DUANESBURG A cloud of dust spikes local anger at highway chief BY JUSTIN MASON Gazette Reporter
Nancy Weis was settling in for the Memorial Day Weekend when a haze of dust descended upon her neighborhood on Duane Lake. The dust cloud, so thick she could barely see through it, was created by a town-contracted street sweeper as it whisked along the road around the lake. “People were diving into their houses, closing windows and shutting doors,” she recalled this week. “It engulfed the entire circle of our neighborhood.” Enough people complained about the dust cloud to draw the attention of the state Department of Environmental Conservation. Spokesman Rick Georgeson said the street sweeping created “excessive dust that unreasonably interfered with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property” — in violation of state law. And this time, the DEC’s warning came with a ticket. Georgeson said the town received a citation for the dust cloud and is now working out a resolution with the state. “The case is currently open and we are in settlement negotiations with the town,” Georgeson said in an e-mail Friday. “No fi ne amount has been set yet.” Supervisor Rene Merrihew said the town received a notifi cation from DEC Wednesday. She was unsure what action the town could face, but was certain it will entail a fi ne. “I went to the neighborhood the day after,” she said Friday. “It was a horrible thing for those people.” The incident is almost identical to several that occurred in summer 2009. Following complaints about excessive dust, DEC offi cials threatened action against the town and ordered Highway Superintendent Steve Perog to refrain from sweeping the streets under dry conditions. Perog answered last year’s warning with an assurance that a 2,000-gallon water tank had been purchased for the sweeper and would be used to prevent excessive dust during its operation. At the time, town offi cials indicated they were unaware of the water tank purchase. Perog did not return calls for comment Friday. Board member Rick Potter said the private sweeping company was hired by the Highway Department but was unsure why water wasn’t used for the job on Duane Lake Road. “I’m not sure whose fault it was,” he said. Weis and several other residents from Duane Lake have speculated the dust cloud was retribution for complaints they lodged against the Highway Department over the winter. A group of residents had criticized Perog for using road salt in their neighborhood, which is located on a small lake used as drinking water reservoir. “I think this is payback,” she said. Board members have been at odds with Perog since he took office in 2009. In April, they reinstated a fired highway worker to his position after an independent investigation found that he was unjustly terminated by Perog following an on-the-job scuffl e between the two men. Tensions with Perog have grown to a point where board members are actively seeking a way to remove him from office. Under state law, any resident or the county’s district attorney can petition the Appellate Division of the state Supreme Court to remove an elected official for “any misconduct, maladministration, malfeasance or malversation” incurred while in office. ......................................>>>>....................>>>>................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r01103&AppName=1
I hope the people of Duanesburg were happy with the "change" they got by all running out to vote democrap. Good old Dave Vincent (non political of course) must be thrilled to have another democrap in office.
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
Re June 12 story, “A cloud of dust spikes local anger at highway chief”: I found the article on the Duanesburg dust cloud very interesting, especially with respect to the quote on state law regarding removal of elected officials: “Under state law, any resident or the county’s district attorney can petition the Appellate Division of the state Supreme Court to remove an elected official for ‘any misconduct, maladministration, malfeasance or malversation’ incurred while in offi ce.” Does this only apply to county offi cials, or does it also apply to our elected legislators who, once again, have failed to carry out their obligations under state law to pass a budget on time? I certainly think their continued actions fall under the categories of maladministration and malfeasance.
Logged
