09/10/2026
Gallucci and Matelitz: Politics Over Public Safety?
Last night’s Rotterdam Town Board meeting raised serious concerns. The town had an opportunity to secure $45,000 toward a new police vehicle with an estimated $3,000 local contribution, yet the resolution was pulled after it became clear it did not have enough votes.
With my recent resignation, the first meeting where the board would need to work together, the clear obstructionist behavior by two members deserves serious public scrutiny. Is this what we have to look forward to from these council members?
Tonight’s Rotterdam Town Board meeting raised a deeply troubling question: when the town has an opportunity to secure $45,000 toward a new police vehicle for its aging fleet, why would elected officials stand in the way?
According to the discussion surrounding the proposed resolution, the grant would have provided substantial outside funding (94%) for a replacement police vehicle, while requiring the Town of Rotterdam to contribute roughly $3,000; with Council Member Teri Gallucci asserting“ we don’t have the money for that” the resolution did not have the votes was pulled from the agenda.
A police vehicle is not a luxury purchase. It is core public-safety infrastructure. Officers rely on dependable vehicles to respond to emergencies, patrol neighborhoods, transport equipment, and provide assistance when residents call for help. When a department is operating an aging fleet, postponing replacement does not eliminate the cost, it often shifts it into higher maintenance bills, greater downtime, and avoidable operational risk.
Fiscal responsibility matters, but so does taking advantage of available funding for critical public-safety needs.
Rotterdam residents deserve answers: Why was this funding not supported, and what is the plan to replace aging police vehicles?
Public safety should never become a political bargaining chip.
(This post is protected speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and under applicable state constitutional protections of free speech and expression.
Nothing in this post is intended as a threat, incitement to violence, harassment, or a false statement of fact about any person. It is offered as part of the open and robust public debate that the First Amendment is designed to protect and reflects votes and statements made by publicly elected officials.)
