The Edgemont Kobayashi Maru Scenario

Star Trek fans will recognize the Kobayashi Maru scenario reference instantly. For non-Star Trek fans, the Kobayashi Maru scenario was an infamous no-win scenario that was part of the curriculum for command-track cadets at Starfleet Academy in the 23rd century. It was primarily used to assess a cadet’s discipline, character and command capabilities when facing an impossible situation, as there is no (legitimate) strategy that will result in a successful outcome. The protagonist of the show, Starship Enterprise Captain James T. Kirk, played by actor William Shatner, was the only cadet in Starfleet history to ever beat the Kobayashi Maru — by reprogramming the simulation so that it was possible to win. This should sound familiar to Greenburgh residents.

While we never would expect Mr Feiner to be torn between an ethical or moral dilemma, he has repeatedly tried to bend, change, alter and scrap the rules. When the Edgemont section of the Town began openly discussing the possibility of incorporating into a village to pursue their goal of self destiny and better financial control, Mr Feiner worked feverishly behind the scenes to thwart their efforts. And, throughout it all they continued to post their thoughts, findings, questions, points and counter-points online and express them at many assorted meetings. At no point did it appear, at least to ABG staffers, that there was ever anything “going on” or any ulterior motives. 

Many of Mr Feiner’s sycophants, committee appointees and supporters as well as Mr Feiner himself claimed that the Edgemont Community Council and Robert Bernstein were behind this move that would cripple the Town's budget and services. While operational changes could certainly happen to Greenburgh, there were far too many people stepping up, becoming involved and seeing Mr Feiner’s attacks as hollow. His public reasoning for not being willing to meet with the incorporation members was that the group was not an official entity and could not enter into a binding contract with the Town. We believe the real reasons are quite different.

By refusing to meet with residents, taxpayers and constituents of the Town regardless of their philosophies, intent or goals, Mr Feiner was already taking a position against incorporation and intentionally alienating some who may have been on the fence about incorporation. His steadfast anti-incorporation position very definitely worked against him. Mr Feiner, who as Supervisor is supposed to remain neutral according to NYS law, continued to rail against incorporation going out of his way to make his anti-incorporation position well-known through other media outlets friendly to him. In fact, emails publicized by many residents and civic associations from Town Hall repeatedly proved this point out time and again.

Once the petitions were finally accepted at Town Hall, another in a series of calculated missteps by Mr Feiner's crew, probably under his orders, he waited until the end of the allotted time period to render his incorporation decision, saying, “No!” Undeterred, the incorporation members forged ahead. But next would be the unauthorized expenditure of Town funds to hire a retired judge so he could shift any ownership of decisions Edgemont incorporators found unfavorable away from himself saying, “It was the judge’s decision, not mine.” Next were the subsequent private investigators sent to homes to invalidate the petition signatures that had been submitted even while NY State law says these expenditures were illegal. Even though Mr Feiner’s illegal position and actions were trying to win a no-win scenario, albeit Kobayashi Maru, he forged on – continuing his alienation of others who may have been amenable to his view but had now changed sides.

An Article 78 is a form of objection for the public against a municipality's decision they believe unfair, unjust or wrong. The Edgemont Incorporation Council (EIC) filed an Article 78 against Mr Feiner once he said no to their incorporation referendum request. On October 31, 2017, New York Supreme Court Judge Susan Cacace rejected Mr Feiner and the Town's motion to dismiss the suit. In the Dromore Road case it was also no surprise when Judge Cathy Siebel referenced the Fortress Bible federal discrimination case, noting Mr Feiner and the Town’s guilty verdict for federal discrimination, lying under oath, destroying evidence and more!

With each apparently hapless misstep, and we know each move was very calculated by Mr Feiner, both sides seemed to dig their heels in deeper. Now Mr Feiner has a new ploy. He has offered the Edgemont community the ability to control its own zoning and planning without incorporation to thwart their movement. The argument from the EIC has always been about having better control over their own destiny. Mr Feiner has claimed incorporation will cause the Town budget to have a $17 million shortfall. While that number is questionable, other residents in the Unincorporated Town have pressed Mr Feiner and his Board to explain why they are not doing everything possible to ensure minimal budget disruption? Their answers are hollow as they follow Mr Feiner’s mantra that incorporation will fail and there’s no need to plan ahead. This lack of planning, whether over incorporation, sidewalks, infrastructure, or flooding, etc., is another on the list of hallmark shortcomings of the 24-year tenure of the Feiner Administration.

Mr Feiner’s latest idea of allowing only Edgemont to have control over its planning and zoning is not the only issue at play. ABG believes this latest offering to placate the EIC is just another desperate and illegal move to segregate Edgemont from the rest of the Town by Mr Feiner. It smacks of spot-zoning – illegal, yet still practiced with impunity by Mr Feiner and his Board. This move harkens back to his other discriminatory practices in the Fortress Bible Church discrimination case which we are all paying for to the tune of $6.5 million dollars (of which $1 million was paid by the insurance company). Instead of trying to work in good faith with everyone, Mr Feiner has chosen to alienate just about everyone - the EIC, most of Edgemont, the Unincorporated taxpayers, and the courts. This must end. 

Whether you are for or against the incorporation, this haphazard method of governance calls to mind of the same old political games that turn people away from participating with their government. Maybe that’s what Mr Feiner is hoping for. But, these kinds of shenanigans, back room deals, subterfuge, lies, discriminatory efforts and Kobayashi Maru scenarios have no place in our Town and must end. Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.

Predictable Incompetence

Predictably, Mr Feiner and his Board voted unanimously to adopt their ill-conceived zoning district change. This move, again predictably, promises to embroil the Unincorporated Greenburgh taxpayers in yet another discrimination lawsuit. The new zoning amendment creates what will be known as a M-SH62 district. Simply, this represents what will be know as Multifamily Senior Housing for 62 year old people and over. Commissioner Garrett Duquesne claims this will create much needed new senior housing.

The zoning change is being made for a specific intent, affecting specifically, the housing structures located at 48, 50, 54, 56 and 58 Manhattan Avenue. This housing is currently considered part of a low-income scatter-site housing complex that is next to the Theodore Young Community Center. Many people who spoke at the Town Board meeting endorsed scatter-site housing as well as low-income housing. Many also endorsed the rebuilding effort as neglect and a lack of maintenance, a hallmark of the Feiner Administration for over 24-years, have cited the need for improvement.

During the Town Board meeting, one younger woman who stated she lives in one of the apartments, begrudgingly got up to speak after she and her neighbors did not receive an accurate account as to what was happening with the project or exactly what was going to happen to their place of residence? Then she stressed while she had concern for her neighbors, she wants to know how she, specifically, would be affected. Again, different answers abounded with Town Attorney Tim Lewis seemingly having the final, although apparently not correct, word in the matter.

During the meeting, Mr Feiner requested Raju Abraham, Executive Director of the Greenburgh Housing Authority, to come to the podium and clarify a few points. Yes, 4 families will be moved out as they won't qualify to be a resident there under the new zoning code. He also acknowledged that the tenants will be moved to a newly renovated apartment with new appliances in a different Greenburgh Housing Authority facility in another part of Town. This sounds like they are being bribed to just shut up and go along with their eviction. He also stated they could move anywhere in the Country as they are Section 8 voucher recipients and they can use the voucher anywhere. Section 8 requires a tenant to spend 30% of their income towards rent. Simply, this is nothing more than subsidized housing.

Commissioner Duquesne has stated the plan is to demolish the currently occupied five buildings and ultimately relocate four of the five families as they are under 62 years of age. Clearly, this is another form of discrimination once this bill was voted through! So much so, in fact that several speakers (of the G10) reiterated the point several times during both comment periods and the hearing itself. Ignoring the advice of attorneys and other well-regarded residents, the Town Board went along with the flawed bill and adopted it anyway, virtually ensuring a lawsuit for $25 million. 

What does this mean? Several things. 

First, this new spot-zoning change is more of the same throughout the Town. We’ve been witnessing spot-zoning by Mr Feiner and his Board with wanton regularity. They've done it with Westhab in Fulton Park, Brightview in Glenview, Shelbourne in Edgemont and so many more locations. Virtually every neighborhood, except Mr Feiner’s gated community of Boulder Ridge, has felt the spot-zoning wrath of Mr Feiner and crew. So, with this new zoning code change specifying by law an age restriction, the Unincorporated Town should expect to be in court again.

Second, is the illegality of creating a law that restricts people of a certain age from being able to move into a neighborhood. In fact, replace “62-year olds” with any other group and see if you can more easily understand why this is wrong on so many levels. Had the Town left out the “age of 62 and older” from the bill now passed into law, and left the onus on the Greenburgh Housing Authority or the group the Town is contracting these apartments with to build, we would not have to worry about going to court for another discrimination lawsuit. In fact, zoning guru Ella Preiser suggested at numerous times that the bill could easily be changed and the liability eliminated. Instead, Councilman Jones took to the bully pulpit to berate and rudely shout down Ms Preiser. Shortly thereafter, Town Councilman Sheehan would jump on the bully pulpit and attack Ms Preiser as well when she got up to speak again. 

Immediately before the rudeness by Mr Jones, Bob Bernstein explained in great detail why the change in this proposal could easily be corrected, but must be done before its adoption. He further explained why this will wind up in court and expose the Unincorporated Town taxpayers to a $26 million dollar discrimination lawsuit. An interesting aside witnessed here again was several audience members, new to the sham known as open government , were actually engaged in a back and forth discussion by the Board members. These same Board members usually refuse to discuss anything with their critics and detractors. And, as we witnessed this night, chose to be rude to regular attendees instead.

There’s already a lawsuit against the Town from S&R (Steven and Richard Troy) Development, who changed their original proposal from luxury houses (2 or 3 McMansions) to an affordable housing proposal on Dromore Road in Edgemont. In an effort to halt the Town from going deeper into the discrimination hole the Board was digging for themselves, Mr Bernstein suggested Mr Feiner and his Town Board hold off passing the “neg dec” for another project after Mr Bernstein warned them not to, as their motion to dismiss the discrimination lawsuit by Dromore Developer's S&R, would be going in front of Judge Cathy Seibel, who cited when reading her decision not to dismiss it, that the Town, Mr Feiner and Board had already been found guilty of discrimination, destroying evidence and lying under oath in the Fortress Bible law suit.

Since the motion to dismiss the S&R lawsuit against the Town was, ahem, dismissed, and the lawsuit moving forward, the Town should tread carefully when they make such decisions as to zoning with the intent to limit who can and cannot move into a specific area of the Town. While decisions like these are terrible for the Town financially, they're embarrassing to the taxpayers who support developing various types of housing throughout the Town. It's also completely understandable why Edgemont residents are actively pursuing incorporation. Who would want to be part of this circus at Hillside Avenue? The numbers are growing. At least the villages are insulated from a good part of this. It has to end. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Celebrate Elmsford Day

Travel The World - Come To Hartsdale