We can certainly abide by the findings as presented by DeCicco below. DeCicco has been cleared of the charges brought against him. We have difficulty overlooking the obvious, that one of the participants in the campaign fund-raising and then the verdict, is attorney Mark Constantine, a member of the Greenburgh Ethics Board and Chuck Pateman's attorney!
We'll give DeCicco the benefit of the doubt and from this point forward ease off of him unless he takes another miss-step. It doesn't mean we'll stop watching him as well as others, but we'll put this to bed for now.
In fact, if you read below, he says he has lots to share. Here's an open invitation: Simply, if it's about Greenburgh, you share it and we'll post it.
WW
Hi,
I don't know who you are but would appreciate it if you would actually inquire with me before writing about me.
This would go a long way to bringing some truth and accuracy to your stories as they relate to me.
The cherry-picking of facts, and misrepresentations, and conspiracy theory's (all which were summarily dismissed by the EB) sound very Bernstein-esq, but perhaps you have more of a desire for truthfulness.
Even Ella has acknowledged that Bernstein's complaint was poliitcally motivated.
Maybe you can acknowledge that the Ethics Board DISMISSED as MERITLESS the vast majority of Bernstein's complaint - everything that had to do with acting honestly and with integrity they found in my favor.
Use of term "found" "guilty" is inflammatory and not quite accurate - as I voluntarily reimbursed Pateman once I was made aware of the provision which stated that EVEN THOUGH i was recused from the DD matter the reception attending the reception was still prohibited (a rule found only in Greenburgh)
Maybe you could acknowledge Bernsteins clear political agenda in this and his financial, legal, and strategic support of Shimsky?
All your fantasies about back room deals are just that - fiction, as I have sworn to, and as the Ethics Board accepted.
Again - Come out and announce yourself... Many things you write about - most in fact - are good issues and hold our leaders accountable. I am a good honest and faithful person and believe that my input would be sought after to get accurate information out to the public.
Have lots to share -
Get back to me and lets start the dialogue.
Nick
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Here is a copy of an email I sent out:
The complainant, Bob Bernstein, got decimated.
Allegation 1: I did not properly recuse myself - DISMISSED (The EB found that I did properly AND immediatly recuse myself once a conflict arose)
Allegation 2: I had an "interest" in the Deli application and did not disclose - DISMISSED (The EB found that I had NO "interest" in the Deli Delicious matter and therefor had nothing to disclosue)
Allegation 3: There was undue influence/reward - DISMISSED (The EB found there was NO undue influene, intent to influence, or reward as I immediately recused myself once a conflict arose and abided by said recusal)
Allegation 4: Accepted prohibited contribution – Uncontested & Voluntarily corrected (The EB accepted this as an honest oversight which I voluntarily corrected by reimbursing Mr. Pateman for the cost of the reception)
In typical and predictable fashion, Mr. Bernstein immediately posted a fraudulently deceptive summary of the decision on the Edgemont Community Council's Facebook page which did NOT mention all of the allegations which were dismissed, only mentions the once that was "upheld," and makes it seem like the Board "forced" me to reimburse Pateman rather than making it clear that it was done voluntarily. Bernstein also incorrectly that I wrote the Ethic's Board stating that I would not contest the charges – when in fact there was only ONE charge not contested (which I took accountability for as an honest oversight and voluntarily remedied) while all other charges which were contested by me were DISMISSED as meritless.
Throughout this entire process Mr. Bernstein has failed to disclose to the Ethics Board, or the public, the hundreds of dollars he contributed to the MaryJane Shimsky campaign (my competitor in February's election, and probable opponent in November), the countless hours of other support and advice he offered to her campaign, or the newspaper ad he openly endorsed her in.
Mr. Bernstein's continual dishonest and misleading portrayal of the facts and findings of the Ethics Board, via to the ECC website, the ECC news letter, and other social sources, and his suppression of opposing information (by deleting my comments from the ECC page and not posting my replys), shows Mr. Bernstein lacks the integrity to tell the truth to the community and is more interested in using town resources to pursue a clear personal and political agenda.
If Mr. bernstein had made a courtesy phone call and presented his concerns to me like a professional then it all could have been resolved without the filing of an ethics complaint and attendant negativity. But Mr. Bernstein was never interested in the truth but in political rhetoric and mudslinging to the point where even ELLA PREISER, has acknowledged that Bernstein's complaint was "obviously politically motivated."
Thanks,
Nick
You have to wonder about a flamer like Nick DeCicco, a Zoning Board member, who got caught taking thousands of dollars in political contributions from the representative of an applicant seeking zoning changes, and was made to return them, who then thinks the appropriate thing to do in response is to attack the guy who brought the complaint against him. You also have to wonder why DeCicco would keep invoking Ella Preiser's name when she never said the ethics charges against DeCicco were politically motivated. What she said to DeCicco, with plenty of witnesses present, was that the charges were not politically motivated, but it wouldn't matter to her even if they were -- Nick violated the Ethics Code and, in her opinion, in the opinion of the Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations, he should resign or be removed from the Zoning Board because his continuing presence on that board undermines its integrity.
ReplyDeleteMs. Preiser has done a lot of work for the Fulton Park neighborhood. One would think that before posting DeCicco's comments about what she supposedly said, the administrator of this site would at least pick up the phone and ask her if she really said those things. And when you find out the answer, Mr. Site Administrator, perhaps you'll remove DeCicco's post or at least point out that he wasn't telling the truth when he made that comment.
DeCicco's attacks on Bernstein are likewise wrong. The fact is DeCicco was caught violating the Code not by Bernstein, but by a fellow Republican who received a copy of the Pateman fundraiser invitation for DeCicco and knew it was wrong for DeCicco to have accepted Pateman's invitation. That Republican is the one who outed DeCicco, not Bernstein.
This doesn't mean he did the right thing, otherwise there would be no cause for the Ethics Board to review this. But maybe in the end he's sincere and will do the right thing from this point on.
ReplyDeleteNick did the right thing by 1) Immediately recusing once there was conflict and by 2) voluntarily returning a contribution once he was made aware it may be prohibited, thereby being accountable.
ReplyDeleteThe Ethics Board looked into this matter because Bernstein didn't have the professional courtesy to follow common practice and inquire with Nick beforehand to give him a chance to remedy the concerns.
If Bernstein had inquired with Nick he would have found out that most of his concerns were meritless (as supported by the board's decision) and that Nick would have voluntarily corrected the other (as evinced by his actions) and therefore obviate the need for a formal ethics complaint - but therein lies the exact reason why Bernstein didn't inquire. Politics at its worst.