To the Editor:

In the June 14, 2018 article in The Altamont Enterprise [“Judge Napierski out with Dems, Clenahan in as November pick”] regarding the appointment of Justice Christine Napierski, Guilderland Supervisor Peter Barber implied that Christine Napierski was selected as town justice because she was “available” and the board needed to “get someone in very quickly.”

I find these statements to belittle Justice Napierski’s impeccable qualifications and suggest that the town board did not take its time and do its due diligence.

I attended the town board meeting on April 17, 2018, when my sister Christine Napierski was appointed town justice by a unanimous vote. At this board meeting Supervisor Barber stated that the members of the town board “spent over three days” and engaged  “...in a deliberative process.”

Supervisor Barber later moved to appoint Christine Napierski as the town justice after what he called “careful consideration.” When discussing the selection of Justice Christine Napierski, another town board member thanked the 14 candidates (which included Bryan Clenahan) and indicated, “We did our due diligence and feel that the selection that we’ve made is appropriate.”

Thank you for the opportunity to set the record straight.

Michelle Napierski-Prancl

Guilderland