One reader left a comment that fingers can be pointed at Yancy McArthur should an accident occur at the three way stop on Franklin Road. 

It should be made aware to the readers that should an accident occur at this intersection which is heavily used by the residents of the large housing development on Roosevelt Road (and being only one of three access points to the development) that the Town of Hyde Park may be held liable. Not only is this road used by drivers, but pedestrians as well that walk and run that route. Residents of the community have stated that the stop signs are needed because there have previous accidents that have occurred there before traffic devices were installed and there is a tendency for drivers to speed on that particular turn between Franklin and Roosevelt Roads. The stop sign at the three way intersection has halted the high speeds, thus ensuring the safety of other drivers and pedestrians. The argument that stop signs are not needed because there have not been any recent accidents occurring at a particular intersection is null and void. Traffic devices are installed to deter accidents with the assumption that accidents MAY occur. 

This is a factor that should be considered in the town board's decision to remove the signs. The looming question is whose interests is the town board actually serving...that of Yancy McArthur or the safety for the residents of the community.
 
 
It has come to the attention of the writers at the HV News Lies that Yancy McArthur is at it again in attempts to use his power to influence others to bend the rules for HIS desired outcome. His latest caper is the stop signs on Franklin Rd, which was a topic of the agenda on January 23, 2012 meeting.

The writers at the HV News Lies found it interesting that it was not disclosed by Yancy McArthur that one of the stop signs happens to be located on the southeast corner of his yard.  Rather than have to mow around it he wants it gone and is using his position as a fire commissioner (and FORMER supervisor) to be rid of this burden.

His basis for the removal of the signs is that it may affect the response time to fire calls, however, he cannot provide any data to support how the stop signs are affecting the time it takes to arrive at a call.

Here are some facts that the readers should consider:

1) There are stop signs at all three access points to the firehouse: Bill Reynolds & Roosevelt Road, Bill Reynolds & Haviland Road, Wright Ave and Rt. 9G and Franklin Road. In addition, there is a traffic signal at the intersection of Haviland Road and Rt. 9G. Why aren't the other intersections where there are traffic devices being considered for removal if these traffic devices are concern for the response time for the fire department?

2) Per the Roosevelt #3 website (http://www.rooseveltengineco3.com/history.html?callyear=2008&callmonth=12)  the call log indicates the following:

2008- 100 calls
2009-45 calls
2010-9 calls
2011-7 calls, 6 of which were mutual aid calls, which means they were either assisting another fire district or on stand-by.

Is this dwindling number of calls even enough to substaniate the argument that the stop signs are impeding the response time to fire calls?

3) Per NYS Law, authorized emergency vehicles do not have to come to a complete stop per the following:
Per NYS Law: Section 509-G . Section 1104:
§ 1104. Authorized emergency vehicles.
 
(a) The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when involved in an emergency operation, may exercise the  privileges set forth in this section, but subject to the conditionsherein stated.

 (b) The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may:

    1. Stop, stand or park irrespective of the provisions of this title;

    2. Proceed past a steady red signal, a flashing red signal or  a  stop sign,  but  only  after  slowing  down  as  may  be  necessary  for safe operation;

    3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as  he  does  not  endanger life or property;

    4.  Disregard  regulations governing directions of movement or turning in specified directions.

4) Bill Truitt and Yancy talk about the 'hundreds of people' that are complaining about the signs in question, yet they have no basis of who these complaintants are. It's very convenient to claim that there are 'hundreds of people' that support their request, but ironically neither Yancy or Bill Truitt could produce one of these people at the town board meeting to speak on behalf of the request to remove the signs.  The writers at the HV News Lies speculate that more than likely these 'hundreds of people' are no more than mere products of their mental invention. People have bigger fish to fry than complaining about a stop sign that adds another 5 seconds onto their morning commute.

The conclusion of the writers here at the HV News Lies is that Yancy is using his position to sway town law to his favor rather than just being honest and telling the public he's just too lazy to mow around the stop sign.

*Food for thought: Apparently Yancy has a penchant for introducing himself as the 'former' supervisor of Hyde Park. Perhaps someone should ask him when he uses that introduction why isn't he the CURRENT supervisor...