Waddington Battle
Residents Divided on Leishman Point Referendum Vote Tuesday
BY KRESTIA DeGEORGE
The controversy over Leishman Point that has steadily grown through the past few months
will come to a climax when residents go to the polls Tuesday. As the referendum on the
town's resolution has grown closer, people on both sides of the issue have stepped up and
spoken out.
The town sent out a copy of the proposal and a map showing the area where proposed
development would take place to each Waddington voter. According to Town Supervisor
William Dalton, this is the most they could do, since state law dictates that any
materials they send out be strictly informational. He added that although some people have
spoken out in favor of the resolution in public these people are representing themselves,
not the town.
According to James Thew, President of the Waddington Redevelopment Association (WRA), his
organization has not sent out any material or made any other efforts to campaign for a no
vote, beyond informal canvassing by individuals. He added however that The Friends of
Leishman had sent out a flyer similar to the town's including a map and copy of the
referendum. Unlike the town's flyer however, this one sports content which urges citizens
to vote 'no.' Thew also added that he and others, under the auspices of the Friends of
Leishman, had made phone calls to voters asking people to consider a 'no' vote.
According to Thew, in the phone calls he has made to educate voters about his stance, he
estimated those in favor of a 'no' vote outnumbered others ten-to-one. Elizabeth Pier, a
founding member of the Friends of Leishman, also quoted a high estimate, 80 percent, for
people she had talked to during her phone canvassing who were in favor of a 'no' vote. She
said that her group also sent out a second flyer sporting the slogan 'what's the hurry?',
and he
and others have been handing out material on the vote in front of the post office.
Both the people in favor of the resolution and those opposing it are optimistic about town
residents voting in their favor. Members of both sides of the debate admit to having given
little thought to what comes next should the vote go against them. Dalton said that should
the resolution be voted down, "we would have to get a committee and decide what the
town will do with [Leishman Point] in the future." He added that the town board
members haven't really discussed that possibility.
Thew was equally unprepared for the possibility that the vote might go in favor of the
town's resolution. "I don't know [what the WRA would do]; we'd have to discuss
it," he said. Should the referendum go in their favor, however, Thew says the WRA
will be ready: "We'll go back and ask the town for a public planning process so we
can hopefully make an informed decision," he said.
Dalton meanwhile said that if the resolution is passed, that the town will get the
engineers back to work drawing up plans to develop the point.
The controversy has already drawn many people, including most of those running for public
office into the argument. Roger Sharlow, a former mayor and candidate for town councilman
on the Democratic ticket, is in favor of the town's proposal. He said that "{The
resolution] comes from a long process which has been going on for the better part of 20
years.'' Sharlow explained that the town had fought with the New York Power Authority for
Leishman Point to develop it as a residential area for many years, because they believed
that was the will of the voters. Still, he regrets that the dispute has "really
driven a wedge between the community." He especially objected to descriptions of the
point as a trophy saying "There's no trophy to be had here," he said,
"we're all going to be losers in one way or another."
Janet Otto-Cassada, who is running for the position of Town Supervisor as a Republican, is
also in favor of residential development on Leishman Point although she said she is not
necessarily in favor of the 16-lot plan put forth by the town. She too feels that the
controversy surrounding the point has long ceased to have any positive value for the town;
"It doesn't solve anything," she said. After the referendum, she said
"hopefully the bickering will stop and the town will come together."
Meanwhile Mark Scott, who has been active with the WRA is also running for position of
town supervisor, as an independent. He is opposed to the town's resolution and has been
actively pushing for a no vote. Scott believes that the board has failed to listen to the
public. "That's the job of a public servant," he said. Scott was among the those
who circulated the petition which sent the resolution to a referendum.
The final resolution in this struggle will come down to the results of Tuesday's vote. Of
that vote Dalton said "I hope we get a good turn out, that way we'll get a true
feeling of what the public wants. It's their land, not ours, whatever they want will be
done."
Originally published 10/12/2003
Ogdensburg Journal
Used with permission