What’s More Important to Sandy Frankel… Residents’ Safety or Politics?
Sadly, it’s Politics.
What is going on with the local Democrats lately? First we learned about Assemblyman David Gantt and his cronies aggressively pushing a female police officer; then we have newly elected County Legislator Dick Beebe ignoring NYS Election Law by not filing financial reports; and now Brighton Supervisor Sandy Frankel is basically telling her constituents and citizens throughout Monroe County that she could care less about their safety.
Now that sounds absolutely foolish, right? What elected official in their right mind would blatantly disregard the personal safety of the people they serve as well as the safety of those they may want to serve in the future (show me a politician who isn’t always looking for the next best thing).
Well, Sandy Frankel did just that. The Brighton-Pittsford Post helped spin this for Sandy a little but read it yourself here with an objective eye to see who is truly putting safety at risk.
You see, the New York State Department of Transportation routinely repaves and repairs state roads in order to make sure they’re safe for those travelling them. On I-490 in the Towns of Brighton and Pittsford, the state wanted to make such improvements. Apparently, the professional highway workers determined there was a need.
And, the professional highway workers also prefer to do this work in the evening. Apparently, they have this belief that there is less traffic later at night and that it would be safer for the men and women working on the road. In addition, they must think that the vast majority of area residents would be better off not encountering road crews during rush hour traffic twice a day. Who do these professional highway workers think they are to make these assumptions?
Well, Sandy Frankel will have none of these baseless and overly imposing demands. Sandy and three of her lockstep board members (all except Councilwoman Sheila Gaddis) voted against allowing the project to be done correctly, deciding that safety is not that big of a deal, and told the professional highway people to go shove it. Gaddis must be new. Wait til she experiences Frankel’s wrath. We’re told Sandy doesn’t like it when her board members go against her in public (or in private for that matter). Gaddis has no idea what she’s in for.
What’s surprising to us at Monroe Rising is that it’s the beaurocrats that seem to care more about the people’s safety and doing the job efficiently than our elected representatives. What is wrong with this picture? Well, I’ll tell you what’s right with it for Sandy Frankel. Once again, she is putting the opportunity to get a front page story in the newspaper with this self-created controversy, over what is best for her constituents and all the people who travel this stretch of 490.
So, as a longtime Town Supervisor, Sandy Frankel cannot (or refuses to) work towards a favorable solution with all involved parties that both protects the people living near the project AND ensures that the much needed work on this busy highway is done properly?
Putting politics before people is never a good way to govern. Let’s hope she changes her mind, for all of our sake. We’ll keep you posted on how this pans out.
3 Responses to “What’s More Important to Sandy Frankel… Residents’ Safety or Politics?”
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Great post Mr. Peabody!
Thanks Cinci. Apparently imposing consistently high tax increases, trying to steal land from a church and stopping people from building the house they want aren’t enough for Ms. Frankel
Dear Mr. Peabody,
Unfortunately, you may not have had the full facts about the I-490 road improvement project that was the subject of a public hearing by the Brighton Town Board when you wrote your comments.
To clarify the issue, here’s the rest of the story:
1. The fact of the matter is that the NYSDOT already had the authority under state law to do contruction work at night on roads that they own, so they really didn’t need to ask the town for permission. In addition, at the meeting the NYSDOT representatives threatened the town and its citizens by saying that if the town didn’t approve night construction, then the NYSDOT would simply drop the Brighton section from the project. If the road was in need of repair via a mill and fill project, then it wasn’t responsible to threaten removal of that segment of road. We don’t take kindly to intimidation, especially since the NYSDOT could easily proceed with the work at night if that was their preference.
2. So why did the NYSDOT come to the town in the first place? Because our prior approvals, though not binding on the NYSDOT, included conditions that would reduce the likelihood of property damage to homes from intense vibratory equipment, and lessen jarring noise in the middle-of-the-night for nearby homes. The NYSDOT chose to use these conditions in their specifications when bidding out projects as added reinforcement in the monitoring of and adherence to the required noise abatement measures. NYSDOT guidelines call for noise abatement measures to the best extent that they can be achieved. This was essentially a belt and suspenders request.
In the past, the Brighton Town Board and I were pleased that the NYSDOT wanted to work with us and the neighbors to find reasonable noise abatement solutions and limitations on vibratory equipment that had caused serious damage to some homes. But this time the attitude of the NYSDOT at the public hearing essentially made a sham of their request.
3. During past NYSDOT projects on I-490, nearby residents have, indeed, suffered substantial consquential damage to their homes, have had to fight tooth and nail to get relief from the contractor’s insurance, and have had their lives disrupted for extended periods of time as a result of how the road work was conducted.
4. Now I certainly understand and agree with your concerns about the safety of construction workers on highway projects. Since we share that concern, I will point out that the NYSDOT has approved a variety of highway improvement projects here and throughout the state during daylight hours as well as at night, mindful that night work is prefereable. If the safety factor is so substantial, then the NYSDOT should ban day work and only conduct night work.
5. With the knowledge that the NYSDOT could work at night regardless of the town’s position, I asked the NYSDOT representatives at the meeting to review the concerns raised at the meeting and to talk with us about how the project might proceed before making a final decision. I suggested that we wait until the next board meeting to take action. That was the basis of Councilwoman Sheila Gaddis’ vote. While that was my desire as well, my vote to the contrary responded to the NYDSOT’s continuing attitude of threat and intimidation with regard to the progress of the project.
6. Despite this, I conducted mediation over the next few days and was able to reach a satisfactory resolution. The project will be done at night under conditions that all involved parties believe are appropriate and warranted.
7. How did this come about? During my discussion with the NYSDOT Regional Director who was not at the public hearing, I learned that the road improvement probably would provide some reduction in the ambient noise level of traffic for several years. That information was not presented to the public or town board during the public hearing. I thought that If the residents could manage to live with a few days of added noise and discomfort in exchange for several years of a slightly quieter road, then that might be a basis for compromise.
7. I then spoke with the neighborhoods’ representative who, in the interest of reaching an amiable resolution, agreed to night work if certain conditions were met: (a) no vibratory compaction or back up alarms along with other noise abatement measures, (b) survey of homes with photographs pre- and post-construction to make insurance recovery easier in the event of consquential property damage from the construction work, and (c) noise level testing pre- and post-construction to instruct future projects. The NYSDOT agreed to these conditions as did the residents.
So as you can see, I was able to reach a positive outcome. We will continue to represent the interests of the people we are elected to serve, to work cooperatively with the NYSDOT, and to stand against treats and intimidation.
I hope that this is helpful to you, Mr. Peabody, and to other readers.
Sincerely,
Sandra L. Frankel
Supervisor
Town of Brighton