Good Morning
Good Morning

Wainscott is the best site to bury cable for wind power

Richard DeRose of Wainscott walks his dog at

Richard DeRose of Wainscott walks his dog at the town beach on Beach Lane in Wainscott, likely site of a cable landing for the South Fork Wind Farm. Dec. 5 Credit: Newsday/Mark Harrington

Wainscott best site to bury power cable

Thanks for your Dec. 9 news story on the South Fork offshore wind project [“Negotiations over cable”] about talks regarding the landing site of an electrical cable. As a former commissioner of the state Department of Environmental Conservation, I’m no stranger to local opposition to projects like this. But the opposition by Citizens for the Preservation of Wainscott to the cable landing is “not in my backyard” on steroids. I encourage this small group of owners of second homes to reconsider.

The cable landing in Wainscott is preferred because it is the least environmentally disruptive and would affect the fewest people for the shortest period. Unfortunately, despite the need to rapidly move away from fossil fuels, the citizens group is taking an irrational “anyplace but here” attitude. The temporary inconvenience from burying the cable would be minimal, and would occur in the offseason, when most owners of second homes are not around.

Connecting this offshore energy to the Long Island grid is now being reviewed by several state agencies. I believe this time-tested process, along with decisions by local officials, will produce a project that is good for the South Fork, Long Island and the state. I urge citizens of Wainscott to support it. After all, coastal property owners have the most to lose if New York does not lead the way in combating climate change.

Joe Martens, East Hampton

Editor’s note: The writer is director of the New York Offshore Wind Alliance, a coalition of organizations supporting wind power.

Congratulations to Time honoree

I would like to apologize to climate activist Greta Thunberg for ignorant, bullying remarks made by President Donald Trump after she was honored by Time magazine [“Trump mocks teen’s Time honor,” News, Dec. 13].

Like many of his Republican cohorts, Trump has ignored the facts about climate change.

The survival of our planet is now in the hands of youngsters like Thunberg, 16, who have not been corrupted by money and power. To her, I say, please continue your campaign and ignore the moronic comments of those who place financial self-interests over the health and safety of future generations.

Congratulations on being named “Person of the Year”!

Julian Esposito, Levittown

Fix facilities instead of renaming them

A state assemblyman wants to explore renaming Robert Moses State Park [“Robert Moses naming debate,” News, Dec. 8]. Public money spent to rename roads, bridges and other public facilities is a growing thorn in my side — especially when those same facilities have a dire need of repair.

Several entities got new names in recent years: the Robert F. Kennedy Bridge (formerly the Triborough Bridge), the Hugh L. Carey Tunnel (formerly the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel), the Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge (formerly the Governor Malcolm Wilson Tappan Zee Bridge), and the Jackie Robinson Parkway (formerly the Interboro Parkway). In addition, the Verrazzano Bridge needs new signs to add another Z to properly spell the name.

Despite $2 billion in tolls collected by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority in 2018 for administration and maintenance of its own infrastructure, potholes are everywhere. In addition, these MTA tolls are supposed to keep buses, subways and railroads running.

Fellow citizens, it’s time for a sweeping change in our government starting at the state level. We must elect officials, regardless of party, who will truly represent us. If the new ones don’t do the job, get rid of them next election. It’s time to stop the nonsense and take back our state.

Ray Manzo, Hicksville

New $80 fee should be based on water use

Here they go again!

Starting Jan. 1, customers of the Suffolk County Water Authority will pay extra for treatment of contaminants, including 1,4-dioxane [“Suffolk Water customers to pay extra $80 per year,” News, Nov. 23].

With this surcharge, my annual water bill will go up 40%. We are extremely frugal with our water use. Others who use enormous amounts will pay the same $80 a year even though it is a figurative drop in the ocean for them. It is not fair that the authority forces customers who conserve to subsidize those who overuse or waste water. When will common sense prevail?

Therese Madonia, Farmingville