Greenburgh Central School District Vote Passes and Disappoints

In reviewing the numbers after an election of any kind held in Greenburgh, the apathy and blasé attitude of voters has reflected poorly on the vast majority. It seems that particular causes may unite a certain part of the citizenry, and there are groups in our community doing the same things at the local level.

The School Board elections and the School District’s budget vote took place after being delayed by NYS and rescheduled from May to June with a mail-in vote as opposed to an in-person vote at the polls. Good or bad, the numbers were somewhat the same as many more people had the opportunity to vote but again, did not bother to vote. It seems the only time we see a spike in voting is when there is a project(s) in a certain neighborhood that literally affects them in their backyard. Hence the term we’ve coined called OIMBY: Only In My Back Yard.

There are roughly 90,000 residents in all of the Town of Greenburgh. There are six Villages including an seventh possible new one with the Edgemont incorporation looming near. The Villages in the Town are Elmsford, Ardsley, Hastings-on-Hudson, Dobbs Ferry, Irvington, Tarrytown. Interestingly, they have their own elections yet are also allowed to vote in Town elections, which many feel is just seems wrong. But because of this, Mr Feiner and his Board play the Villages like a fine instrument to ensure no matter how much they touch that turns to crap for Unincorporated Greenburgh, Mr Feiner, et al, will get their votes to remain in office and not be held accountable or culpable for their misgivings, lies and illegal actions.

So, while we know there are 90,000 residents, we also know that not all can vote. Greenburgh School enrollment is about 1800 kids. So roughly speaking, without fact-checking the dual-parent vs single-parent households status, there could be up to 3600+ voters participating in a school vote. According to information provided by School District Clerk Ivy Krauss, the actual count of ballots that were distributed to registered voters was 16,563. The amount that was returned of votes cast was 3,594. So 78.3% of the voting population did not participate. Those voting for the budget approved it, 1,968 to 978, roughly a two-to-one victory. Or was it?

Out of those numbers there were 619 votes that were disqualified because the voters didn't read the instructions, understand the instructions or thought their votes would be counted regardless of what they did or didn’t do correctly. So 3.74% of the voters who thought they voted weren’t counted. A breakdown is as follows:
401: oath envelope not signed; 190: oath envelope not provided; 15: oath envelope contained extrinsic papers (ie more than one ballot); 9: ballot torn and/or defaced; 1: signature did not match that of the voter; 2: ballot was blank; 1: oath envelope did not contain any ballot. Apparently, everyone is okay with these amounts being dismissed. Why? Probably because the budget passed.

What we are struggling with is that out of 16,563 people who could vote, only 3,594 did vote - a slight increase from the usual amount. We’d have thought that those who don’t usually come out to vote would have thought this mail-in style voting would prove more convenient and garnered more votes – but that doesn’t appeared to be the case. In fact, statistics show that senior citizens typically vote against school budgets for a host of reasons. And, when the School District and the Administration pushed the ill-fated consolidation bond proposal, a two to one defeat was confirmed to be in part due to the senior citizens vote. And, knowing Mr Feiner has injected himself as the caped crusader of poor mail delivery, how much of the votes cast never made it beyond the mailbox they dropped it in? We may never know.

There was also a proposition to move money from one part of the budget to a reserve fund for maintenance and repairs. That passed with 2519 votes for and 445 against. Previous Boards have failed to adequately fund the repair budgets for years causing much disrepair of our school buildings and an excuse to consolidate. Still, the taxpaying public saw past the incorrect information provided and shot the consolidation down. The several proponents of the consolidation were Superintendent Chase, who appears to be trying to develop herself as a brand; Trustees David Warner and Terry Williams. In fact, both of these gentlemen have been on the School Board for years and hold responsibility for the lack of repair funding which has led to the degradation of the buildings. Could this have been a covert plan all along?

Two School Board members were running for re-election, Tracy Mairs and Ashley Pineda*. Ivy Kraus, the School District Clerk, shared the totals for their re-elections: 2441 and 2391 respectively. We have no problem with either candidate seeking a second term of office and believe they can make a difference in that period of time although we prefer term limits. We’ve seen Ms Mairs openly participate in school district related conversations but hardly ever witness Mr Pineda getting involved in the discussions. Granted this was his first year in the position and may taking some time to get up to speed and comfortable. As such, we believe he needs to step up his game.

Voting during this primary coincided with the School District/Board elections were fraught with problems. The voter sites that were trimmed back seemingly experienced problems that caused hours-long delays in voting. Some have claimed this falls in Mr Feiner’s lap. While we never hesitate being critical of Mr Feiner, it does not. But he did say he would write a letter or two to the appropriate parties involved. Translation: send a letter and out of his hands and done. Move on to his next contrived issue.

This election was rushed by the School District per the mandates of Albany and the Governor. While we're sure everyone involved tried their best, it still seemed unorganized to some extent. If this is the precursor to the November elections, we’re not hopeful that we’ll be seeing results on election night. This has to change and get better. Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.

* A one-year incumbent filling the balance of a term of a Board member who resigned and needed to run for the position.

Abinanti Legislation Removes Greenburgh Residents Right To Vote - Again

There is no shame in politics. Mr Feiner proves that regularly. Now his Albany cohort and co-conspirator has re-introduced legislation hastily requested by Mr Feiner to remove the right of Greenburgh residents to vote should they desire to secede from the Town and incorporate as a village. This was brought about as Mr Feiner desperately tried to stop the Edgemont Incorporation Council (EIC) from succeeding.

At first, Mr Feiner played down the movement, believing it would never gain any traction. But this was big news and the lifetime supervisor was caught off guard as momentum and interest swelled. Mr Feiner wasn’t the only one against the incorporation. His Town board was most likely instructed by him to be against it as well, however Ken Jones was the only one who would speak openly against it.

When pushed at several community meetings as to why the Town leaders were not sitting down with the incorporation leaders to discuss contingency plans and the possible charging for services as presented by the incorporation proponents, Mr Feiner continued to say he didn’t believe the referendum would go through, should it come to that. He was convinced there would be no incorporation!

Next he took it upon himself to illegally hire a judge to be his scapegoat under the guise of providing advice on the ballot petition signatures to the tune of an unauthorized $50,000! His Town Board would later push through another $50,000 for the judge. On behalf of Mr Feiner, the judge engaged private investigators to go out into the Edgemont neighborhood with a new petition to get the incorporation petition signatories to sign which would unknowingly invalidate their original incorporation petition signatures! You can’t even find these kind of corruption twists in Hollywood!

Once exposed by a pro-incorporation resident’s home security/nanny-cam system, and the defecation began hitting the ventilation, Mr Feiner realized he could really lose this and decided to double-down. That’s when he reached out to his career politician friend, Assemblyman Abinanti* and asked him to push through legislation in Albany that would help him stop the incorporation. Probably a bit concerned about what he was being asked to do and his political future, Mr Abinanti was no doubt aware that former Town Councilwoman Sonya Brown had publicly stated at a Town Board meeting that Mr Feiner had told his running mates (her included) not to bother campaigning in Fairview because those residents were not intelligent. Could this come back to bite him? We’re sure if this did take place Mr Feiner instructed him not to worry and just do it.

So, once word on the street reached the Edgemont Incorporation Council (EIC), they decided to take a road trip to Albany. Once in Albany, they sought out Mr Abinanti who refused to meet with them! Phone calls and emails to other legislators were enough to slow the out-of-control Abinanti freight train from submitting the bill for a vote at one of the infamous 3AM votes. That bill, essentially the same as what’s being offered now, was to negatively affect Town of Greenburgh residents by taking away their right to vote for incorporation! Pressure mounted and the bill was withdrawn.

Like most diabolical plots hatched from the corner office, bad ideas and/or proposals don’t go away. Rather, they return repackaged as something different with the more objectionable portions sanitized and made to seem like a benefit to those about to get screwed. Such was the case with Mr Abinanti’s previous bill. First, while his original bill was Town of Greenburgh specific, the second one is for all Towns in New York State – with a voluntary “opt-in” by any Town government. Now, while most Towns throughout the state will not care about this, Mr Feiner will and will instruct his Town Board to opt-IN. So with a little massaging, one hurdle was eliminated. As an aside, no other legislator was willing to vote for the first iteration as most believe they shouldn’t be voting on what is considered Greenburgh’s home rule. Mr Abinanti obviously does not care about constituents, his own or those of other jurisdictions.

Next up in Mr Abinanti’s Eliminating Voter Right’s legislation are numerous roadblocks that force residents seeking to incorporate to perform numerous studies, which ironically the EIC had provided, among other requirements. But if one requirement is good, then two is better, and three is, well, you get the idea. The new bill is essentially the core of the hastily authored original bill. Although Mr Abinanti claims he is not attempting to affect the petition process or invalidate the Edgemont Incorporation Council petition, those in the trenches who have been following this entire process know this is too convoluted to believe. He has increased the number of steps, designed to wear-down those seeking incorporation, by putting numerous hurdles in the way.

Several requirement’s in the new bill are designed to make incorporation incredibly difficult and cumbersome for those seeking to incorporate. In the earlier version the Town Board would have had approval to authorize an incorporation referendum, under the guise of whether or not incorporation would have “significant impacts on the rest of the area.” This is blatantly specific to Edgemont! How do we know? It’s the  argument Mr Feiner has been making all along about Edgemont's incorporation. Huh? Still don’t see the setup? We believe Mr Feiner concocted the elements of Mr Abinanti’s bill that he would need and began the argument before the introduction of the bill so when the bill passes at 3AM in Albany, he’ll be able to continue his argument against it and say, “No!” to the EIC. 

This is similar to the sidewalk to no-where when the Stop and Shop on Rt 119 near the Marriott Hotel was proposed. No one understood why he was letting them build a sidewalk there, instead in front of the supermarket. Two years after the supermarket was built, he and his Board approved the Brightview Assisted Living facility to be built immediately behind the sidewalk. Who knew? Only Mr Feiner and his Boards...

Another requirement is that this updated version will change New York State law to include “group think,” providing the rest of a given town the ability to vote against a community’s incorporation. This is one of the key points Mr Feiner so desperately needs to thwart the Edgemont incorporation. Just like the referendum for the GameOn 365 “deal” that promised to hurt the Worthington Woodlands neighborhood should the referendum pass, Mr Feiner knew he could get his faithful followers to approve it – and they did.

So Mr Abinanti, well along into his professional career as a politician, also knows to mention certain buzzwords for those not in the know to think his concerns are genuine. He uses words like “fairest approach” and “require community impact statement.” This legal change, should it happen by June as he has planned is anything but fair. It takes away voting rights of some and allows them to be controlled by others. It heightens the argument in the book 1984. What’s next, meet us in the Ministry of Love’s Room 101? 

This legislation is nothing but a blatant attempt by Messrs Feiner and Abinanti to help Mr Feiner get his way and stop the Edgemont incorporation. It is wrong. Both of these politicians are proof of why term limits are so necessary. It’s time for them to go. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

* Mr Abinanti had lived near the Fortress Bible Church property that was purchased by the church with hopes of building a school and church for their congregation. We believe once Mr Feiner was found guilty of discrimination against the church, lying under oath and destroying evidence in a Federal trial among other charges, Mr Abinanti tried to distance himself from this by relocating his home to Pleasantville and office in Tarrytown.

Clarification On A NYS Constitutional Convention (Con-Con)

A lot of people have been discussing the Constitutional Convention in order to make an educated vote! Here’s our take on both sides of the issue.

For – Vote Yes

A Constitutional Convention only comes along once every twenty years. Many people say it’s the public’s opportunity to change what they don’t like in the NYS constitution. The attraction of this idea suits those who are proponents of a constitutional convention, believing the constitution is a living document. As is typical, there are those who do not believe it to be a living document.

It is said that potential improvements from a Con-Con could include a reform of election law, achieve nonpartisan redistricting, setting term limits and mandating budget-making transparency. A big gripe that many New Yorkers have against the state is the amount of unfunded mandates New Yorkers are saddled with as the current crop of politicians cannot seem to stop themselves from creating a new tax, fee, requirement, statute etc. that someone mysteriously comes up with, claiming, “It wasn’t me,” but costs us more in money, businesses, residents fleeing and so on. As everyone is fond of saying, New Yorkers are voting with their feet and leaving.

If the proponents of “Yes” were to win, it will set off a year of primary and general election voting to choose Con-Con delegates. There would be three per state Senate, plus 15 at-large ones. Rest assured that many, if not all of our current representatives would be actively seeking one of the positions – the same people who have either put us in this predicament or are contributing to it! 

One aspect is the great pay they would receive in addition to their existing salary. The other is they would be able to change the constitution to further allow whatever their own agenda might be. They could also “gang up” together with other legislators to ensure minimal resistance. The convention would meet in Albany with an expectation that would either offer individual amendments or one package with everything lumped into it. Then it would go to voters in 2019 for either passage or rejection. And, as voters have proven time and time again, they vote not knowing what both sides of an issue might be.

Need an example? In 2012 Mr Feiner wanted the GameOn 365 project to be built against the wishes of the entire neighborhood.  He tried to virtually give them the property on a very favorable lease to only meet resistance from that neighborhood, civic associations and other residents who recognized why this was so wrong on so many levels. What did he do? He delayed everything so he could have a referendum on allowing the proposal. Twenty-two thousand people in the Town who were not given all the facts, voted to allow it, superseding the neighborhoods desires. Fortunately, the residents prevailed on a technicality as foreclosed property has to be sold, not leased; but the lack of trust was now out in the open. By the way, Mr Feiner will get relected this Tuesday as the Republicans and other party’s have abandoned Greenburgh as a democratic stronghold not worth using resources on.

Against – Vote No
At least $350 million in taxpayer dollars will be spent on a Constitution Convention. Delegates will pocket $80,000 each! Delegates who hold NYS office[s] will get their full salary and their convention paychecks at the same time. That’s double dipping for hundreds of politicians. Delegates get paid every year, for unlimited years. Plus, they can hire family members and cronies for their staffs, and pay them, too. Delegates don’t have to accomplish anything to be paid. Sort of sounds like a politician, doesn’t it?

At the last convention in 1967, 4 of 5 delegates were Albany insiders. No person can seriously expect a convention of Albany insiders to take on Albany’s culture of corruption. They never have. Voting NO stops greed, corruption and insider politics. 

The NYS Constitution can be changed at ANY time through amendments. There is no need for a long, costly, inefficient convention. The Constitution has been amended over 200 times since 1894. After the last Convention in 1967, voters rejected every single change that the delegates proposed. After spending tens of millions of dollars, the convention accomplished nothing! Voting NO stops waste and inefficiency. 

Here are some of the changes wanted:

Article 5 protects cops, paid firefighters, nurses, and other first responders by guaranteeing the retirement safety they’ve earned on our streets. PBA’s and NYSP reject the Constitutional Convention. NYSPFFA, the statewide firefighters organization rejects the Constitutional Convention. NYSNA, the statewide nurses organization rejects the Con Con. UEMSO, the statewide EMS organization rejects the Con Con.

Article 14 promises places like the Catskills and Adirondacks “shall be forever kept as wild forest lands.” Constitutional Convention would expose lands to clear cut logging, hyrdro-fracking, and development. Sierra Club, Food and Water Watch, Adirondack Council, Friends of the Forest, Protect the Adirondacks, Environmental Advocates of NY, ADK Mountain Club - these are just some of the environmental groups that oppose Con Con. Voting NO on Con Con would preserve wildlife, trees, parks, and open space.

Article 11 guarantees all children the right to free public education. Advocates of vouchers, religious schools, privatization, and charter schools want a Con Con so they can diminish our constitutional right to public schools. One of the changes adopted at the last convention in 1967 allowed public monies to be used to pay for religious schools. If voters hadn’t rejected it, our entire public education system would have changed drastically. 

Article 5 protects teachers’ safe retirement after decades of service to children. Voting NO to Con Con will defend kids, public schools and teachers.

Article 17 protects the vulnerable by guaranteeing the “aid, care and support of the needy.” Mental health, public health, SNAP, veterans’ services, HEAP and elder care are just some of the programs operated under the umbrella of Article 17. Voting NO on Con Con shields the vulnerable.

Article 1 promises that labor, like electricians, steelworkers and plumbers, can form unions. Right-to-work predators want to use the Con Con to turn NY into an anti-worker state like Wisconsin or Alabama. Article 1 guarantees workers comp for people injured in the job. AFL-CIO, CSEA, NYSUT, IBEW, and unions across the state oppose Con Con. Voting No on a Con Con is standing for working people.

In addition to all the organizations noted above, here are just a few more of the 100-plus coalition partners that have formed New Yorkers Against Corruption to oppose the Con Con: 

LEFT: Working Families Party, Equality NY, Planned Parenthood, NAACP, LGBT
RIGHT: Conservative Party, Council of Churches, NYS Rifle & Pistol Association, NYS Right to Life, NYS Republican Party. Voting NO to a Con Con will sustain political diversity.

An informed voting decision and an informed and engaged voting electorate is the key to making changes to New York, Westchester County and the Town. This is not the only information about the Constitutional Convention and we encourage our readers to research and learn more before Election Day. Do we really want our current crop of politicians, who have made us the highest taxed, highest regulated and highest intrusion into everything we do the stewards of changing their own bad behavior? We hope not. Regardless of your position, we encourage you to vote. Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.

Candidates Skate Real Issues

Being an incumbent candidate has its advantages, especially when it comes to being re-elected. Except in the Town of Greenburgh. In Greenburgh, as we’ve been witnessing almost forever, the incumbent’s position is a guaranteed-for-life position unless the candidate or Mr Feiner chooses otherwise as in “being Sonya’d”. Such is the case with Francis Sheehan and Diana Juettner.

The Hartsdale Neighborhood Association, which prefers to not be known as a civic association, hosted a meeting for its neighbors at the St. Paul’s United Methodist Church’s basement on Central Park Avenue. It was known that the two Town Board candidates would be there “campaigning” as well as other topics being discussed. As usual, the candidates arrived late. We wondered if it is because they are running unopposed or just felt entitled enough to not worry that they might lose their seats, again as they are running unopposed?

Regardless, an update briefing regarding the status of the Edgemont Incorporation began the meeting. One member spoke as to the incorporation effort, the Article 78 appeal by the EIC, the latest Article 78 by “another group” which we interpret as Feiner sycophants, in hopes of negating the EIC Article 78 appeal. Apparently, even though this second appeal is underway, the EIC is prepared to address it as well. There wasn’t much subsequent discussion at this point about incorporation – although it remained the 800 pound elephant in the room.

Next, a discussion took place about the planned upcoming “Hartsdale Day” event. Many residents had questions while others had suggestions about what should be done. Some questioned why a more widespread effort to encompass more of Hartsdale wasn’t being done. The response was that this was the first attempt and that the hope was to build off of the initial effort and have it grow year after year. A future goal was to turn this into the event that Dobbs Ferry does every year. What we didn’t hear was more than one or two people offer to help with it. We wish them well and are happy to advertise it here if they choose to send us information.

Finally, we got to what some believed was the main event. The first candidate to speak was Councilwoman Diana Juettner. She decided to discuss various properties throughout the Town and infrastructure. When you speak about things that are not the topics many wish to discuss, and are allowed to go on unencumbered with questions, you can spin an effective tale about how difficult these issues are and why it is such a challenge for the Town Board to address and what she is specifically doing about it. What she didn’t discuss is the Edgemont Incorporation or why she participated in the voter suppression effort spearheaded by Mr Feiner and his friend Mr Abinanti. Smug and content, she sat down to a faint smattering of applause.

Mr Sheehan decided to take a different tact and relate how he had moved to Greenburgh and slowly gotten involved in an issue of zoning. This tale took about ten minutes as he discussed several particulars, making him the hero and champion of the people. While we admit Mr Sheehan is knowledgeable about zoning issues, he too avoided the pachyderm in the room and did not mention the Edgemont incorporation and his vote to suppress voter rights either!

One audience member asked why the Town was so unfriendly to businesses. Ms Juettner remained silent and Mr Sheehan did a Feiner-like rope-a-dope. He also obfuscated his answers enough to make it difficult to stay on topic. We’re sure if one of his students did this they would be chastised for it. But this is Greenburgh politics and the goal of this administration is to not provide information or answers. Mr Feiner would be proud of his two semi-independent appearing minions.

Mr Sheehan also took the lead when they were finally asked why they endorsed the Feiner created, Abinanti and Stewart-Cousins’ sponsored, voter-suppression bills in Albany. An audience member pointedly mentioned that the administration claimed the bills were not directed against Edgemont. And, almost everyone was against it, but according to Mr Feiner, the bills were directly aimed at Hartsdale residents as it was suggested numerous times that they might also be interested in incorporating. Mr Sheehan claimed that was not true and his political answer almost made it sound like the voter suppression move by these two candidates and their co-conspirators was a good thing! Fortunately, the audience knew better and grew restless.

Know that the 800 pound elephant was in the room and out in the open. Several informed audience members began to vociferously pepper the candidates answers with interruptions, facts and real information. Several Feiner-friendly people tried to quiet them and encourage the candidates to answer. But the damage had been done. Fortunately, the clock would save them. So while the two candidates didn’t need to be there, the real issues were avoided with fluff. No matter. Both candidates will be re-elected as the Democrat party condoned their actions of voter suppression, as did its members. If things do not change, we may never see A Better Greenburgh.

A Call For Civility, A Call For Democracy- You Decide

As we were writing an article about Mr Feiner's email blast, hard-copy mailing to follow, we received a rebuttal email from the Edgemont Incorporation Council (EIC). While we refuse to print Mr Feiner's press releases for numerous reasons, we felt it fair to print it in its entirety with the EIC rebuttal. As we have followed this entire process, we believe the EIC has been forthcoming, forward with their answers to any questions and tried to provide an honest and open discussion. The same cannot be said about Mr Feiner and his Board. With the exception of the special Sunday night "CYA" meeting, his Board has seemed to distance themselves from him and this event. No matter, they know you will re-elect them in November. In fact, the Democrat party has already nominated them and is carrying petitions to that effect.

Regardless of the election outcome and stalemate of ideas, creativity, new or better thinking the residents will not be receiving come this November, the real effort by Mr Feiner should recognized for what it is, voter suppression and control. Simply, Edgemont residents should be allowed to vote. They followed the rules to do so. They gathered the signatures, they put their money ($6,000 fee) up while Mr Feiner has bent, manipulated and disregarded the rules. This argument is broken down by both of the sides below. Once again the EIC has provided links to back up their position and share information. 

Eventually, usually at taxpayer expense and in the courts, this will be decided. Allowing the community to vote without Mr Feiner strong-arming the process to achieve his goal,even though its usually served for him before, should be the outcome in court. It's the right thing to do even if you don't want it. Why? Because like it or not, it will help to make A Better Greenburgh.

A Call For Civility

As many of you may have experienced, the debate related to Edgemont’s proposed incorporation has produced a level and intensity of rhetoric which has inflicted real damage on every segment of the Town’s population and staff, as well as the outside world’s view of both our Town and its Hamlet of Edgemont.

At this time, the attacks on the Town Board, our staff and on me have become increasingly personal and in many cases cruel and hurtful.  I have not reacted previously to the ever-mounting, non-stop barrage of vicious commentary, as I believed that acceptance of criticism comes with the “turf” when you choose to be a public servant.  However, this process, which I truly believe is an orchestrated plan by the pro-incorporation group to discredit every aspect of the Town, comes with a severe cost.  Residents, both pro and con, are at “each other’s throats.”  Words like racism and elitism are being tossed about outside and within a community which previously had been seen as a bastion of acceptance of diverse opinions.  The results of this campaign will clearly live on beyond the Edgemont referendum, both in the form of our residents’ perception of each other’s values and in the manner in which the Town of Greenburgh and its Villages are viewed by the outside world.  In addition, the effect of this nasty rhetoric on our staff, who fear for their jobs and whose spirits are being broken by the constant criticism of their commitment and ability to professionally fulfill their responsibilities, is wrong and unacceptable.

I am the elected Town Supervisor for approximately 90,000 residents of the incorporated Villages and unincorporated Town of Greenburgh.  In conjunction with a Town Board comprised of individuals I trust and respect, we endeavor to do the best job we can, for all residents.  The Town Board and I oversee  434 full time and 268 part time Greenburgh employees, who are dedicated to serving Greenburgh’s residents and have proven their competence and commitment, over and over again.  The Town Board and I have great pride in these individuals and respect for each and every one, on a personal and professional level.  They are the best of the best and provide the highest level of service anywhere.

At some point Edgemont voters may cast ballots in a referendum to determine whether Edgemont will become a Village.  Let us be clear, the potential loss of nearly $17,000,000 in revenue will absolutely have a devastating effect on many of the more than 42,000 residents of unincorporated Greenburgh.  As Supervisor of “The Town of Greenburgh,” not just any single entity, I will do my best to ensure the fairest outcome for my entire constituency.

I appeal to those Greenburgh residents on both sides of this debate, to our local newspapers and media outlets, to pursue their objectives, as is their right and responsibility, to their fullest, but to utilize restraint in their tone and presentation.  Our community and our children are watching, and regardless of the outcome, it is my fervent hope that Greenburgh’s reputation for civility and acceptance can remain intact.

PAUL FEINER, Greenburgh Town Supervisor

Open Response to Supervisor Feiner on Civility 

The EIC completely agrees that the discussion on Edgemont's incorporation should be civil and respectful.  

Since it began, the Edgemont Incorporation Committee has conducted a fair, open, information-based, transparent process. The thousands of Edgemont residents who have attended the dozens of meetings, forums, open houses and petition-signing events over the past year can attest to the depth of the discussion, the sincerity of the views held (on all sides), and the genuine spirit of civic engagement that has animated the entire process. Thousands of visitors have examined, analyzed and debated the detailed information assembled by Edgemont volunteers and experts on our website.  

Edgemont's residents are not "at each other's throats" -- we are discussing, debating and challenging each other to build a better community.  What we are attempting -- with no help from you and your regime -- is to exercise our rights under state law and under the constitution.

But let's be clear about what Edgemont has gotten in return from you, your board, your hired investigators and some of your anti-incorporation supporters: 

- a consistent pattern of obstruction, deception, and delay at every step in the process.
- a secret and outrageous scheme (revealed through emails to which you were a party) to organize and support an opposition campaign, including false allegations of intimidation. 
- vulgar gestures directed at Edgemont residents in a public meeting
- the active solicitation of false objections to Edgemont's legitimate petition. 
- the use of Town funds for private investigators to deceive petition signers into disowning their signatures.
- and most recently, an attempt to thwart democracy with an unconstitutional home-rule bill.

The EIC endorses any call for civility in this process. But even more importantly: 

We call for DEMOCRACY.  After months of assurances that you were merely trying to follow the law, it turns out you could only pretend to care about the law as long as you were winning. So last week, you decided if you couldn't win an Edgemont vote, you would try to have Edgemont's right to vote taken away altogether - by ramming a "home-rule" request through the legislature in Albany on the last few days of the legislative session. With no notice, no debate, and then a sham last-minute meeting on Father's Day, you had your Board of Supervisors rubber stamp your anti-democratic end-run in Albany.  It was only thanks to the very civil appeals of hundreds of Edgemont residents to their legislators in Albany that your scheme was halted. 

We call for HONESTY.  Don't hide behind your hired guns to disclaim responsibility for the private investigator fiasco.  It was your responsibility and your decision. Don't tell us, with a straight face, that the home-rule legislation you tried to ram through the legislature had nothing to do with the Edgemont incorporation effort. 

We call for RESPECT.  The Edgemont community has expressed its clear will to hold a vote on incorporation.  The EIC has expressed its clear intention to promote a fair and cooperative process between the Village of Edgemont and the Town of Greenburgh. You have rejected the community's petition based on fabricated technicalities and outright falsehoods, and you have rejected any possibility of a constructive, cooperative dialogue with the Village of Edgemont. 

The Scarsdale Inquirer's editorial page this week called you "a desperate man" and said your latest attempt to stop Edgemont was "manifestly desperate," seeking "new, totalitarian authority to keep [Edgemont] and their money right where they are." This week's Lohud article calls your "failed effort to change the rules in the middle of the game seems desperate, if not vindictive."

We agree.

Mr. Feiner - the CIVIL thing to do would be to honor the will and the right of Edgemont's citizens to hold a vote on incorporation and to accept the outcome.  If you insist on fighting, do so on the facts.  Argue the merits. Accept the voters' will.  That's civility. 

One more thing:  
It is not a fact (as you continue to state) that Greenburgh will lose $17-million in revenue when Edgemont incorporates. The EIC has consistently, repeatedly, emphatically laid out many scenarios in which the Village of Edgemont might find it advantageous to contract with the Town of Greenburgh for a variety of services.  What is a fact is that after Edgemont incorporates, you - Paul Feiner -- will lose your personal control over that $17 million in revenue.  You will no longer be free to use that money, among other things, to pay multi-million court judgments for your unconstitutional actions (Fortress Bible) or to hire private investigators to come into our homes and trick us into surrendering our constitutional rights. 

Sincerely, 
The EIC.

Abinanti & Stewart Cousins’ Voter Suppression Bill Suppressed, Until Today?

In a most typically secretive way, Mr Feiner, a democrat, spoke and/or met with NYS Assemblyman Thomas Abinanti and Andrea Stewart-Cousins, also democrats, to change the 100 or so-year old state law on incorporation in another futile attempt to stop the Edgemont community residents from incorporating into what would be Greenburgh’s seventh village. It would also curtail any other area in the Town from thinking about incorporation.

Ironically, the attempt in Albany also failed, albeit until today, even though Mr Feiner had enlisted his Albany buddies to change the law. Both Abinanti and Stewart-Cousins submitted the voter-suppression bills in their respective branches of the NYS legislatures, but their attempt to sneak this unincorporated Greenburgh specific bill through was met with resistance. In fact, on June 20th, several Edgemont residents traveled to Albany to meet with the Greenburgh representatives. Stewart-Cousins met with constituents. Abinanti refused to meet with his constituents. However today is a critical day as Governor Cuomo has ordered the legislature into a special session to pass through other legislation that he and others believes is critically needed. Does that include the Abinanti/Stewart-Cousins/Feiner Voter Suppression bill? Let’s hope not.

Abinanti’s refusal to meet with constituents speaks volumes and lets residents know how he feels about representing them or anyone else. It’s a shame that constituents who travel two and a half hours are thought so little of that their unchallenged representative, conspiring in cahoots with unchallenged Mr Feiner to take away voters’ rights, thinks he can treat people this way. In spite of Mr Abinanti’s rude and bad behavior, Greenburgh residents did meet with other more receptive representatives. They discussed the legality and ethical conundrum created by Mr Feiner, Mr Abinanti and Ms Stewart-Cousins. They all know it’s okay as they are democrats and their seats will never be challenged by anyone else in Westchester. Or will they?

The Greenburgh Town Democrats have nominated Mr Feiner, Mr Sheehan, Ms Juettner, Ms Beville and Ms Povella (collector of taxes) for re-election. They put their names on petitions, and Democratic District Leaders started obtaining signatures, allowing the usual suspects to run (likely uncontested).  A vacancy then opened up on the Town Court and Bonnie Orden was nominated to fill the void. The Greenburgh Democrats came up with another petition, not one just for Bonnie Orden, but one that included Mr Feiner, Mr Sheehan, Ms Juettner, Ms Beville, Ms Povella and also Ms Orden. 

So now the Democrats will be trying to get more signatures. How will they be monitoring to ensure that people do not sign both, and duplicate signatures?  Will voters even remember if they already signed a duplicate petition?  Has the Democratic “leadership” made any effort to warn petition carriers to take steps to avoid duplication? Of course, if someone were running against Mr Feiner, someone such as Mona Freitag would be double checking for duplicate signatures.  

The Greenburgh Democrats will do everything possible to support a totalitarian regime. They criticize Trump, Putin and North Korea. They protest gerrymandering. Now it appears that they support removing voting rights for unincorporated Greenburgh. Mr Feiner’s latest attempt to block the ECC, the EIC, Bob Bernstein, Jeff Sherwin and others from Edgemont and Hartsdale in Albany, may have seemingly failed. What will be next? ABG was surprisingly caught off-guard when we learned of the bill that he had concocted in secret with Abinanti and Stewart-Cousins against Greenburgh residents. Yet, even so, this latest maneuver continues to re-enforce all the reasons we believe this administration should be removed. Between law suits with guilty verdicts, fines and penalties being charged to unincorporated Greenburgh residents, unethical and discriminatory behavior, it’s time. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Abinanti Refuses To Meet With Constituents

Sunday was not your typical Father’s Day. Yes, barbecues still happened. Families still traveled to visit loved ones. Lawns were mowed. Presents were exchanged. And, like any other Father’s Day, savings were still to be had at most retail stores.  What was unusual was that in one town in America, the Town of Greenburgh, the Supervisor and Town Board who acted illegally and immorally, abruptly ended all the festivities. Let’s recap.

Under the cover of a holiday weekend and a lazy Friday afternoon, the 24-year incumbent supervisor got arrogant. He decided to hold a special meeting, claimed it was a public meeting and in one minute and thirty-one seconds, it was done. No public notice to speak of was given. The Town Clerk said that she was notified of the meeting on Thursday and put the notice on her Bulletin Board. It wasn't sent on the Town's email list or put on the Town's web site. But once we exposed what had taken place, Mr Feiner and his Board scrambled to hold a public meeting in a “CYA” attempt to undo the illegal meeting held on Friday. Why?

Because his plan to have Albany introduce this oppression of voter rights had already started. And if they didn’t have the official vote on record, the bill would die. We imagine Mr Feiner making a few phone calls, saying, “Screw the families and Dads in the Town who were celebrating. Hey, screw the residents. Lets make it so hard to incorporate that it’ll never happen in Edgemont. I need you to come to Town Hall Sunday night to hold the special meeting at 8:30PM. Nobody will show up, we’ll vote and go home.”

Used to not having to justify his actions, have any accountability or perish the thought, remorse, Mr Feiner decided to eliminate Greenburgh residents right to vote. That’s right. He’s so upset. embarrassed or simply annoyed at Edgemont for wanting to incorporate, he’s trying to change the NYS law regarding incorporation by having his friends in Albany introduce a bill that will change the voting rights for only Town of Greenburgh residents. And, we’re told that no assembly legislator will go against the bill as they don’t want to go against one locales “home rule”, no matter how illegal, oppressive, immoral or negative it might be. It’s the only thing that will keep this bill alive.

This horrible bill was masterminded by Mr Feiner and is being executed right now in the NYS Assembly by his close political friend, Democrat Assemblyman Thomas Abinanti. As the TV commercials say, “But wait, there’s more!” Mr Abinanti may not be the only one complicit here. The NYS Senate version is being championed by Democrat Andrea Stewart-Cousins! Many in Greenburgh considered both the legislators their friends and never believed they could do such a horrible thing like voter suppression to them.

Several Greenburgh residents went to Albany in response to these two bills, which had been introduced a week ago. That means that Mr Feiner and his Board asked these two legislators to work on this for him quite some time ago. The web of deceit, usually contained within the Town’s unincorporated district, has now spread its corrupt tentacles to Albany. A phone call to several of the representatives offices yielded this comment from one, “You know, we’ve been getting a lot of calls about this bill. That usually means there really is something bad with it.” Indeed.

The cornerstone of America is the right for all to vote – except in Greenburgh. His Town Board, complicit in every way, vocally condoned his actions when they cowardly went into executive session and voted to support elimination of voter’s rights only in the Town of Greenburgh. Residents went to Albany today to speak with the various legislators involved All of them agreed to meet with our neighbors. All but one. Assemblyman Thomas Abinanti refused to meet with Greenburgh residents! It’s bad enough that taxpayers have to put up with Mr Feiner and his Boards bad, illegal and sometimes immoral behavior. But now Mr Feiner’s reach has extended to Albany. It has to stop. Only then will we get A Better New York and a Better Greenburgh!

Call your state elected representatives and voice your opposition to these two bills. But hurry - votes are scheduled for later today!

Senate: refer to bill S6728 sponsored by Sen. Stewart-Cousins

• Sen. Andrea Stewart-Cousins 914-423-4031 518-455-2585 
• Sen. John Flanagan
  He's president of the state senate and head of the rules committee 518-455-2071
• Sen. George Latimer
  He's the Dem nominee to run for county Supervisor against Astorino this fall 518-455-2031

Assembly: refer to bill A8423 sponsored by Tom Abinanti

• Tom Abinanti  914-631-1605
• William Magnerelli
  Chair of Local Govt committee that meets today  518-455-4826
• David Buchwald
  Rep from Mt Kisco who sits on Local Government comm  518-455-5397

Quid Pro Quo: A Learned Skill

Which politician made this statement:

“This legislation will eliminate big money from campaigns and make local residents the sole concern of local candidates for offices. It will make it clear to local residents that their participation really matters.”

One would naturally believe it’s our Town Supervisor as this is Greenburgh, where Mr Feiner knows what to say to the press but does not have the ability to practice what he preaches. No, this statement is from another politician who actually got his start in Greenburgh, moved up the food chain as a County Legislator and is now the sitting Democratic NYS Assemblyman. That’s right, this statement is from Tom Abinanti, regarding campaign financing for political candidates.

Why is this important? Because Mr Abinanti just imposed another NY State unfunded mandate upon us via our school taxes. Second, because on October 30, 2014, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo signed into law two bills that New York State Assemblyman Tom Abinanti (D-Greenburgh/Mt. Pleasant) sponsored/co-sponsored. The first bill is the one we are taking issue with. It's not because of what is accomplished with this unfunded mandate of helping students in need of this medical treatment. Rather, because it reeks of Quid Pro Quo in a Town that sees approvals passed for fire truck donations and lawsuits when the approvals are denied because a donation is refused.

The first bill (A.7791) authorizes schools to stock and administer EpiPens to any student in an emergency even if the student doesn’t have a prescription. Assemblyman Abinanti drafted, sponsored and pursued this legislation in response to increasing reports of deaths in schools due to anaphylactic reactions. 

As we were looking into the financial records of Mr Abinanti during this election, we were stunned to find that he may be receiving payments in the form of campaign contributions from the drug company Pfizer to introduce legislation that could financially benefit their company. Knowing the inculcation of how things get done in Greenburgh, we thought we would take a look and see what else we could find.

We took a look at the Pfizer website and found that not only do they donate a lot of money to a lot of people on both sides of the aisle, they even have a political PAC set up to do so. They claim it is set up so their employees can help their local politicians. We did a search of 2014 and lo and behold, there is Mr Abinanti’s name with a $1000 donation from the Pfizer drug company (see picture below). 

 

Before we made a judgement, we went to the Campaign Financial Disclosure of the New York State Board of Elections Contribution web page and sought Mr Abinanti’s donation information. Not surprisingly, it listed the donations from Pfizer along with other businesses, PAC’s and individuals (see picture below).

Further investigation to previous election filings showed many of the same supporters routinely coughing up donation money to Mr Abinanti. But not the drug company Pfizer. Here’s the rub: Pfizer pays Mr Abinanti $1,000 through his campaign finance account in two increments of $500. Mr Abinanti sponsors and get passed a bill requiring schools to purchase EPI-Pens from a drug supplier. The drug supplier may or may not be Pfizer. Of course, many will champion that this is acceptable because after all, “it’s for the children.”

ABG cannot prove an ulterior motive between the financial payments made to Mr Abinanti and the pharmaceutical company Pfizer. But there is certainly a link that exists between the two! There's no two ways about it, the legislation he sponsored and got passed will benefit big drug companies such as Pfizer. Quid pro quo? In an economic climate as bad as what we have, shouldn’t Mr Abinanti be trying to help small businesses prosper instead of creating legislation guaranteeing humongous drug companies even more money?  Of course he should. But, if he’s obligated to Pfizer and any other companies, can we really expect anything else?

He also sponsored campaign finance legislation that would allow incumbents a gold-mine of money for campaigning if passed. This year Mr Abinanti showed that he raised $49,201.01 as of his last campaign finance filing with the Board of Elections. His legislation, if passed, promises to give him a lot more of our money so he can continue to run for office and find new and improved ways to waste our money. Would he stop taking payments from drug companies if the bill were passed into law? There's no way to tell. However, while past performance is no guarantee of future results, we think the results are kind of easy to guess. Mr Abinanti should be trying to curb taxes for the everyday person instead of trying to find new ways to waste our money for his benefit?

This Tuesday is your opportunity to make some of this right. Mr Abinanti has spent 24 years in public office and is a career politician whose primary interest has been proven to be Mr Abinanti. It's apparent he's gotten very comfortable in office. It's time to think differently. Make the right decision and maybe we can start to see A Better Greenburgh.

92nd District Candidate Responds Addendum

We've previously posted several positions that Mike Duffy, Candidate for the 92nd Assembly District had made to ABG. Here is one more that he wished to add to what he had already given us:

How I would handle tax incentives:

I've already been instrumental in obtaining tax incentives. I am a member of the Mount Pleasant Industrial Development Agency. Recently, we approved the Regeneron project in Eastview, which provided for tax incentives for Regeneron to stay in the Greenburgh-Mount Pleasant area, and greatly expand their facilities. There was a strong possibility that they would relocate out of the area.

Greenburgh, Mount Pleasant, Elmsford and Tarrytown, which are within the 92nd Assembly District, will benefit directly from the project. Approximately 400 additional jobs will be created with the expansion. Local businesses will benefit from the new employees who patronize those businesses, in addition to increased sales tax revenue.

Click the link to see the lohud article on the Regeneron project:

http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2013/04/04/regeneron-to-expand-create-400-jobs-in-mount-pleasant/

92nd District Candidate Responds

In a previous post, we discussed some of 92nd District Candidate Mike Duffy's Campaign platform. A reader posed a few questions and Mr Duffy's response is below:

Unfunded Mandates
With regards to unfunded mandates in general, I will propose legislation that mandates if the state passes the law mandating local and/or county compliance, the state pays for it. It would not be allowed to pass the costs down to county or local governments.

Medicaid
Medicaid is a federal program foisted on the states. The states' issue with Medicaid is that the 62 counties administer the program - this is unnecessary! The state should administer the program, allowing for uniform administration and a freeing up of county resources. A secondary major issue regarding Medicaid is that there is a tremendous amount of fraud in the system. Fraud raises the cost of Medicaid exponentially. Again, if the state administered the program, it would be in a better position to investigate and combat fraud. Most counties in NY have relatively small governments and the administration of Medicaid is a costly burden that needs to end.

Pensions
Public pensions are tied to collective bargaining agreements. However, often the high cost of pensions occurs due to the padding of overtime. Legislation could be enacted that would comport with the cba's (collective bargaining agreements), and fight overtime abuse.

Valhalla & the Kensico Dam
The roadway to the Kensico Dam is administered by the county, and the dam infrastructure belongs to the NYC DEP. You also have the towns of Mount Pleasant and North Castle involved. Having said all that, I would contact all the parties involved and work towards opening the dam by being persistent with all necessary individuals. I'm not saying it would be easy. What I am saying is that sitting back and nothing will accomplish nothing. I believe that intelligent persistence will result in the roadway bring opened, thus allowing a quicker commute, and relief to the traffic choked village of Valhalla.

Candidate Mike Duffy for 92nd Assembly Seat Receives Governor Pataki’s Endorsement

In a statement just released by former New York State Governor George Pataki, he had these comments to say of 92nd Assembly District candidate Mike Duffy:

“I am pleased to endorse Mike Duffy for the 92nd Assembly district in Westchester County. 

Now more than ever, New Yorkers need a representative who has the courage and integrity to take a stand against the business-as-usual Albany cronies and their failed policies. 

For three decades, Mike has served the people of Westchester County in a distinguished career in law enforcement.  

From a police officer in White Plains to Chief Investigator for the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office, Mike has protected the rights and lives of New Yorkers.

As Chief Investigator for the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office, Mike Duffy and his investigators worked shoulder-to-shoulder with NYPD to keep New Yorkers safe and secure in the aftermath of terrorist attack of 9/11. 

Mike will protect our rights, ensure taxpayer dollars are spent in pursuit of improving the lives of all New Yorkers, not just a select few, and demand integrity and transparency. 

As Assemblyman, Mike will continue his public service. He will make sure that New York is working for its people, and that all voices are heard.

I endorse Mike Duffy for 92nd Assembly and I urge you to vote for him.

George E. Pataki”

Report To The People Offers Little

As if schooled by The Paul, we received a recent “Report to the People” campaign piece that said little, but managed to produce a collage of pictures with the sender posing with several politicos and others from the public, all under the pretext of performing legislative service. The reality is, he is short on substance and long on hyperbole. By the way, we’re not using his name to keep from promoting his lame record and abuse of mailing privileges. We hope that others will view this and other campaign mailers with a more critical eye.

On the front page of the campaign piece is “his statement” in response to the Newtown murders of twenty-six people. These murders were truly horrible and ABG means no disrespect toward those victims, families and friends who are suffering from this. It’s a shame that he would use this as a political opportunity to issue a statement “in response” to the Newtown shootings, when nobody asked him for one and he has nothing to add. Sadly, it’s pure politics. His plan? Keeps guns away from those who would misuse them, ban military style weapons, register all guns, their transfer, mandate their secure storage, carefully license every gun owner, train them in gun safety, and check on them periodically. Then he wants to utilize more mental health professionals in the community to minimize the likelihood of violence. Of course, he fails to mention how to pay for all of this or any real strategy for implementation.

ABG is always saddened to see anyone injured or killed. In fact, several of our staff members volunteer in the Greenburgh community in different capacities and recognize first-hand the horrors that people inflict upon others. We also recognize that most of his talking points are strictly designed to appear to promote a call to action while merely promoting himself. The reality is nothing will happen and in particular, he will do nothing but continue to talk about it. The shooter in Newtown appears to have a history of mental illness. For that matter, his mother, whom he also killed, must have had something wrong too, since she legally purchased and kept weapons in the home, and took her mentally ill son to the firing range to “bond”. He didn’t use military style or assault weapons. In Webster, NY, the shooter of the two firefighters was obviously deranged and then killed himself. Could the talking points our representative have made a difference? We’ll never know. Lets examine his points individually.

1) Keep guns away from those who would misuse them. It’s great to say, but how to you propose to do this? Will he introduce another unenforceable law that he can brag he co-wrote or co-sponsored? You can’t control who gets a gun unless that person is a law-abiding citizen. It’s like putting locks on doors; hence the saying, ‘locks are for honest people’. The amount of people who own guns versus the amount being murdered is being disproportionately represented.
2) Ban military style weapons? They are. It was not a military style weapon that was used in the Newtown killings. It was an over the counter automatic rifle. But okay, ban military weapons. How?
3) Register all guns? Good luck making that happen. Handguns are currently required to be registered, rifles are not. Since the police are prohibited to enter your homes by the constitution, this would be a voluntary program at best, is unenforceable, and limited to the law-abiding. However, if we should attempt to have all guns registered, amend the current law to include rifles. It’s a start in the direction he claims we need. We agree it needs to start.
4) Regulate gun transfers. Again, how? An example was given by a friend whose grandfather gifted a shotgun to his teenage grandson. He took the time to train him in the proper use of the gun, the grandson took a gun safety class and became a remarkable target shooter – not a hunter. As a familial transaction, government would never know about it.
5) Carefully license every gun owner. We already have this law on the books and again, normal law-abiding citizens are never the issue. In fact, the Newtown shooter’s mothers guns were legally registered. Sometimes, bad things happen by bad people that no amount of legislation will stop.
6) Train them in gun safety. Good idea. And yet, government has mandated every new driver take an 8-hour driver safety class before they can take their driving test. Yet once licensed, many of these new drivers still drink, text, and drive under the influence even though they were told them it wasn’t safe to do it. And which group has the highest accident rates? New drivers. So, how much of government mandated training is going to produce the results he seeks?
7) Check on them periodically? Could this be more ambiguous? We hear of child abuse victims all the time who are neglected because a case-worker was overworked or unable to effectively investigate the parents. So, now he proposes hiring more people onto the government payroll that is already bloated? Can you say tax increase? His response, of course, will be, “If we save just one life, any cost was worth it.” That’s debatable.
8) Stop glorifying violence. Many talk about needing anti-violence, especially the Hollywood crowd. Aren’t they the same ones that make and star in the violent movies for gazillions of dollars? The movie industry’s been in a slump and then the action-packed, violent, James Bond “Skyfall” movie sets records for attendance. Add to that The Expendables, Transformers, Batman (repeatedly) etc., proving the law abiding public wants these films because movies are an escape from our everyday lives. Hollywood is being disingenuous, not wanting to bite the hand that feeds them. Good luck with stopping that.
9) The group he works with passed legislation requiring micro-stamping bullets to assist in tracing weapons back to their owner. Didn’t the police know who was doing the shootings in most of these killings. Feel good legislation? You decide.

There were several other items he “worked” on. Or did he? Actually, here’s some of the mailing’s legislatiive topics that was passed into law but not necessarily written by our legislator: DNA Databank, Domestic Violence protections, Cyber-Bullying, Micro-stamping, I-Stop (Internet - System for Tracking Over Prescribed drugs), Water Protection (accidental sewage discharge notification into waterways, sponsored by him), Health (prohibits smoking within 100ft of a school - because our police officers need to be busier), Hydro-Fracking (requires studies of the health impacts of hydro-fracking, co-sponsored by him).

Finally, to the back page of the campaign piece. He claims we need to replace ConEd as their Hurricane Sandy storm response was “totally inadequate, a management fiasco, a poor plan, poorly executed.” He’s calling for hearings into ConEd’s poor response. Why? We know their response was as good as it could be given the magnitude of damage and their current staffing. ConEd called in for help and the ConEd unions turned some of the non-union utility workers away. What results could hearings possibly render? The committee’s 30-page report summary will state that ConEd was woefully understaffed, the size of the storm was unpredictable, and the amount of damage into the billions of dollars and the federal government, along with FEMA must do more. This is strictly grandstanding on his part. The Paul will want to get in on the media frenzy and issue a press release commending the committee, berate ConEd again (he’s already done this), and say we should do away with county government.

He has introduced legislation for an idea that many have offered before him to put a height restrictor at the entrances of our parkways to deter trucks from accessing the roadways. He doesn’t even allude to how much will this cost? Regardless, it does have merit. Currently, the bridges that get repeated hits on the Hutchinson River Parkway cost us little if anything but time to address. When a bridge hit in Mamaroneck happens, the County Police respond (paid, on duty), the Mamaroneck Fire Department (no cost, volunteer) responds, a wrecker responds (big cost, insurance pays) and tickets and fines are issued. Virtually no cost to the tax payer except for the time delays. Now, we’ll be paying for some elaborate study, then prototype development, testing, changes and installation. Worth it, or another government boondoggle? Whatever the cost figures are that are presented to the public, triple the number and you’ll have the final cost. Watch for the federal and state subsidy slight of hand with the accompanying claims of low cost to the taxpayers because the feds are picking up the bill. YOU are the feds picking up the bill!

He also is requesting a discounted rate for all Westchester residents who use the Tappan Zee bridge. ABG, as well as everyone else we discuss this with, recognizes that the tolls will skyrocket once the bridge is completed, so this is highly unlikely to happen. He is still insisting on only building one bridge and keeping the original bridge as a park and bus use. Apparently, it’s been designated as maintenance-free and no longer needs demolition. He should pay more attention when he’s at his part-time job supposedly representing us to what’s already been decided. There will be two bridges, no park and dedicated bus lanes. But he’ll be able to say look what I tried to do for you – and with a straight face.

He brags that he was able to get legislation approved to allow Greenburgh (really The Paul) to lease Town property to a private, for-profit business, undoing the safety net provided by law to protect the Unincorporated residents of the Town. Another legislator from the other side of the building was participatory in the unraveling of this law. Then his last tidbit is that he joined with the Pleasantville mayor, other local officials and numerous residents to stop the installation of cell towers there. Funny, we wonder why he didn’t help the Irvington residents trying to accomplish the same thing? ABG’s guess is that The Paul wanted the towers and he was afraid to go against his eminence.

All of these talking points make for a nice generic mailer/campaign piece that does nothing but continue to aid incumbents with their off-season campaigning. Change a few pictures and this template will surely be used by other legislators. They keep their name out there, ensuring little chance that the electorate will vote for a new candidate come election time. Ultimately, they are doing little for the prized salary and perks they receive. It needs to change. We can only hope.