To the Editor:

In a recent letter to the editor the new vice chairman of the county legislature Mr. Kevin Acres offers a story line of clever but empty rhetoric regarding land claims events. There are numerous inaccurate or misleading statements in the letter. Kevin continues to sell his plan to keep the $4 million dollars for the county alone. Mr. Joseph Lightfoot and Mr. Kevin Acres were displeased with the idea that the previous board of legislators tried to follow through with a proposal to distribute funds to the other municipalities in the land claims areas.

Regardless of an earlier positive opinion, Mr. Paquin and I ended up not being able to vote on the original proposal for the allocation of funds due to an unfavorable opinion from the county ethics board. This action to sideline us was prompted by Mr. Lightfoot in a Sunday edition of the newspaper. The casualty of this action was the Massena Central School District. It was removed to follow through with at least a major portion of our vision of compensation for the two towns and the St. Lawrence Central School District. The original proposal would have died due to a lack of support from the other side of the aisle and the funding for all other municipalities with it.

From day one of introducing this land claims settlement in executive session and in public session I was clear that the county should share the money. When I presented a powerpoint in public session no one voiced any opposition to the plan. Mr. Acres did ask a clarifying question during my presentation about the $3.5 million dollar “signing bonus” from the state and tribe which I had proposed that the county keep to itself entirely.

Money coming to county governments out of the state’s share of gaming funds for land claims settlement is not a new concept or unique to only our memorandum of understanding. What is different in my proposal is that I tried to make all parties winners up front. I made it clear that we should share some of the annual proceeds even though we didn't have to. Besides being the right thing to do it would avoid potential litigation and smooth over some of the hard feeling that could arise from the potential transfer of land. Mr. Acres would have you believe that the forthcoming effort to keep the entire $4 million dollars is somehow my fault. His letter tries to make me a scapegoat, a fall guy. It seems as though Kevin Acres would have people who oppose his unjust proposal throw their hands up in despair and quit. Mr. Acres cites a part of the MOU which states that land transferred to the tribe will have property taxes paid to municipalities by NY state.

The suggestion has been made that it is adequate compensation for the municipalities and I will say again and again that it is just pocket change. It is nothing more than a few crumbs that fell off the table for these municipalities.

Mr. Acres makes the argument that because I have no small business experience it disqualifies me from serving the public in a meaningful and productive way. I didn't pass Mr. Acres litmus test. Would you be able to? I try to be respectful to people from all walks of life. For some reason Mr. Acres has had a bit of a chip on his shoulder about public employees in general. He has indicated that private sector workers are better than public sector workers. Kevin has shared his belief that the public schools ought to be privatized.

I offer no apologies to Mr. Acres for having entered into a field of public service and I believe I have the most rewarding job in the world working with our youth. I do believe that Mr. Kevin Acres is very intelligent. If you ask him he may affirm to you that he is indeed smarter than I. Perhaps he fits in the top 1 percent of our population in a variety of categories and good for him. While I hope that he comes to his senses in regards to justice and equity regarding land claims I'm afraid he won't be changing his views. He is entitled to his views as to the way the world is now and what it ought to be. We all are entitled to our opinions.

The fictional character Gordon Gecko from the movie “Wall Street” said “greed is good.” That is an opinion I disagree with. There are currently two legislators on the record with their intent to keep all the money and I doubt that they can be moved. However no vote has been taken on the repeal of the allocation of funds and there are eight new Republican legislators who haven't gone on record yet. Eight brand new legislators who haven't been on the job very long and so far have relied upon Mr. Acres and Mr. Lightfoot to guide them. If they truly believe that keeping all $4 million for the county government is fair then they can have a party line vote and with their 10 votes make it so.

The treasure could be all theirs if the land claims proposal is eventually ratified with other parties and at the federal level. However if the new Republican legislators aren't satisfied with the existing proposal but also don't feel it is fair to keep all the money then they should negotiate something to replace it with. If they repeal the resolution then it should be replaced with something better simultaneously. Repeal and replace in the same resolution. I might be open to that.

I'm sure other people would like to hear what an improvement might look like from the new Republican majority. Why the rush to jam this resolution to keep all the money? Why not study it, think about it, hear from people and work together?

Folks this is about a land claim not about whether or not the county is “the needy party” as is Mr. Joe Lightfoot's rationale for promising to bring forward a resolution to keep all the money. If this land claim were in your town or in your school district would it be right if the county kept all the money?

Jonathan Putney

County Legislator District 15