Greenburgh Minority Votes Down School Budget!

The Greenburgh Central 7, 2011 operating budget for the coming year was handily defeated in a second vote of the same budget originally proposed in May. The vote in May was 403-398 against the budget. The cries of “for the children” began ramping up. Yesterday’s revote had a wider margin of defeat than the last vote by 143 votes, coming in at 578-435. With only 1,013 people voting, out of a total residency of approximately 90,000, we can only hope things might change. This turnout isn't even 1% of the residents. 

There was no mention of the defeated budget in the following day in the Journal News. Apparently, Paul Feiner was unable to quickly draft a spin for the defeat and the Journal News bowed to the probable request by The Paul to keep it out of ‘his’ newspaper. After all, they are only there for his campaign. In an article the following morning on the website, TheDailyGreenburgh, they quote three people regarding the budget. 

Above is the picture of Thomas Bock and a portion of the article as it appeared in an article posted in the TheDailyGreenburgh website.

At the top of the article, they posted a picture (above) of Thomas Bock, a former Republican candidate and opponent of the proposed budget, as if he were the one leading the charge against it. He chastised the Board for not posting the budget online for residents to see and download. ABG agrees with him. True transparency in Greenburgh, something that doesn’t exist yet but is touted often by our deficient leadership, is not only necessary, but is essential for ensuring public involvement.

Two other residents were quoted. “I voted," said Gayle Williams, a supporter of the budget and mother to Woodlands High School students. "[I’m] so disappointed with the paltry turnout and the defeat. Our children will be the losers.” What the article didn’t mention was the fact that she is married to Terrance Williams, a long-time incumbent school board member who was not only in favor of the budget, but in favor of not making any changes to the second proposed budget. “The children get hurt most by the people who voted that either don't have kids in the schools or their kids have moved on," said Stephen Morton, who has a son at Lee F. Jackson Elementary School. “It's our kids’ future. Austerity plans in this day-and-age will hurt our kids more than they help our pocketbooks. We need to stop looking so short on our terms and think long-term.”

Obviously, Williams and others on the Board believed fewer voters would respond to the special election and it would sail on through passage. Oops! They were playing a game on a very slippery slope. To listen to them, this had the future of our schools, as well as our children in peril. The reality is, the funds in question simply don’t go to programs for the children.

With the resulting defeat, the district is now forced to adopt a contingency budget, set at $57.338 million. This budget will force Greenburgh Central 7 to suspend impending services. What specific children's programs are being cut? We’re told it includes certain transportation, library renovations and the installation of a new telephone system. ABG is not moved by the paltry amount stated here, which comes out to be roughly $294k. By removing this amount only, the School Board is making this whole process a mockery and is a slap in our face.

Many Greenburgh residents shared their thoughts on the budget's successes and downfalls. Bock, also stated that many residents were frustrated with the tax increase, which was slated at 5.8 percent. This will happen regardless, whether it's the regular or austerity budget. This is why many people are upset.

"When you compare our school district to Westchester and throughout the state, we are paying a higher amount of money per student and getting lower results,” Bock said. ABG agrees and is baffled why we pay so much more. How are other communities so successful with less money and Greenburgh's Central 7 is a constant struggle? Perhaps a school board member will respond.

ABG believes that the community needs to clean house and remove all incumbents from the school board and start with a fresh group of people. Let’s have real transparency, real dialog and real results. Not these petty excuses that insult the constituents intelligence. 


By the way, we had high hopes for TheDailyGreenburgh site. Unfortunately, they've elected to do fluff pieces and not challenge our leaders. We don't really need another Feiner Koolaid media machine. Once the Journal News abandoned the art of reporting, their readership, subscriptions, staff and revenue fell. It's why weekly publications are still thriving. If fact, the Journal News has what they call Express weeklies which regurgitate what was printed during the week in hopes of getting some of that advertising revenue. It's not for reporting, but another vehicle for advertisements. They'll be gone soon, too. Hopefully, the former staff of the Journal News that has undertaken running TheDailyGreenburgh, will realize what the real need is and try to fill it. Let's hope so.

Consolidation: Incoherence, Failure and Patronage

Some strategic concepts, if they’re revered as untouchable, may lead us in the wrong direction. While the intent may be admirable, the results are far from it. Something of that sort has happened during the past several election cycles in Westchester County, New York State and even the Federal government.

Two of the most influential strategic ideas widely held in business, and intuitively appealing, are so seemingly sensible that they are very hard to abandon. Yet, these may be a very precarious route to follow.

First, is the premise that, when it comes to strategy, bigger is better. In business it’s believed that bigger is better and avails a larger company a more likely outcome of success in emerging markets. Many believe the chances of winning, in every region and every market segment, are enhanced by size. More salespeople, larger distribution footprints, bigger advertising budgets, more robo-calls — these would prove to be the ingredients for success.

The second misleading idea is that consolidation is inevitable. For years, experts predicted that most consumer goods would end up with just two or three big rivals, a handful of niche players battling over the scraps, and a few private-label brands for value consumers. On the Federal level, we see this mentality with Obamacare. In New York, we see it with the Cuomo-Merger mentality and in Westchester County its ugly head has gained visibility under the guise of Consolidation from many.

Together, these two myths have been the mantra of most political pundits, wannabes and potential candidates. Someone said that if we follow a business model to run our government, we would streamline costs, curb spending, and return our respective fiscal houses to some sort of order. Of course once one politician says something catchy, and the media outlets report it, the others follow suit. It’s why we have so many backbenchers in government unable to bring any ideas to the table. In time, these same people that might get elected or appointed, often fail to find the path to success, and we see a fragmentation of efforts, cycling back to the same thing they proffered to ease us from.

To be sure, Westchester County has experienced this same phenomenon with our County Executive and our County Legislators – similar in the ever hostile bickering between two or more siblings that a parent would have ended before it got to this point. In such an environment, no one prospers, with each successful politician finding their own path: some end up fat-and-happy, some remain small with insignificant participation, playing along to get along, and some segregated by regional issues of no interest to others. But none of the paths taken involve forwarding us, the electorate, to a positive outcome. Instead, the growth that could lead to profitability turns to incoherence, failure and patronage. And, in Westchester, the patronage machine is operating at whirlwind speed by the current power brokers. Even minor players are attempting to gain a presence.

Coherence is a town or village’s ability to concentrate its resources and collective intelligence, and marshal all of them in the service of a well-aligned group of products and services with a focused strategic direction. Highly coherent ones have three to six major distinctive capabilities, all of which are integrated into a single system that is used throughout. This type of strategy and management execution allows municipalities to be efficient in their activities, disciplined about their services, and differentiated in the eyes of customers. The towns and villages that employ administrators, instead of supervisors or mayors, seem to understand and prosper with this.

In fact, many executives of companies have often overlooked the value of coherence. They have focused on sheer size and scale instead. But size and scale are no longer as critical as they once were in business — at least not in the mature markets of industrialized nations. But, because of the consolidation mentality pervading the landscape, our ineffective, inefficient and morally deficient leaders are adrift.

In assessing the relationship between scale and performance, one might argue that it’s not fair to compare the growth rates of large and small towns and villages. Large towns such as Greenburgh or Mt. Pleasant are so large, compared to the villages, there’s no way they can grow as fast as a village that’s a fraction of their size. A smaller community, especially one that’s run well, always has a better chance of showing dramatic growth because of its small revenue base and hands-on immediacy.

Can we escape the Consolidation Mentality? Coherence seems to be particularly important in consumer products companies, where there is always a temptation to react opportunistically to changing markets. So too, do towns and villages. Why does it make such a difference to resist that temptation? Because a town or village, as a coherent entity, is simply more coherent than its neighbors, they can focus on a few capabilities, increasing a mastery of those critical areas, gaining in efficiency, don’t waste time, money, and attention to capabilities in areas where it doesn’t need to outdo anyone. Rather, they can focus on improving services and revenues.

In assessing the relationship between scale and performance, one might argue that it’s not fair to compare the growth rates of a town to a village. Large towns already have so much invested in their services, there’s no way they can grow as fast as a village that’s a fraction of their size. There is some truth to this — a smaller town, especially one with a real mayor, an engaged board, and most importantly, an administrator, always has a better chance of showing dramatic growth because of its small revenue base. So, if the advantages of size, scale, and quantity of personnel were really that great, one would expect bigger towns to do better than the vast majority of their smaller village peers.

The history of the marketing suggests that size was indeed a vital element in the past. But that’s been erroded. One important factor in this was the rise of digital media. A generation ago, when network television was the most effective way to get a branding message out to residents, players with scale could get the best deals for airtime. Now, with a cable audience divided among hundreds of channels, prime-time network television isn’t necessarily the smartest or most efficient buy. Newer outlets, including infomercials, custom-designed Internet sites, and social media such as Facebook offer better options. Creativity and promotional skill are supplanting sheer size as the determinant of marketing success. Many towns and villages are delivering their own branded experiences through websites or mobile phones — an approach showing more and more promise.

Outsourcing and alliances have also helped erode the value of scale. It is harder for a town to maintain advantages through functions such as customer service. These capabilities can be offloaded to outside partners that can do the job as well as the largest rivals in a market, often at a lower cost. For example, in the private sector, many organizations have outsourced their cleaning crews because their services will be more affordable, efficient and requires no investment in pensions, health care and other expenses that are choking all our communities. Nowadays, a smaller village that needs an outsource function can turn to a specialist firm assuring successful implementation of that service.

Some residents, who are truly loyal to their town or villages employees, don’t care how a large municipality provides it. The value of consolidation, like the value of size, was more substantial in the past than it is today. In the 1980s, village or town with a loosely configured budget pursuing an incoherent growth strategy could maintain adequate performance for years, until the balloon was eventually burst. Those days are gone. Some are proposing consolidation, but wind up fragmenting services, departments and entire organizations instead.

Paradoxically, one of the reasons this situation favors consolidated services is because business has been doing more with less for years now; where municipalities had only to raise taxes. The Town of Greenburgh under the failed stewardship of Paul Feiner, exemplifies this. And now, the constituency has reached its Waterloo and is insisting something be done. Yet, when he’s needed the most for solutions, he’s abandoned the Town, again proven impotent.

In such an environment, communities don’t need the biggest fleet of trucks, the most employees, or the largest budget. They need to gain support with residents through distinctive capabilities, utilizing innovation, services development, and customer service. Residents, for their part, are open to choosing with a high level of engagement or sophistication. Think of the chocolate lover who is drawn to a highbrow brand such as Lindt, or Ghirardelli. Consumer engagement also tends to spread virally; if a large number of people in a community buy specialized pots and pans at Williams-Sonoma, sooner or later their neighbors will look for similar cookware at Walmart or Target. This type of dynamic can be afforded to all municipalities and what they offer their residents and equally important, what they cannot.

Start by assessing the dynamics of your town or village and your potential for gaining advantages there. This exercise would include a close look at the likely future of your communities ‘product’ or service categories: Will consolidation around a few services benefit the community or will they fragment it? In the last consolidation proposal by our County Executive for the Department of Emergency Services and the County Police offered only fragmentation. His advisors were ill prepared to instruct him properly because they aren’t trained to evaluate and implement. Re-read paragraph six.

To wring savings and cost efficiencies out of many parts of its operations, municipalities must use a level of financial discipline more common at private equity firms than at Town Halls. This in itself is a strong capability, and one that has the mark of a top performer. In the end, the problem with many strategic assumptions is not that they’re wrong, it’s that they are not universal. Be wary of the idea that other municipalities and politicians find beguiling; the right strategic destination is different for every level of government, even — or especially — in mature ones such as ours.

Be careful, also, of the ideas that have made you successful over time. Many success stories that have gone from consolidation to fragmentation leave no road to reversal or return. Some have shifted between these dynamics several times. There is always the chance a town or village will find a new service or process that changes the nature of the paradigm altogether. The advantage given to you by your municipal environment is thus transient, and you will have to react ever more quickly in the years ahead. Even so, your greatest strength is steady and long lasting: these capabilities that you hone over the years will be matched to your residents’ needs. 

Ethics Beget Ethical Questions

Due to unforeseen reasons, we have recently been offline, causing us to miss the recent Ethics Board meeting. The Board interviewed and discussed Jordan Glass' ethics violation complaint. You may recall he had an ethics violation lodged against him regarding the Deli Delicious/Ernest Tartaglione zoning variance debacle. He is the handpicked, hand-appointed, hand-planted designee of the Supervisor; to make decisions the supervisor orders him to. He also has a business relationship with the applicant, as does his brother. This would be more than enough reason to recuse oneself from an application; except in Greenburgh, which seems to be giving Yonkers a run for the corruption lead.

The issue at hand is the fact that Glass voted in favor of the Feiner-anointed project of Ernest Tartaglione, owner of Deli Delicious. We have covered this story extensively as well as Town Zoning Board member Nicholas DeCicco, who also voted in favor of the project. Immediately after the vote, DeCicco accepted a campaign fundraiser and assorted donations from Ethics Board member Mark Constantine, and Irvington Developer Chuck Pateman, among others.  Pateman is the official representative for Deli Delicious and the contractor for the deli's expansion project. DeCicco was found not guilty on all but one count, that he accepted funds from the aforementioned Deli group. He has since returned the monies. 

The Board, with its member-scheming crew, has decided to allow Glass to forgo a hearing and plead the offense down. This is similar to what we see when criminals plead from a felony down to a misdemeanor, avoid jail-time and have their records expunged after a certain time. This is a big problem as it means Glass will not be called to task for the crime he's committed and allowed to walk away from his unethical behavior. In effect, he will be able to say he did nothing wrong. It's a perversion of justice and certainly a perversion of ethical conduct by any Board member, especially an ETHICS Board member!

The Town of Greenburgh has long been lead by Supervisor Feiner, who operates without a moral compass, and he encourages our elected officials to skirt responsibility and ultimately the law. This must stop. While the saying is somewhat corny, the stench starts at the head. Regardless of whether any Board member is appointed or elected, volunteer or paid, they must be held to a higher standard. It's time for Paul Feiner to go.

Lawmakers: School-bus Ads Could Raise Funds

ABG Encourages Your Tuesday's Budget Vote To Be, “No”!
A recent Journal News article explained what you would expect from this headline. We all know school taxes everywhere are out of control. ABG understands the problem to be rudimentary; most officials would rather upset voters with a tax increase than cut spending. Rarely, does anyone remember when the next budget comes around. In Greenburgh in particular, Greenburgh’s school budgets traditionally spend a higher rate of money per student than practically any other school district in America. Why? Why do they need so much money every year and always seem to be in dire straights no matter what the few school budget voters approved? Why are the graduation rates and test scores so much lower than other area school districts? It seems the electorate has become resigned to the fact that there aren’t any good candidates available to fill positions on the school board. Perhaps that’s the greater problem, the resignation of the electorate. Where’s the Voice of the Electorate?

Should we put advertising on schools buses? Probably not; and here’s why ABG doesn’t consider it viable. With its red lights flashing as they are either picking up or dropping off children, NYS law requires motorists to come to a complete stop when a school bus is stopped. And, how many of you honestly don’t stop? Whether we intentionally did not stop and kept going, or you slowed down not sure if you should stop? We’ve all done it. Sometimes you realized it too late; sometimes you were just too wrapped-up in your phone conversation. Or, you rationalize that your time is too valuable and why bother stopping, the bus will protect the kids – until it’s your kid – only then should the world stop!

Add to this, the very specific yellow paint of the bus, which is a color by law that is unavailable to be used for any other vehicles. The reasoning is apparent. When you see it and the bus itself, you immediately know that it is a school bus and if it is stopped with flashing red lights, you need to stop. It was a sound idea when it was developed and it still is today. By adding any kind of advertisement to these yellow kid-handlers, you begin to camouflage and disguise them, hindering the intent of the school bus yellow color scheme to protect our kids. Drivers already distracted with cell phones, drinking, eating, doing makeup and simply not paying attention will be hard pressed and frankly defeated with the challenge of seeing a school bus.

Let’s protect our kids. Let’s also find another revenue stream for our school districts. Better yet, let’s elect some representatives with backbone and try to change the paradigm from within with sound fiscal practices, compassion, caring and ultimately, common sense. Vote no for the unchanged, previously defeated Greenburgh school budget. And, in the next election, let’s clean house and really change the equation. Listen to the Voice of the Electorate this Tuesday, VOTE.

The Blue Code: Using Our Police to Intimidate Residents?

We all understand the infamous “blue code” and the brotherhood of the police. And, in certain instances it is understandable why it happens. But how long should it be tolerated and can it be ignored? An ABG staffer related an incident with his brother-in-law, a local police officer who arrived at the scene of an automobile accident to find the perpetrator of the accident, a probationary police officer from a different jurisdiction, who had flipped his car and subsequently struck two parked cars. There were no injuries, but it was evident to this officer that the probationary police officer had been drinking excessively. He admits he tried to follow the “Blue Code” but was unable to do so without jeopardizing his own career. The Blue Code is the unwritten code of police officers helping their own. To this day, the brother-in-law says he wanted to help his fellow officer, but could not. He did the right thing for himself and the community. No Blue Code.

On a Sunday evening, the police department gets a call for a two-car automobile accident. An ambulance is also dispatched as the elderly passenger of the vehicle that was struck was complaining of chest pains. A Hispanic-speaking paramedic explained the elderly man’s pain was apparently a result of the seatbelt locking into position to restrain the occupants of the struck vehicle. He refused medial aid. ABG's staffer ran into two officers at a diner after their shift, one of which was the one on scene of the accident. He explained that the perpetrator of the car accident was a local village official.

The officer felt he was in-between the proverbial rock and a hard place. He wanted to cut the official a break but couldn’t. There was damage to both vehicles, a small crowd had formed and he did not want to put his job in jeopardy. During the second cup of coffee, he repeated that he felt bad about not being able to help the official but had to do the right thing. He hated being put in the position. The staffer told him the driver was intoxicated he chose to drink and drive. The officer did the right thing and had no reason to feel bad about his actions. And he replied, “But still… what else could I do?” It was simple, do the right thing. No Blue Code. How many other times does this happen? It seems more often than we know.

The Wednesday night Greenburgh Town Board meeting seemed somewhat beyond the normal entropy we observe every two weeks. The regulars were there, not content with the usual pandering by our Town Supervisor. After a certain amount of contentious behavior, the supervisor claimed in frustration that if the disruptive residents continued their outbursts he would end the meeting. Well, as political history has proved, nothing can stop Greenburgh residents from the frustrations of The Paul. But this time, The Paul called their bluff, ending the Town Board meeting at about 9 PM, the unofficial start time after his pre-meeting campaigning, and moved the meeting to executive session.

Several residents remained for a brief period to see if our Board would return to the Hall. When the Board did not emerge for some time, several of the residents left the parking area. Finally, Councilwoman Sonya Brown, whom we applaud for finally voting her conscience, exited the building. Now that Ms. Brown has finally stopped drinking the Feiner political Kool-Aid, her resistance to him and the rest of the rubber-stamping board is a breath of fresh air. We’re puzzled as to why it took so long.

The below story was related to ABG by two separate individuals:

With just Councilwoman Brown and one resident in the parking lot, Councilman Kevin Morgan, a former Greenburgh police officer, exited the building with the other board members, stopped, and from a distance looked at the two still in the lot, retrieved his cell phone and appeared to make a phone call. He then proceeded to his car and left. Minutes later a police cruiser pulled into the north end of the lot, turned off his lights and appeared to be observing the Councilwoman and the resident. After about ten minutes, it left. Coincidence? Perhaps. Minutes later an SUV with dark tinted windows pulled in and went to the middle of the lot and turned off his lights.

Councilwoman Brown approached the not too distant SUV and tapped on the window. The occupant cracked the window about an inch, maintaining anonymity, and Councilwoman Brown asked if she could help him, perhaps he needed directions, and he replied in the negative. Then she heard him speak into what must have been a Bluetooth headset or a microphone to someone stating, “She claims to be Councilwoman Brown.” He then closed the window. After a few moments, he left, never identifying himself. The Blue Code in action.

At this point these two were, in fact, understandably shaken and decided to leave in tandem. It seems if Morgan made the call to them, his plan was working. Ms. Brown stated she needed to stop for gas before picking up her daughter and proceeding home. In separate cars, the two believed they were followed by a third unmarked police car. They pulled into a nearby gas station and as they parked at the pumps, the same vehicle pulled into the far end of the lot, apparently continuing his unofficial observation. Now in the safety of an open, public area, the other resident walked toward the vehicle to get the license plate number and, as before, the car sped away!

As Councilwoman Brown was heading home via Manhattan Avenue, it was apparent to her that the police department’s game was still in play. She was subsequently passed by a police vehicle before she  returned home. Then, with her daughter in the car, she saw the same unmarked SUV. This time she called her brother to accompany her into her home. That's the Friends and Family Code.

ABG is revolted at the thought that our police would participate in clearly harassing not only certain council members, but also our residents. Residents should have no fear of the police and should not have to worry about intimidation, collusion, or bad judgment such as this. Most of our officers are exemplary, hard-working and ethical people. In fact, ABG believes this is most certainly an anomaly. If Mr. Morgan truly made that call, it is not the norm of our Town employees.We sincerely hope we don’t see any Blue Code episodes in Greenburgh from our elected and municipal employees. If this has happened to you, we'd like to know.

Republican Convention Held in Hastings

This past Tuesday was the Republican Party's first Convention of this election season. The Democrats have already had theirs.

The ballroom upstairs is the same used for the Republican’s Annual Lincoln Breakfast. At the Lincoln Breakfast the room was packed with standing room only. Tonight's meeting was for District Leaders and/or  nominees. The room had many unfilled seats. The Lincoln Breakfast gave a sense of change that the Republicans were on the cusp of an explosive rebirth. Even my spouse admitted this evening that he's not so sure they'll be doing much of anything different. It was the same old names, literally and figuratively, the same old ideas, the same old rants and the increasingly distasteful partisan politics that is becoming more and more prevalent in Westchester. The Democrats are just as guilty of this. It appears everyone is hoping to maintain what little power they have left.

The host for the evening was Douglas Colety, offering a lackluster performance. Once the event began, it was turned over to the Secretary, Kevin Eccleston, who proceeded to take attendance, and then move on to the rest of the order of business, focusing on nominations of candidates. The majority of the nominations were for the County Legislative Districts. Hardly an inspirational evening as the same old players were dragged out of cold storage. Some newbie candidates, not yet beaten down by the Astorino/Colety apparatus, accepted their nominations with the expected platitudes. But here again, no new ideas, no new blood, just a big group of “same old, same old”, as politics for Republicans in Westchester fades. But we pray something changes, and fast!

The entire evening seemed to focus on several core themes: breaking the super-majority in the County Legislature; County Legislator Ken Jenkins is entertaining with the most ridiculous things he says and does; redistricting was done without Republican input (and now Jenkins actually lives in the district he represents); we're still the highest taxed County in the USA; and the like. After nominating James Maisano, for County Legislator again, he spoke, as did all the candidates. Maisano is a 17-year County Legislator who ran unsuccessfully for the NY Supreme Court in the last election. He's a nice guy and has served well. Although, ABG wonders isn't 17 years enough? Term limits are becoming more and more a necessity.

ABG has been disappointed with the Republicans in general and Greenburgh's Republicans in particular for quite some time. This Convention left the County Legislative's 8th District, among others, unchallenged. This allows a marginal Democratic legislator, Alfreda Williams, an unchallenged win in an uncontested race. It also means that while democrats maintain a super majority vote, Greenburgh will suffer with sub-par representation. We're not sure why Nicholas DeCicco, who challenged Democrat Mary Jane Shimsky in the special election for Thomas Abinanti's seat, didn't try again in this regular election? We're also not sure what district he's in now that the County Legislature did the redistricting?

Specific to Greenburgh, at the recent Greenburgh Town Chair election, we understand that Timothy Hays was elected as the Greenburgh Republican chairman. How did they pick him? We remember an article he contributed to in Westchester magazine supporting Paul Feiner and are told he is still a fan of Feiner. A Republican can certainly support a democrat, but there's a very fine line here. Regardless, we expect to see some passion, new ideas and fresh candidates - but we're not holding our breath.

We're also waiting to hear if Thomas Bock will announce his candidacy for Greenburgh Town Supervisor as well as Nicholas DeCicco, for County Legislative District 8. Bock was at the Republican event and DeCicco was not. Are there no other people in Greenburgh's Republican camp willing to run for office? We think if the moderate and conservative Democrats go to the polls with an open mind, at least these two candidates will have a chance - as will the people of the Town of Greenburgh. The Democrats are not endorsing their three sitting Democratic judges. Apparently,  they're not happy with the direction Greenburgh is heading, either.

ABG believes Greenburgh needs some radical redevelopment. Not just because there are so many Democrats, but because there is no challenge, no check and balance, no variety anymore. Unfortunately, we're not getting the best of anything. It's time for a change in Greenburgh.

Nicholas DeCicco Responds to ABG's Posts

Below is an email ABG recently received from Nicholas DeCicco and have decided to post in the effort of fair play. Our issues go deeper than DeCicco, which manifest themselves as part of Greenburgh's hand-picked appointments in various committees and boards by a contemptible Town Supervisor. 


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

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

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

What Part of 'NO' Don't You Get?

The Proposal

The proposal for the renovations/additions to Deli Delicious, go back to at least 2009. ABG found that one of the neighborhood residents was a candidate for political office. He attended a fundraiser hosted by Chuck Pateman, in Irvington. While there, Pateman offered the use of his home and property for a fundraiser if the candidate would supply everything else, such as entertainment, food, beverages, etc. He thanked the host for his generosity and later exited the event.

The following day, this same candidate received a telephone call from Pateman. After some brief pleasantries, Pateman asked the candidate if he could help persuade the neighborhood to get on board and go along with Tartaglione’s deli expansion? This candidate explained he was reasonably sure that not only could he not change his neighbor’s minds, but also offered that Tartaglione should have reached out to the neighborhood to make his case before proceeding. Tartaglione had not. The candidate also explained how Supervisor Feiner, his feckless Town Board and another property’s petitioner, Westhab, had assaulted and “dumped on” the neighborhood by forcing an oversized homeless shelter be built. 

Lifelong neighbors told an ABG staffer that Feiner had said some twenty years earlier that if the homeless population were ever removed, he would support a senior citizen living facility. Numerous conversations confirmed this information, just not Feiner. In the beginning, he claimed he didn’t remember saying this. Then he claimed he never said it and went so far as to threaten the neighborhood by saying the County under the Spano administration, would build their own facility on the property and supercede local zoning laws if this project didn't proceed. This was simply not true. In fact, then County Executive Spano was questioned by residents and so outraged by Feiner, he sent the area residents a letter saying as much and that Feiner was lying. Tartaglione, Pateman and Constantine pushed on.

Ethics and The Vote

There were not enough votes in a straw vote by the Zoning Board, to show the zoning variance petition had legs. County Legislator hopeful, Nicholas DeCicco, a member of the Greenburgh Zoning Board, voted in favor of the Deli Delicious zoning variance request. Chuck Pateman held a fund raising event for DeCicco at his Irvington home. Robert Bernstein, an Edgemont resident and attorney who has sued the Town before, lodged an ethics complaint against DeCicco for voting on an active case while accepting campaign donations from the applicant. There would be a hearing. DeCicco asked for a continuance, as he would be away. It was granted. However, while he was away, DeCicco pled guilty of unethical conduct as a Board member and returned the money given to him by Pateman. He should have recused himself (Webster’s definition: to remove oneself from participation to avoid a conflict of interest) in the very beginning and this would never have been an issue during his failed County Legislative race against Mary Jane Shimsky or even now if he contemplates other political aspirations. He claims he did recuse himself and is currently still a member of the Zoning Board. There’s an ethics conundrum for you: should a Board member who pleads guilty of an ethics violation still be allowed to sit on the Board. We think not.

It's Official

The Zoning Board voted at a regular meeting on the Tartaglione petition and this time officially voted against Tartaglione’s petition. When Pateman asked for permission to address the Board, the President told him, “Absolutely not. There is nothing to add.” As sore losers go, Tartaglione stormed out of the hearing and the following day had put plywood across the windows and spray painted the word “closed” on them. He also hung signs, which ABG maintains is in violation of the Town’s signage regulations. Yet the Town, with Feiner’s blessing, is ignoring this. Although, about two years ago Feiner had his building department go after a neighbor for code and building violations. This neighbor was leading the fight against the Westhab proposal. When the case got to court, it was dismissed. Feiner’s intimidation tactic didn’t work this time. Ask any Greenburgh employee about Feiner and intimidation. They'll probably remain mum unless they know they can trust you. It speaks volumes.

Article 78

Now Tartaglione, surely under the intimate hand-holding of Pateman and Constantine, has filed an Article 78 with the Supreme Court, ProSe. Pateman’s lawyer, Ethics Board member Mark Constantine, must be the engine behind this move. Tartaglione doesn’t exhibit the necessary intelligence to even know what ProSe or for that matter, what Latin is, let along file the requisite paperwork required in Supreme Court. ABG also wonders if non-practicing attorney Paul Feiner isn’t also offering input to this motley crew. Note: An Article 78 of the New York State CPLR provides a mechanism for actions, or inactions, of a government agency or official to be challenged in court. There are three basic forms of relief one can seek in an Article 78. 1) A Writ of Mandamus to compel a government agency or official to do something they are required by law to do; 2) A Writ of Prohibition seeks to force or compel a government agency or official to refrain from doing something it should not do; or 3) A Mandamus of Review is utilized where on seeks the reversal of a public agency or official’s decision. We haven’t been able to get more information yet as to the specifics of the appeal, but if Tartaglione in fact filed this, we wouldn’t be surprised to see it written in crayon.

Just Go

This is what is very wrong with politics in general and Greenburgh politics specifically. After twenty years of iron-fisted political intimidation, deals, arm bending, coercion, control and out and out lies, Feiner has turned into what the average citizen fears – a corrupted, conscious-less politician bastardizing our government from the top down for his own interests. Please keep in mind that the Town has mostly good, dedicated employees working for us. Unfortunately, Feiner and his play-along-to-get-along Stepford Board overshadow these same good employees. It’s time for Paul to go.

Guilty! DeCicco Returns Contributions

The Greenburgh Ethics Board, a tainted Feiner appointed group patterned after the three monkeys "See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil" mantra, found Nicholas DeCicco guilty of an ethics violation. As a Zoning Board member, DeCicco accepted campaign contributions from a business with an active petition under review with the Zoning Board, from which DeCicco claimed to have recused himself. You'll recall from an earlier blog we discussed DeCicco's failed election campaign against Mary Jane Shimsky. ABG was actually disappointed with both candidates lack of knowledge of the issues as well as a lack of vision for the district, but preferred DeCicco over Shimsky. Vacating the same district assembly seat was Feiner cohort, confidant, and conniver, Thomas Abinanti; whose claim to fame, like Feiner, is using the press for reelection publicity over substance.


DeCicco was accused of violating the Greenburgh Ethics code after Chuck Pateman, the "representative" for Ernest Tartaglione's Deli Delicious, held a fund raiser for DeCicco in February at his Irvington, NY estate on Mountain Road. ABG feels a bit of compassion for DeCicco as he came into the politcal game as a neophyte, and didn't know who the players really were. We supposed that the Republican Chairman, Douglas Colety probably set these wheels in motion for DeCicco after Pateman approached Colety and offered a tit-for-tat deal. "You get me zoning approval and I'll make sure little Nicky gets a few bucks." He then turned to his attorney and consigliere Constantine, snapped his fingers and said, "Make it happen." "Yes, m-lord."

How does this impact this current election? It doesn't really, just DeCicco. He stated an interest in running for County Legislator again, against Shimsky. ABG believes that is where he should focus his efforts. Any attempt to run for a seat in Greenburgh will be futile. Voters forget and Greenburgh voters will forget too. Nick, skip this year's Greenburgh election and try next time and you'll have a shot. Robert Bernstein, the Edgemont Community Council President was asked to withdraw his complaint and he refused. So this issue for DeCicco won't easily fade away. Pateman, who still represents Tartaglione, can now take the cash DeCicco has returned and use it to pay for the Article 78 he just filed with the Supreme Count to try to get Deli Delicious' zoning variance. Obviously Tartaglione's supposed financial woes and cause for the deli's closure, is nothing more than the ploy we've maintained all along. His "unemployed" workers still show up for work every day albeit behind plywood doors and windows. His truck, his car and occasionally other people's cars, park in the lot daily behind the blocked entrance. Business as usual - just not as an open deli. It's all a scam and Paul Feiner is complicit with this scam!

  ** As an aside, an ABG staffer, who was leaving work at Staples at about 9PM or so on a week night and saw Tartagliones brother or son and another male dumping a piano onto the Westhab property adjacent to the deli property.** 


The Ethics Board will continue hearing the case against Zoning Board member Jordan Glass, which will be the subject of further discussion at its June meeting. The Town had decided not to pay for an attorney for DeCicco, and have decided the same thing for Glass. So while both conspirators plotted, possibly for their own gains by using their seats on the Zoning Board, even with Supervisor Feiner's ineptitude everywhere, justice seems to have partially prevailed. Now, if we could just get Pateman, Constantine, DeCicco, Glass and Feiner to just remove Tartaglione's piano from the Westhab property, everyone will be able to move on.

Driving Around Westchester, Using My Cell Phone

Recently, the Town Supervisor stated at a Board meeting and posted the following, “Frequently, when I am driving around Westchester County and using my cell phone, my phone doesn't work.  There are many areas around the county that are not covered by cell phone service. I think I'm in a third world country - my phone dies on me during the middle of telephone conversations.”

His admission of guilt as it relates to using a cell phone while driving, is indicative of the poor leadership he’s exhibited for years.  ABG is hoping our new Police Chief, Joseph DeCarlo, will have a chat with the supervisor about following the traffic laws for cell phone usage while on the roads. Otherwise, we hope he gets pulled over by a police officer from a non-Greenburgh area and ticketed. Why non-Greenburgh? He won’t be able to intimidate his way out of a ticket with job loss threats to our officers.

He made another ridiculous statement, and again we quote, “In the event of a terrorist attack or emergency evacuation, cell phone coverage could be important for families and law enforcement officials.  Cell service provides a link to family members and to public safety officials.” Perhaps. ABG spoke to numerous first responders, both career and volunteer and asked how many calls they make during their average emergency and how many they made on September 11, 2001. They said they rarely if ever make cell calls when at a call – they’re usually pretty busy. On 9-11, many that were on duty called home to ensure the safety of their loved ones, but if they didn’t get them on the line, they continued doing what needed to be done. One responder we spoke with said he couldn’t get phone service anyway as the cell towers were down. Another said he was able to use his direct-connect feature to raise his wife. Once he was sure they were safe, he made no more calls.

Once again, this seems to be one of those manufactured issues that our Supervisor is so good creating. It’s something he doesn’t control, has no say in, and yet the media will entertain his blather on this in article after article. Would cell coverage in an emergency be a good thing? Probably. But it’s also why the localities’ Police, Fire, EMS and various highway and road crews have radios with specific frequencies.

Our final quote, as unbelievable as this seems, is this, “I think that Westchester County should conduct an annual inventory of areas around the county that do not have cell service (by carrier) and that the county should publicize the areas that lack coverage.  This should be coordinated with the local police force and be incorporated into emergency preparation plans.” ABG’s guess is Feiner endorses this as the County has so much extra personnel, time and money to waste on frivolous Feiner fishing expeditions. Yes, we’re being facetious. We also know that our police department has better things to do than worry about cell phone coverage. Feiner can never seem to focus on real issues affecting Greenburgh taxpayers.

It’s time for The Paul to go. He’s stopped doing what’s good for the residents quite some time ago. He's committed and focused on fast tracking projects for developers and keeps fostering absurd ideas such as this. We look forward to a change this November.