>Readers Fire back at Rurlk Halaby
I admire that you use your name in posting, however since you ask why someone might legitimately not use their name.
not exclusively, but how about
– a. if they are an employee or spouse of an employee of Valley – You run a business, wouldn’t it awkward if an employee/consultant were publicly against your business plans?
b. similar if a person does business with Valley or is just personal friends with mgmt.
Your views about anonymity have noble intentions, but please note that anonymity on blogs did not begin or end with Valley issue.
Anonymous 1 was rude and you are right that that kind of remark is unfortunately encouraged by anonymity.
Each of the council members was required to state their reasoning, as advised by the Village Attorney.
This wasn’t the place for them to extoll the virtues (which are many) of Valley. They had to be very careful to clearly note zoning/planning reasons for their vote, and these minutes of meetings are likely to be evidence in litigation by Valley against the Village Council.
Your comments suggesting that these hearings were a predetermined sham are an amazing echo of how many regard the Planning Board hearings.