In "Mayor's concerns are unfounded" (Your Views, July 21), the writer, a rail historian, wonders why Oradell and the Pascack Valley Line towns are concerned about freight trains. One only need look at how the New York Susquehanna and Western freight operations have endangered the lives of the people of North Bergen and the Meadowlands towns.
News reports say that NYS&W stockpiled 280 tons of phosphorus pentasulfide alongside their tracks. This chemical can ignite or explode upon contact with water and give off toxic fumes that could be fatal. A recent Record editorial states, "North Jersey communities have had to put up with all sorts of headaches from railroads - from foul fumes of long-idling freight trains to the mounds of trash at rail yards."
As mayor, I want to protect my community from the dangerous practices and quality-of-life impacts posed by these freight railroads.
The Pascack Valley towns sued to protect the public health and the water supply, as the tracks run alongside the Oradell and Woodcliff Lake reservoirs. We stopped a railroad siding from being placed in forested wetlands where pollutants would run off into the reservoir.
I would suggest that the writer and other "rail fans" write letters to NYS&W and urge them to clean up their act and stop endangering the public health.
Frederick T. LaMonica
Oradell, July 21
The writer is mayor of Oradell.
Mike Kelly's column "Dissent at Ground Zero" (Opinion, July 31) summarized the controversy that has emerged regarding the planning and development of a memorial at Ground Zero.
It's a controversy that unfortunately has been framed in political terms of conservatives versus liberals. Thus it has hampered discussions and consensus-building regarding what should be built.
Perhaps at some point rational thinking and level heads will prevail, resulting in a win-win solution with respect to the memorial for all concerned parties.
Arnold Korotkin
Montclair, July 31
The truth is: Absolutely nothing is more inherently dangerous in our everyday lives than getting behind the wheel of a vehicle, moving onto a highway and driving.
Nothing else takes as many lives.
The next most frightening part of the scenario is getting into a vehicle while intoxicated, drugged or underage ... or knowing that someone else may be.
After these two comes operating a vehicle when one is too debilitated by age or illness to be driving.
Next would be driving a huge vehicle such as an SUV while having to pay attention to children in the back seat. Then would come driving behind or next to a person shouting with rage into a hand-held cellphone as his car swerves from lane to lane unpredictably.
Finally, there are the issues of smoking, drinking, applying makeup, eating a dripping burger, drinking hot beverages, reading a map, doing a crossword, shaving and an enormous list of other things that people do while driving a car.
Perhaps we could all, privately, take a look at the things we do while we are navigating a moving vehicle and think not once or twice, but many more times about the dangers inherent in driving a car at 60 mph and being otherwise engaged.
Sandra Steuer Cohen
Teaneck, July 31
Smoking is a habit. When in my car, I know where my cigarettes are, I know where my mouth is, and I know where the factory-installed cigarette lighter is. I don't see where the distraction is.
When I am on the parkway or the turnpike and I come to a tollbooth, I have to fumble for change for the toll. On the turnpike I have to look at the little card with the amount due at the exit. Maybe the tollbooths should be eliminated for being a distraction just like the cigarettes, the same cigarettes that benefit the state from the heavy taxes we pay on them.
Roy Weinzierl
Maywood, July 31
Regarding, "Drivers fume over proposed smoking ban" (Page A-3, July 25): I strongly feel that this ban should be enacted.
Smoking could decrease a driver's reaction time, increasing the chance of his causing an accident. Say, for instance, a driver dropped ashes on his lap and, while attempting to brush them off, removed his concentration from the road. Passing this ban can possibly save that person and prevent others from being harmed.
Is smoking while driving more important than your own life?
Katherine Serpa
Hackensack, July 29
Teacher salaries
The arguments made by various people justifying teachers' salaries tend to conveniently miss the key point.
Their salaries are not what is imploding municipal and state budgets; it is their guaranteed 100 percent taxpayer-subsidized health-care costs. Budgets and taxes will continue to spiral out of control until someone stands up to the teachers union and says no more free ride for life.
It is not fiscally sustainable to expect taxpayers to fund 100 percent of a retired teacher's health-care costs for life.
Teachers need to pay for a portion of these costs, similar to what takes place in the private sector.
I am one taxpayer who is totally frustrated by this issue.
Chris Brady
Ramsey, July 29
"True or false: Teacher salaries are too high" (Page A-1, July 29) was not as shocking as it was a statement of how low the values of this country have sunk.
We think nothing of spending $50 a seat for a sporting event to help pay the salaries of multimillionaire athletes. We will give our teenagers $100 to go to a concert to hear the X-rated lyrics of "artists" earning millions of dollars a year. We think nothing of leasing high-end vehicles for $400 or $500 a month, and we certainly don't begrudge the doctors and lawyers their high fees.
But when it comes to probably the most important thing we can do for our children and the future of our country, we scream it is too expensive.
If we think education is expensive ... try ignorance.
Stephen and Joan Palmino
Wayne, July 29
May I congratulate you on Mary Ellen Schoonmaker's column about why Douglass College should remain a women's college ("Why we need to save Douglass College," Other Views, July 28). She made excellent points. But I want to note that she characterized Douglass as unique in that "it is the only women's college in the nation at a major research university."
Barnard, which is an independent college but is affiliated with Columbia University, falls into that category, too. If she had said that Douglass is the only public women's college at a major research university, that would have been correct.
Barnard prides itself on being an independent college, but we also highly value our relationship with Columbia that allows students at both of our institutions to take classes at the other.
Suzanne Trimel
New York, July 29
The writer is vice president for public affairs at Barnard College.
Regarding Jeffrey Page's, "Insanity at WPU: Mr. Daniel's censure" (Page L-1, July 27):
The commentary has attempted to trivialize the perceived threat that Professor Arlene Scala felt about the comments from Jihad Daniel. Yet no one has done the same in regard to his response to a campuswide announcement.
While Daniel is entitled to his opinion on homosexuality, could it not be considered petty for him to have stated that it is a perversion?
If he did not want to receive e-mails of this "type," then certainly it was his prerogative to state such without the derogatory comment. It also appears that Page seems to forget that it is not about the intent of the sender but about how the recipient takes it.
Could the ensuing events have been an overreaction by Scala and the University? Perhaps. But would the same have been said if the comments were race- or religion-based? Free speech does not mean we have the right to send disparaging comments, even if we feel the justification lies in our moral or religious beliefs.
Maybe the effect of this "censure insanity" is that Mr. Daniel will think before sending out his next e-mail.
Nadine M. Cawley
Hackensack, July 28
The writer is a senior at William Paterson University.
(1.0)
