Mr Feiner sent out another email blast via the Town’s GBList. This time, we believe it to be a credible use of the email list: to inform residents that the “adjourned” public hearing of the Edgemont Incorporation will be proceeding on April 24th at 7:30 pm at Town Hall. It was adjourned because the hearing became derailed when attorney and retired judge Robert Spolzino, imposed what many believe to be a misinterpretation of the Village law about hearing objections and speaking at the hearing.
Hired by Mr Feiner to advise him of the Edgemont Incorporation petition’s sufficiency, with an unnecessary cost bore by taxpayers to the tune of $50,000, Mr Spolzino said it was his ruling of the law to not allow hearing objections to the objections to the petition (for lack of validity). The irony is that this was not a court of law, just a hearing that should have been run and controlled by Mr Feiner - who we believe abdicated his responsibility to maintain either deniability or to simply stall the process.
Many vociferously disagreed, shouting at Mr Feiner and his surrogate judge. Some made claims that he “bought a judge” merely because he opposes the Edgemont Incorporation. Mr Spolzino and the subsequent private investigation firm hired to trick residents into disavowing their original petition signatures was totally unnecessary, deceitful and unethical. Just remember how this money was squandered away as you amble over to Town Hall to pay your increased property taxes and especially in November to vote.
It’s unrealistic to think this administration can be considered to be playing by the rules just by hiring a former judge to appear to determine the sufficiency of the Edgemont Incorporation petition. Beyond Mr Feiner not wanting the Incorporation to proceed or be successful, he and Town Councilman Jones have alluded to not be willing to provide services that the EIC has repeatedly said they wish to maintain from the Town for a fee. Why is this important? Because if they did contract the services, the Town budget will remain mostly unchanged. Mr Feiner is the master at creating faux problems to later swoop in and be perceived as the “problem solver.”
He has written the following:
“On Monday night at 7:30 PM I will be continuing the Edgemont incorporation hearing at Greenburgh Town Hall, 177 Hillside Ave. The purpose of the hearing (required by NYS law) is to hear objections to the incorporation petition. A determination has to be made whether the petition complied with the statutory requirements of NYS law. At the meeting tomorrow I will also welcome statements from those who disagree with the objections. At the hearing the only comments that can be made will pertain to the sufficiency of the petitions, not whether you support or oppose incorporation of Edgemont as a village. The hearing will not be closed tomorrow evening. I will accept written statements on Tuesday April 25th until 12 noon. The hearing will be closed on Tuesday April 25th.”
Sadly, but painfully similar to Town Board meetings where they routinely prove their unwillingness to truly communicate with residents, speakers will only be permitted to speak one time for no more than three minutes each. All legal hearings allow unlimited time to speak. Again, this is not about communication, rather, control. The hearing will continue until 10 p.m., at which time the hearing will be concluded. Written submissions will be received by the Town Clerk until 12:00 p.m. on April 25, 2017, at which time the record will be closed.
This is not the way to run a hearing, utilize taxpayer dollars or to run a Town. The rest of us cannot incorporate to get out from under this administration, it's bad management or illegal actions. It must change. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't understand how the Feiner regime has any collaborators within Edgemont at this point. Most of them must be completely uninformed or have interests other than Edgemont at heart. There is a possibility that some truly think incorporation won't work, but they should still be disavowing Feiner's reprehensible behavior the same way Republicans should be condemning the support they received from Russia in the recent election.
ReplyDeleteDe Chaya, I think some are in the pocket of developers or their lawyers. Money talks, nobody walks.
ReplyDeleteWell that was something. Tim Lewis read an affidavit from a surveyor who does not reside in Greenburgh and thus has no standing to file an affidavit. Lewis acknowledged receipt of the affidavit at least a couple hours prior to fulfilling the FOIL before the close of business today, yet he had no explanation as to why it was omitted. It should go without saying that this was an ambush. It is yet another example of the banana republic government in Greenburgh and why Edgemont needs to incorporate ASAP.
ReplyDeleteIt took an hour or so, but finally someone from Edgemont told Mr. Feiner that his task under the Defreetsville case was to perform a ministerial task in evaluating the petitions and nothing more. Instead, he tried to turn it into the spectacle that the courts have repeatedly condemned by among other things hiring private investigators to trick his own taxpayers. This was a morally reprehensible act that was rightly criticized by Edgemont residents. Feiner, being out of his league, and poorly counseled by the equally flawed Robert Spolzino, who was paid $50,000 for nothing of value, tried without success to use every gimmick in his arsenal (Wespac, NAACP, Fairview, TDYCC, Stanton, arbitrary rules, etc.) to derail incorporation. It all backfired in a big way. Despite 27 years at the helm, Feiner came off as indecisive, inarticulate and ill-informed. He made up the claim of having to do some sort of due diligence while ignoring due process. If an employer viewed the proceedings, he would never be hired for any position including the mail room. The standard of review for incorporation petitions in Westchester is substantial compliance with the Village Law. Oddly, none of the Edgemont folks made the essential point that the objectors had the burden of establishing substantial non-compliance which would preclude consideration of hyper-technical objections of which there were few and consisted mostly of speculation and conjecture. The ultimate purpose of the petition is to allow a vote. How sad that Mr. Feiner and his fellow travelers from mostly outside Edgemont (and even outside Greenburgh)were seeking to deny their fellow citizens that right.
ReplyDeleteHI Raid, thanks for your report. My guess is the Edgemont people are saving these arguments for their court appeal. Feiner is likely to deny their petition on spurious ground.
ReplyDeleteInteresting post, RAID.
ReplyDelete39, is there anyone in Edgemont who supports Feiner who doesn't have ties to real estate development? Also, how is Hugh Schwartz even allowed to sit on the Planning Board given that half his household income is derived from a law firm representing developers?
What's the story with Don Cannon? He isn't even from Edgemont and he went up at the end to speak in "solidarity with those who have been bullied and silenced by incorporation supporters," whatever that means. He didn't even have an objection, he just wanted to blabber on about how butthurt he is by our success with the petition. Does anyone know his financial interest in keeping Edgemont within Feinerstan?
It seems that the opposition are modeling their attack of the petition on the ones that failed opponents in Defreestville:
ReplyDeletehttp://caselaw.findlaw.com/ny-supreme-court/1210701.html
Thank you Greenburgh 39 and Villa De Chaya. It is interesting to note the opposition failed to come forward with a single person who claimed they were tricked or intimidated into signing a Petition favoring incorporation. To the contrary, a number of the tricked or almost tricked came forward to condemn the near criminality of the Feiner team's attempt to rob people of their constitutional rights. One hopes there is a mechanism for taxpayers to force Mr. Feiner to repay the $50,000 he used for illegal purposes and undoubtedly lawsuits are being prepared to sue Mr. Feiner and his entire team (including Spolzino) for their misconduct. It should also be observed that the local media (such as it is) including LoHud and the Scarsdale Inquirer have shirked their obligations by not condemning Feiner's actions. The same is true with respect to the local Democratic Party (who has endorsed Mr. Feiner and the other Town Board members who endorsed this chicanery) and other state and local politicians who have remained silent. As one trenchant commentator observed, the whole evening was the elite vs. the deplorables. In part, incorporation is about being embarrassed by Mr. Feiner and his crew of rubber stampers on the board which now includes Tim Lewis who had the audacity to assert that Mr. Feiner was doing the objectors to the objections filed previously a favor because in his opinion (for which no legal support was given), they had no right to speak in the first instance.
ReplyDeleteWell put, I would love to see Feiner forced to repay the $50k or at least whatever Spolzino passed through to the town in relation to Stanton. I'm sure he has feathered his nest pretty well by saving 50% on property taxes bc he lives in a luxury condo.
DeleteI would say that the Scarsdale Inquirer wrote a reasonably pointed editorial on Affidavitgate a couple weeks ago.
Oh yes, the Feiner two step. High taxes for you, subsidy for me as Supervisor living in gated Boulder Ridge Condominium courtesy of no homestead exemption decided in a secret no notice meeting. You are correct - the SI did
ReplyDeletecomment on the Stanton Scandal of the Week in Greenburgh (err, Feinerstan)
The big winner last night was Spolzino - $350 an hour (so with door to door billing an easy $1400 at least). With the objection door closing soon, lets see what Spolzino and Feiner decide. If Feiner fails to certify, I hope the EIC has new petitions ready to go to counter any bs arguments Feiner manufactures. Its not clear that an Article 78 alone is safe as there is a new law making its way in Albany that will be the death knell of village incorporation in Greenburgh if it passes. So time is of the essence.
RAId, I suspect that law has NO chance of passage. Large groups of Orthodox Jews are opposed to it. It is overreach on the situation of Mastic Beach
DeleteCan you please clarify what proposed law this is? I am unfamiliar with it.
Delete
Deletehttps://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2017/S1855
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2017/A2871
As you can see, no movement at all in the Assembly, movement in Senate, but with reservations. Both Senate and Assembly bills were submitted by members in the area near Mastic Beach. Not going anwywhere.
Further, If you check, most Village law bills die in Committe
DeleteThank you. I would think that we get grandfathered in if it passes. The issue would be if the petition gets rejected by the courts and we have to do a new one.
DeleteAt a minimum, the Spolzino expenses should be charged to the A budget
ReplyDeleteI disagree with you on that. This has nothing to do with the A budget. Edgemont is a B budget jurisdiction. In fact, not one person from the villages appeared at either hearing showing its complete irrelevance to them. To the contrary, opposition came mostly from the TOV (who, and especially Fairview, will rue the day they did that if Edgemont incorporates).. I understand the Town is being coy about where the $50,000 is being paid from and the resolution was silent on this contentious issue. In point of fact it should be paid for by Mr. Feiner as hiring Spolzino was an abuse of power. He has $100,000 in his re-election fund and sadly is facing no opposition.
ReplyDeleteWith regard to the proposed law, if its so controversial - why is it sailing along in the Senate? Why are there no comments on the website? Why is it marked a priority? This terrible bill should be DOA and is an example of the lackluster crowd we have in Albany starting here with our own Tom "anti vaxxer" Abinanti who practices law by bouncing candidates off the ballot.
RAID, we will have to agree to disagree. The responsibility to allow the election is that of the Supervisor, and not a TOV responsibility, like zoning. But more importantly, I suspect the $50,000 in expenses is just the tip of the iceberg, once litigation starts, it will increase. It is not just about Fairview or Edgemont, to Feiner, it is about him keeping his job.
ReplyDeleteThe Assembly Committee will not even read the bill. No hearings scheduled. The Senate Committee passed it with 5 votes for it and 4 with reservations. they can call it a priority all they want, to provide cover for the guys near Mastic. Don't mean it is going anywhere, the people in Rockland and Orange see the problems in it and wont get near it with a 10 foot pole.
Villa, the bigger issue with this bill is Hartsdale. Somme there are concerned as to what will happen to them if Edgemont incorporates. Some believe that it is only a matter of time as to which village anyone will be part of, not whether.
ReplyDeleteIt's not difficult to envision a domino effect. First the bits of unincorporated Irvington and Ardsley would seek to be annexed by their villages (how doable is that?), at which point it's just Hartsdale propping up Fairview. Presumably Hartsdale would want to incorporate rather than carry that weight on their own.
DeleteVilla, it is a little more confusing. If Ardsley SD in TOV joins Ardsley, they lose their parking at the station. If Ardsley TOV in the Hartsdale FD joins up with Hartsdale they keep their parking. Hartsdale has no district other than the Fire District or the School District, AFAIK
DeleteParking and suppose the pool are real issues for Ardsley TOV but how many people need or use it. Of course its a selling point but the district needs the revenue and cannot survive on Hartsdale alone. So once Edgemont incorporates, all sorts of inter-village deals may be possible. Feiner has milked balkanized Greenburgh by pitting neighbor against neighbor and village against TOV and totalling ignoring Hartsdale which is a dumping ground for feel good look awful walls for Feiner photo ops.
DeleteRAID, the district can sell all the spots it wants for the higher non resident rate. It can easily survive on the approximately 40% that Edgemont has a call on, and then use some/charge nonresident for some. The pool is living on borrowed time, per the study the Town commissioned, and needs $10M of work. Would of been nice if no Fortress Bible settlement.
DeleteRaid, how.why do you say the bill is marked a priorty in the Senate. It was reported out of Committee on March 1, no activity since then?
ReplyDeleteSpoke to legislative aide in Albany for Senate bill's sponsor. She said it was marked priority. I hope you are right its DOA.
ReplyDeleteThe Sponser is from the Mastic Beach area. Not certain what support you see for it other, than the Mastic Beach area and Abinanti, who of course wants to deprive Edgemont of voting rights any chance he gets.
ReplyDeleteAbinanti is a menace but once again there are no candidates. His anti vaccine bill was beyond reckless but he is career politician who practices law by knocking candidates off the ballot.
ReplyDelete