As recently as May 22, 1998, Sharoff boasted of his role in organizing the fatal and tragic student protest at Kent State University, 1969-1971.
Kent State: What Happened and Why, by James Michner, pictures Sharoff shouting into a megaphone; and burying a copy of the U.S. Constitution in the earth while mouthing off to a student who objected to his disrespect, and supporters stood by smiling.
Sharoff declared: "And the Jewish Defense League? What was it but Jewish facism? Looking at the whole bundle, and listening to Agnew's assaults on reason, I developed the idea that the majority of Americans ought not be allowed to vote. They simply are not intelligent enough. And college students are not much better" (p. 18).
Has he now changed his mind about the intelligence of the voters?
Associated Press, as reported in Honolulu Star bulletin and the Sunday Honolulu Advertiser/Star Bulletin, May 2, 1970, "Nixon's Action Riles Students Across Nation", in Comments made on Compuserve.
Malloy and the Monticello Five: Another view of ‘Musical Chairs'
To the Editor:
We have read with interest the Evening News' April 14 opinion column white-washing former Monticello manager Jim Malloy's role in the 1993 job swap which media outlets here dubbed "Musical Chairs."
"You would think, based on the talk in some circles in Sturbridge, Malloy committed unspeakable atrocities in Monticello, where he was the village manager from 1992 until 1994," your columnist asserts.
Malloy's behavior toward local business people and residents, on the whole, were indeed atrocious and led to his being canned by responsive elected officials who heard and heeded the public's dissatisfaction with this self-important little man.
The tendency of the officials who were removed for violating New York laws by doing business in secret was typical of Malloy's tight-lipped, iron-fisted style, even if he wasn't accountable himself.
During our attendance at village board meetings, we saw Malloy as ill-mannered, ignorant, and apparently impressed with himself. Your newspaper's inaccurate depiction of his tenure here was so galling to us that we felt a need to set the record straight. The flags flew at full staff the day Malloy left Monticello, though we bear him no personal ill will today.
Malloy conducted himself poorly as manager here, in our opinion, as shown by his failure to effectively advise the board which hired him for that service and by his intolerance of public debate.
It was common during the pendency of the lawsuit which led to the overturning of our local government by the highest court in New York State, for villagers to protest unlawful official acts with cardboard signs.
The use of protest signs is hardly unique to Monticello. Signs are commonly used everywhere to convey opinions about government acts.
Malloy's arrogance became so extreme that he forbid signs in the village hall. His policy came to a head August 2, 1993, when five Monticello residents were arrested on Malloy's unlawful order.
This group of peaceful protesters became known as the Monticello Five. We two were among them. One of our signs said simply, "We love democracy" -- which Malloy evidently did not.
Testimony at trial and in prior sworn statements, in our First Amendment lawsuit filed for false arrest and violation of civil rights, was that all five of us were quietly holding signs. Malloy admitted that, after consulting only his cousin the village attorney, he decided to tape flyers to the glass door to the village hall ordering residents not to bring signs into the building which they, the people, owned.
He exceeded his lawful authority by this decision and act.
The signs for which Malloy had us arrested were barely larger than a notebook. They bore no pickets or sharp objects. There was no noise or disruption involved, and no one's vision was blocked. They were merely words on oaktag which challenged the acts of an illegal body, and which petitioned government for redress of grievances. Truthful printed words are dangerous to tyranny.
For our signs, Malloy had us and three others hauled off by police. This was an atrocity.
He did it without benefit of a local law, or even a resolution or vote. He merely ordered the police chief, on the chief's very first night in office, to prevent anyone from entering village hall carrying a sign. When challenged, this policy led to arrests under the approving eye of Jim Malloy.
The police charged us with Disorderly Conduct, but it was Malloy's attitude toward the public which was disorderly.
At the meeting after our arrest, police again threatened us, at Malloy's direction, when one of us held up a blank book in which was penned the words, "Go back to Colorado, Jim Boy Malloy." Malloy even banned books in Monticello, when they contained words which opposed him.
Malloy's over-extension of authority and poor administration cost our village and its carriers a huge sum in cash, distress, suffering, and other costs, not the least of which was the out-of-court settlement of $95,000.00 to the Monticello Five and their attorney, in recompense for just one atrocity.
For whatever reason, the Evening News has chosen to protect this fair-haired boy -- whether readers and voters in the Town of Sturbridge do or not. We invite you, therefore, to keep him, if only to prevent him from returning here.
Sincerely,
Tom and Carmen Rue
Monticello, New York http://www.catskill.net/rue/
The River Reporter, Narrowsburg, NY, 03-11-1999 Sullivan County Democrat, Callicoon, NY, 03-12-1999 The Independent Weekly Review, Wurtsboro, NY, 03-12-1999 ("guest column") The Times Herald Record refused to print the above letter, though it was e-mailed to them on 03-07-1999. Partisan? Seems so.
April 6, 1999
