This historic house and its tenants played a role in the development of the town but also was the scene of events of the infamous Anti-Rent Wars of the 19th century. It's not being torn down for a hospital, or a school, or community center. No, it's not even being torn down for the proposed Target store. It's for a few additional PARKING SPACES for the Target store - spaces that may be needed once a year at Christmas if they are lucky. The fact that Town supervisor Robert Angelini and Developer John Nigro have been spinning a tale from here to the moon about their wanting to save it borders on the surreal. The bottom line is these folks had no intention of addressing the needs of this building in the first place.

Angelini has been quoted in the paper as saying it's too late in the "process" to change the design. Baloney! If he was seriously interested in the homestead he would have insisted it be incorporated into the original design first proposed a year and half ago. It's been reported that the town wouldn't even let members of their own historic society discuss it at a hearing. I would suggest someone look at the submitted Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) required under the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Did they address the negative impact on the historic house? On the SEQRA short form, question C1 asks if the proposal would result in any adverse effects associated with "aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources." I would love to see their explanation. The town gave it a "negative" declaration meaning there was no problem with the proposal.

I'm also puzzled by a quote from the State Office of Parks & Recreation who are suppose to be working under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and in particular Section 112 that states they will "encourage owners to preserve such resources intact and in place." A spokesperson from the State office was quoted as saying they "worked with other agencies and there are no working viable alternatives." Huh? What? How about leaving the house alone! That's a viable alternative!

There has been opposition to this from the very start by East Greenbush citizens, but not against Target coming into the area. Local citizens proposed good alternative proposals from the start but they were ignored and the truth is they simply want a piece of their dwindling history saved. You know, a token reminder that the early history of the town IS different from the rest of the world! Can you blame the citizens if they want their town not to look like the current sea of poorly designed, row after row of national chain eye sores that are making their "main" street look like every other similarly sprawled part of the USA?

This is a classic example of big corporate bully tactics. Nigro and Target can bully their way into anywhere they want because they have the money and the influence to do it - simple as that - and the public be damned if it gets in the way.

One thing is guaranteed, however. Angelini and the rest like him eventually will be thrown out of office - fortunately we have a no dictator clause in the American way of life. Nigro's plywood tinker toys will eventually turn to dust. We can only hope that the citizens of East Greenbush wake up before they find themselves declaring Wal-Mart's as their only historic site. And yet, I have realized two things from this fiasco. I would never live in East Greenbush, nor will Target ever see any of my hard earned money.