NCC hurdles, climate fearmongering, plastics issue

NCC addressing variety of hurdles

The op-ed by the president of the Nassau Community College Federation of Teachers, Faren Siminoff, is part of a seemingly misguided and deceitful effort to thwart prudent actions by the college administration and board of trustees to address budgetary shortfalls due to a decline in student enrollment and inadequate state and federal funding [“Nassau CC needs an intervention to survive,” Opinion, June 20].

Community colleges throughout the country, including within SUNY, currently face significant challenges. Institutions have announced closures, restructurings, and reductions in course offerings.

Fortunately for NCC, its administration is addressing these hurdles with a comprehensive plan to reduce redundancies, while maintaining the college’s excellent course catalog and entire roster of tenured professors. In fact, the college will offer even more courses and programs in the coming years despite these difficult economic conditions.

Decisions regarding mergers are being made after lengthy deliberation and in compliance with the agreed-upon union collective bargaining agreement to increase efficiency and boost enrollment. Already, this administration’s efforts have increased enrollment the past two years.

Instead of working with this administration to ensure a prosperous future for students and staff, Siminoff has turned down every opportunity for collaboration and gone her own way. Despite this, the administration will continue working to ensure that NCC not only survives but thrives.

 — Jorge L. Gardyn, Garden City
The writer is chairman of the Nassau Community College board of trustees.

Fearmongering foils climate action

That polluting industries’ “affordability” fearmongering is accepted and repeated as fact, thwarting climate action, is galling.

The state HEAT (Home Energy Affordable Transition) Act would stop the $220 million that National Grid bills Long Island ratepayers to subsidize others’ average $9,183 gas hookups [“Several climate bills stall,” News, June 17].

This subsidy keeps homeowners from adopting less expensive, more efficient heat pump technology that does both heat and air conditioning well. It would also preclude average rate hikes like National Grid’s new $29-a-month increase, which rises to $64 a month in 2026. (Is $1,620 per customer extra in three years “affordable”?)

The Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act incentivizes manufacturers to eliminate toxic food packaging and make sure it is smaller, recyclable and gets recycled. It affordably relieves sanitation and recycling taxes, while consumers have free choice.

The Bottle Bill update is affordable — return your drink containers and get every penny back. And you get a whole unseen world of redemption and recycling that pays for itself — 5.4 billion additional drink containers in New York wouldn’t become litter or be incinerated into our climate every year.

Plastics and the fossil fuels that make them, and their lobbyists’ untruths, are truly what is unaffordable to our grandchildren’s future livable world.

 — George Povall, Point Lookout

The writer is executive director of All Our Energy, a Long Island environmental and energy nonprofit.

Education not enough to slow plastics issue

I agree with the editorial “Approve Suffolk bill on plastics” [Opinion, June 19]. Unfortunately, the Suffolk County Legislature failed to take the lead and pass it. The legislation died in the Health Committee.

Some members apparently value business, profit and convenience over public health. At the conclusion of the meeting’s hour-long public portion, which discussed the real problems of pervasive plastic pollution, microplastics and our growing waste stream, it ended with an argument that a missing fork for macaroni salad “is a problem.” Seriously?

Opponents of the bill made weak arguments, forgetting about the generous grace period as an educational opportunity.

Unwanted utensils and condiments in takeout orders may not be the largest source of plastic pollution, but they are the most wasteful. As one speaker said, they are worse than single-use plastic because they are “no-use” plastic. These unwanted items often go straight into the trash or, maybe, stored aimlessly before their eventual disposal.

It’s disappointing to see this bill end this way. Those who voted “no” claimed to be environmentalists and touted education as the answer. Real environmentalists know that education is not enough. We need real action and legislation to change the plastic crisis.

 — Jenna Schwerzmann, Southampton