Greenburgh Politics Votes No Change

In a not-stunning-in-the-least primary vote, seemingly nothing will change in Greenburgh. Sure, change can be scary. So can the lethargic same-old, same-old mentality that seems to prevail. That's what the minute portion of Greenburgh Democratic voters decided last night.

With no surprises, the problems that plague the Feiner Administration will remain until the election which will invariably yield similar results. The results of the primary vote for the two Town Council seats and one Town Clerk seat played out this way:

GINA R JACKSON       2,706 or 41% of the votes. 
ERIC ZINGER              1,458 or 22% of the votes.
KEN JONES*               2,426 or 37% of the votes.
Office Totals               6,590 or 100% of the votes.

In the Town Clerks race
MARIA J PORTILLA    1,775 or 48%
JUDITH A BEVILLE*   1,947 or 52%
Office Totals                3,722 or 100%

*incumbent

More Conflicts Of Interest, Lies and Ethics Violations

After we published the article about Mr Jones unrelenting drive to pass resolutions TB1 & TB2 on a previous Town Board agenda (see Monday, June 10, 2019 Misdirection, Lies and Ethics), we felt as though we were watching the “Greenburgh sausage” being made. We continued to dig and uncovered even more information that raises doubt about Mr Jones' sincerity of following an ethical course as a Councilman for the Town, liaison for the Greenburgh Housing Authority (GHA) or as an officer of the courts.

You'll recall during the meeting that Councilman Jones made a motion to vote on TB1 and TB2. Councilwoman Hendrickx, newly appointed moments earlier that same night, seconded his motion. After some back and forth, Councilman Sheehan requested those two resolutions be held over. Another argument ensued as Mr Jones insisted they vote on the resolutions. Mr Sheehan insisted that their rules and past procedure allowed any councilperson to hold over any resolution without cause. He's correct and even Mr Jones has held over resolutions. 

There was a contentious back and forth when someone said that Tim Lewis is the "Town Parliamentarian" and should tell them how they can proceed. At which point he said move to suspend the rules and then move the vote. We are not Parliamentarians but we have at least held a copy of Roberts Rules and question the legality, ethics and sensibility of this maneuver. Both resolutions passed with Councilwoman Juettner abstaining, stating they've never done this before and Mr Sheehan voting no. 

One of the issues we’ve uncovered was that Mr Jones, as liaison for the Town Board with the GHA, was also an attorney for the Bozeman Law Firm in Mt Vernon, NY. The Bozeman Law Firm is the law firm that represents the GHA. At one point in the arguing during the meeting, Mr Sheehan stated that a Town Board member even asked the Board of Ethics in 2018 about a possible conflict of interest. That got a rather loud and emotional reaction from Mr Jones. He claimed he had not gone to the Ethics Board and that Mr Sheehan’s assertion was ridiculous. Mr Sheehan said he never mentioned any names. But ABG will. We acquired a copy of the Ethics Board minutes and it shows below, Mr Jones appears to be lying, he was in attendance and he did in fact ask them for an unofficial ruling just as Mr Sheehan recounted. See below:

Mr Jones also stated that he no longer worked for the Bozeman Law Firm. But an email that was forwarded to us partially indicates otherwise. It shows that Mr Jones still may have an active address with Bozeman Law, which is indicated by the address at the bottom of the email. If he simply rented space from Bozeman it would still constitute a business arrangement and be wrong as well as unethical! Notice also that this is his private Gmail account with the Bozeman mailing address. Could he be using this to keep from having certain communications as a Town Board member from being F.O.I.L.-ed?

See below:

So with staffers digging, we checked the Board of Elections records for Mr Jones’ campaign donations. We found several interesting donations to the Committee To Elect Ken Jones, by people connected to the Town Board or seeking positions in the Town Administration. The first is from sitting Town Councilwoman Diana Juettner for $90; next is from Town Clerk candidate Maria Portilla for $50; Alfreda Williams for $200; Mona Fraitag for $500. Ms Fraitag was appointed this year to the Planning Board. There are others but we believe the next two are significant: Andre Early, Commissioner at the Theodore Young Community Center, for $75 and the Bozeman Law firm for $500! Sounds an awful lot like pay to play? 

Next up, we learned that there is an Ethics Board complaint that has been filed against Mr Jones. We sent a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request to the Town Clerk requesting a copy of the complaint. This request was turned over to Town Attorney/HazMat Mitigation Specialist/Town Parliamentarian Tim Lewis who determined it should be rejected and cited what we believe is an unrelated case of the Herald Company vs City of Syracuse School District where the school district denied disclosing the name or charges against a tenured teacher.

Mr Jones, while believing Town Council positions may be a tenured position, is not a tenured teacher. Nor are we seeking the name of whom the complaint is made against, we already know it’s Mr Jones. What we want to know is what the complaint is for and who made the complaint? Actually, we know that Mr Rodney Lederer-Plaskett submitted the complaint, and ABG will be writing more about this soon. Once again Town Attorney Tim Lewis tried to cite an irrelevant case to stall our information request, a common tactic from this Town administration. But his case is not related to the requested information at hand and should have been released.

Moving right along on the Ethics Express, ABG learned a lawsuit has been filed by the Legal Services Hudson Valley (LSHV) group announcing that they have filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of five current and former tenants of the GHA against The Bozeman Law Firm, PLLC. The Mount Vernon law firm which represents the GHA (a public housing authority) in landlord-tenant disputes lawsuits.

The lawsuit claims that Bozeman Law repeatedly sues tenants in the GHA’s housing sites who receive Section 8 federal housing benefits for non-payment of rent, even though Bozeman Law knows that the sums it seeks are not “rent” by law and often not owed by the tenants. If a tenant obtains a lawyer, many have used LSHV staff attorneys to defend them, Bozeman Law immediately withdraws the legal proceedings. Shortly thereafter, they will re-initiate the same lawsuit based on the same or similar facts. This process is repeated again and again. There’s more but you get the idea.

So if Councilman/Liaison/Attorney Jones is/was/remains on the Town Board as a Councilman, how is it not a conflict of interest that he worked for the Bozeman Law firm who represents and also sues the residents of the GHA? Is the liaison (Jones) to the GHA with copious amounts of information from both sides, both suing and getting sued, over the same matters? And did he ever share any of this information with Town Attorney Tim Lewis, Supervisor Feiner and the Town Board? When he went to the Ethics Board to question a conflict of interest, was the entire story laid out to them or just a partial story or any story at all? Mr Feiner appoints the Ethics Board members. Is that a conflict of interest as well? The taxpayers deserve answers and justice. 

Finally, with the Democratic primary only days away, we’ve learned about the deals that were made behind closed doors for this election. Mr Feiner was promised the Democrats’ endorsement if he endorsed the entire ticket which did not include Gina Jackson at the time. He’s done that. It’s apparently the third or so time Mr Feiner has had the party endorsement. The Democrats’ logic is interesting now that Councilman Morgan has passed away. They will take Ken Jones over Eric Zinger because they don’t believe they can control Mr Zinger. They’re also afraid of Ms Jackson because she might be an independent thinker. We still believe Mr Zinger and Ms Jackson are the preferred candidates. 

We know politics is an ugly machine for most people and they tend to stay away from it. Most people are usually clueless to know the inner workings of Greenburgh politics. We hope that we’ve helped you get a glimpse into what’s going on. If you can, please go vote in the Democrat primary on Tuesday. We suggest moving away from Mr Jones this time around and hope others will take this information and finally do the right thing for our Town. It will make for A Better Greenburgh.

“If You Don’t Like What I’m Doing, Sue Me!”

On Saturday, July 2, 2016, ABG posted a story about Mr Feiner and his Town Board working, and we believed even then in secret, with Formation Shelbourne, a developer looking to build a 94-bed assisted living facility at the current Sprainbrook Nursery location. That article was titled:

Like A Good Neighbor, Formation Shelbourne Sues Everyone Hoping To Stop Free Speech, Then Realizes Their Blunder. This article explained that Formation Shelbourne decided to sue numerous groups, individuals and of course the Town for rescinding their NegDec ruling which would have easily opened the doors to “the process” for Formation Shelbourne to proceed with their project. After rescinding the NegDec, Formation Shelbourne would be forced to start the process over again. 

On Wednesday, July 6, 2016, in our article entitled:

Shelbourne Decides Not to Sue, we explained that after the furor we and others created, Formation Shelbourne issued a press release stating that their initiation of lawsuits against the citizens and civic groups questioning their project was a mistake and they would withdraw their lawsuit – without apology.

 

On July 9, 2016 we wrote another article entitled Embarrassed Town Leaders To Vote To Undo Scam, explaining the move being contemplated by Mr Feiner and the Town Board to reverse the NegDec vote that had foolishly made to push the Formation Shelbourne project forward as promised. You see, promising constituents and taxpayers something and then doing something else can usually be done with little or no consequence. But when you go up against a multi-million dollar entity whose resources are almost immeasurable, the consequences can be severe. 

On Saturday July 16, we posted yet another article entitled: Town Board Threatened, Delays "NegDec" Cancellation Vote and described how Mr Feiner and his Board had decided to reverse their NegDec ruling. While this was brought about by public pressure as well as websites such as this one and others, Mr Feiner cleverly decided to explain his improper actions as a mistake and that the Zoning Board of Appeals should be the one reviewing this, not he and the Town Board. 

Unbeknownst to the average taxpayers was that Formation Shelbourne initiated and then withdrew their law suit as we had written earlier. What most would also not know was that Formation Shelbourne’s representative, threatened Mr Feiner and the Town Board with another lawsuit at a Work Session if the Board rescinded their NegDec. They rescinded it and soon after Mr Lino Sciarretta did in fact bring suit against the Town on August 18, 2016! 

Not only did most residents and taxpayers not know another lawsuit was brought against the Town because of Mr Feiner and his Board’s (illegal?) actions, the Town officials intentionally kept it under wraps and did not inform the public of this action! Ironically, Town Attorney Tim Lewis had informed the Town officials that they had been warned there would be a lawsuit even after he explained to them that he believed they had acted improperly by rescinding the NegDec. Mr Feiner always says, "If you don't like what I'm doing, sue me." So they are; now for a second time!

In reviewing the lawsuit, the petitioners state numerous times when a NegDec can be reversed or withdrawn. Those would be a) substantive changes to the plans; b) newly discovered information, or, c) changed circumstances that the rescission could be based. Added difficulty for Mr Feiner and his Board was the Formation Shelbourne’s admission that they and Greenburgh officials had secretly agreed behind closed doors to support the Formation Shelbourne application, the Town Board’s issuance of the NegDec as part of their agreement!

Apparently, the ethically challenged Mr Feiner and his Board believe they can do whatever they want without consequence. Perhaps because they always seem to run unopposed at election time feel invincible? Perhaps they believe their own hype that they have the toughest ethics law on the books and revel that other communities want to emulate it? Perhaps it’s because Mr Feiner appoints and his Board approves all members of the various Boards, including the Ethics Board? Following the Town’s ethics law is a whole other story. Actions such as these prove of why we need term limits and engaged constituents. Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.

Witholding Information and Selective Open Government

Last week’s Town Board meeting had two issues of significance that had residents turning out in numbers. The first was the alleged Comprehensive Plan Hearing for the latest iteration of a diluted and less potent Comprehensive Plan document that was met with mostly resistance. The other was numerous residents from Ardsley in attendance to protest the proposed Jefferson housing project in the area of Lawrence Avenue. Previously, several hundred residents had turned out in opposition. In fact, due to the volume of people at that meeting, the Police Chief began enforcing the occupancy limits and herding people into other areas of Town Hall.

While there is much to discuss about the watered-down and almost ineffectual proposed Comprehensive Plan, we want to focus on the lack of open government from 177 Hillside Avenue. Our previous post details an email that was received by Mr Feiner from Rick Rucoba, the Public Affairs Manager from the Akzo Nobel chemical titan that owns the property under contract for sale to create The Jefferson. The contract is only valid however if the developer could get approval to build the 272-unit housing extravaganza. 

Below is a copy of the email Mr Feiner received at 7:27PM on Wednesday night. Where was he at 7:27PM on Wednesday night? Of course, he was at the Town Board presentation arena using up residents’ valuable time forcing a limit with their engagement with a critical public. So he received the email from Mr Rucoba at roughly the beginning of the night’s proceedings. Yet, knowing there were people from the Ardsley community there planning to speak against The Jefferson and seeking his help in doing so, he chose to secret the information and remain silent! Is it possible he chose not to share this crucial information because he would not get as much publicity from it than if he waited and had a full day to publicize this? That’s our belief. In fact, two days later found a rather large article appearing in one of the area’s daily newspapers!

We've highlighted in yellow the 7:27 time stamp when the original email was sent to Mr Feiner. Then, highlighted in purple at 10:11, is the time stamp when he forwarded the email to someone else. Did he forward it to the “Say No to Jefferson” group or his press release list or his press release agent? We know he sits at the dais during meetings ignoring the speakers while he plays with his phone. ABG staffers are convinced he was already mapping a press release strategy during the meeting – concerned residents be damned! 

It’s difficult enough for citizens of Greenburgh to get straight answers and honest information from the Town and it’s elected officials without having to file a Freedom of Information request (FOIL). It’s sad that Mr Feiner would choose to conceal valuable information such as this from a group of people who were anxiously seeking his help. Obviously, politics is more important to him than the welfare of others. This needs to change and more importantly, be stopped. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Zoning Proposal Nightmare

This past Thursday night, the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) met to discuss several applications before them. The first one on the agenda was from Foundation Shelbourne (Shelbourne) – again. They had already been before the Board hawking their proposed assisted living facility at 448 Underhill Avenue, which is the current home of the Sprainbrook Nursery, and were turned down. Their proposal in a residential neighborhood is simple. They will purchase the property from Al Krautter and his family for several million dollars. They will remove everything there and build their proposed 80-unit, four story facility in the middle of a residential neighborhood. According to the lawyers for Shelbourne, they only need a few variances to conform to code. If you don’t listen to the lawyers, the project violates the new Town Assisted Living facility code recently written (by Brightview Assisted Living) and adopted by the Town Board several years ago! According to them, however, they are making a residential proposal.

As mentioned previously, the Assisted Living Zoning code was written by the attorneys for the Brightview Assisted Living facility and custom tailored for their then-proposed Glenville takeover. They specified the height requirement, the acreage needed, the need for a State or County right-of way within 200ft and so on. There are other points, but these are the most salient and what was again being regurgitated to the ZBA this night. To their credit, even though the lawyers droned (more on drones in a moment) on, the ZBA members appeared to pay attention. The ZBA is actually the last line of defense for homeowners to not lose their neighborhoods. However, with the last few appointments made by Mr Feiner, that privilege is slowly being lost.

The fact that Mr Feiner wants this project to move forward for whatever reason and at any cost is more than troubling. This project is very much reminiscent of another inappropriate commercial project in a residential neighborhood that he endorsed and even held a phony referendum for: the GameOn 365. With that project, he claimed an 8-story sports bubble placed in a residential neighborhood was perfectly acceptable! While Mr Feiner enjoys a relatively unscathed lifestyle in his gated community, he has no qualms about devaluing your home or neighborhood to satisfy the financial needs and wants of his developer friends.

During the ZBA meeting many points were made by the attorney’s for Shelbourne, although many if not most were simply their opinion. In fact they showed a flyover video recorded by a drone of the property. They claimed to have unanimous Planning Board and Town Board support. This point is correct. Mr Feiner wants this project and these two Boards’ members know not to go against him or be “Sonya’d”. So they are for it. They claim there will be less impervious space and they are remediating the existing flooding on the northwest corner. Perhaps, but remediation usually entails regrading and altering the terrain, ultimately moving the water from one location to another. A key point, then, is who will get stuck with the water? They plan to extend the sewer lines into the existing ones in the area. New, larger sewer piping will be linked for these 80 units into the smaller existing sewer lines already in place. With a failing infrastructure throughout our Town being ignored by this administration, we don’t think this is a very good plan. Finally, attorneys claimed they worked closely with emergency responders at their other facilities to respond to alarms without lights and sirens. We know this cannot be correct.

The Shelbourne attorney’s tag-team presentation insisted multiple times that the residents for this facility will come from our Greenburgh neighborhoods. They will not be welcome if they are on Medicaid or have no assets to pay their way into this high-end facility. They also claimed to have ten facilities operating elsewhere and three of them are on less than the required 4-acres of property. Yet they have never said where these facilities are. Why does this matter?

Because as you agree to insert any commercial facility in a residential neighborhood, it sets a precedent that then allows any commercial facility to appeal for a variance and build where they want, whether appropriate or not. Likewise, when you have a Town Board who refuses to follow the zoning and dare we say Comprehensive Plan for the Unincorporated Town, you’ll get fractured neighborhoods, lack of continuity with looks, traffic and feel all being compromised. Is that what our homeowners signed on for when they purchased their home? We doubt it.

At issue are the same two points Shelbourne refuses to accept and know they don’t have to, mostly because they have Mr Feiner on their side fighting their fight. But the Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals, as we mentioned before, is the Town’s and its residents’ last line of defense. This proposed facility needs variances because the property is too small at 3.79-acres instead of the required 4-acres and is over a mile away from the State or County right-of-way that is required to be 200ft or less. The Town allowed Brightview’s attorney’s to write the current Town Zoning ordinance. That ordinance was tailor written for their facility at Rt. 119 and Benedict Avenue. It overwhelmed the rest of the neighborhood, is exclusionary to Greenburgh residents on Medicaid or without any money to purchase a space and doesn’t blend in with the surrounding area. 

If you’re not sure that the size really makes a difference, go there and see how their facility looms over the edge of the property and overpowers the area. Shelbourne’s requests for variances will probably be approved by the newer half of the Zoning Board. However, this request is cut and dry. The variances should be refused because the variances are bigger than a simple variance such as moving a set back distance from 50ft to 40ft. Shelbourne is looking to cavalierly overturn Town Zoning code for their financial benefit. This must not be allowed to happen. If Shelbourne truly wants to build an assisted living facility in Greenburgh, they should seek a different location. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Town Board Makes Mockery of Process

We’ve previously written that Mr Feiner, and naturally his Town Board, favor the Foundation Shelbourne Assisted Living facility proposed at the site of the current Sprainbrook Nursery. Sadly, once Mr Feiner wants something, he’ll do whatever it takes to be successful. He previously tried to stop the Fortress Bible Church of Mt Vernon from building in State Assemblyman Tom Abinanti’s former backyard. He, and ultimately we the taxpayer, was subsequently sued in Federal Court and found guilty of discrimination, lying under oath, destroying evidence and four other counts. Town Councilwoman Diana Juettner was also found guilty in that action. No stranger to violating the law or bastardizing "the process" for his own gain, Mr Feiner and his Town Board has done it again.

At the last Town Board meeting, Mr Feiner prematurely held a public hearing for the SEQRA process, calling the hearing “optional”. The G10, as well as others, were out in force and all of them questioned why this SEQRA hearing was being done? SEQRA stands for State Environmental Quality Review Assessment analysis. The analysis is usually done once a project proposal has been approved. This one was not - except by Mr Feiner, which in bizarro-Greenburgh, is enough.

At issue for the proposed 4-story, 80 unit assisted living facility, is that it does not meeting the zoning requirements for the location and would require numerous variances to be allowed. You may recall several years ago when Brightview Assisted Living proposed their facility overlooking Rt 119 at Benedict Avenue (across from Stop and Shop), they wrote the zoning code for the Town. ABG and others protested it but were overruled when the Town Board adopted it almost verbatim. The code they submitted included every nuance that they had put in the plans for their facility. ABG cannot help wonder why the Town has a legal department that cannot write our own codes, regulations and laws?

This proposal requires a proper use variance. It does not have one. The Zoning Board of Appeals issued a determination on April 21st regarding an appeal by the Edgemont Community Council of then-Building Inspector John Locido’s ruling that the project did not need any variances to build its facility on the nursery’s location. One factor in play here is that the facility must, by the Brightview-written Town code, be 200 feet from a state or county right of way. That condition was easily met by Brightview with Rt 119. Shelbourne’s nearest state/county roadway is Central Park Avenue, which according to the Town Building Department is 6,025 linear feet away. The attorneys for Shelbourne have stated it is less than that if you go in a straight line. Another major issue requires another variance as the property itself is 3.79 acres and the code, again written by Brightview to accommodate Brightview’s own project, requires 4 acres! And, while maximum height shall not exceed 3-stories or 40 feet, this proposal tops out at 56.7 feet. There are several more variances and issues that the project would need to proceed. The Town Board’s myopia at the time Brightview was attempting to take over the Glenview neighborhood didn’t allow them to see any of this as an issue because Mr Feiner wanted Brightview’s project to go through. They all ballyhooed the G10 when these points were challenged. In fact, they went out of their way, as did others in the Town, to stand firm and say numerous times that there were no other parcels that could accommodate an assisted living facility anywhere in Unincorporated Greenburgh!

The Town Board’s myopia at the time Brightview was attempting to take over the Glenview neighborhood didn’t allow them to see any of this as an issue because Mr Feiner wanted this project to go through. They all ballyhooed the G10 when these points were challenged. In fact, they went out of their way, as did others in the Town, to stand firm and say numerous times that there were no other parcels that could accommodate an assisted living facility to be built anywhere in Unincorporated Greenburgh!

At last week’s Town Board meeting, many residents spoke favorably about the the Krautter family and their contributions to the neighborhood over the years. This is exactly why this “hearing” was being done and what Mr Feiner had hoped would happen. It would validate his position to move forward with this project. Others noted that this isn’t about the Krautter family and is about an inappropriate proposal for that particular location. Tor Krautter, the son, spoke passionately about the nursery being at that location long before the homes were built there and that this was his parents one shot to sell the property. We agree that the nursery was there first and will willingly concede them that property as long as it remains a nursery.

Whether good or bad, the zoning and the Town have changed and while everyone seems to support a nursery at that location, the Town should not allow an inappropriate assisted living facility there. While he and others see Shelbourne as their best option, there other developers who may be willing to purchase the property and build within appropriately zoned requirements. If Shelbourne is truly committed to this project in Greenburgh, they can find another location which conforms to the Town’s code. It’s time to stop giving developers carte blanche in our Town. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Fast Tracking Senior Living Facilities, the Latest Green-Light Buzzword

As a developer, if you want to build in Greenburgh, what could be better than to have unfettered access to parcels of land that are otherwise inappropriate for certain zoned usage? Several years ago the active buzzwords needed for approval morphed from homeless shelters to workforce housing and now to assisted living. This new solution is simply to propose an Assisted Living facility and offer all kinds of tax revenue that Mr Feiner will be able to trumpet on the developer’s behalf. The first meeting will be behind closed doors in the corner office. The next step will be an informal proposal at a Town Board Work Session, followed up with a proposal at a regular Town Board meeting. By then, all of the various departments will have gotten in line and the “sails” will have been raised by Mr Feiner enough for the deal to be ready for Town Board consummation. Such emerges the case with the Shelbourne Formation, Inc., also know as Shelbourne Assisted Living Facility.

Is justification really necessary for the consummation of this project or will a preemptive act with the Town Board’s heavy handed stamp-of-approval suffice?  As this is one of Mr Feiner’s pet projects, approval is not really necessary – it has been mandated and will go through with minimal resistance. We’ve seen when he wants a project to happen, it’ll be the proverbial “done deal”. He will send an email blast from his much-coveted GBList, professing the advantages of approving this project, regardless of the merits or accuracy of the conjectured information. A court has ordered him to share the list with a local civic association but he has still refused to surrender it! Why is this important? Because as he spreads misinformation to residents, the civic association is seeking to inform its members of the rest of the story – something that hasn’t happened in years.

The Town Board will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, May 11, 2016. It is regarding the environmental review process (SEQRA) associated with special permit applications submitted by Shelbourne Senior Living. ABG believes this to be a phony justification hearing strictly for the purposes of slanting the application forward on Shelbourne’s behalf. The assisted living facility is proposed to be built at 448 Underhill Road, the current home of the Sprainbrook Nursery. The Sprainbrook Nursery, which was opened on Underhill Avenue in Edgemont by Al Krautter's parents in 1944, has been struggling for the past few years, reducing its staff from about two dozen employees to just Krautter, his wife Heidi, and a handful of others.

The Shelbourne Senior facility is proposed as a four story, 80-unit, 70,000 sq.-ft. assisted living facility building, with off-street parking, landscaping and related amenities. Numerous approvals are required for this project to move forward. Special permits are needed from the Town Board, which will encounter little, if any resistance and be granted post haste. Area variances from the Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals seem to be in flux now that the Zoning Board of Appeals ruled against the former Town Building Inspector John Locido, who retired last month, overturning his determination that no variances were required to construct the 80-bed facility. New Town code, written and submitted by the Brightview Assisted Living Facility’s attorneys, created a customized path to allow assisted living facilities in residential neighborhoods only if they are within 200 feet of a state or county right-of-way, excluding parkways and interstates. The nearest state or county right of way is nearly a mile away. The code also requires the property to be 4-acres, which this is not. And, while the Planning Board must also approve the site plan and steep slope and watercourse permits, we see little, if any, resistance there. Interestingly, when a homeowner seeks to make small additions to their homes, a years worth of permits and approval processes along with other hurdles often make moving a more viable alternative to remodeling.

Some like assisted living facilities because it offers the chance to encourage elderly family members an option to remain local while seeking to remain independent. Some see that as a win for the school districts as it promises revenue without the school district having to invest in more children. Discussing the tax revenue for the Town and various agencies involved with the operation of the facility within its neighborhood offers conflicting thoughts.

In fact we’ve been promised over a 10 year period that the Shelbourne facility will generate approximately $5 million in total property taxes – which would include $3 million to the Edgemont School District, $500,000 to the Greenville Fire District and $900,000 to the town. Of course, let’s not forget that Mr Feiner promised the Town $5million if we approved the GameOn 365 sports bubble arena in a residential neighborhood – which was proven a figment of his imagination. 

While $3million would be a windfall for the school district, the $500,000 to the Greenville Fire District may turn out to be an inadequate amount of money for the amount of alarms generated by the facility. How so? There will certainly be fire alarms from that location. But there will also be ambulance calls, known as aided cases for that location. Greenburgh Police will provide the bulk of the medical services per se, but the fire department will also respond and assist, as will volunteer ambulance corps (who will receive no money). As seen with the Hebrew Home and the Fairview FD, their responses are almost daily and in fact sometimes more. As with all fire departments, volunteer and career, if there is an alarm, they will respond, regardless of the money generated through taxes.

Other impacts related beyond the projected requests for emergency services, is the location and delivery times coupled with traffic issues during their normal course of a business day. Subsequently, the impacts of the proposal to surrounding properties should be a significant concern.

While the desire to build assisted living facilities appears noble at first blush, the apparent tact here for the developers is nothing more than finding a legal way to construct four-story apartment buildings in inappropriate locations throughout the Town. Additionally, numerous assisted living facilities throughout the state are running into financial difficulties. Sadly, most of the seniors who have moved into them have signed over their estates to do so, leaving them with little or nothing to fall back on should the facility fail. One such facility is operated by the Hebrew Home on Grasslands Road next to the Westchester Community College campus. They, and now their residents, are in financial distress as they are experiencing significant difficulties with their model. Likewise, The Esplanade in White Plains which has failed as an assisted living facility is being converted into a multi-family housing unit. Was that the plan all along?

There is a public hearing this Wednesday on May 11th at Town Hall to discuss whether or not to move forward with the Shelbourne Assisted Living Facility. There are too many issues, questions and problems with this proposal for it to move forward. We hope many residents will recognize this and come out to tell the Town what they think about this. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

The Propaganda Scramble

Now that Mr Feiner has alienated his loyal base of Village residents via the revaluation, said to have been handled ineptly by Tyler Technologies, he is scrambling to validate the increased taxes the Villagers will be paying in their next tax bill. But is it enough? This same voting base were his guaranteed votes that would routinely put him back into office year after year.

The Jefferson project proposed at the Ardsley and Dobbs Ferry border between Rt 9A and the Saw Mill River Parkway is just one example. He has rallied against it. Why? We believe he did so because it would increase his school taxes. As you may know, about 60% of your property taxes is school taxes. He also did this on behalf of Ardsley resident and Greenburgh Town Board member Diana Juettner. He did the same thing against an assisted living facility proposed in North Elmsford’s Payne Street area. The location is in the backyard of Greenburgh Town Board member Kevin Morgan. He’s also fought the Yonkers development of a big box store in his own back yard as part of the Stew Leonard’s property expansion claiming traffic concerns. When Greenburgh residents have the same concerns about projects in their neighborhoods, they are summarily dismissed and told to suck it up. Can you say Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY)? Meanwhile, they routinely tell all of us how good this is for the Town, the neighborhoods, the residents, etc. Ultimately, it is not.

Roll Camera. In spewing his “what we’ve done for you lately” propaganda, there are some truths but also a great deal of unsubstantiated showmanship. First, he makes sure that someone else is to blame by saying the Villages are part of the Town because of state law. Second, he provides a breakdown of the taxes Villagers pay, claiming only 2% of their entire tax bill goes to the Town services. Again, according to him 60% goes to school tax, which the Town is obligated to collect. The rest of his tax collection speech is him doing the Feiner vamp, saying nothing and  proving politicians can speak without saying anything. Stop camera.

He says:

What does the town do for the 2% of your entire tax bill? ABG provides a closer to the truth answer to each point.

1. We offer advance life support (ALS) and paramedic services which has a proven record of repeatedly saving the lives of village residents. Hopefully, you won't need them, but if you do these services are ready to respond to your call 24 hours a day.

Real Answer: They do provide this. However, the Villages pay the Town for this service. What he doesn’t mention is that the Village Ambulance Corps augment the Greenburgh ambulances by responding to Greenburgh calls when requested through Mutual Aid. And while Greenburgh is the “owner” of the call and bills for its services, they do not share any of those monies collected with the ambulance corp or fire department ambulances they used.

2. The town's town wide senior program serves or delivers over 30,000 meals to village seniors each year. The program provides a hot meal five days a week to eligible seniors. We have three nutrition sites - in Dobbs Ferry, Tarrytown and unincorporated Greenburgh. Our home delivery program provides delivery services to seniors who cannot come to one of these sites.  

Real Answer: Mr Feiner habitually throws out numbers hoping some of them will “stick”. Sadly, while he is telling you they deliver 30,000 meals to village seniors, we know it's simply not true. No matter how we did the math, there seems to be about 120 seniors out of about 92,000 total residents who are are getting meals from the Town. And there is no informational breakdown available between Town and Village recipients.

3. The town has a recreation program for developmentally disabled residents.

Real Answer: This may be, but we could find nothing about this on the Town website.
4. The town's animal control department responds to calls for service within the villages. If there is a stray or injured animal the animal control unit will respond. We transport the animals to an appropriate medical facility for care.

Real Answer: This is sort of true. Animal Control is only available between 9 to 5, if the animal control people are available/working. By the way, they won't take every type of animal.
5. The town's civil defense unit provides civil defense services during natural disasters and other major events, such as post 9/11 and during blackouts. These services include coordination of communications for police, fire, paramedics and refilling of air packs and fresh air for specialized rescues. The unit also responds to refill the air tanks of village volunteer firefighters during fires.

Real Answer: While we applaud the work performed by the Civil Defense, this is an extremely small group of volunteers without the personnel necessary to do a lot during an emergency. In fact, they are augmented by the Town's C.E.R.T. group. They DO go to fire scenes and fill air tanks for any firefighters who request them. The paid fire departments have their own systems and don't utilize them. In fact, there's a move now by the paid departments to replace all of their air packs which will require that they purchase new refilling systems. If they didn't use the Civil Defense's system for free, they could go to the Westchester County Fire Training Center in Valhalla and refill their air tanks there 24-7-365 at no charge.

6. The town's highly trained and specially equipped special weapons and tactics (SWAT) team is available 24/7 to respond to emergencies. Officers from throughout the town who meet very rigorous standards are readily available to respond to emergencies in the villages.

Real Answer: This is true. The Town's special operations groups are comprised of the paid fire department members and the police department members and require overtime that the taxpayer must pay. Once dispatched, their positions are required to be "backfilled" by off-duty members. This is mostly billed as overtime to the taxpayers. The County has the same special operations teams that can be called out at a moments notice and at no charge to the community and have much more resources available to them.
7. The town's road striping unit is responsible for striping roads, including the center and side lines and crosswalks on roads in all six villages.

Real Answer: While valuable, we're guessing this is not vital. What is vital is to have more police officers on the road, patrolling our communities.

8. The town acts as a collection agent for the schools and county. The town guarantees 100% of the taxes to both entities. If you do not pay your school or county tax bill the town pays it for you. The town then has to use its offices to pursue collection of all unpaid taxes.

Real Answer: This is true, the Town is obligated by law to collect these monies. They don't do because they want to help the Villages out.

9. The Town Clerk
• Responds to FOIL requests from residents town-wide; and provides…

Real Answer: All government agencies are required to respond to FOIL requests. The Town of Greenburgh seems to take an inordinate amount of time fulfilling this obligation while other communities seem to do this more quickly and at less cost to the taxpayers.

• dog licenses to residents, town-wide;

• marriage licenses to residents, town-wide; New York State Licenses: Fishing, Hunting, Handicap Parking Permits;

• Town of Greenburgh Licenses: Cabaret, Canvassing/Peddlers & Solicitors, Filming, Sanitation (private), Taxicab and Taxi Driver;

• Senior Citizen Rent Abatement Program (ETPA) for qualified town residents;

• Management of all vital records (marriages and deaths) that occur in the Town of Greenburgh;

• Sales Tax Letters to residents and businesses for correct Sales Tax amount for the town; and several other miscellaneous services.

Real Answer: While all of this is true, it's our understanding that these services take up a miniscule part of the Clerk's office time and frankly, that's their job, regardless of the Villages' usage of it or not.
10. The Town's Sewer Department responds to calls for service from the villages for sewer emergencies 24/7, which require the use of The Town’s jet/vac truck and operator.

Real Answer: While it is available, our understanding is that it is not used that often.
Because the Theodore Young Community Center was paid for with federal and state tax dollars, residents of the villages have the ability to use the indoor pool at the Theodore Young Community center and to participate in their programs.

Real Answer: While true, most people are unaware of the center because of where it is and if they are aware of it, find there is very little time available to use it because there are daily programs already filling their burgeoning calendar.

The above are some highlights representing the services offered to village residents. I hope this information answers some questions. Feel free to contact me with any further questions.

Real Answer: While these services may be available to the Villages, it hardly justifies the significant tax increase revaluation is placing on many residents. This is pure Feiner Deflection, changing the subject from the original discussion to something unrelated. It has to stop. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Sustainable Westchester Executive Director Out

In 2014, a town resident, filed a Freedom Of Information Law (FOIL) request for the Town’s GBList. The GBList is the Town of Greenburgh’s E-Mail list that Mr Feiner and his Board use at their discretion for whatever they deem appropriate. The resident’s argument, made in court and agreed to by the courts with their verdict, found that the request to be able to tell “the other side” of the story that Mr Feiner was telling was a reasonable one. However, even after being told to turn over the coveted email list, he refused. The legal department scrambled and filed an appeal at the eleventh hour. So, now the resident is forced to wait even longer.

Mr Feiner has posted jobs that he learns about on a private site he maintains. Another way to garner email addresses is for those out of work people to sign up. He doesn’t screen the positions, he doesn’t get paid for sending candidates, qualified or not, and he doesn’t guarantee your success. What he does guarantee is the growth of his contact list, including email addresses! His real fear with releasing the GBList is that he will be called out when he says something that is not true - which at times is often.

In a recent “post” for a position, really a self-promotion campaign for name recognition, he sent out the position of Executive Director for Sustainable Westchester. Below is the opening portion of the blurb that goes with the job description. We’re not posting it because we don’t want your email information, and have no ulterior motive. If you think you are executive director material and the position may be for you, click on the link below and get the entire picture. 

Executive Director

Sustainable Westchester

Sustainable Westchester, a not-for-profit organization, is a membership-based consortium of municipalities that addresses critical sustainability concerns within Westchester County. Formed from the merger of the Northern and Southern Westchester Energy Action consortia in 2014, Sustainable Westchester’s membership has rapidly expanded to include the membership of virtually every municipality in Westchester County and now serves more than 900,000 residents.

The organization provides a forum for communities to share ideas, develop programs and procedures, and formulate effective responses to important sustainability-related opportunities. It convenes and provides support to individuals in member municipalities through volunteer-led Working Groups. Presently there are four Working Groups: Land Use/Transportation, Energy, Materials Management, and Water.  The Working Groups set the strategic direction for initiatives in these areas based on the needs and opportunities presented to the member municipalities.   Website: http://sustainablewestchester.org/

We’re not sure why the previous Executive Director of Sustainable is no longer in that position. Could it be that he didn’t move the process along quickly enough for their Board of Directors and they gave him “the boot”? It reminds us of Westhab in Fulton Park. Their Vice President of Real Estate had sealed the deal with Mr Feiner and his Board and then hit all kinds of roadblocks from the neighborhood associations when the neighborhood associations actually did better research on the zoning, covenants, etc., than Westhab did, causing an over two year delay and significant reduction in the size of their project! Could it also be that due to the delay, the lower cost of fossil fuels and the lack of return once proffered by ESCO’s that Sustainable Westchester is not the Golden Goose it once was thought to be? ABG thinks so.

Below is a letter written by the Mayor of Scarsdale that appeared in the latest edition of the Scarsdale Inquirer about questions surrounding Sustainable Westchester. There are other communities as well who did not drink the KoolAid and go along with this. Rather, they asked the hard questions, studied the facts and made an informed decision with their community. This is the way government should work. When it does so in our Town, we'll finally get A Better Greenburgh.

Lied To Again

Under the guise of “good news”, Mr Feiner has done it again. He blitzed the mainstream media with press releases that the former owners of the animal shelter in north Elmsford, Pets Alive, will be returning ownership of their now-closed facility to the Town. You’ll recall they closed their facility on September 17th. That’s when the Town’s Building Department condemned their building as unsafe due to structural faults that had arose and not been addressed. The reason given was that the structural issues were caused by settlement, declining revenue and increased costs. All of the animals were transferred to another Pets Alive facility in Middletown, NY.

When Pets Alive proposed returning ownership back to the Town, Mr Feiner and his Board said, “No!” He began saying the building was uninhabitable and needed too much extensive and costly work to be made whole again. After being informed by the Town Building Department that the building was uninhabitable for safety reasons, they were forced to close their doors. The public was repeatedly told by Mr Feiner and the Building Department that the building could not be repaired! New “good news” press releases from Town Hall prove that to be a lie.

A little known fact about the property was brought out by Mr Feiner in that the former Town property was restricted to being used as an animal shelter when it was given to Pets Alive. This provided another dilemma for Mr Feiner as well as a campaign bonanza. He was forced through his own mandate to keep the facility as a pet shelter and would be unable to unload it to someone else, such as another assisted living facility. What to do? John Lucido, the Town's Building Inspector, now stated that half of the building could be used after saying it was uninhabitable, once again changes the playing field for a predetermined outcome.

In fact, in a statement on their website, Dr. Joseph D’Abbraccio, Acting President and Chairman of the Board of Pets Alive says, “The Town knows its constituency and could more easily work with another animal rescue organization to get the appropriate building permits and meet the other needs to restart operations as an animal shelter.” Again, what to do? An initial estimate from engineers in December 2014 reported a price tag of $1.1M to repair the building. If that’s the case, and half of the building is uninhabitable, wouldn’t it be more cost-effective to tear down the structure down and rebuild a new one, allowing for the use of the entire building? In fact, given the structural issues which many believe have been compounded by the development in the area, shouldn’t they tear down the old building and erect a new one, specifically designed to house animals? In fact, the new building should be constructed to earthquake-proof standards as it is next to a rock-crushing, gravel making facility that will cause the same issue to any building. It should also be built above the area's floodplain to avoid future flooding as this area will get worse in the upcoming years.

The building at 100 Warehouse Lane was never designed to be an animal shelter. Regardless, that's what Mr Feiner wanted it to be and he made it so. Half of the building cannot be used. Pets Alive is seeking to deed the ownership of the property back to the Town now that their animals have either been adopted or moved. They cannot afford it or the necessary renovations. Mr Feiner, already saddling taxpayers with paying $5.5 million dollars for a $6.5 million judgement for being found guilty of perjury, lying under oath and destroying evidence, can ill-afford yet another million dollar expense. Add to that the loss of income for violating the WestHelp contract to the tune of $1.2 million per year for four years and still counting, the former Frank's Nursery property mired in schemes, contamination and lies and you’ll see the lies are catching up with Mr Feiner. It has to end. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.