Letters, Week of August 1, 2013

I’m an Anthony Mayer Weiner… Not! 

 To The Editor:
Re “Sext and the City” (Scoopy’s Notebook, July 25):

Oh I’m glad that I’m not Anthony D. Weiner

That is quite a raunchy thing to be

Exposing parts could rate a misdemeanor

But sexting might just bring mayoralty
Sal Hirsch

V Lit is a hit!

To The Editor:
Re “Peeling the layers of Tania Grossinger’s cocoon”

(V Lit, July 25):  I am honored to be included in the first issue of V Lit! Congratulations on a marvelous addition to The Villager!
Tania Grossinger

Art adored Avital

To The Editor:
Re “Peeling the layers of Tania Grossinger’s cocoon” (V Lit, July 25):

She certainly did not know Avital, who was adored by Art more than life itself. She may have had a relationship with him but she wasn’t the only one — yes, there were others. Calling my mother, myself and my sisters “troubled” indeed shows cowardice. Sad you didn’t get to know her, you would then have seen why he never left her.
Sharon D’Lugoff

Where’s the BID? Where’s anyone?

To The Editor:
Re “‘Soho Wild Man’ is cleared, again, of assault charges” (news article, July 25):

He clearly needs to be housed in an institution that addresses violence and his clear need for medication.

Where is the Soho BID on this?

Where is the anti-Soho BID on this?

Why is there no place with the capacity to address this issue? It’s not the job ultimately of the N.Y.P.D. He needs medical care and housing, even if against his wishes. The Soho people are arguing with each other in print over other issues and Margaret Chin, while a terror who needs therapy and medication is loose in their neighborhood.

Your neighbors are at risk. Solve the problem. What’s it going to take — someone getting killed?

Stop worrying about the so-called civil rights of an absolutely clear and present danger already.

If he were a family member who was threatening to kill or commit suicide, would you just let him be, or would you find a way to get him committed?
Patrick Shields

Get those apartments moving!

To The Editor:
Re “Westbeth empty units fuel rumors; Used for storage” (news article, July 18):

Congrats to Clarissa-Jan Lim for her sharp investigative reporting on the big cover-up of shady dealings on the Westbeth board of directors. The irony is that Westbeth was set up in the Seventies as a refuge for artists living in a cannibalistic corporate culture — a haven from the rat race. But now it seems some rats are running the show there.

As Lim reported, when asked, George Cominskie, president of the Westbeth Artists Residents Council, confirmed that “there are definitely 15 empty apartments, some held for 18 months before Sandy.”

“In all the years I lived here,” Cominskie continued, “if we went above three apartments for more than two months it was a rarity. About two years ago the board of directors put the management office in charge of overseeing in-house moves. Since that change, the lists have been kept from the public eye and no one really knows if a person who gets an apartment was on the list ahead of them.”

Under this predatory change in the in-house rule — in a patronage system — in-house artists get the first pick of the new apartments. This is outrageous. They should restore the rules as originally intended. Cominskie also confirmed two apartments were sold commercially.

Many worthier artists are slaving away, their work stifled as they try to stay above the whirlpool of living expenses. They should not be subjected to secret rules by fools who oversee their fate. Get those apartments moving and fixed up. Get that list moving again, fairly and equitably. Now!
Richard West

Bypassing the public

To The Editor:
Re “Pier air rights may open a Pandora’s box of development” (talking point, by Andrew Berman, July 18):

Again, a major policy change that will impact the future of Greenwich Village is done without any public scrutiny. Just what is the agenda of the good liberal electeds that snuck this legislation through anyway?

Do they not trust the residents of the West Village to be able to engage in discussion on an issue that has such long-term impact as the transfer of air rights?

I am dumbfounded when I realize that Deborah Glick and Brad Hoylman have now joined Richard Gottfried in siding with the developer interests rather than putting both Governor Cuomo and Mayor Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn — who was elected to represent the Lower West Side — on the spot.

Soccer fields for the children whose families can afford to send them to private school may sound nice. But what about the traditional cultural values of the Village, including its long involvement in the arts, most specifically, theater? Seniors again will get the short stick, as they do now, with so little seating space that is supportive of the lower back.

I have always looked to Glick and now Hoylman to come up with progressive solutions that benefit the diverse community that still exists in the West Village. But this plan plays into the destruction of the Village as it has historically been. Please, let’s have some public meetings on this and every subject that will change, not only the landscape, but also the culture of the West Village.

We just saw how four Village women — with the support of Community Board 2 Chairperson David Gruber — snuck through a conservancy takeover of Washington Square, without sufficient public hearings, to create essentially a privatized public park.

We saw how the silence of elected officials allowed a fracked-gas transfer station to be built right next to a children’s playground in the Hudson Park Park in the West Village.

Thank you, once again, Andrew Berman for staying on top of these issues and, most importantly, doing everything you can to alert and engage the public on public policy issues that have the potential to fundamentally change what we call Greenwich Village.
Jim Fouratt

Comes as no surprise

To The Editor:
Re “The billionaires back Margaret Chin for City Council” (talking point, by Sean Sweeney, July 25):

The Real Estate Board of New York’s backing should come as no surprise looking at Chin’s disgraceful record supporting N.Y.U., the Soho Business Improvement District and the Chinatown BID (opposed by a majority of Chinatown merchants and property owners), and destroying the landmarked 135 Bowery for a mainland Chinese bank.
Carl Rosenstein

Chin blew her chance

To The Editor:
Re “The billionaires back Margaret Chin for City Council” (talking point, by Sean Sweeney, July 25):

Chin and Quinn did us in. Rajkumar will raise the bar.

Jenifer Rajkumar hears us, meets with us, listens to what our community needs — and is our choice.

You had a chance, Margaret Chin. You abused it big time.
Judith Chazen Walsh

E-mail letters, not longer than 250 words in length, to news@thevillager.com or fax to 212-229-2790 or mail to The Villager, Letters to the Editor, 515 Canal St., Suite 1C, NY, NY 10013. Please include phone number for confirmation purposes. The Villager reserves the right to edit letters for space, grammar, clarity and libel. The Villager does not publish anonymous letters.

The Villager encourages readers to share articles:

Comments are often moderated.

We appreciate your comments and ask that you keep to the subject at hand, refrain from use of profanity and maintain a respectful tone to both the subject at hand and other readers who also post here. We reserve the right to delete your comment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


+ three = 11

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>