Nassau County's casino plan, litter, and children's books

Nassau County rushing casino plan too fast

Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman announced a lease agreement for the proposed Las Vegas Sands casino ["Planners OK lease transfer," News, April 28]. Touting its benefits and surrounded by special interests, . Blakeman concluded the casino proposal would likely pass because there was community support. Putting aside the casino’s implications for Nassau, I want to highlight Blakeman's tactics:

-- Comments regarding community support are misleading. Thousands have signed petitions, there have been protests and no details of the proposal, including plans for traffic and crime, had been made public before the April 28 due date.

-- More troubling is that Blakeman stated his intention to bring the proposal to a vote May 22. While fast-tracking legislation is a common tactic to mitigate special-interest influence, Blakeman, is fast-tracking this proposal toward a vote only 24 days after public disclosure, which gives special interests the advantage

The Sands and Blakeman apparently understand the adage "time kills all deals." Given the gravity of this decision, 24 days is inadequate to review and debate the proposal to ensure it’s a good deal for Nassau and not just the special interests

Mike McKeever, Garden City

As a Nassau County resident and senior citizen, I strongly oppose the county transferring the Nassau Coliseum lease lease to Las Vegas Sands. It may ruin the lovely concerts and facilities of Eisenhower Park, for which we pay taxes, with tourists who could crowd us out. It could become a target for the homeless and gamblers who cannot afford a hotel room. Traffic will be negatively impacted . The proximity to college campuses is another reason to seek other sources of revenue for this location.

Fran Parker, East Meadow

LI's litter answer is blowing in the wind

After reading "Official: LI's litter issue worsening" [News, April 22] and the editorial "Stop trashing Long Island" [Opinion, April 27], not to mention two readers bemoaning the issue at beaches ["Let’s keep our beaches litter-free," Just Sayin', April 29], I have my own slant why this is happening. Take a walk, ride a bike ride, or drive around your neighborhood on a windy morning when recyclables are put out. Some folks tie up their papers and others put out a full heavy pail of empty bottles, but others don't. I see a lot of untied paper goods and pails with three or four empty water bottles. The pails are so light that they simply blow over, and the cardboard is no match for even light winds. It's ironic that recycling is for ecological reasons, yet it seems to be making a bigger mess of our planet. I cannot remember the last time I saw someone throw garbage out a car window. Yes, car tires, appliances, etc. aren't windblown. Maybe it's time for municipalities to supply mesh covers within an elastic band that ties onto recyclable pails and keeps the contents contained. Tie up paper on windy days -- or don't put it out.

Anthony Palumbo, Plainview

We need all Long Islanders to be more conscious of our surroundings. I cannot understand while people think it’s OK to litter everywhere. I walk in my otherwise beautiful neighborhood and see litter on people's lawns and in the street in front of their houses. Homeowners and residents should pick it up and throw it away. How long does it take? Most of the time I see this is following a sanitation truck pickup. Commercial establishments must also pitch in and keep their surroundings clean as well.

I will continue to walk around my block picking up trash when I see it and discarding it properly. It would be nice to see others do the same. If you're concerned about germs, use latex gloves and throw them in the trash, too.

Tom Salvato, West Hempstead

Parents want a say in books kids access

“Banned” books is a bit of a misnomer ["Raising awareness on banned books at SCCC," News, April 27]. Those taking part in the Suffolk County Community College banned book awareness event are adults who have full access to all of the books listed in the article. Parents concerned about questionable books in the school curriculum or children’s libraries do not have issues with adults accessing these books. Instead, we reject the inclusion of books in children and teen’s spaces that include graphic descriptions (and for some books, graphic depictions) of sex and introduce confusing ideas about sexuality. Meaningful conversations about race that could stem from “The Bluest Eye” get eclipsed by the graphic and unnecessary descriptions of orgasm, sex and pedophilia. Books like “Melissa” are available for adults to purchase for their children, but a school has no place wading into the extremely controversial topic of gender confusion permeating the book. Reasonable people should be able to agree that certain topics are not appropriate for teachers and librarians to expose our children to. Adults have their own ways to access books.

Amanda Bonagura, Floral Park