michelle is the better
choice, however, I say that with some major reservations despite the glowing
support from letters in the WDT. Personally
I believe we need to vote with our eyes open to the realities, not glowing political
election year propaganda.
Although I could generally support Ms. Oswald and have
before I think she has dropped the ball on
a couple very critical CV town issues.
Several comments in editorials were made that would lead you
to believe Ms. Oswald is more independent and not just a rubber stamp for the
Hirschey govt. But if you read this blog
you know I like to look at the actual record and evidence on those claims and
see if they actually hold. And there is
record to look at
During the wind issue with BP under the Art 10 process when
Ms. Oswald was on the board she apparently fully supported the appeasing of the
Art. 10 process with BP, rubber stamping with her signature many letters
written by the town to the NYPSC in this distorted process.
Art. 10 removed our land use home rule rights on the siting
of energy projects in our community, yet Ms. Oswald supported the town’s
involvement in a process with BP and the State that removed citizen’s rights on
one of the most critical home rule powers given to local govts., the local
zoning control of our land.
I believe the town should have stood in protest of Art 10
and not appeased it as they did. I believe
that Ms. Oswald, who publicly declared she was against industrial wind in CV
(to her credit) should have been a voice to look at other viable alternatives like
prohibiting industrial wind development in CV instead of the typical and Art 10
zoning regulation of wind energy approach that gave BP and the State wind
agenda a huge advantage over local communities.
Instead she caved in to the Hirschey zoning law approach, or
she did not comprehend the other alternatives which were explained to her by
myself and others. And keep in mind the
law that exists now allows some wind energy development in CV. So where was the anti wind Ms. Oswald who apparently supported the
Hirschey govt. zoning (or chose to remain silent under social pressure)?
Now it appears based on some recent case law after a NYS
Appeals Court ruling on Fracking, that banning wind development might have been
the more appropriate approach to preserve home rule and truly protect us from
future wind development and other invasive land uses. To understand this you can see a very well
crafted explanation on this matter in
WDT letter I posted by Dave LaMora of CV.
So on the wind issue and the Art 10, process I just don’t see the independence and critical
thinking when needed that others claim to observe in Ms. Oswald, and to me that
is disappointing as a leader.
The second point to consider is the solar zoning fiasco of
last summer 2013 when Ms. Oswald was on the CV board. Our zoning process and officials and the
proper administration of our brand new zoning law failed badly and very
publicly. The “solution” was a badly
distorted and very legally questionable application of the process.
The questionable clean up and damage control of this zoning
mess, which even made the WDT paper, involved many town officials, doing what I
would consider some very questionable things.
The final ZBA decision on the fiasco was a disaster as well, with even
some officials saying the process if challenged probably would not hold up in
court, but they approved the permits anyhow.
What happened was an inexcusable twisting of the zoning process.
So where was Ms. Oswald on this critical CV matter? I don’t remember any real questioning or
protest of this of this process. I don’t
know what level she may have been involved
behind the scenes, but it seems to me anyone on the town board who appoints
zoning officials should have been raising a real stink and having some very
serious reservations and questions about the behavior of some CV zoning and other
board officials.
The person who was hurt by this process was a fellow CV
female citizen who needed help. So where
was Ms. Oswald on that level?
Of course you have to keep in mind that the town supervisor
Mr. Hirschey was involved in this solar zoning mess with his own prohibited
solar project put up in error months before.
Apparently Ms. Oswald did not question that either, and she may have
known about it.
Did Ms. Oswald not comprehend the zoning law and process, or
with the supervisor involved was there simply too much social pressure for her
to speak up.
I was at the heart of exposing this zoning mess, yet never
received a call, email, or contact from Ms. Oswald for details or
clarification, nor did the women citizen who was aggrieved by the process.
Once again at a critical point for the CV town board and the
zoning process Ms. Oswald in my opinion did not step up with the appropriate leadership
when it was badly needed and really dropped the ball on this matter.
If you have the opportunity you might want to ask her why
she failed to address or question this matter that was right in her lap as a
town board member.
We know about Marty Mason’s history, agenda and failure of
leadership on the town’s most critical issue in decades…but it is time to ask
Ms. Oswald some tough questions as well before we support her as the preferred choice.
Of course in the tight knit Republican social scene in CV these questions are not likely to get asked.
That is why we have a supervisor and zoning officials who could not comprehend or properly apply the very zoning law they wrote!
Mr. Pundt, your intentions as a self-accredited political analyst/consultant- to- the- voters are baffling. The basics of election campaigning is to promote the positive features of one candidate over another to garner support at the ballot box. Your tactic of supplying your readers with a continual list of actions by every candidate that display how they all fail to pass your litmus test of leadership would seem to have only one end result, that being to convince voters to not vote for anyone.
ReplyDeleteSince this is an opinion blog,I would offer that in the case of the primary in Cape Vincent between Oswald and Mason, your tactic will assuredly lead to the election of the native, albeit ill-suited, Mr. Mason, since leadership qualities are not the driving force behind his support, rather the fact that he is the favorite of the "return power to the locals" faction ,who have a history of supporting any candidate regardless of leadership qualities ,case in point- Harvey White for supervisor. In a previous post you offered Mr. Mason the advice to consider all the residents of the town, local and seasonal alike. You can be assured that will not happen.
In a two person primary with much at stake, it is difficult to see the advantage of picturing the candidate you claim to prefer, as lacking in leadership. You make a most arrogant assumption that the voting public is unaware of the issues you present, and votes with their eyes closed. It would seem to this observer that a re-election of Mr. Mason would be catastrophic to the town of Cape Vincent. That makes Mrs. Oswald the preferred option for anyone interested in the future of the town.
An expose of what you consider her failings is hardly a rally call for voting support.