The Newark Mayor's refusal to fully research or discuss all options for dealing with the loss of the East Avenue bridge raises some questions. The answers are not complimentary to the Mayor or the Board which seems to support that position.

If there were no need to move people across the canal, the bridge loss would not be an issue. It is not much of a leap then to conclude that there probably is more than one place that this might be accomplished. Possibly with greater benefit.

Since we are talking about a solution to be used for years and an investment of $800,000, there is an obligation to make the best long-term investment possible. Placement of that bridge can no longer move traffic with acceptable efficiency for the State to invest in it. Should our standards be that much lower? By refusing to deal with these things, do they cease to exist?

No, no, pretending that the state money did not come out of our pockets, or that we should spend it with less care, is also trying to side step the issue. Should the long-term maintenance costs and those of eventual replacement not be a part of this decision? Our children will have to pay those costs. Why are we trying so hard not to admit the costs are there?

We may gain ownership of the bridge, but historic preservation rules do not allow removal of a bridge over the canal, just because it becomes unsafe. Nor do they allow you to replace it with a modern design, if it is not historically accurate. One of the engineers cautioned the village board members to take the State's quest for historic preservation seriously.

Village officials have known for a decade that it was only a matter of time (through a series of downgrades) until the bridge would be closed. They have also known that New York would not rehabilitate the bridge and why. The State is willing to pay us $800,000 to take it off their hands. We really should look this gift horse in the mouth.

Without explanation the mayor and board have been willing only to talk about repair/replacement. Are we to presume they are incapable of dealing with more options, or afraid that the added findings might not point toward the solution they want to see?

On August 1 a series of bridge research questions were presented. Most questions remain unaddressed and unanswered. We will make this space available to the mayor to tell his constituents about the broadened search for information or why these serious items are not worthy of consideration.

Come on gentlemen, people deserve better than what they are getting.

John H. Van Dusen, Publisher

Note: The August 1 editorial is available anytime via the Courier-Gazette Digital Edition on the Internet. http://www.our-hometown.com click on Newark, click the news button, then the typewriter graphic for August archived Viewpoint.