Edgemont Denied Right To Petition for Incorporation

In a typical turn of events, the Town Supervisor was able to once again thwart the proponents of an Edgemont incorporation (EIC) by violating their rights to hold a referendum allowing them to essentially secede from the Town of Greenburgh and chart their own destiny out from under the monopolistic thumb of Mr Feiner. Sadly, the court condoned Mr Feiner’s desire to stop the EIC’s rights by agreeing with his convoluted assertion that the petition failed to include a description of the territory to be incorporated with common certainty. 

When the first court case came up in 2017, Mr Feiner routinely took advantage of his position to write numerous op-ed pieces and do interviews that bemoaned his eagerness to stop the incorporation. A proven liar (found guilty of lying in the Fortress Bible Church Discrimination Lawsuit), he said that should the incorporation happen, it would affect the Town budget by $17 million dollars. When the incorporation proponents repeatedly stated that they were planning all along to contract for Town services with the Town which might affect the budget in total but would make up a vast portion of the tax revenue that Mr Feiner claimed would disappear. And then he often said he would not do that deal. If effect saying, “Screw unincorporated Greenburgh residents!”

In a Town that is making Yonkers, known as the City of Hills – where nothing is on the level, look more and more like the Flatlands of New York, has had Mr Feiner enlisting the assistance of Councilman Jones, who has parroted the same mantra. Why would these representatives not do the best thing for the Town should the referendum go through? Why would they purposely sabotage the revenue of the Unincorporated budget? Jones, is also no stranger to controversy, having had two Ethics violation charges brought against him with the hapless Ethics Board. We have to say, though, that an Ethics Board in Town of Greenburgh is a contradiction of terms and has proven time and again to be a waste of time and energy when legitimate ethics violation charges have been levied.

In an interesting exchange of back and forth statements by Mr Feiner and EIC President Jeff Sherwin, the reality is that Mr Feiner, a purportedly non-practicing attorney, has  childishly slung verbal jabs at Mr Sherwin, the EIC and incorporation proponents just short of sticking out his tongue at them and saying, “Nan, na, na-na nah.” Considering Mr Feiner is supposed to represent all residents and taxpayers, he should be looking to sit down with the EIC and work out a number of things. First, can the EIC be reasoned with to back off the consolidation drive; second, could Mr Feiner help them draw up the correct proposal so it can go through; third, should the referendum application go through again – and there’s no reason to think it won’t – would Mr Feiner offer a Town Hall meeting to discuss openly and most importantly, honestly, what can and cannot be done should the referendum pass.

Mr Feiner only knows how to work with residents when they agree to what he wants and doesn’t allow differing points of view. This needs to change. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh. 

Misdirection, Lies and Ethics

It's no secret that our incestuous Town Board lies whenever convenient and makes decisions based on those lies. Mr Feiner, including then-Town Councilwoman Timmy Weinberg, was found guilty of discrimination in a Federal Court case that the Fortress Bible Church brought against the Town a number of years ago. Included in the 7-guilty verdicts were lying under oath and destroying evidence. Those lies cost the taxpayers $5.5 million dollars after the insurance paid $1 million. So it comes as no surprise that the autonomous inbreeding on Hillside Avenue has finally come to fruition. Now the rats are attacking themselves. 

Watching the Town Board meeting of May 22nd showed some of this infighting. Case in point was over TB1 and TB2 on the agenda. Below is the summary of each of those:

TB 1 - 5/22/19 Resolution authorizing the Town Supervisor of the Town of Greenburgh to enter into a Municipal Fee Agreement with Manhattan Avenue Senior LLC whereby Manhattan Avenue Senior LLC will pay a fee to the Town in the amount of $100,000 as reimbursement for the costs and expenses related to the development of up to (#units) residential housing units for seniors aged sixty-two (62) and older [#units still needs to be determined by the Town Board-- 66 or 82] (Held over to Town Board Meeting of June 12, 2019) 

TB 2 - 5/22/19 Resolution authorizing the Town Supervisor of the Town of Greenburgh to enter into a Tax Exemption Agreement with Manhattan Avenue Senior Housing Development Fund Corp., a New York not-for-profit corporation, which will hold title to the property located at 48, 50, 54, 56 and 58 Manhattan Avenue, currently owned by the Greenburgh Housing Authority, for the benefit of Manhattan Avenue Senior LLC, a for-profit entity that is a party to the Agreement, for the purpose of exempting an affordable housing project for seniors aged sixty-two (62) years and older from all local and municipal taxes (meaning all real property taxes levied by the Town of Greenburgh, the County of Westchester, the Greenburgh Central School district or any other taxing jurisdiction), other than assessments for local improvements and special district taxes, 100% of the value of the Property and Project for a period of thirty (30) years.(Held over to Town Board Meeting of June 12, 2019) 

It begins to get interesting at eight or nine-minutes into it after Bishop Preston took to the microphone and accused the Board of dragging its feet on approving the Municipal Fee Agreement with the Greenburgh Housing Authority (GHA). Bishop Preston proceeded to complain that it should not take this long to approve and that the Board should give a tax exemption or do a P.I.L.O.T. (Payment In Lieu Of Taxes) program in hopes of expediting the program before the Board, adding what they were doing was disrespectful and dishonorable to the seniors. He claimed that it had been pushed back numerous times again and again.

Mr Jones pontificated about being the Greenburgh Town Board liaison with the Greenburgh Housing Authority and that he was very aware of what was going on and that the agreement should be voted on, adding the GHA have come before them with their professional representatives and there is no reason not to take this vote. It’s just the tip of the iceberg and that this should not be held over. He then moved to vote on it. After being newly appointed that same night, Town Councilwoman Hendrickx fell in line and seconded the motion. 

True to his flawed character, Mr Feiner originally had postponed the vote late in the day but now confronted by an irate Jones, jumped on his bandwagon expressing his support for it, saying it was not a perfect agreement and we’ll have a real crisis if they don’t move forward with this. He continued that this is a crime that Greenburgh is not leading the way and voted yes. He also referenced the lack of funding for WestHelp and how it is wallowing due to a lack of funds. He neglected to mention that the entire WestHelp debacle and its current state was caused by him and his complicit Town Board. This too has cost taxpayers millions of dollars every year! 

Then Councilman Sheehan began to speak about the reason this resolution had been pulled from the agenda which was to give the new Board member (Hendrickx) time to study it before voting on it and got into a verbal back and forth with Councilman Jones. Mr Jones stated he knew nothing of the resolution being pulled from the agenda. Sheehan said that since Mr Feiner advertised this as being pulled from the agenda, many have not attended that night's meeting. He went on to discuss the affordable vs low income categories and the lack of paperwork that he's requested for at least two years to support the verbal commitments made to the Board. They’ve received nothing. 

Both Mr Jones and Bishop Preston (from the audience) stated the paperwork couldn’t be drafted until their petition was approved. If this was true, the paperwork could have been drafted, submitted and held contingent upon approval of the application. Mr Sheehan also stated he sees this lack of paperwork as contributing to the destruction of the Greenburgh Housing Authority. Frankly, it appears that this paperwork could have easily been drafted and submitted during that two year period. This seemingly small stumbling block could have been easily addressed during that time and this point would have been moot. As a matter of fact, taking two more weeks or so after over two years seems more than reasonable. 

Mr Sheehan then stated that the Housing Authority and the developer are using the same attorney, Lucia (last name unknown). Mr Jones interrupted him and said, “No they’re not. No they’re not. That’s a misrepresentation.” Mr Sheehan said she represents both, to which Mr Jones responded she represents the development company that both the Housing Authority and Georgica Green Ventures have formed together. The GHA has separate counsel. Mr Sheehan asked Mr Jones twice if they've actually formed that company and he did not answer. Once again, from the audience Bishop Preston could faintly be heard saying not until they get this resolution approved. 

The meeting seemed to devolve even faster from that point, especially when Mr Sheehan pointed out that a Board member went to the Ethics Board to find out if they should abstain from voting on GHA issues. That woke Mr Jones up who loudly told Mr Sheehan that that statement was not true and that he did not go to the Ethics Board. Mr Sheehan responded by saying he had not mentioned anyone by name. So we wonder, was Mr Jones feeling guilty about just lying to everyone thinking we wouldn’t find out?

Below is an excerpt from the Ethics Board’s May 8, 2018 meeting minutes which we made blue to distinguish it and bold to highlight the pertinent facts:

MINUTESTown
> of Greenburgh Board of EthicsTuesday,
> May 8, 2018 6:30 p.m.Town
> Hall, Steven Belasco Conference Room
>
>
> Board
> Members Present:
> Doris Friedman, Esq.; Carol Sarcinella, EdD; Blase Spinozzi,
> Craig Zumsteg.
>
> Volunteer
> Counsel.
> Joseph Malara, Esq.
>
> Also
> present:
> Ken Jones and Francis Sheehan
>
>
> Meeting
> was convened at 6:38 p.m. A quorum of the Board of Ethics
> was present.Adopted the Agenda.Adopted the Minutes of the March 20, 2018,
> meeting.The Chair Doris Friedman, Esq. thanked Carol
> Sarcinella for filling in during her absence.Correspondence. The e-mail received from the Town
> Clerk, Judith A. Beville and the response were
> noted.The Advisory Opinion regarding David Cannon’s
> request will be discussed at the next meeting.Ms. Friedman will write to Steve Grant inviting
> him to the next meeting of the Board of Ethics.Financial Disclosure. Blase Spinozzi reported that
> David Fried, Esq. stated as of May 2, fifty-nine percent of
> the employees and twenty-eight percent of Boards and
> Committees were in compliance returning disclosure
> formsEthics Training. Blase Spinozzi said David Fried
> will discuss with the Town Board the possibility and date
> for the ethics training presentation. Ken Jones
> made an informal request for advice on how to proceed in
> future decisions involving his position on the Town Board,
> his liaison with the Greenburgh Housing Authority for the
> Town Board, and the legal firm he serves “of counsel.”
> The Board of Ethics recommended that he recuse himself from
> any decisions involving his firm and the
> Town.

This clearly shows that Mr Sheehan's assertion was accurate and Councilman Jones is not telling the truth. The legal firm he is referring to is Bozeman Law firm (see pic below), which we just captured Sunday from their website (https://www.bozemanlawfirm.com/profiles.htm). 

Mr Jones could argue that he left his firm in the Spring 2019, a few weeks  prior to the vote in question and that technically his May 2019 vote was not barred by the Town Ethics Ruling. Unfortunately, the Town Ethics Code does not directly address a “cooling off” for private sector matters. However, the NY State Joint Commission on Public Ethics “plain language guide”  is very clear with its “reverse two-year bar” for public officials in dealing with matters that involved a former private sector employer. Again, technically, the NYS employees ethics rules might not bind town employees, but that is a very weak “ethical” position for Mr Jones to take. Perhaps he subscribes to Mr Feiner's methodology to ignore any laws or standards he doesn't like? By the way, Mr Feiner appoints all Ethics Board members which gets ratified by his Board.

Below is an excerpt from of the NYSJC Public Ethics rule. We made it blue to distinguish it and bold to highlight the pertinent facts:

REVERSE TWO-YEAR BAR
If you are entering State service from the private sector, the “reverse two-year bar” may, depending on the circumstances, require you to recuse from matters directly involving your former private sector employer for a two- year “cooling off” period.
The Commission interpreted Public Officers Law § 74 to contain this “reverse two-year bar” in Advisory Opinion Nos. 98-09 and 07-04.
In practice, the “reverse two-year bar” prevents the appearance that you, in performing your State duties, may give preferential treatment to, or be unduly influenced by, your former private sector employer.

If your Ethics Officer or JCOPE determines that recusal is appropriate, it runs for two years from the date that you terminated employment with the private sector employer. 
Link:

https://jcope.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2018/10/jcope-plain-language-guide-ethics-law-91018.pdf

Watching the Town Board meeting shows just how dysfunctional this Board has become. Mr Jones made a motion for the Board to vote on the proposal and it was seconded by newly appointed Councilwoman Hendrikx. Mr Sheehan said, we believe correctly, that any Board member can move to hold-over any item without cause and he was doing so. Mr Jones objected. They argued some more and finally Town Attorney Tim Lewis, referred to as the Board's Parliamentarian, suggested suspending the rules -- basically to thwart Councilman Sheehan's request to pull the resolution -- and allow the vote that Councilman Jones wanted. Not only can you not vote to suspend your rules so you can have a favored or controlled outcome, but doing so may violate the Town charter. So after they voted to suspend the rules (Yes vote by Hendrickx, Jones, Feiner) Juettner abstained saying they've never done this before, and Sheehan voted no, they then voted for the the original resolution with the same comments and counts. Suspending or changing the rules to control the outcome is like passing a law to say murder is not illegal so you can't be found guilty of murder after you've killed someone. 

What probably most important here is that Mr Jones worked for Bozeman as an attorney while he was a Town Councilman and the GHA liaison. Bozeman represents Georgica Green Ventures which is comprised of the Housing Authority and the developer. Ken Jones should have recused himself because his employer was involved with the Town whether directly or indirectly. Mr Feiner should have removed Mr Jones as the GHA liaison due to the conflict of interest and Town Attorney Tim Lewis should have also asked Ken Jones to step down as liaison for the same reason. But this is “Bizarro Greenburgh” where rules apply to others, not the elite few in Mr Feiner’s inner circle. And, with the forcing of the suspension of rules to make a decision go the way he wanted, Mr Jones has placed the Town in another risky, contentious and possibly criminal position with Ms Hendrickx, Mr Feiner and Mr Lewis.

There are three candidates running for two Board seats in the Democratic Primary on June 25th. Those Board candidates are incumbent Ken Jones(D) seeking re-election, Eric Zinger(D) and Gina Jackson(D) vying for Mr Jones’ and Kevin Morgan’s seat. There are two candidates running for Supervisor position in the general election on November 5th. Lucas Cioffi(IND) is running against incumbent Mr Feiner (D) for the Supervisor's position. We know Mr Zinger and Mr Cioffi and are hoping to sit down with Ms Jackson soon and invite all the candidates to submit position papers to us for publication. Without position papers we believe any of the new candidates would be a breath of fresh air, a welcome change and long overdue. It’s the only way we can begin to get A Better Greenburgh.

Silence Won’t Be Purchased With Appointments

Appointments to various committees happen quite often in the Town. Many are rewards for either supporting Mr Feiner or his schemes. For instance, prior to retiring to Florida, his friend and confidante Alan Hochberg was appointed by Mr Feiner as the Deputy Town Supervisor. Mr Hochberg, also a convicted felon just as Mr Feiner, chaired other committees, including a veterans group for the Town. We understand there’s an unspoken quid pro quo with the former resident and Mr Feiner.


At a recent Council of Greenburgh Civic Association meeting that Worthington Woodlands Civic Association President Dorrine Livson attended, we learned she received an offer from Mr Feiner to be nominated for a vacant seat on the Town of Greenburgh Planning Board. Mr Feiner’s offer, while appropriate at face value, seems like a classic move to silence another of his growing list of outspoken critics. In his correspondence to her, he says, “I think you would be an outstanding member and am confident that you would be fair with each applicant. I also appreciate the constructive suggestions you have made to the town over the years.” Finally, there’s something the Supervisor said that we can agree with!


Apparently an offer was first made to Edgemont resident Jeff Sherwin for the vacant seat on the planning board. It appears that after Mr Sherwin declined Mr Feiner’s offer, Ms Livson declined as well. So now two critics of Mr Feiner failed to be enticed into servitude. We’ve written extensively of Ms Livson and the Worthington Woodlands Civic Association. For those of you who do not know of Mr Sherwin, he is a significant contributor to the Edgemont Incorporation Council, the group which is seeking to get a referendum in the Town as Edgemont seeks to incorporate as a Village and become independent from the control of the Town. In particular, these residents believe they are better suited to control the destiny of their community than Mr Feiner and his Board.

In an article in a weekly newspaper that covers Edgemont and parts of the Town, Mr Feiner was quoted as stating, “I have spoken to others who also believe that you would be an asset to the planning board.” Mr Sherwin was quoted responding, “I believe Paul Feiner is not pro-incorporation. I believe he has a mission to thwart incorporation. I think his asking me to join the planning board was part of a plan, either by distracting me, or by trading favors, or by getting me to say ‘no’ without sufficient reason so he could say Edgemont doesn’t really care about zoning and planning.”


For the last several years, Mr Feiner has pretended to seek approval from his Town Board on numerous projects. As those who follow Town politics are aware, his Board has become nothing more than a rubber-stamp arm of his administration, approving any and all projects of his desire. Project after project appears to get unceremoniously pushed through if it’s one favored by Mr Feiner. The average taxpayer, saddled with exorbitant fees and demands usually take a back seat to the big developers. They also rarely, if ever, get an opportunity to speak to the Board at a work session or in private as so many of the big developers often do.


One project that is currently in litigation is with the S&R developers who are trying to build on a parcel of land they purchased adjacent to the Greenburgh Nature Center. It is being held up for several reasons that never should have seen the light of day. The Town’s zoning maps, changes erroneously made by the Town Board and a covenant held by the neighboring convent of nuns nearby should mandate a dismissal of this project! Regardless, this is yet another lawsuit that is costing the taxpayers more money that we shouldn’t be paying. Planning Board member Hugh Schwartz, whom we have had respect for previously, is regularly vociferous in his objection to the Edgemont Incorporation Council effort. He has had numerous articles published stating so as well as countering those in favor of the effort. Interestingly, Mr Schwartz’s wife is an employee of the law firm involved with the lawsuit against the Town! While we’ll give Mr and Mrs Schwartz the benefit of the doubt, this alludes to substantiating our case with both Ms Livson and Mr Sherwin.


Having a one political party Town works for those members of it. But not having any opposing or dissenting views on the Board robs the residents of fairness, fresh ideas and an ethical compass. Mr Feiner is asking his “critics” to join him on the boards - but that takes away their civic duty to speak out for, against or critique a development as they cannot go before the Town Board, Planning Board or the Zoning Board to present their private point of view or even represent their Civic Association. While it makes him look like the good guy, he is really trying to silence them knowing what they can and cannot do according to the Town’s Ethics Code. This unethical abuse needs to end. Only then will we get 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.

Board Condones Secret $1 Million Deal With Semantics

Wondering if this Town's administration will ever follow the law, practice true open government of any sort or simply do the right thing is rarely, if ever, in flux. Business as usual in Greenburgh for the select few in Mr Feiner’s “inner circle” seems to be more the norm as Mr Feiner continues to get more and more brazen with his decisions and actions. Case in point is last Tuesday night’s special Town Board meeting specifically held to accept a $1 Million donation from the Robert Martin Corporation. The donated money can only be used for the purchase of an undevelopable twenty-eight acres strip of land currently owned by the Unification Church in Tarrytown and near I-287. The excuse this time is to preserve open space – a common contradiction with this administration.

The “deal” was struck by then-appointed Deputy Town Supervisor Danny Gold. At the time of the secret proposal, he was and currently is, the President of the East Irvington Civic Association. It is well known that Mr Gold is also friends with Mr Feiner and has usually aligned himself with Mr Feiner’s actions and policies. However, his friendship with the Supervisor simply adds to the potential conflict of interest Mr Gold had as the now-former Deputy Town Supervisor and this secret land deal donation with a developer operating in Greenburgh.

Tuesday night’s Town Board meeting was held in the cafeteria as the main hall was previously booked. There were two groups of people in attendance. One group, favoring Mr Gold’s secret deal “sold” as an open space bonanza, were there and spoke in support of it. It is unknown if they were aware of the specifics surrounding the secret deal. The other group, primarily consisting of the G10, were there in hopes of at least postponing this secret deal. Their feeling was the deal was struck in secret in 2009 by Mr Gold, so why the rush to act on this without first vetting the deal?

Also unclear was since the property is actually in Tarrytown, why was Tarrytown left out of the proceedings? Why was the Town only told of this expiring deal when the clock was ticking toward the end of this five-year secret agreement? Why did Robert Martin offer $1 Million and what was the true cost to the Unincorporated Greenburgh taxpayer and to the Tarrytown taxpayer. In fact, why would the Town entertain this secret deal at all?

Before the meeting began, a rewritten Town Resolution accepting this deal was distributed to the attendees. The reworked wording made the proposal appear less controversial for the Town Board as they moved forward, as they always intended, to adopt the resolution accepting the $1 million deal created by Mr Gold. The Town Board Work Session earlier in the day even found Mr Sheehan questioning many aspects of this deal and the possible improprieties of it. However, rewording the resolution apparently quelled any and all reservations he may have had and he voted “aye” with the rest of the Board. Done deal. Or is it?

The Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations had requested legal help to send this information to the State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, seeking an investigation into wrong-doing. Information regarding the secret deal as well as the parties to it were included. Anyone seeking to read more can do so by going to this link: https://www.facebook.com/greenburghupdate. There, you can download and/or read the documents online. Regardless, more came out at this meeting that was hastily convened to accept the $1 million on the last day.

The first speaker during the Public Comment session was Tarrytown resident, Linda Viertel. ABG staffers and others sat during her opening comments, where she listed some of her credentials, stating that she didn’t have a blog and could not counter statements made about her and may go a bit beyond her allotted three minutes. Even though she spoke in favor of the donation, she stated after the meeting that she was shocked to learn, unbeknownst to her, that Mr. Gold had named her in this secret 2009 agreement! Another Tarrytown resident, Dr. Stanley Friedlander, was also included in the agreement. ABG wonders if she had no knowledge of her inclusion in the deal, what of Dr Friedlander?

Another question is the timing of this proposal as well as the additional applications before the Town to expand the Avalon Green property. Wikipedia defines “Quid Pro Quo as ("something for something" in Latin)[1] means an exchange of goods or services, where one transfer is contingent upon the other. English speakers often use the term to mean "a favour for a favour"; phrases with similar meaning include: "give and take", "tit for tat", and "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours." ” So why would Robert Martin offer this money to East Irvington’s Danny Gold? They bought his and his Civic Association’s silence when they were expanding Avalon Green back in its heyday. The payoff/payback has finally come full circle. Sadly, as many developers know, its the cost of doing business in Greenburgh.

Anytime anything is done in secret in government many people pay attention. Such is the case here. A secret agreement made by a Deputy Supervisor with a developer with applications before the Town at the time to remain quiet for a finite number of years is wrong. In Greenburgh, however, its business as usual. This type of behavior must cease immediately. Only then can we have A Better Greenburgh.

Pending Another Law Suit...

The Hits Just Keep On Coming
How many "hits" can one Supervisor take before the electorate sees through the façade and votes him out of office? Apparently, in Greenburgh, the scorekeepers follow our current society's soccer game mentality, where no one keeps score to protect tender egos. But, how about our tender backsides, raw from the gripping tentacles of the Town's tax collectors persistently assaulting our wallets for more of our hard-earned money? And what of the developers who seem to be impervious to these same tentacles as they grease the wheels of progress, ensuring an unimpeded application process for their projects?

Certs and the 2% Tax Cap
Once the developer's applications are complete, they begin building. When their building is finished, replete with variances and concessions du jour by the Town, they apply for their requisite certiorari adjustments. After the certiorari application is submitted, the Town automatically grants their request. The cradle-to-the-grave-cycle has been completed. The residents? They are forced to subsidize these certiorari refunds with their own taxes being increased, usually by double-digits, all while Mr Feiner touts the Town's adherence to the NYS 2% Tax Cap. The reality is far from Mr Feiner's warped perspective.

What's In It For Greenburgh?
Another tale of woe for Greenburgh residents has been unfolding under the guise of generosity and benevolence of a former developer, Robert Martin toward a civic association leader, Danny Gold, and of course, Mr Feiner. The "deal" was supposedly brokered by Mr Gold with the Robert Martin Corporation, who are well-known for developing corporate parks throughout the region and beyond. They created the template for corporate parks when there weren't any and became one of the largest landlords of commercial property in Westchester, one of the most powerful developers in the state and donated to numerous political campaigns - including Mr Feiner's and possibly others on his various Boards.

The property in question is a tract of land of 28+ acres in the East Irvington/Tarrytown section of the Town, a mile away from the Avalon Green and Avalon Green II apartments and condominiums off of Taxter Road. It turns out the land being considered is actually in Tarrytown and not Greenburgh "proper". It is part of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon Unification Church's 200 acre estate. But this secret land deal, struck in 2009 didn't include Tarrytown. Why not? What's in it for Robert Martin? What's in it for Danny Gold? Most importantly, what's in it for Greenburgh? The Unification Church is already challenging their taxes so regardless of what transpires, they'll win.

Keep Your Mouth Shut
ABG has learned that this secret deal was struck between Mr Gold, the President of the East Irvington Civic Association back in 2009 and Robert Martin before the construction took place for Avalon Green II. The supposed justification for this deal was to mitigate the future impact of the hundreds of apartments built near the East Irvington neighborhood. In fact, the only stipulation for Mr Gold to be able to proceed with this deal was if he kept his civic association's proverbial mouths shut while applications were made for the Avalon Green development. He did and they did. Why, you ask?

Because after he successfully had Mr Feiner declare Mr Gold's "backyard" a park, purchased with State, County and Town monies, it assured him that there would be no affordable housing built anywhere near his home, maintaining his segregated neighborhood. No one has been able to explain how the private land donation scheme mitigates anything for Mr Gold's neighborhood as the Avalon Green complex is over a mile away from their neighborhood. Its a stretch to say this steep sloped piece of undevelopable property is of any real benefit to other residents in the Town, while being "sacrificed" by the Unification Church for a paltry one million dollars.

October 1st Deadline
Knowing he had this secret deal in his back pocket, Mr Gold played nice with everyone at Avalon Green for years while remaining silent. Now that Mr Gold has put his home on the market, it was time for his silence to pay off and expose his deal to the Town, having his good friend Mr Feiner go to bat for him. He did, with Mr Feiner telling the Board and anyone who would listen that this is a terrific benefit for the Town. But, when pressed, he couldn't actually say why - just that it was. We fully expected him to blurt out how great the Town's Bond rating was.

Feigning forgetfulness of the October 1st deadline, Mr Gold stated he simply realized, albeit a bit late, that for the deal to be consummated, he needed the Town to accept a $1million donation from Robert Martin Corporation post haste. Once the million dollars was received, the Town would then need to turn around and purchase the 28+acres of land from the Unification Estate with the donation, ensuring the property be made into a park in perpetuity by the Town. Not advertised as part of this extraordinary deal was the small fact that East Irvington President Danny Gold had previously been the Town of Greenburgh Deputy Supervisor under Mr Feiner! The deal he brokered for himself and his association was performed while he was still a sitting official for the Town! Collusion? Quid pro quo? Unethical? You decide.

Ethics
To decree any potential appearance of wrongdoing, Mr Feiner suggested at the Town Board meeting that the issue be submitted to the Town Ethics Board for review and a decision reached quickly to ensure meeting the October 1st deadline. What wasn't submitted to the Ethics Board was all of the pertinent information they would need to make an informed decision. However, given that Mr Feiner has appointed all of the members of this Board, ABG is suspect that any finding might be tainted from the start. That said, with the limited information that was supplied, the Ethics Board rendered the decision Mr Feiner knew they would. Seemingly more concerned about ethics was Mr Sheehan, who said he would not vote for the donation/purchase if the Ethics Board came back with a negative decision. That was never going to happen and Mr Feiner knew it. Whether Mr Sheehan was going to vote for or against this is unknown. Perhaps he was posturing, perhaps not.

What's Next?
Mr Feiner's Ethics Board may have waved their magic wand to grant the absolution his Board  desperately sought, but this is far from over. While Mr Feiner has again attacked individual residents for being against this, violating his own tenets listed on the Town Board Agenda to not make disparaging comments about others, it is apparently okay for him to lash out at residents. The reality however is that there is an ethical violation with this entire scheme, covertly hatched by a select few Town officials and a developer who continues to have applications before the Town in the process of seeking approvals.

How did the Ethics Board get this one wrong? They didn't actually get it wrong based on the information they were presented. Mr Feiner knew that controlling the flow of information to the Ethics Board, as he so often does, would garner the outcome he desired. While its possible to still get this "done deal" undone, Mr Feiner's warped perspective may be quite different from our reality. We'll have to see what's next. ABG hopes the Civic Associations along with others will petition the County and State to investigate. Maybe they won't be as ethically challenged and do the right thing. Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.

Honest Answers Welcome But Deflection Triumphs

Whenever Mr Feiner's latest guilty verdict is highlighted, he goes into what we've tagged as "deflection mode". You've seen this time and time again and we've written about it as often. The difference between us and the mainstream media is that we see it exactly for what it is. They, on the other hand, will reprint what he says without question or challenge. ABG believes they've abdicated their role as the fourth estate. Knowing he will get them "to play" by simply saying a few media-friendly buzz-words, he stated the Town's fire districts should consolidate. He began his rant to consolidate the Fairview and Hartsdale paid fire departments and deflected attention away from his failing budget, guilty verdict judgements and the general financial distress the Town of Greenburgh has been delivered. His ploy worked, his schemes have worked but his actions are failing. His policies are failing. HE is failing.

Mr Feiner has a small cadre of die hard loyalists who will do his bidding for him, allowing his appearance of being hands-off any hot button topic - such as fire district consolidation. In fact, when a Town Board meeting is not going his way, he will get on his mobile device and rally his troops via text messaging for help. As he stalls the meeting with his ramblings, awaiting his serfs arrival, they are given quick and unfettered access to the microphone. Their standard response might be an iteration of, "I was watching this at home and was so upset I had to come in to speak..." Others, in particular the G10, must sign up early and wait until called, usually after these troops have had their privileged say. Mr Feiner has perfected this routine and utilizes it often.

When Mr Feiner's guilty verdict was announced, the victorious Fortress Bible Church Discrimination lawsuit was almost put to bed. The judge had given ample opportunity to Mr Feiner and the Town to settle the case outside of the courts, but Mr Feiner, a non-practicing attorney, did not take advantage of the golden opportunity before he and the Town Board. His being obstinate, based on how many times Mr Feiner acted against the law and found guilty by the courts, keeps costing us more and more money we just don't have. One question we have been posing for years is why Mr Feiner can be found guilty in Federal Court on seven counts of discrimination, lying under oath, destroying evidence and still not be disbarred? It's business as usual in Greenburgh and for that matter, New York. Chicago has nothing on us.

Mr Feiner knows the taxpayers have deep pockets and brags they're only being zapped with a 3.4% tax increase, well under the NYS 2% Tax Cap, to pay for his illegal actions. We were under the (mistaken?) assumption that Mr Feiner had been personally found guilty and required to pay the penalties associated with the verdict and be forced to personally pay toward the verdict levied.

His latest deflection is to appear supportive of a 9A Bypass to reduce congestion on the 9A corridor. Naturally, like most of his follies, the "best chance of making this happen is now," a statement often made by Mr Feiner for projects he is interested in. This was the recent article in the once-critical and now-friendly White Plains Examiner. Under his hand, he had the Town Board adopt a resolution supporting New York State's pursuing of a 9A Bypass. This is like kissing your aunt on her cheek - it's nice but just doesn't mean anything. Its interesting that now that our Town Planning Commissioner has resigned to go wreak havoc in Stamford, CT., that Mr Feiner comes up with this exercise in futility. Next up? A press conference with his state representative buddies providing them more air time/publicity but producing little more than the promise to draft legislation to investigate the possibility and funding feasibility to study the need to see if there is a traffic congestion problem on 9A. It will go nowhere because there is no funding available for any of this.

Mr Feiner has included the Villages of Ardsley and Elmsford into the fray. Both of these villages are suffering because of the building that has taken place throughout the Town. What he doesn't address is the already congested traffic throughout the Town and the two mega-proposals in the north-end of the Unincorporated Town north of Elmsford at the old Union Carbide property. His press release, dutifully reprinted by the Examiner, says that the Town has $4.3 million dollars in a 9A Bypass Fund collected from new real estate taxes from new developments, but doesn't say what its availability of designated uses might be. We're back to that Aunt you kissed earlier. Its like her telling you she has put money aside for you when she dies, and then doesn't die anytime soon. Its nice but doesn't do you any good.

Saying you're for something is okay. Unfortunately, Mr Feiner is for everything with little action toward anything except providing for his developer friends and donors. Now that the shooting range has been closed, the bloated budget is done, the 10% salary increases for all elected officials complete, the verdict for Fortress Bible Church rendered, WestHelp still unoccupied costing us $1.2M/year, the Frank's Nursery property languishing, Brightview Assisted Living underway, Dromore Road dragging on, the Ferncliff School relocation gone, the Finneran Law changed with no sports bubbles, Midway Shopping Center expansion before the Town, the Trader Joe's expansion painfully lumbering on, the Landmark at Eastview 100+acres proposal starting to see the light of day, the fire consolidation scheme doing its damage, flooding in low lying areas still not addressed, racism at Town Hall unchecked, paving of Deli Delicious' entire property approved, and the Greenburgh Daily Voice turned over to Mr Feiner for his unfettered use, why shouldn't Mr Feiner do what he does best and add to the obsfuscation with a 9A Corridor Bypass to the mix?

 It's time for real leadership in Greenburgh. The stranglehold of political leverage is slowly proving why one-party rule, lack of ideas, and one voice is not good for our Town. The willfully ignorant must change and become involved. Our Town must change. Only then will we start to see A Better Greenburgh.

The Con Continues

For over three years now, Mr Feiner and his Town Board have been playing games with taxpayer property. For over twenty years now, Mr Feiner has been playing games with taxpayer money. The wallet-busting Supervisor has no plans to follow the law and will engage again in more spot-zoning to achieve his cash “fix”. Specifically, the property at 715 Dobbs Ferry Road, the former Frank’s Nursery property, which has languished as a contaminated, still undeveloped plot of land that continues to be mired in ineptitude and a morass of legal hijinks.

The property could have been sold for a profitable $3.5 M to Elms Street Sports, but Mr Feiner and his Board, began a new deflection campaign by concocting a slew of stories of “serious offers”, “genuine interest”, “real offers” and other well-played lies to keep the Town’s only serious offer from ever seeing the light of day. The reason? Mr Feiner promised the property to Martin Hewitt of GameOn 365 and by hook or by crook (the right word), he plans to keep that promise no matter how ill-advised or costly it will be for the Town taxpayers.

That’s one of the predominant issues here. The fact that Mr Feiner made this significant arrangement with Mr Hewitt, et al, before the Town acquired the property through foreclosure is critically important. But it’s not the only factor contaminating this entire process – beyond the physical contamination of the land at 715 Dobbs Ferry Road. It’s also symbolic that Mr Feiner brought in his Board to strengthen this improper deal. Is it merely coincidence or intentional? ABG wholeheartedly believes its intentional. Mr Feiner couldn’t sell the 83-foot inflatable balloon deal by himself as his credibility is shot within the Town. Oh sure, the lamestream media will regurgitate his pablum, and that helps his cause du jour.

But its not enough and his need to add a legitimate air to the deal was desperately required. As he prepped “newbie” Councilman Ken Jones to go along, he merely had to “head tip” toward Councilman Morgan to get him on Board. Fellow discriminator Councilwoman Diana Juettner would go along with his scheme as she too was embroiled in the guilty verdict with Mr Feiner over the Fortress Bible Church discrimination case. That left Councilman Sheehan, who went along but was later thrown under the bus when Mr Feiner challenged petition signatures witnessed by Mr Sheehan, claiming Sheehan lied as to his permanent home address. Nice.

During this time, Mr Feiner actively ignored the 20-years worth of other foreclosable properties throughout the Town due to non-payment of taxes. That is, until a G10 resident stumbled upon “secreted” paperwork in Town Hall that was not supposed to be viewed by the public! The papers listed information as to how the Town was owed over $20 million dollars in back property taxes and should have been pursued by the Town through foreclosure. This discovery was a revelation! The Town had just been found guilty of discrimination in federal court and upheld in federal appeals court and being forced to settle, having to pay $6.5 million dollars with this guilty verdict. You’ll recall that the discrimination against the Church was trumpeted by Mr Feiner and backed by Ms Juettner. Once this “new” information was exposed*, Mr Feiner immediately offered a Tax Amnesty program to the twenty-plus year’s worth of offenders. The illegality of what he was doing was questioned by many, but since Mr Feiner has no trouble ignoring laws he dislikes, he simply shoved this one aside and began his Deflection Campaign for amnesty.

We’d be remiss if we didn’t mention the $1.2 million a year the Town was now losing yearly because Mr Feiner chose to not renew the WestHelp lease in Valhalla. So with some quick accounting in broad strokes, the Town has cumulatively lost:
$20+M from outstanding tax arrears,
$2.4M from WestHelp (so far),
$6.5M from Fortress Bible Church guilty verdict,
$3.5M from Frank’s Nursery
$9M for underinsured tree death lawsuit
Sub Total lost to taxpayers by Mr Feiner: $40,200,000.

What’s missing here are the assorted financial fees for consultants, legal teams, court expenses and, well, you get the idea: there are many ancillary expenses that the Unincorporated Town taxpayers have been forced to pay for Mr Feiner’s illegal, irreverent and bad behavior. ABG has asked before why both he and Ms Juettner have not lost their law licenses as they are officers of the court and must adhere to the law, not break it? Isn’t being found guilty in Federal Court enough validation to endorse this?

During the entire GameOn 365 back-room debacle deal to court and the subsequent intended handoff of the property at 715 Dobbs Ferry Road, we’re suspect that Mr Feiner has been coaching Mr Hewitt either directly or indirectly as to how to proceed to ensure he and his newly formed company receive the property. During this entire time, Mr Feiner has engaged a concerted misinformation scheme to discredit Elm Street Sports’ $3.5M cash offer for the property. Ironically, Mr Feiner and the Board have always had the right to make a private sale of the property to whomever they wanted. But this was never about making a sale of the property. This was always about Mr Feiner finding a way to “gift” the property to a personal group of friends without the resources necessary to purchase it. Without investor money GameOn 365, is simply a paper company without any resources, location or staff.

To continue the con game which all of these players have been engaged in, now GameOn 365, possibly under advice of counsel (Mr Feiner?), have begun a new chapter in their Book of Deceit. They claim to be moving forward with an alternate plan: building their ridiculously out of place sports bubble on the Golf Driving Range owned by the Vizioli family. The Vizioli family is currently one of the property owners with over $1M in tax arrears since 2008 that the Town has not bothered to collect. But, they have missed the tax amnesty period originally offered and can no longer pay the back taxes without penalties.

Another ploy GameOn 365 appears to be perpetrating on the community with Mr Feiner and Mr Madden’s approval, even endorsement, is to bring in other for-profit corporations to partner with them to offer varied services under the umbrella. The plans have now gone from a sports bubble and soccer field to a sports bubble, several sports fields and other facilities on the “new” site, truncating the driving range. You may recall several years ago that Mr Feiner attempted to “steal” the Vizioli Golf Driving Range by eminent domain to build a police station/town court complex. When that failed, a developer investigated building a senior housing complex that the Town then shot down. Now, all bets are apparently off for the Vizioli’s as they forego preserving their business and Mr Feiner is right on board with them to hand it over to GameOn 365. So, the hell with the taxpayers in the surrounding residential communities and what they want. In fact, now GameOn 365 has asked the Town to rezone the 32-acre area to benefit only them, yet again. This is quite a bit larger that the (almost) 7-acres of the Frank’s Nursery property.

ABG is confident that the Town Planning Commissioner and the Town Supervisor will resort to the spot-zoning Mr Feiner’s beloved GameOn 365 requires to proceed. The Town Board will invariably vote in favor of the spot-zoning change as they are used to going along to get along. At worst, it will be three in favor of the spot-zoning and possibly two against. This fight against spot-zoning, government officials assisting for-profit and even not-for-profit companies pitted against other, non-favored for profit companies is simply wrong. It could be worth an Ethics Board complaint, but their crafty use of words will yield little, if no results slowing or stopping the Town Board.

Another downside of Mr Feiner’s pursuit to illegally influence the results for a for-profit company, such as GameOn 365, is that the property at 715 Dobbs Ferry Road, the former Frank’s Nursery, will continue to languish. Mr Feiner’s greed to have his favored GameOn 365 receive the property over Elm Street Sports, who offered twice the amount of GameOn 365 in cash and would assume the contamination cleanup, has effectively flushed that deal away. Then Mr Feiner said other companies expressed interest in spending even more than the $3.5M Elm Street Sports offer. This was apparently another Feiner lie. Each time residents asked him who offered more and how much, he refused to say. Ah, yes, open government.

What all of this really means is that a) the Town will not be making $3.5 million dollars in cash; b) the property will not be remediated of the contamination that exists; c) once the illegal spot-zoning takes effect, no other company, investor or developer will look to develop the property; d) the “big need” for fields that was the impetus and justification for Mr Feiner to push his favored GameOn 365 to getting the property at 715 Dobbs Ferry Road, is now moot. Only in Bizarro Greenburgh. It has to change. Only then, will we get A Better Greenburgh.

* Mr Feiner is only for open government when its convenient for him to share information or he gets caught not being forthcoming with information. Such was the case here.

Ethics Anyone, or Foxes in the Henhouse?

It seems residents and taxpayers are repeatedly treated to more and more questionable, and in fact illegal, actions through Mr Feiner’s seemingly untouchable administration. Since we know we cannot curtail these actions, we’re forced to seek remedy through other means. On the surface, one might think the Ethics Board would be an avenue worth pursuit for this satisfaction. Once traveling down that avenue, you will soon find the well-honed and notorious roadblocks craftily set in place to dissuade your pursuit of justice, remedy or anything close to it.

In September of 2013, Town resident Thomas Bock submitted a registered a complaint against Town Attorney Timothy Lewis for several ethics violations relating to the Democratic Primary election petitions. Simply, he lodged an Ethics Complaint against Town Attorney Timothy Lewis because of the actions Mr Lewis took for getting Democratic Primary ballot petition signatures for Town Supervisor Paul Feiner and Town Clerk Judith Beville and swearing to their legitimacy as Town Attorney. Without fear of being found guilty of an ethics violation by an Ethics Board appointed by Mr Feiner, the preordained outcome for Mr Lewis was no surprise to anyone, especially Mr Lewis.

If you read our post, “Ethical Challenge Dismissed By Ethical Challenge” of September 24, 2013, (http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6521092612847585726#editor/target=post;postID=4973448450613789264;onPublishedMenu=posts;onClosedMenu=posts;postNum=17;src=postname)  

you can see some of the disingenuous bloviating that takes place by members of the Ethics Review Board. In fact, several members of the Ethics Board brought up Chicago politics as though to compare Greenburgh to the worst political model in hopes of validating a foregone conclusion for “one of their own”. Interestingly, the Ethics Board is chaired by Jack McLaughlin. The Planning Board is chaired by his wife, Fran. He should recuse himself with any claim involving planning, zoning, departments, or employees. Ethical, unethical? Your call. 

As can be found on Mr Feiner’s blog during the waning days of his still practicing open government, there are numerous statements validating other violations, specifically Mr Feiner’s violations, such as what’s listed below from his 2007 blog (ABG has added the bold highlight):

“Feiner has been caught lying to the Town's Ethics Board about lawyer Mark Weingarten's involvement in a March 2004 fundraiser that netted Feiner tens of thousands of dollars in contributions from developers with applications pending before the town. 

In his October 6, 2004 letter to the Ethics Board, Feiner made no mention of Weingarten when he described the $1000 Feiner picked up that night from Michael D'Allessio, the developer who had an application pending before the town to cut trees in Edgemont. Feiner wrote as follows: "Mr. D'Alessio attended a fundraiser that William LoSapio of Gregory's Restaurant in White Plains hosted for my campaign account on March 29th."

Here’s another quote from that same post:

“See The Scarsdale Inquirer, "Residents Question Feiner on Campaign Contributions," September 17, 2004. Mr. Feiner also omits to mention in his letter that Mr. Weingarten was then representing Mr. D’Alessio and that, in addition to Mr. D’Alessio’s $1,000, his law firm contributed another $500."

On Wednesday, August 1, 2007, the Town made public the actual invitation to the event. The invitation, dated March 4, 2004, was on the letterhead of Weingarten's law firm and says as follows:

"On Monday, March 29, 2004 . . . Bill Losapio and I will be hosting a fundraiser for Greenburgh Town Supervisor Paul Feiner." Weingarten cited Feiner’s “strong support for economic development within the Town of Greenburgh” and said, “I know you have been helpful to Supervisor Feiner in the past. . . A minimum contribution of $250 is recommended. Paul has earned our support in the past. . . .” Contributions were to be mailed to Weingarten’s law firm, to Weingarten attention, care of his secretary.

The invitation was mailed to numerous developers with applications pending before the town.”    

William LoSapio’s reward for his fund raising efforts was to be appointed by Mr Feiner to the Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals. He raised money for Mr Feiner and thereafter gets appointed to the Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals. How much do the other seats usually cost?

In 2010, community leader Bob Bernstein brought a verified ethics complaint against two residents, Jordan Glass and Nicholas DeCicco, both attorneys, who were both serving as volunteer members of the Zoning Board of Appeals. For Glass, he represented Deli Delicious’ Ernest Tartaglione’s brother and at the time leased space in Valhalla from Tartaglione’s real estate corporation. Tartaglione was an applicant before the Zoning and Planning Boards. For DeCicco, it was about attending a fund-raising event held for him by Irvington developer Chuck Pateman, and sitting on the Zoning Board as he ran for the vacated County Legislative office against Hastings-on-Hudson’s Mary Jane Shimsky. Pateman, an area developer, hosted the DeCicco fund raiser at his home in Irvington, NY. while representing Zoning Board of Appeals applicant Ernest Tartaglione and owner of Deli Delicious in Fulton Park pursuing expansion. 

Mr Bernstein’s persistence with the verified complaints against these two residents (Glass and DeCicco) exposed the web of deception. The Board of Ethics had no choice but to negotiate a settlement which resulted in Glass and DeCicco’s “voluntary” resignations.

There was a third person involved in this deception appointed to the Town’s Ethics Review Board, Mark Constantine, also a local Attorney with an area practice and a resident of Tarrytown. Mr. Constantine filled the vacant “Republican seat” and has served ever since. Mr Constantine was the co-sponsor with Pateman of the above fund-raiser! 

Concerned citizen/activist Hal Samis lodged a Verified Complaint against Mr. Constantine on February 15, 2011 on similar grounds to those cited by Mr. Bernstein. Mr Samis’ complaint was in reference to Mr Constantine’s involvement as a sponsor with Mr Pateman of the fund raiser. Again, there were overlapping connections among these persons and all with direct or indirect involvement with an Applicant before the ZBA, Ernest Tartaglione owner of “Deli Delicious”!

Read more at: (Thursday, March 17, 2011); Paul, You Have Some Explaining To Do!
(http://abettergreenburgh.blogspot.com/2011/03/paul-you-have-some-explaining-to-do.html)

The Ethics Board properly referred Mr Samis’ complaint to the Town Board, citing a conflict of interest as Mr Constantine is a fellow Board member. While the Town Board has been repeatedly reminded of the need for a decision, they have refused to take any action. The charges against Mr Constantine are for three violations of the Town's Ethics Code: 570-7, 570-4(D) and 570-4(L)(2) relating to/with Prohibited Political Activities and Standards of Conduct. By definition, Mr. Constantine is an Agency Member and thus subject to the Code. Without any action by the Town Board, whether to clear or indict him, Mr. Constantine has been free to continue unrestricted to advocate and to vote on the Ethics Board since 2011. This is Mr Feiner playing fast and furious by his own rules. Who on any of these appointed Boards will challenge him?

So, to review, Mr Feiner appoints LoSapio, Constantine, DeCicco and Glass to maintain control of the various Town Boards. Tartaglione has a numerous zoning applications (appeals) before the Zoning Board of Appeals (LoSapio, DeCicco), the Planning Board (Chairwoman Fran McLaughlin – not that we’re accusing her of any impropriety) and the Building Department by Tartaglione to approve his building changes. When it is discovered that these players are implicated in Pateman’s fund raising efforts, it seems like the collusive players just dig in their heels preparing for the seige. To be forthcoming regarding Mr DeCicco, he did return the money collected and given to him from the Pateman fund raiser, claiming he had no knowledge of the relationships between Pateman and Tartaglione and stepped down from his Zoning Board position when everything came to light.

Another appointed and non-voting member of the Ethics Review Board, Mr Joseph Malara, whom we understand is a Somers, not Greenburgh, resident. He too, “serves” on the Ethics Review Board, providing the unpaid service of Council to the Board. Even so, he regularly tenders his (albeit Mr Feiner’s) point of view without being asked for a legal opinion, participating as though he were a “regular” Ethics Board member. His actions remind us of Town Attorney Tim Lewis’ constant input during Town Board meetings. He is there to render legal opinions if requested by the Board. Ironically, when they do ask, he typically suggests not giving an answer and to seek outside council. 

ABG has stated before that having Mr Feiner and his Town Board being reviewed by a Board appointed by Mr Feiner creates a host of new ethical challenges in a Town bereft of ethics. How can we have a Ethics Board rule on complaints against the same people who appointed them have the public expect a fair outcome? We can’t and probably never will. 

Mr DeCicco resigned from the Zoning Board but was appointed by Mr Feiner as an alternate to the Planning Board. Mr Pateman is no longer representing Ernest Tartaglione although Tartaglione is currently before, and trying the get approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the same project they turned down 2-years ago. The exception to this offering is he has increased the impervious surfaces, seeking to pave the entire property. Mr Malara continues to be the Council for the Ethics Board while living far beyond the Town line. Mr McLaughlin has not recused himself from Ethics Board decisions involving other Boards. Mr Constantine continues to be in property tax arrears with numerous properties he owns within the Town. He desperately needs the flawed “Tax Amnesty” program Mr Feiner seeks to initiate as another Feiner Folly to collect over $21 million owed the Town – and accrued during Mr Feiner’s tenure. The other Board members sit unscathed by all of these ethical issues – for now. The Town needs some major overhauls or we will never have A Better Greenburgh.

Ethical Challenge Dismissed By Ethical Challenge

A verified citizen’s complaint against Greenburgh Town Supervisor Paul J. Feiner (“Feiner”) and Judith Beville, Greenburgh Town Clerk, (“Beville”) alleging violations of the Greenburgh Code of Ethics in connection with their having solicited or accepted services in aid of their political campaigns for reelection from Town Attorney Timothy Lewis was/is in violation of Chapter 570-7(A)  thereof, and against each of them for aiding each other in the violation of such section of the Ethics Code in violation of Chapter 570-13 therein. There’s a mouthful of the party of the first part and the party of the second part and so on. Simply, Greenburgh resident Thomas Bock lodged an Ethics Complaint against Town Attorney Timothy Lewis because of the actions he took for getting signatures for and swearing to their legitimacy as Town Attorney. And, never fearing being found guilty of an ethics violation by an Ethics Board he appointed, the preordained outcome was no surprise.

Listed below are the points highlighted in Mr Bock’s complaint:
1. Complaintant is a citizen of the Town of Greenburgh
2. Feiner is the Town Supervisor of the Town of Greenburgh, a position he has held for the past 22 years.
3. Beville is the Town Clerk of the Town of Greenburgh, a position she has held since 2008.
4. Chapter 570-7 of the Greenburgh Code of Ethics is entitled, “Prohibited Political Activities” and subsection A thereof is entitled, “Contributions.” Subsection 1 thereof states in pertinent part that “No Public Officer . . . shall directly, or indirectly, solicit or accept any contribution or money or services or thing of value for any political party, campaign committee or any Candidate from any Appointed Officer or Employee. . . .”
5. As Town Supervisor, Feiner is a “Public Officer” within the meaning of Section 570-7(A)(1). As Town Clerk, Beville is likewise a “Public Officer” within the meaning of that same section.
6. Section 570-3(A) of the Code defines “Appointed Officer” as any “person who is appointed as an official of the Town, including a person appointed as a department head or deputy department had of a Town department. . . .”
7. As Town Attorney, Timothy Lewis is an Appointed Officer within the meaning of the Greenburgh Ethics Code.
8. Earlier this year, Feiner and Beville each asked for the endorsement of the Greenburgh Town Democratic Committee to run for reelection to his position as Town Supervisor. However, at its annual convention on May 24, 2013, neither Feiner nor Beville received the party committee’s endorsement.
9. Because neither Feiner or Beville received the party’s endorsement, in order for them to obtain the Democratic Party’s nomination for their respective town positions, Feiner and Beville had to create their own petition, obtain at least 1,000 signatures from Democrats registered to vote in the Town of Greenburgh, file such petition with the Westchester County Board of Elections, and win a majority of Democratic votes cast in the Democratic Primary to be held on September 10, 2013.
10. Obtaining the required number of signatures to get on the ballot requires many hours of work to make sure that the persons whose signatures are obtained are in fact registered to vote as Democrats in the Town and reside therein.
11. The petitioning period this year ran from June 1, 2013 to July 8, 2013.
12. During that period of time, and specifically between June 6, 2013 and July 7, 2013, Town Attorney Timothy Lewis carried petitions for Feiner and Beville, obtaining a total of 58 signatures on five separate sheets. A copies of these signatures, each of each was signed and verified by Lewis, is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
13. By accepting signatures obtained by Lewis to put them on the ballot for the Democratic Primary, Respondents Feiner and Beville each violated Chapter 570-7(A)(1) of the Greenburgh Ethics Code, which bars public officers of the Town from directly or indirectly soliciting or accepting contributions of services for a political campaign from an appointed official of the Town.
14. Chapter 570-13 of the Town’s Code of Ethics is entitled, “Inducement of Violation.” It states in pertinent part that “[n]o Public Officer . . . shall induce any other person to violate, attempt to induce any other person to violate, or aid any other person in violating, any provision of this chapter.
15. The term “Public Officer” is defined in Chapter 570-3 of the Code of Ethics to include “both elected and appointed officers as herein defined.”
16. Town Attorney Timothy Lewis is a Public Officer for purposes of Chapter 570-13 of the Code of Ethics. Respondents Feiner and Beville are also Public Officers for purposes of that section.
17. By obtaining and delivering to Respondents Feiner and Beville signatures to get them on the ballot, in violation of Chapter 570-7(A)(1), which prohibits the solicitation or acceptance of such services or things of value to a political campaign from an appointed official of the Town, Respondent Lewis violated Chapter 570-13 by aiding Feiner and Beville in violating Chapter 570-7(A)(1) of the Code.
18. Similarly, by accepting signatures to get them on the ballot from Respondent Lewis, Respondents Feiner and Beville violated Chapter 570-13 by aiding Lewis in violating Chapter 570-13.

The Ethics Committee, having previously visited with Mr Feiner while they were coming into Town Hall, was followed by Mr Bock. Once in the F. Lee Jackson conference room, they continued discussing whatever they might have been discussing outside, with a sitting member making a few disparaging comments about several religions with a tasteless joke. How ironic. Ethics, anyone? Once they began, they asked the audience members to identify themselves and they did the same. Their regular order of business transpired quickly and they came to the Ethics Complaint. They each had received copies of it and were ready to discuss the complaint.

Having all received a copy of the complaint and read it prior to this meeting, they began by questioning what the definition of “service” is. This was akin to to former President Bill Clinton asking what the definition of “is” is? Being reviewed by a Board that was appointed by Mr Feiner finds us in a quandary of yet another ethical challenge in a Town bereft of ethics. How can we have a ethics board adjudicate the same person who appointed them to their position and then hope to get a fair outcome? We can’t and probably never will.

In fact, Mr Feiner posted on his own blog, back when he probably still thought transparency meant posting the truth, about his lying to the Ethics Board, comprised of some different members:

8/02/2007 3:37 PM

feiner caught lying to town's ethics board said...49

Feiner has been caught lying to the Town's Ethics Board about lawyer Mark Weingarten's involvement in a March 2004 fundraiser that netted Feiner tens of thousands of dollars in contributions from developers with applications pending before the town.

In his October 6, 2004 letter to the Ethics Board, Feiner made no mention of Weingarten when he described the $1000 Feiner picked up that night from Michael D'Allessio, the developer who had an application pending before the town to cut trees in Edgemont.

Feiner wrote as follows: "Mr. D'Alessio attended a fundraiser that William LoSapio of Gregory's Restaurant in White Plains hosted for my campaign account on March 29th."

Bernstein, who first raised the issue of Feiner's ethical problems, wrote to the Ethics Board on October 18, 2004 and said Feiner was playing fast and loose with the truth.

Bernstein wrote: "In fact, Mr. Feiner told The Scarsdale Inquirer that the fundraiser was organized by Mark P. Weingarten, a member of the White Plains law firm of DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Tartaglia Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP, and that it was Mr. Weingarten, who issued the invitations on behalf of Mr. Feiner’s campaign committee. See The Scarsdale Inquirer, "Residents Question Feiner on Campaign Contributions," September 17, 2004. Mr. Feiner also omits to mention in his letter that Mr. Weingarten was then representing Mr. D’Alessio and that, in addition to Mr. D’Alessio’s $1,000, his law firm contributed another $500."

On Wednesday, August 1, 2007, the Town made public the actual invitation to the event. The invitation, dated March 4, 2004, was on the letterhead of Weingarten's law firm and says as follows:

"On Monday, March 29, 2004 . . . Bill Losapio and I will be hosting a fundraiser for Greenburgh Town Supervisor Paul Feiner." Weingarten cited Feiner’s “strong support for economic development within the Town of Greenburgh” and said, “I know you have been helpful to Supervisor Feiner in the past. . . A minimum contribution of $250 is recommended. Paul has earned our support in the past. . . .” Contributions were to be mailed to Weingarten’s law firm, to Weingarten attention, care of his secretary.

The invitation was mailed to numerous developers with applications pending before the town.

The invitation proves that Bernstein was right: Feiner was lying to the Ethics Board in October 2004 when he tried to claim someone other than Weingarten was responsible for the fundraiser.

Other documents show that Feiner lied to the Ethics Board about other matters pertaining to that fundraiser as well.

So while Mr Bock and others lodge complaints against Mr Feiner, he has appointed members to the Ethics Board that will be sympathetic to him and his lies. One of the current members on the Zoning Board is William Losapio (above) who held the fund raiser for Mr Feiner. He also voted on the Westhab project as well as other Feiner-centric projects that residents were vehemently against. So, how can residents be assured of getting any real and honest decisions from him when they file with the Board or go against one of the Town leaders? They can’t. Nor can they appeal a rendered decision.

If we look at any of the major projects that have been perpetrated in many of the neighborhhoods throughout our Town seems to be represented by DelBello, Donnellan, Weingarten, Wise and Wiederkehr, LLP. Since this law firm has actively participated in Mr Feiner’s previous campaign, it’s no wonder that Mr Feiner will make a motion to have the Town Board become the Lead Agency and “floor the accelerator” for the process to sail through every required review process. In the event one of the reviewing entities votes against a DelBello, Donnellan, Weingarten, Wise and Wiederkehr, LLP client, the Lead Agency has the power to ignore their recommendation(s) and simply move the project along. For instance, when Westhab petitioned to change the zoning for their subsidized housing project at 22 Tarrytown Road and the Zoning Board voted against the change, Mr Feiner told the Town Board to ignore that recommendation and the Town Board changed the zoning and continually greased the project past every bump in the road.

Ethical behavior needs to begin with the Ethics Board as well as the other Boards in our Town. The Ethics Board’s cavalier and wanton disregard for the real issues lodged against Mr Lewis and the others are easier skirted because the control of these appointed Board is just that: controlled. This needs to change. The decision was laboriously discussed even though the Ethics chair succinctly described the issue and the recognizable ethics violation, poised for a vote. The three other members able to vote, whose position was echoed by the volunteer attorney, providing a service that their explanation deemed not a service, claimed the heart of the matter was a definition of service. They twisted the issue to be about Mr Lewis’ right to participate in community service gathering petitions. One member even went so far as to compare this to the civil rights movement of the 1960s, which was in no way what was inferred in the complaint or the explanation given by the complainant. It was a very well-done, Feiner-like deflection.

This issue was a simple one for anyone without an agenda, but changed to nothing more than pleasing their benefactor (Feiner). Mr Lewis acquired signatures for Paul Feiner. It was a service that would be paid for if volunteers were not available. It was also a thing of value and both of these were clearly stated in the Greenburgh Ethics code and the gist of the complaint. Mr Bock explained that Mr Lewis could place a yard sign in his own yard, a bumper sticker on his own car, and get signatures for any other candidates that were not a member of the Town of Greenburgh government. As an attorney he was the witness to the ballot petition signatures, similar to that of a Notary Public which is a service that is normally paid for. While the three members of the Ethics Board voted to dismiss the suit, the issue of an ethical decision being heard and made by this ethics board will certainly impact whether or not others will step forward to lodge a complaint. It’s exactly the outcome that was expected and Mr Feiner as well as Mr Lewis knew the outcome. These members should have a shelf life and be replaced by an independent vote by the public to the position for a limited specific time period. It would help make for A Better Greenburgh.