Sunday, April 2, 2017

Reprehensible Trickery Used To Thwart Incorporation

We learned yesterday of a video that was made by an astute (and security aware) Edgemont resident. The woman, seen answering her front door with her two children, let a woman into her home who claimed, “I’m just here to verify some information in regards to the incorporation petition.” She never mentioned that she would try to have the voter sign an affidavit objecting to the incorporation petition. They proceed into the kitchen to sit down and when the Edgemont resident asks who she works for, and what her job is, she’s given a vague answer, “I’m here to verify some information.”
It is critical that you watch the entire visit:

Every time the Edgemont homeowner asked the private investigator a question, the investigator continued to evade providing an answer. Mr Feiner hired a firm to do his job of verifying the incorporation petition signatures. Yet, the private investigator is requesting the pro-incorporation resident who signed the petition now sign an objection – not a verification – to the incorporation petition!


What should be happening is the private investigator should be asking the resident if they indeed signed the petition, possibly showing a copy of it for verification and leaving. Instead, each time the homeowner asks a question, she’s still given a vague answer. Although, when the private investigator asks any questions, they are leading questions to elicit specific answers and move the conversation toward signing the objection form. However, in this one case, the homeowner is smart, informed and not duped by Mr Feiner’s private investigator.

One of Mr Feiner’s main tactics in a primary or regular election is to invalidate petition signatures. To remain hands-off and maintain deniability, he's even used his Board's family members to do this. This is not foreign territory to him or his Board. In fact, before we learned of this damning video but learned that Mr Feiner had employed private investigators, ABG staffers discussed who actually hired the private investigators, knowing Mr Feiner would have someone else do it to keep his hands-off approach. We discussed that he would deny culpability by saying he didn’t write, know of, or saw the questions the private investigators were asking. Thriving on total deniability, non-practicing attorney Mr Feiner is always careful enough to stay just beyond the reach of the law. Otherwise, when caught, he simply lies as he did under oath and was found guilty of doing in the Fortress Bible Discrimination case.

Below the video is an unedited exchange between a resident and Mr Feiner. Please note: there are always Feiner-buzzwords to watch out for that he will employ during any rough patches or challenges to his bad or illegal behavior. This time it’s “due diligence”, a term he enlisted and subsequently exhausted with his Board during the former Frank’s Nursery and GameOn 365 debacle. This kind of trickery and despicable behavior will not cost Mr Feiner and his Board reelection, but it embodies the reason Edgemont is seeking to incorporate. This needs to change. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Video link:

Exchange between Edgemont Resident and Mr Feiner:

Published on Apr 1, 2017
I've received several reports in the last 24 hours from Edgemont residents who have had visitors at their doors, asking about incorporation petitions. This post is not about incorporation, but it is about our Town, and its interest in suppressing our 1st amendment rights to have a vote on how we wish to be governed. Our elected supervisor is responsible for certifying a petition and ensuring our rights as citizens, and is instead spending our tax dollars subverting the effort.

You can also read below for exchanges between another resident and Paul Feiner, and at the very bottom, an email from Paul Feiner to a 3rd resident.
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 9:05 PM
To: Paul Feiner
Subject: Misrepresenting

I am appalled and disgusted by your tactics to undermine signatures for the incorporation of Edgemont. You are a criminal and should be put in jail.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 1, 2017, at 10:06 AM, Paul Feiner wrote:

We are not trying to undermine the petition process. There is a New York State statute that requires me to do my due diligence in reviewing the petitions before ruling whether the petitions complied with state law. A public hearing is being held on Thursday evening at 7:30 PM at Veteran park to hear testimony (if people have any objections). After the hearing is closed I will review with a former Appellate division Justice of the NYS Supreme Court the testimony and will issue a decision (which could be appealed by either side in court) on whether the requirements of the law were met.
I encourage you to read the NYS law regarding the incorporation process. PAUL FEINER

On Apr 1, 2017, at 11:13 AM, EDGEMONT RESIDENT wrote:

The law also says that people should not misrepresent themselves. She came in my home pretending to b working for incorporating not to undermine the process.
You are a criminal and I will be at the meeting to remind the people of that. Using my tax money to hire people to misrepresent themselves to fill your agenda
It's disgusting what you are doing.

Sent from my iPhone
From: Paul Feiner
Date: April 1, 2017 at 11:46:08 AM EDT
Subject: Re: Misrepresenting

Meeting is Wednesday the 5th not thursday

Sent from my iPhone

See below for an email to yet another resident from Paul Feiner, where he blames his lawyer (a tactic he tried with the Dromore road case, which the court did not accept):

From: Paul Feiner
Date: April 1, 2017 at 6:33:27 PM EDT
Subject: Re: Validation of signatures

As Town Supervisor I have the responsibility to do my due diligence in reviewing the petitions to make sure that the petitions comply with the law. The review has not been completed. The Town Board has retained the services of a former Appellate Division Justice of the New York State Supreme Court to assist in reviewing the petitions. I have not met the person who knocked on your door. I have not been privy to what she was asked to say when knocking on doors. Have no idea how many doors the Judge wants her to reach. I have not seen the form that you were asked to sign and have not been advised whose doors she is knocking on. My understanding is that anyone who is assisting him will be reporting to him.
I want to reassure you that I have a legal responsibility to review the petitions. And, by NYS statute have the responsibility of determining whether the petitions comply with the law (my decision can be appealed). I have told the Town Board, Town Attorney and Judge that I will base my decision on the law. That's why I requested the assistance of a well respected former Judge who was appointed by Republican Governor Pataki to the Appellate Division and redesignated by a Democratic Governor. If the petition complies with the law a referendum will be held quickly.

1 comment: