In Thursday's, Oct. 5, edition of the Manhasset Press a press release from the Village of Munsey Park stated that the board was "looking to adopt" two resolutions approving two bond issues, one to replace roads, for $2,750,000 and one for $250,000 to renovate Copley Pond Park. The resolutions were scheduled to be adopted at a board meeting a mere six days later.

This was the first notice that the residents of Munsey Park had that the board intended to ignore the results of the referendum that was held on May 3, 2005 in which the village residents resoundingly rejected, by a vote of 116-83 votes, the idea of a bond issue (albeit a larger one) to replace roads.

To their credit, in connection with the previous referendum, the village board had scheduled meetings - poorly attended, but, hey, people have to work to pay their taxes - and also sent out a copious information package. As a result of the mailing, over 200 voters turned out in May of 2005 (when only about 35 normally vote in village elections) and voted 116-83 against the proposed first bond issue in Munsey Park Village history.

And this time? One press release, readable at best six days before the bond vote - which never mentioned the referendum rejection by the village residents. And that press release contained a major error that would cause people to stay home even if they saw the story in a timely fashion.

What was the error? To quote the release:

"As presently contemplated, these capital improvements will cost the average homeowner $225 in incremental village taxes over the borrowing and repayments period of the project. The average annual increase for residential village tax village taxes relating to this specific project will be $37 a year for six years."

If former deputy mayor Vincent Syracuse and myself, a former six year village trustee, hadn't followed the bond question closely, we might have thought that statement was correct. And for $37 a year for six years, we too would have stayed home from the village meeting.

However, according to a previous mailing of the village, in connection with the referendum of May 2005, the village stated that a $3,000,000 bond issue (the size here) would cost homes valued at $800,000, $260 a year for 15 years, and homes valued at $1,300,000, $425 for 15 years. (That is extra village taxes beyond other increases.)

Mr. Syracuse vigorously pointed out that the $225 total and $37 a year for six years was wrong.

Here is the part I consider particularly outrageous: In view of the six day stealth press release, in view of the previous rejection of the bond idea in a village referendum and in view of the "stay-at-home" egregious error in the press release, both Mr. Syracuse and I asked for a one month delay in passing the bond issue resolution, so villagers would have a real chance to attend a village meeting and comment.

The mayor and all four trustees said no. They said there had been enough delay. They deeply regretted having the referendum. There would be no one month delay for public comment.

It's one thing to do what you think is right as a public official; it's another to do so when you haven't given the public a chance to comment or, at best, a chance to comment on five day's notice, based on erroneous information.

And if Munsey Park Village officials say they have been talking about roads for months, that's probably true; what isn't correct is that the village residents had notice that had decided to do it by the first bond issue in village history in spite of the rejection of the bond issue for roads measure in a public referendum a mere 16 months before.

The dangerous lesson: Villages can pass bond issues without voter approval. And they legally don't have to keep their villages truly informed to do so.

James H. McGivney