To:

NY PUBLIC LIBRARY

Bonnie Birman, Associate Director

Manhattan Borough Office

20 West 53rd, NYC 10019

Dear Ms. Birman:

I am a patron of the Roosevelt Island Branch of NYPL. I have patronized same when it was a community library, before this insane "renovation" that brought turnstiles and black straps which must be unhooked for wheelchair users like me, and immediately re-connected behind the patron (who is actually required to enter the "back door") - thus insuring that the same fire-trap conditions suffered by ambulatory seniors and just plain folk, with or without strollers, are inflicted on the disabled as well.

The entrance and exit turnstiles, both of which wheelchair users cannot negotiate (seniors and stroller pushers do so with great difficulty) requires the walker to be nimble and quick for he or she is "locked" into a narrow one-way labyrinth littered with rickety tables and children's bookshelves slanting so that books fall on the kids. There is simply no room, and much difficulty and outright hazard.

Pre-renovation boasted a small but sensibly laid-out, highly functional library.

I trust the antiquated turnstiles can be replaced by electric sensors, and that the $2.85 million awarded this branch will be wisely used for either a new location or a new expanded floor-plan that shall include, but not be limited to, "count" sensors, automatic entrance doors, new shelves and equipment, and an enclosed children's area; all this implemented in another larger location.

I really find it demeaning to sit by that black strap like a little beggar, until I catch someone's attention (I'm a respiratory quadriplegic) to ask them to open the strap, wait for me to trundle in, cautiously making my way between the copier and the desk and the standing patrons waiting to be served while the librarian is unhooking that damnable strap, and hooking it up behind me. If I am dauntless enough to make my way widdershins to the back, I must unseat two hapless computer users.

Come on down, take a look. The Roosevetl Island Library condition - it also floods periodically - is to be deplored - a fire violation (aside from totally ignored ADA requirements) and an insult.

Sharon Stern

To the Editor:

I recently received a letter under my door from the Roosevelt Island Safety Kommittee (RISK), inviting me to share with them any issues I might have about public safety on Roosevelt Island.

I did send them my comments and I also want to share with fellow Island residents my concerns about Public Safety Department activities on Roosevelt Island which affect our daily life. Here they are:

. Public Safety officers park their vehicles in front of Island House, thus making it very difficult for the building's residents to stop their vehicles in front of their home for loading/unloading. It will be extremelly helpful if those officers will park their vehicles somewhere else. This will show consideration to Island House residents.

. I've noticed many times how Public Safety officers stop their cars in the middle of Main Street just to have a chat with a fellow officer in another car in the other lane, or with a friend on the sidewalk, thus blocking the traffic and completely ignoring people around.

. Many times, sidewalks or Island House stairs are blocked by noisy teenagers, and Public Safety officers a few feet away seem not to care. They should advise those kids to be polite and respectful to others passing by.

. The same noisy teens sometimes gather in the middle of the night on the park inside the Island House complex, making loud noise, using obscene words, listening to extremely loud music, and obviously disturbing people sleeping in the apartments facing them. Again, Public Safety Officers seem to ignore this behavior.

. It seems to me that the only concern of those Public Safety Officers is how to issue as many parking violation tickets as they can.

Mircea Nicolescu

To the Editor:

Your reader described our pastor as "scruffily dressed," suggesting that she had prejudged him, by his appearance, as unworthy of civility.

Backstory: Fr. Miqueli was helping to make Good Shepherd safe for all users (secular and religious) by clearing out detritus of long standing. This job did not require a meticulously pressed soutane. He found several large tubes of compressed fluorescent gas and carried them to the Thrift Shop for safe storage until appropriate use or disposal facilities were available.

His arms were full of these risky items when he entered the shop and requested the assistance of the manager. Your reader chose to perceive this as cutting the line, and took offense even when advised that our pastor was not a customer but the padrone of the Thrift Shop. She continued to disturb the peace to the point that Fr. Miqueli was obliged to call Public Safety to remove her from the premises.

Many visitors comment on the friendliness of Roosevelt Island, but just as many are appalled at a high level of interpersonal abuse witnessed or experienced here, a quality-of-life issue that needs addressing.

Had your reader demonstrated some "Island friendliness" to a gentleman engaged in serving our community and creating a safe environment for parishioners and secular users of Good Shepherd alike, she would still be enjoying the reciprocal facilities of the Thrift shop. As it is, as a former executive member of the Foreign Press Association, I can only wonder why, with all the issues and problems facing our little "Elba," The WIRE would raise the spectre of Catholic-baiting by giving "ink" to a person in dire need of a crash course in protocol - or just plain good manners.

Deirdre McNamara

Editor's note: When The WIRE publishes an Islander's letter commenting on prices or service at Gristede's, is the letter (or its publication) viewed as an attempt to "bait" some entire class of people? We hope not. And we hope that our policy of publishing virtually all non-libelous letters we receive from Islanders is seen as a service rather than "baiting." We would also hope that readers would consider the Thrift Shop equally eligible, with other Island shops, to receive Islanders' comments, rather than an operation whose affiliation with the Catholic parish would entitle it to some special handling. Nonetheless, it's good to have a follow-up from an eyewitness (correct?) defending and explaining the behavior of which the letter-writer complained (September 10 issue, available on line at nyc10044.com)

To the Editor:

In response to Ronald Mullins's September 10 letter:

I do understand your chagrin and others, who feel the same as you, over the under-utilized apartments of 3-4 bedrooms. However, to say that the Eastwood Building Committee (EBC) did not fight and negotiate forcefully enough, to imply that attorney Serge Joseph was ineffectual, and to request a refund of his fee - I do not believe you thought things out thoroughly.

In a Mitchell-Lama development, which we were in until recently, income and family structure played a major part in tenants occupying apartments. In our new agreement of a Mitchell-Lama buy-out, income and family structure will play a major part in tenants occupying apartments under two programs - the Section 8 Enhanced Voucher Program, and the Landlord Assistance Program (LAP).

Before buying out, the landlord/owner needed to downsize some tenants. Downsizing would perform a major part in assisting those disenfranchised families who desperately need the space of 3-4 bedrooms. After placing all families in the appropriate space, then the remaining apartments that are vacant can be rented at fair-market prices. After all, the landlord/owner must make money from this buy-out; it is business, not personal. However, another option was negotiated by the EBC and our attorney for those who did not wish to move from their apartments. If you are underutilized by one bedroom, you will be allowed to stay in your apartment by paying the last Mitchell-Lama rent, plus a one-time surcharge of 25%. The landlord/owner wanted far more than 25%. If you are underutilized by two or more bedrooms, then you will eventually have to move.

Downsizing and underutilization of apartments were on the table and discussed at our EBC meetings with the tenants from day one. EBC negotiated for the past six months and was always open to opinions and suggestions. If a tenant could not attend a meeting, he could phone any member of the executive board and/or stop them on the street to discuss concerns. Those concerns did not fall on deaf ears.

The EBC has never backed down from a fight. From the beginning, our attorney, Serge Joseph, told us to be prepared for battle, if necessary, even with lack of funds in our account for any long-term litigation. We had to "pull teeth" to raise funds, and we still need to retain the attorney's services. Other Mitchell-Lama developments that bought out (such as Independence Plaza, Ruppert Towers, etc.) started their buy-out negotiations years before Mitchell-Lama expired and had substantial amounts of money available for litigation. But Independence Plaza will now have to spend more money in litigation because of the unfair deal they received from their owner. After leaving Mitchell-Lama, the development should have been placed under rent-stabilization regulations, which cap rent increases at rates determined annually by the City's Rent Guidelines Board, but that's another story.

In the real world we cannot obtain everything that we desire, but what was achieved for the tenants of Eastwood proved to be a better agreement than most developments were able to establish.

Margaret Lipscomb-Gaspard

Secretary, EBC