To the editor:

Once again, Mr. Tarby has missed the point. In his recent articles he chose to take the “low road” by interpreting the meaning of the word “transients” to infer that residents speaking in opposition to the proposed Meyer Manor Apartment development were labeling apartment renters as “scum of the earth.” This was an egregious and purposeful misinterpretation of their intent. These neighbors, who had the courage to speak at the hearing, were not making disparaging remarks about apartment dwellers. Their point was that renters who often “stay in one place for a short period of time” (the definition of a transient), generally do not have the same commitment to a neighborhood shared by tax paying homeowners.

This is not the first time Mr. Tarby has chosen to ignore a positive effort in order to create sensationalized content. In an editorial posting earlier this summer he basically delegitimized the opinions of 168 residents who had signed petitions opposing the Meyer Manor Project because they were 32 signatures short of the 200 that were initially announced. (By the way, 242 residents have now signed, and we’re still adding more).

How sad that Mr. Tarby often seems to focus on the negative aspects of “Livin’ in Liverpool” especially when it comes to citizens expressing their concerns. Then he laments that more residents don’t step up to express their opinions. Well, nobody likes being ridiculed in the media for simply exercising their rights.

The point, Mr. Tarby, is that we care, and that we firmly believe that our opinions should matter, should be reported on accurately, and that the board of trustees and planning board members have a duty to consider our concerns about this proposed development. We plan to keep on “Livin’ in Liverpool” and we are simply not willing to compromise the quality of life that encouraged us to move to the village in the first place.

Neighbors Against Meyer Manor Apartments

Liverpool