After
being unnecessarily delayed, the seekers of an Edgemont incorporation may
finally get their chance to vote for just that: incorporation. Judge Susan
Cacace issued a decision against Mr Feiner’s decision that disqualified the
resident’s petition signatures to incorporate. Once he issued his original
decision and invalidated their petition, Mr Feiner did what he always does to
attract publicity and delay the inevitable. He said what he always does, “If
you don't like what I’m doing, sue me.” And, once again, they did.
This
lawsuit, while considered frivolous by Mr Feiner’s supporters, was far from
frivolous. Had Mr Feiner adhered to the law, he would have reviewed the
petition signatures, returned his judgment that everything was in order and
scheduled the referendum. Instead, he chose to politicize the request from the
Edgemont residents and force them to play his games. Before he disqualified
the petition, the incorporation momentum didn't stop and he enlisted the “help”
from a retired judge. However the real goal behind hiring the judge for $50,000 unauthorized Town dollars was to be able to point a
finger at him when the defecation hit the ventilation. And, it did and he did.
The
judge, on Mr Feiner's behalf, hired a private investigation firm to scour the
Edgemont community and acquire residents' signatures that would actually
invalidate their original petition signatures. This seemed like the move of a
desperate man - and rightfully so. Numerous attorneys, practicing attorneys,
kept explaining to Mr Feiner, his Town Board, supporters and those not fully
informed with what was going on, that what he was doing was not only
reprehensible, but legally wrong. As he always does, he ignored their advice, refusing
to sit down and discuss any of this.
Numerous
groups also called upon Mr Feiner to “do the right thing” to no avail. In fact,
we cannot recall a time when Mr Feiner actually did the right thing.
Unfortunately, his bad behavior and unethical actions cost the Unincorporated
taxpayers a fortune unnecessarily. It would be nice to have a Supervisor and Board
that was actually looking out for us, the beleaguered resident - sort of like what Edgemont residents are seeking.
While Mr Feiner played his games, the Edgemont Incorporation Council (EIC)
continued to try to move the equation forward. They drafted a second petition
and sought more signatures than they garnered the first time. This time they
also dotted their “i’s” and crossed their “t’s” with a renewed vigor and
perceptible scrutiny. This time when they submitted the second petition – if
required – there would be no wriggle room for Mr Feiner’s games.
Regardless,
Mr Feiner took to the media again, having already positioned himself that he
was probably going to lose. As an aside, the resident taxpayers have already
lost because of him. It’s not just the filing fees, or the unauthorized $50,000 paid to the
retired judge. Rather, it’s the fact that so many residents asked him and his
Board what they were doing to plan for the Town’s finances should Edgemont be
successful and incorporate. Nothing! He and Councilman Jones were vociferous in
posturing that they would not do anything and only admitted that layoffs and a
loss of services would be the solution. It is not. If the Town contracts services with the new Village of Edgemont, the budget could theoretically remain close to the same as it currently is without layoffs or loss of services. It just would not garner the publicity Mr Feiner graves.
Many residents throughout the Town asked if they would contract services with the new Village of Edgemont, they arrogantly insisted, “No!” Rather than look to maintain the well-being of the overall Town, they played their selfish games. And, for what reason? It’s hard to say. Obviously the saying about absolute power corrupts can easily be applied here. So now that so much time, money and trust has been wasted, it’s time to finally learn what the entire Edgemont population will do when they vote on the referendum. It’s also time to see if Mr Feiner and his Board will ever “step up to the plate” for the entire Town should the Edgemont incorporation succeed? We hope so; it’s way past time for Mr Feiner and his Board to help to make A Better Greenburgh.
Perhaps ABG would do well were it to read what it writes. If the newer EIC petition contains "no wriggle room", then there was wriggle room in the first which allowed Feiner "full (court) press".
ReplyDeleteAlso is $50,000 what ABG believes is "a fortune" in unincorporated taxes? This resident wonders how ABG would describe $17,000,000 in absent Edgemont revenue should Edgemont leave the fold. Is risking $50,000 hoping to save $17,000,000 not enough of a risk-reward ratio in ABG wisdom so that it derides Feiner for his effort to save. Me thinks that ABG has some ulterior motive...but more on that later.
Does ABG feel that its version of the controversy takes the higher road when criticizing Feiner (granted, an almost daily necessity) or must it sink to Feiner's level when courting media which ABG is itself; yet it claims genetic immunity to Feiner's entreatments. Would that ABG resist temptation by being less judgmental and more open to allowing Feiner some wriggle room of his own.
Now comes the moment that everyone is waiting for: will a majority of Edgemont residents take the opportunity to get into their SUVs and hie their collective hither to polling places to vote? Such affirmative action steps will be more telling than merely signing a Petition brought to their front door and tasked in the presence of activist neighbors.
Personally I regard the outcome for either side to result in a lose-lose scenario. Were Edgemont as a Village to seek to rent from column A or column B of the Town's Chinese menu of Departmental services, that would be confirmation that Feiner as Supervisor must be doing something right at least some of the time. But for those who characterize his nuances as all bad all of the time (an assumption that Edgemont activists have capitalized upon), then a more practical and less rigid "blue-bloods" only approach would have resulted in their discontent being exhibited at the two and four year Democracy outings known as Elections -- either by fielding a viable candidate(s) for the two year term of Town Supervisor or one or more of the 4 four-year well-paid part time positions on the Town Council.
Instead, those unwilling to take on the job demands now undertaken by an oft documented unfit Town Supervisor, in a fiercely contested election might be the same person(s) angling for the lesser but likely uncontested roles of Edgemont's Village Mayor or Trustees.
And throughout this local uncivil war, the false talking point of Edgemont's contested tax burden was continually raised as though it were the deciding factor for voters. Instead of acknowledging that the largest contributors to high taxes (School and Fire District) are not of Feiner's doing, the argument appears to hinge on programs and services that Edgemont will in all likelihood have to contract for from outside Edgemont providers: a subset which could include the bereft Town. ABG argues that the Town, having lost the battle, should sue for Peace by yielding to Edgemont service demands. Given that the "nation" of Edgemont does not yet exist nor does it yet have Ambassadors with Portfolio, such dialogues and terms are yet to exist -- nor need they prior to the Referendum.
Indeed, this cacophony amplified in such venues as ABG is akin to Trump on Twitter: is this not a fair comparison? "Absolute Power", like Beauty, is in the hands of the "be-stower"; however note that the incorporation prospectus is using for their sales pitch that contracting for vital services is no big deal. Apparently ABG has signed on to that selling point by condemning Feiner and Company were they not to buy into this scenario in advance of the Referendum.
Missing from ABG's agenda is that A Better Greenburgh would be a Greenburgh in its current entirety -- not a Greenburgh less Edgemont. In that regard, is ABG to Greenbugh as Bendict Arnold was to the Colonies?
I may not be following all your comments Hal, but I think that the most important thing to many in Edgemont is the ability to control their own zoning. Paul insisted on trampling on them by allowing huge variances to Shelbourne. If Paul had not been so arrogant on zoning issues, I doubt the incorporation movement would have so many members.
ReplyDeleteThe longer Paul drags this out, the more service providers will come out of the woodwork, and this will enable Edgemont to negotiate favorable contracts. Is it any coincidence that Ardsley is now looking to build a new public works garage at the entrance to Veterans, a location which would work very well to service Edgemont too? The County has already said they will contract for police, like they do for Mt. Kisco.
Yes, a united Greenburgh would be better, but the ship has sailed on that. Paul has played one group against another (satisfying the Villages by not charging them for TDYCC), and now has no cards left to play.
Some have asked why is it the function of a town to have property owners pay for "social services?" This appears to be more properly a county or state obligaion. The TDYCC is primarily a recreation facility and as such, is governed by Finneran. A court has already ruled on this. Lets stop engaging in this farce there is such a thing as Greenburgh. The best thing to happen will be Edgemont incorporation which hopefully lead to the end of this farce. Breakup the failed one party state of Greenburgh!
ReplyDelete