Thanks, Con Ed, for Saturday morning ‘alarm’
The following open letter was written by Stuyvesant town resident Sherman Sussman, who had been getting routinely woken up by vehicles entering and exiting the Con Ed property during the wee hours of the morning.
Why??? You guys were doing so good. Not perfect by far but good.
So why is it that the neighborhood needs to be awakened at 6:45 a.m. on a Saturday morning?
Con Ed has decided that the big orange bucket truck with its noisy movement alarm (which is unnecesesary in a non-construction site, in fact the only noise that is being made is by the alarm) is necessary to move at this time in the morning.
A. Is it because there is an emergency? I don’t see one.
B. Is it because people like myself like to get a little more sleep on a Saturday morning?
C. Or is it because Con Ed really doesn’t care what they do at whatever time they feel like doing it?
Sherman Sussan, ST
Did you say… too much heat?
To the Editor:
I must admit to being flabbergasted by a letter in this week’s paper (“Can’t take the heat,” T&V, Dec. 4) complaining about too much heat in his/her apartment. Wish I could say the same.
In my building heat has been at a minimum. I always thought that when it is under 50 degrees outside, heat is required.
Oh well, maybe 20th Street has a different climate from 14th!
430 E. 20th St.
Appreciative of T&V’s de-cluttering tips
Dear Town & Village,
I know I’ve written you in the past about how useful and informative and interesting AJ Miller’s column is, and I’m doing so again.
For example, her “De-cluttering problems and solutions” in your October 30 issue, as an example, was a simply written yet eloquently stated column.
Well-written and practical. She’s a gem as are many of your fine writers, reporters and columnists.
What happened to going to the bondholders?
To the Editor:
On October 20, 2012, to great fanfare, press releases, and news conferences, local elected officials and the STPCV Tenants Association said that they were taking our case directly to the bondholders. TA leaders said the time had come to “cut out the middleman.”
If CW Capital would not give us a seat at the table, they said, then CW should step aside and we would “talk directly to the bondholders.”
Two years later, we have heard nothing. Apparently, the TA prefers to have press conferences. Perhaps despite their promises, they did not really contact the bondholders. If they did, then we the tenants deserve to know what did the bondholders say.
The TA repeatedly says that it wants a seat at the table to allow the 11,000 tenants to take charge of their destiny and ensure middle class affordability through a non-eviction condo conversion. But now Mayor de Blasio feels that STPCV should remain a rental complex forever, and the TA refuses to challenge him on it.
The TA apparently prefers to trumpet “affordability!” like a voice crying in the wilderness, rather than tell us what the bondholders said – and require the mayor to be responsive to 30,000 residents of our community.
Mayor de Blasio needs to stand with tenants, not with the developers of affordable housing and the landlords.
The time has come to go directly to the bondholders, as the TA promised us two years ago.
Name withheld, ST