On Wednesday, June 17, 2015, Hartsdale Park Association (hartsdalepark@yahoo.com) sent a letter to its membership regarding the important zoning change the Town Board is considering to benefit GameOn 365, a for-profit commercial entity. It details many of the aspects this decision will have as it will negatively impact the entire Town, not just the Dobbs Ferry corridor.
Dear Hartsdale Park Residents:
Much of the discussion in the case of Game-On's request for special rezoning seems to be focused on the Game-On use of the Vizioli property, the former golf driving range. That is only part of the proposal before the Town Board. Their proposal is to insert a commercial use ( indoor/outdoor recreation center) into a residentially zoned area by special permit. Its impact goes far beyond the Vizioli property.
The amendment to the Zoning Ordinance proposed by David Steinmetz, attorney for Game-On, requires the Town Board to grant a special permit if the applicant meets certain conditions. There is no discretion involved. If the applicant meets all of the conditions spelled out in the code, the permit becomes a right.
The problem is once you allow any commercial entity in a residential zone, there is nothingto stop that use from being expanded OR for it to happen anywhere else in Greenburgh! This is a VERY dangerous precedent to set.
Suppose Game-On receives approval and builds a 107,000 sq.ft. building, then is sold or goes out of business. The community would have a huge empty building with 300 parking spaces and other infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, etc.) in place. Any number of fairly low-traffic-impact businesses might want to locate there, and depending on the financial standing of the Town, such commercial use might be encouraged. Also, there is nothing to stop other commercial uses from seeking entry into OTHER residential districts. If the Town does it once, other commercial uses will seek approval.
Paul Feiner argues that Dobbs Ferry Road is already a recreational and/or commercial corridor - Frank's, East Rumbrook Park, Carlson's Nursery, Elmwood Country Club, Elmwood Day Camp, Fairview Fire House. All of the uses cited (other than Frank's Nursery) -- parks, farms, membership clubs, camps, firehouses -- are allowed in one-family residence districts as permitted uses or by special permit. They are listed as the residential and related uses Zoning Ordinance. Fully enclosed commercial recreational facilities are differentiated and listed as "commercial.”
The focus of our opposition must be on not introducing any kind of commercial use into residentially zoned districts. Once they get a toe in the door, there is no going back!
Some may argue that we already have done this when assisted living facilities were introduced into residential zones. However, "health care facilities” have been Special Permit uses for more than two decades and these are residential uses. The principal change in recent years was to allow them on lots of four acres instead of requiring ten acres.
Creating a new zone is a discretionary act by the Town Board. If the Board chooses not to entertain a requested rezone, there is nothing an applicant can do. In other words, the Town cannot be sued in court.
The proposed change is not only about the Vizioli property. It affects all properties zoned R-30 that are greater than 20 acres on a state road. Thus, the Elmwood Country Club Property across from the Vizioli properly on Dobbs Ferry Road and the Knollwood Country Club property on Knollwood Road would also be able to request special permits if the code amendment is approved. Furthermore, if this code amendment is approved by the Town Board properties that are not 20 acres or are not located on a state road could seek variances from those provisions. Sunningdale Country Club on Underhill Road is a good example, though it is more than 20 acres in size. As an example, Mr. Steinmetz was successful in getting a code change to permit assisted living facilities (Brightview) on properties of four acres or more located within 200 feet of a state road.
I attended and spoke at the April 8, 2015 Town Council meeting. I was present for the entire meeting, which lasted for over 3 hours. During the public comment portion the ONLY people to speak IN FAVOR of Game-On were soccer coaches from Tarrytown!
As President of your Hartsdale Park Civic Association I am urging you to contact Supervisor Feiner and the Town Council Members immediately if you object to Game-On’s request for this “special consideration.”
Game-On is welcome to come to Greenburgh, BUT NOT on Dobbs Ferry Road. There are many other sites, including several in Tarrytown, already zoned for commercial use where this type of facility is more appropriate. We say, “Game-On please GO THERE!”
Here are the Town Officials’ email addresses for your convenience:
Supervisor Paul Feiner - pfeiner@greenburghny.com
Town Council Members:
Kevin Morgan - kmorgan@greenburghny.com,
Ken Jones - kjones@greenburghny.com,
Francis Sheehan - fsheehan@greenburghny.com,
Diana Juettner - djuettner@greenburghny.com
This is an extremely important matter to all of us. Your support is needed and much appreciated.
Yours sincerely,
Celia P. Novo, President
Hartsdale Park Civic Association
Showing posts with label Morgan Frank’s Nursery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Morgan Frank’s Nursery. Show all posts
Friday, June 26, 2015
Saturday, June 6, 2015
A Letter To The Planning Board
Former Justice and Attorney Herb Rosenberg recently sent a letter to the Planning Board and its members discussing why the Zoning Change proposal, veiled as the "GameOn 365 proposal" on the Visioli's Golf Driving Range property, is wrong for the Town, our residents, unfairly represented, and in our view, seemingly a done-deal. ABG believes it is a done-deal for several reasons. A) Mr Feiner has continually stumped for GameOn 365 amidst a 5-year public outcry against the proposal. B) Mr Feiner has attempted to violate the law to help these outsiders and ignore and disrespect the residents throughout the Town. C) Mr Feiner has adopted and used often his newest catch phrase, which is that people should have, "confidence in the process" (they don't); and finally, we believe Mr Feiner instructed Messrs. Morgan and Jones to tow his line or be "Sonya'd". Councilpersons Juettner and Sheehan are against the proposal for numerous reasons which we'll get into in another article.
Here is Justice Rosenberg's unedited letter:
6/4/2015 12:14:15 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Game On/Planning Board
To the Planning Board
My name is Herbert Rosenberg. I am retired lawyer and a former judge. I am a stranger to you all except to Fran McLaughlin, who I have met before and we have had some limited contact. You may recall an Op-Ed article that I wrote that was published in the Scarsdale Inquirer on April 17, with the title A GameOn 365's plans set a dangerous precedent in town of Greenburgh, (the title was written by the editor, not by me, though I agree with it).
I attended last evening's Planning Board meeting because I am interested in the Game On matter. Please don't take this personally, but I was quite astonished and disappointed at what I saw. This long letter will explain why.
Let me put aside the question of whether there should or should not have been a pre-submission conference on the Game On application. What I am saying is that what took place was the wrong discussion. The application is for a zoning change to Code section 285-11 that cuts across all of unincorporated Greenburgh, yet the proposed zoning change was not discussed at all. What is not before you is the approval of the Game On project (which would be a site plan approval) and such an approval can be considered only if and after a zoning change is adopted, yet the Game On project was the only thing that was discussed.
This is what happened.
1. Mr. Steinmetz and his colleagues presented an extensive and detailed description of the proposed Game On business. It took more than one hour. As one would have expected, he painted a glowing picture, with much overstatement of what will actually happen there, some attractive photos of the site and films of traffic movements that were quite unreal, and with no mention of the weaknesses and problems that will occur at the site and affect the neighboring communities. He even made an incorrect statement on an important point. One Planning Board member asked whether Game On had considered another location, and Mr. Steinmetz answered that there is no other available site in Greenburgh. That is not true. Landmark at Eastview has made it plain that they would like to have a recreational facility such as a sports facility at its site, and Landmark is in Greenburgh. Mr. Steinmetz spent about fifteen seconds on the subject of the zoning change, making the short statement that if the zoning application is adopted, it will also include the Elmwood Country Club and the Knollwood Country Club.
2. Several members of the Planning Board asked some questions about the project, how could it be made better for local kids and seniors, whether another site had been considered, etc. Not a single question was asked about the zoning change and its consequences and effect upon the rest of unincorporated Greenburgh.
3. At the end one community resident was given a very short time to speak -- not at all sufficient to discuss the issues involved.
But there is an overriding question, and that has to be addressed and answered before the Game On project can be considered. That overriding question is whether there should be a zoning change that would permit commercial uses on all R-30 residential districts that fit the specifications -- not less than 20 acres, with 400 feet frontage, on a state road. It is the overriding question because the proposed zoning change is not limited to the Dobbs Ferry Road site, but applies to many other areas of unincorporated Greenburgh. And it is the overriding question because the Planning Board has to first conclude that such an unincorporated area-wide zoning change is desirable for the Town before it can consider whether the Game On project is a good one. Indeed, even if the Game On proposed project were not controversial, the question of whether to change a zoning change that applies to all R-30 zones in unincorporated Greenburgh would have to be considered.
What surprised me last evening was that no member of the Planning Board asked any question about this zoning change. All the questions were about the Game On project. I commend Mr. Steinmetz for his skill in focusing complete attention on the project to the exclusion of the zoning change issue. His presentation was so well done that to the listeners in the audience it seemed that the Planning Board was unaware of the fact that this hearing involved an unincorporated area-wide zoning change rather than a site plan review of the Game On project. Had Mr. Steinmetz and his colleagues not taken up almost all the available time, and had some members of the group opposing the zoning change been permitted to speak, the zoning change would have been introduced and discussed, to the benefit of the Planning Board.
Mr. Steinmetz asked you for an indication of how the Planning Board was leaning. He said, or indicated, that if the Planning Board is negative, then he and his client would not waste the large sum of money incurred in doing all the environmental and related work. (Similarly, the Town would be spared the significant expenses that are involved in continuing the exploration of this zoning change.) I think that it is fair to say that the comments of the Planning Board members strongly communicated to the listeners that with few tweaks the Game On project will be approved, almost as though there was no zoning issue at all. By the Planning Board not even discussing the proposed zoning change Mr. Steinmetz is entitled to presume that zoning will not be an issue or a deterrent, and so both Mr. Steinmetz and his client will incur heavy costs proceeding with the effort, and so will the Town.
Is that really the message that the Planning Board wants to convey? Have you already concluded that the zoning change will not be an issue and does not need to be discussed? Have you concluded that other R-30 zones will not be subject to the possibility, perhaps likelihood, of commercial uses? That other R-30 districts, and R-40 districts, will not be added to the list of eligible sites for commercial use by variances regarding size and other business uses? Mr. Steinmetz mentioned the Elmwood and Knollwood Country Clubs, but he gave more away -- in a letter to the Town Board dated May 21, 2015, relating to abutter petitions, he raised the possibility that Ato the extent that parcels can be assembled in the R-30 District that satisfy the locational criteria of the draft Zoning Text..."a such assembled parcels would be free to introduce commercial uses under the zoning change." Mr. Steinmetz knows, but he is not telling you, that the possibility of commercial uses being introduced to R-30 one-family districts goes far beyond Elmwood and Knollwood Country Clubs. Real estate developers are not shy or timid.
If you have already concluded that the zoning change will not be an issue that has to be addressed and considered then what you did last evening was alright. I don't think that you have reached that conclusion, but in all fairness you have given that impression. If Game On believes that you have reached that conclusion, as they have good reason to assume, then you have to correct that assumption. You need to do it so that Game On, and also the Town, do not incur the large expenses that are inherent in the application.
I suggest that the way to do it is to notify Game On that at the next meeting of the Planning Board you would like them to attend and discuss the zoning issue, and that you permit some comments by persons who are knowledgeable and who oppose the zoning change. I believe that this is the only way now to be fair to all the parties who have an interest, and also to the Town of Greenburgh.
I should add that the change of zoning, unlike the Game On project, involves policy and not facts. Hence, if you decide not to change the zoning, you can make that decision without hearings, studies, etc. It is what courts call a question of law, not a question of facts, and thus needs no hearings. It enables you to conclude, if you wish, the matter without having to consider the Game On project -- unless, of course, Game On decides to build its project elsewhere in Greenburgh, as it can if it chooses to do so.
Sincerely,
Herbert Rosenberg
Here is Justice Rosenberg's unedited letter:
6/4/2015 12:14:15 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Game On/Planning Board
To the Planning Board
My name is Herbert Rosenberg. I am retired lawyer and a former judge. I am a stranger to you all except to Fran McLaughlin, who I have met before and we have had some limited contact. You may recall an Op-Ed article that I wrote that was published in the Scarsdale Inquirer on April 17, with the title A GameOn 365's plans set a dangerous precedent in town of Greenburgh, (the title was written by the editor, not by me, though I agree with it).
I attended last evening's Planning Board meeting because I am interested in the Game On matter. Please don't take this personally, but I was quite astonished and disappointed at what I saw. This long letter will explain why.
Let me put aside the question of whether there should or should not have been a pre-submission conference on the Game On application. What I am saying is that what took place was the wrong discussion. The application is for a zoning change to Code section 285-11 that cuts across all of unincorporated Greenburgh, yet the proposed zoning change was not discussed at all. What is not before you is the approval of the Game On project (which would be a site plan approval) and such an approval can be considered only if and after a zoning change is adopted, yet the Game On project was the only thing that was discussed.
This is what happened.
1. Mr. Steinmetz and his colleagues presented an extensive and detailed description of the proposed Game On business. It took more than one hour. As one would have expected, he painted a glowing picture, with much overstatement of what will actually happen there, some attractive photos of the site and films of traffic movements that were quite unreal, and with no mention of the weaknesses and problems that will occur at the site and affect the neighboring communities. He even made an incorrect statement on an important point. One Planning Board member asked whether Game On had considered another location, and Mr. Steinmetz answered that there is no other available site in Greenburgh. That is not true. Landmark at Eastview has made it plain that they would like to have a recreational facility such as a sports facility at its site, and Landmark is in Greenburgh. Mr. Steinmetz spent about fifteen seconds on the subject of the zoning change, making the short statement that if the zoning application is adopted, it will also include the Elmwood Country Club and the Knollwood Country Club.
2. Several members of the Planning Board asked some questions about the project, how could it be made better for local kids and seniors, whether another site had been considered, etc. Not a single question was asked about the zoning change and its consequences and effect upon the rest of unincorporated Greenburgh.
3. At the end one community resident was given a very short time to speak -- not at all sufficient to discuss the issues involved.
But there is an overriding question, and that has to be addressed and answered before the Game On project can be considered. That overriding question is whether there should be a zoning change that would permit commercial uses on all R-30 residential districts that fit the specifications -- not less than 20 acres, with 400 feet frontage, on a state road. It is the overriding question because the proposed zoning change is not limited to the Dobbs Ferry Road site, but applies to many other areas of unincorporated Greenburgh. And it is the overriding question because the Planning Board has to first conclude that such an unincorporated area-wide zoning change is desirable for the Town before it can consider whether the Game On project is a good one. Indeed, even if the Game On proposed project were not controversial, the question of whether to change a zoning change that applies to all R-30 zones in unincorporated Greenburgh would have to be considered.
What surprised me last evening was that no member of the Planning Board asked any question about this zoning change. All the questions were about the Game On project. I commend Mr. Steinmetz for his skill in focusing complete attention on the project to the exclusion of the zoning change issue. His presentation was so well done that to the listeners in the audience it seemed that the Planning Board was unaware of the fact that this hearing involved an unincorporated area-wide zoning change rather than a site plan review of the Game On project. Had Mr. Steinmetz and his colleagues not taken up almost all the available time, and had some members of the group opposing the zoning change been permitted to speak, the zoning change would have been introduced and discussed, to the benefit of the Planning Board.
Mr. Steinmetz asked you for an indication of how the Planning Board was leaning. He said, or indicated, that if the Planning Board is negative, then he and his client would not waste the large sum of money incurred in doing all the environmental and related work. (Similarly, the Town would be spared the significant expenses that are involved in continuing the exploration of this zoning change.) I think that it is fair to say that the comments of the Planning Board members strongly communicated to the listeners that with few tweaks the Game On project will be approved, almost as though there was no zoning issue at all. By the Planning Board not even discussing the proposed zoning change Mr. Steinmetz is entitled to presume that zoning will not be an issue or a deterrent, and so both Mr. Steinmetz and his client will incur heavy costs proceeding with the effort, and so will the Town.
Is that really the message that the Planning Board wants to convey? Have you already concluded that the zoning change will not be an issue and does not need to be discussed? Have you concluded that other R-30 zones will not be subject to the possibility, perhaps likelihood, of commercial uses? That other R-30 districts, and R-40 districts, will not be added to the list of eligible sites for commercial use by variances regarding size and other business uses? Mr. Steinmetz mentioned the Elmwood and Knollwood Country Clubs, but he gave more away -- in a letter to the Town Board dated May 21, 2015, relating to abutter petitions, he raised the possibility that Ato the extent that parcels can be assembled in the R-30 District that satisfy the locational criteria of the draft Zoning Text..."a such assembled parcels would be free to introduce commercial uses under the zoning change." Mr. Steinmetz knows, but he is not telling you, that the possibility of commercial uses being introduced to R-30 one-family districts goes far beyond Elmwood and Knollwood Country Clubs. Real estate developers are not shy or timid.
If you have already concluded that the zoning change will not be an issue that has to be addressed and considered then what you did last evening was alright. I don't think that you have reached that conclusion, but in all fairness you have given that impression. If Game On believes that you have reached that conclusion, as they have good reason to assume, then you have to correct that assumption. You need to do it so that Game On, and also the Town, do not incur the large expenses that are inherent in the application.
I suggest that the way to do it is to notify Game On that at the next meeting of the Planning Board you would like them to attend and discuss the zoning issue, and that you permit some comments by persons who are knowledgeable and who oppose the zoning change. I believe that this is the only way now to be fair to all the parties who have an interest, and also to the Town of Greenburgh.
I should add that the change of zoning, unlike the Game On project, involves policy and not facts. Hence, if you decide not to change the zoning, you can make that decision without hearings, studies, etc. It is what courts call a question of law, not a question of facts, and thus needs no hearings. It enables you to conclude, if you wish, the matter without having to consider the Game On project -- unless, of course, Game On decides to build its project elsewhere in Greenburgh, as it can if it chooses to do so.
Sincerely,
Herbert Rosenberg
Monday, June 16, 2014
Impassioned Plea To Maintain Segregated Neighborhood
Several Planning Board meetings ago found a discussion on a proposal made by a family that is looking to combine three parcels of property into one and build a 2400 square foot home on it. The zoning for the neighborhood would allow for a 2800 square foot house. 2400 square feet is not an unwieldy, garish and/or oversized home as new homes go. This project would have most likely gone under the radar for approval except for one speaker. As the Board opened the “hearing” to the public to speak, the first speaker voiced their opinion against the proposal for several reasons which he proceeded to explain. Next up was Town Clerk Judith Beville.
She took to the microphone and speaking softly, introduced herself, stating that she was the Greenburgh Town Clerk. She began discussing “her” community and requested the Board “join” her in imagining going to her neighborhood and proceeded to ask the Board to envision how close her home was to the projected new home proposed across the street from hers. She stated that this was a woodlands, wetlands, nature preserve and protected environment that they would be allowing to to be disturbed. he left out wildlife preserve. The neighborhood is comprised of small colonial style houses. This home will stand out and not blend with the rest of the houses in the neighborhood. Living directly across the street from the proposed home, Ms Beville asked the Board, “ I want you to ask yourselves, ‘would you want this house built near you?’ ”
She proceeded with an impassioned plea saying this was a direct exploitation of this long-time African-American community.There it is. When all other arguments fail, bandy the race card to win the NIMBY argument. How disappointing it is to once again witness discrimination, this time in the form of racism through NIMBY-ism from another member of Mr Feiner's administration. Ms Beville has supported Mr Feiner and his Board's multiple construction projects against the wishes of many more people than the few in attendance this night. You may recall packed Town Hall meetings where neighborhoods protested Westhab, WestHelp, 88 North Rd, Frank's Nursery, Avalon Green, Toll Brothers, Dromore Road. The list goes on. What is different for her than what these other resident taxpayers were seeking to limit? Absolutely nothing!
Her claim was that this home shouldn’t be built because it would be a change to this long time African American community. Interpretation? Her racially segregated neighborhood should stay as it is. This is an example of reverse racism coming from another community leader and member of the Feiner administration. We’ve previously posted that the Feiner Administration condones racism from within and now it’s becoming more exposed.
We invite you to watch these videos linked below from the meeting and ask you to decide. Here are two links we found on YouTube of her speaking at the Planning Board meeting. By the way, these are not videos that ABG produced or created.
Watch her plea here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5a2n-AjUXY
The Board later detailed what constituted a wetland – this property was not. They explained a nature preserve – this property was not. They explained all of her other postulations only to summarize that the space she bemoaned as a waterway was determined to be a drainage ditch that occasionally collected water. They went through each of her points of objection and detailed how she was incorrect.
The Board’s response:
It’s interesting to watch how the "Greenburgh elite", or "1%-ers", who are used to getting their way for what they want, react when something is going to affect them more directly. This time it is Ms Beville and a project across the street from her home. When Westhab was proposing their building in Fulton Park, the residents didn’t say “No” to the proposal. They only asked the Town Board to not change the zoning and keep its size within the confines of the existing zoning. They had worked with the homeless at that location for years while it was a homeless hotel. The Fulton Park Civic Association President, who lived directly across the street, just asked for a more reasonably sized building and a buffer. Ms Beville felt Westhab should be built regardless of the residents concerns and publicly stated as much. But Ms Beville is saying she doesn't want anything built there. That's just wrong.
When Mr Feiner decided that a new Stop and Shop on Rt 119 would be a good thing on Rt 119 and the Glenville Neighborhood objected, they were summarily dismissed. When the Parkway Homes neighborhood found out they were getting yet another group home at 88 North Road, there were two issues at play: the first was that Mr Feiner led the state to that piece of undeveloped property and second, Councilman Jones failed to inform his neighbors and former neighborhood association. When Mr Feiner realized he could get Valhalla votes by letting WestHelp rot, he instructed somebody at the Town to leave it open. Now it needs millions of dollars worth of repairs to be habitable. Why are Valhalla residents, who live at least one mile away from this facility against this affordable/low income housing?
Some of the reasons people object to the developments throughout the Town are invariably told that it will raise our property values, increase diversity, increase tax income and make the Town more vibrant. The reality is usually not what we are told. Objections to the Dromore Road development is about overwhelming the school district, not about low income residents. Objections to the Comprehensive Plan's "nodes" is not about low income residents, but of urbanizing the Town and overwhelming the school system with more kids at an undervalued tax income as apartments pay less in taxes than single family homes. Of course, the elephant in the room is the continued racism emminating from our Town administration. Once this stops, we'll finally have A Better Greenburgh.
She took to the microphone and speaking softly, introduced herself, stating that she was the Greenburgh Town Clerk. She began discussing “her” community and requested the Board “join” her in imagining going to her neighborhood and proceeded to ask the Board to envision how close her home was to the projected new home proposed across the street from hers. She stated that this was a woodlands, wetlands, nature preserve and protected environment that they would be allowing to to be disturbed. he left out wildlife preserve. The neighborhood is comprised of small colonial style houses. This home will stand out and not blend with the rest of the houses in the neighborhood. Living directly across the street from the proposed home, Ms Beville asked the Board, “ I want you to ask yourselves, ‘would you want this house built near you?’ ”
She proceeded with an impassioned plea saying this was a direct exploitation of this long-time African-American community.There it is. When all other arguments fail, bandy the race card to win the NIMBY argument. How disappointing it is to once again witness discrimination, this time in the form of racism through NIMBY-ism from another member of Mr Feiner's administration. Ms Beville has supported Mr Feiner and his Board's multiple construction projects against the wishes of many more people than the few in attendance this night. You may recall packed Town Hall meetings where neighborhoods protested Westhab, WestHelp, 88 North Rd, Frank's Nursery, Avalon Green, Toll Brothers, Dromore Road. The list goes on. What is different for her than what these other resident taxpayers were seeking to limit? Absolutely nothing!
Her claim was that this home shouldn’t be built because it would be a change to this long time African American community. Interpretation? Her racially segregated neighborhood should stay as it is. This is an example of reverse racism coming from another community leader and member of the Feiner administration. We’ve previously posted that the Feiner Administration condones racism from within and now it’s becoming more exposed.
We invite you to watch these videos linked below from the meeting and ask you to decide. Here are two links we found on YouTube of her speaking at the Planning Board meeting. By the way, these are not videos that ABG produced or created.
Watch her plea here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5a2n-AjUXY
The Board later detailed what constituted a wetland – this property was not. They explained a nature preserve – this property was not. They explained all of her other postulations only to summarize that the space she bemoaned as a waterway was determined to be a drainage ditch that occasionally collected water. They went through each of her points of objection and detailed how she was incorrect.
The Board’s response:
It’s interesting to watch how the "Greenburgh elite", or "1%-ers", who are used to getting their way for what they want, react when something is going to affect them more directly. This time it is Ms Beville and a project across the street from her home. When Westhab was proposing their building in Fulton Park, the residents didn’t say “No” to the proposal. They only asked the Town Board to not change the zoning and keep its size within the confines of the existing zoning. They had worked with the homeless at that location for years while it was a homeless hotel. The Fulton Park Civic Association President, who lived directly across the street, just asked for a more reasonably sized building and a buffer. Ms Beville felt Westhab should be built regardless of the residents concerns and publicly stated as much. But Ms Beville is saying she doesn't want anything built there. That's just wrong.
When Mr Feiner decided that a new Stop and Shop on Rt 119 would be a good thing on Rt 119 and the Glenville Neighborhood objected, they were summarily dismissed. When the Parkway Homes neighborhood found out they were getting yet another group home at 88 North Road, there were two issues at play: the first was that Mr Feiner led the state to that piece of undeveloped property and second, Councilman Jones failed to inform his neighbors and former neighborhood association. When Mr Feiner realized he could get Valhalla votes by letting WestHelp rot, he instructed somebody at the Town to leave it open. Now it needs millions of dollars worth of repairs to be habitable. Why are Valhalla residents, who live at least one mile away from this facility against this affordable/low income housing?
Saturday, May 24, 2014
The Grand Plan (Part 4)
Mr Feiner has Thomas Madden, his favored planning and expansion employee, on the Town’s Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee to ensure control. He used to rely on Town Councilman Francis Sheehan until Mr Feiner threw him under the bus during the Democratic Primary campaign last year. Mr Madden operates not out of a love for Greenburgh (he does not live in Greenburgh), but out of a love for his meal-ticket, Mr Feiner, and of course his own job security. The more building and development that takes place in the Town, the more work he has to do and the more secure he is in his job and Mr Feiner’s good graces. Apparently its okay to congest Greenburgh with more and more projects, its just not okay to live in it?
When we listen to him present developer’s plans on their behalf, he seems to get more and more excited with his voice becoming softer and softer, almost to a whisper. When this was originally pointed out from an audience member, she suggested he was becoming flushed with excitement. Be that as it may, Mr Madden has repeatedly disclosed confidential information to “Feiner-friendly” developers while claiming the lack of confidentiality is nothing more than “planners talking”. This is hardly the case as his “talking” supplies them with insider information, akin to insider trading and aids them to craft their projects for future compliance with the yet to be proposed or adopted Town Comprehensive Plan! This insider trading is just another notch on the Feiner Administration’s developer approval chalkboard.
Now that the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee is having public outreach meetings, more and more people are focusing, even highlighting the over-development being proposed for the three major roadways in our Town: Saw Mill River Road (Route 9A), Tarrytown Road (Rt 119) and Central Avenue (Rt 100). The intersections with 4-corners will be developed with what is referred to as “nodes”. Travel any of these major arteries in Town and start paying attention when you sit at a traffic light. The Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee believes this “design of the future” (our words) and urbanization (others’ words) will be good for the Town. It has been stated by many speakers at the two Comprehensive Plan Community Outreach sessions (so far) that they want less of what the Comp Plan is foisting upon us as “progress”. Several from the Comp Plan Steering Committee have said there were numerous common themes when they went into the communities during the first phase of evaluations with the neighbors and neighborhoods.
Some themes were to preserve open space, have more sidewalks and bike paths, not have bigger buildings and have less impervious space. Crowds of people listened in packed venues to hear what the Comp Plan architects sought and provided PostIt notes suggestions on big sheets of paper. This input would provide them critical neighborhood information and be the guide for the development of the Comprehensive Plan. Somewhere in the process, the politically correct members lost sight of what the people asked for and decided to go with a more extensive social engineering. One of the ideas is to have “nodes” throughout the Town on major arteries such as Central Avenue, Rt 119, and Rt 9A, to name a few. Nodes will consist of city-like four story buildings that do not follow our current set-back distances of space from the curb, include grass in-between and are built right to the edge of the sidewalk! It’s been referred to by many as the urbanization of Greenburgh. Mr Sheehan asked community leader Bob Bernstein for a definition of urbanization, which was provided.
The first floor will consist of a retail business because apparently the Town lacks enough unoccupied stores in the Town. The second, third and fourth floors will be residential units. The plan/goal of these, as we so often hear in developer proposals, is that these will be affordable housing units. We’re told these people will not have cars and will rely on a new and improved public transportation system of buses, so appropriate parking will not be necessary. But what if they do have cars, what then? No provisions have been made to accommodate them. Interestingly, we've repeatedly witnessed the BeeLine Express Bus and the local bus system in Rye have service reduced by the County because they, and really we, cannot afford to run them. Since this Comp Plan is a plan for the next twenty years, each intersection with four corners and a traffic light is on the chopping block. Urbanization? Your call. One point to note is that there are no requirements for these nodes to maintain a certain look or feel as they are constructed. And, when they cannot be rented, what happens? The property owners will go for Section 8 housing, which requires the tenant to pay 30% of their income toward the rent. Yes, they become subsidized housing, just like most Westhab facilities throughout the County. Is this the plan we want for the next twenty or more years?
Corner nodes are... hey,wait a minute... You don’t think Mr Feiner is pushing fire consolidation to get a jump on building a new Node at the four corners in Hartsdale, do you? Is he looking to close the Hartsdale Fire station near the four-corners to facilitate the reconstruction of Central Avenue with Nodes? Absolutely! The portion of the Comp Plan to construct nodes at corners such as the four-corners in Hartsdale, is exactly why Mr Feiner seeks to have a partial fire department consolidation. As he pushes his agenda of creating a new level of urbanization throughout our suburban Town, he violates the trust and wishes of the neighborhood who participated in ernest with the pre-Comp Plan meetings. This is not in keeping with Greenburgh’s history, culture, desires or residents’ requests and wishes. Nor do they approve of Mr Feiner and the Town Board’s history of continued spot-zoning.
We have just witnessed the affects of the Town Board’s gas-station tax on Central Avenue, a precursor to the Comp Plan changes in store. On Central Avenue, by Scarsdale Ford, a long-time gas station was recently closed as Mr Feiner and his Town Board tilted the playing field by literally driving an owner out of business with unnecessary fees that were really taxes. The G10 fought this move for months on end, trying to explain to the non-business savvy Board of the outcome that would be had if they enacted the tax. They would not listen, as usual, and proceeded to adopt this Central Avenue service-station only fee. Unfortunately, the G10 position was validated once again.
While service is really the mainstay of most service stations, the company funded Cumberland Farms gas station that was reopened after being closed for several years was given preferred treatment after losing their special zoning. Forget that the big company was underselling gasoline below what the "mom and pop" stations could purchase it for. Consequently, when the Town forced this new tax upon them, they were crushed. What’s next for that site? ABG has learned that through the new Comprehensive Plan (here it is again) information possibly leaked by Thomas Madden to the developer as simply "talk", the Central Avenue corridor will be changed to be more New York City-like. On the corners now are mostly single-story buildings of small retail businesses. What will be built on this small parcel promises to be the forebearer of things to come. This must be changed before the proposal is given to the Town Board for a hearing. Residents must get involved to slow this train wreck from changing the flavor of our Town. Only when this happens will we begin to see A Better Greenburgh.
When we listen to him present developer’s plans on their behalf, he seems to get more and more excited with his voice becoming softer and softer, almost to a whisper. When this was originally pointed out from an audience member, she suggested he was becoming flushed with excitement. Be that as it may, Mr Madden has repeatedly disclosed confidential information to “Feiner-friendly” developers while claiming the lack of confidentiality is nothing more than “planners talking”. This is hardly the case as his “talking” supplies them with insider information, akin to insider trading and aids them to craft their projects for future compliance with the yet to be proposed or adopted Town Comprehensive Plan! This insider trading is just another notch on the Feiner Administration’s developer approval chalkboard.
Now that the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee is having public outreach meetings, more and more people are focusing, even highlighting the over-development being proposed for the three major roadways in our Town: Saw Mill River Road (Route 9A), Tarrytown Road (Rt 119) and Central Avenue (Rt 100). The intersections with 4-corners will be developed with what is referred to as “nodes”. Travel any of these major arteries in Town and start paying attention when you sit at a traffic light. The Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee believes this “design of the future” (our words) and urbanization (others’ words) will be good for the Town. It has been stated by many speakers at the two Comprehensive Plan Community Outreach sessions (so far) that they want less of what the Comp Plan is foisting upon us as “progress”. Several from the Comp Plan Steering Committee have said there were numerous common themes when they went into the communities during the first phase of evaluations with the neighbors and neighborhoods.
Some themes were to preserve open space, have more sidewalks and bike paths, not have bigger buildings and have less impervious space. Crowds of people listened in packed venues to hear what the Comp Plan architects sought and provided PostIt notes suggestions on big sheets of paper. This input would provide them critical neighborhood information and be the guide for the development of the Comprehensive Plan. Somewhere in the process, the politically correct members lost sight of what the people asked for and decided to go with a more extensive social engineering. One of the ideas is to have “nodes” throughout the Town on major arteries such as Central Avenue, Rt 119, and Rt 9A, to name a few. Nodes will consist of city-like four story buildings that do not follow our current set-back distances of space from the curb, include grass in-between and are built right to the edge of the sidewalk! It’s been referred to by many as the urbanization of Greenburgh. Mr Sheehan asked community leader Bob Bernstein for a definition of urbanization, which was provided.
The first floor will consist of a retail business because apparently the Town lacks enough unoccupied stores in the Town. The second, third and fourth floors will be residential units. The plan/goal of these, as we so often hear in developer proposals, is that these will be affordable housing units. We’re told these people will not have cars and will rely on a new and improved public transportation system of buses, so appropriate parking will not be necessary. But what if they do have cars, what then? No provisions have been made to accommodate them. Interestingly, we've repeatedly witnessed the BeeLine Express Bus and the local bus system in Rye have service reduced by the County because they, and really we, cannot afford to run them. Since this Comp Plan is a plan for the next twenty years, each intersection with four corners and a traffic light is on the chopping block. Urbanization? Your call. One point to note is that there are no requirements for these nodes to maintain a certain look or feel as they are constructed. And, when they cannot be rented, what happens? The property owners will go for Section 8 housing, which requires the tenant to pay 30% of their income toward the rent. Yes, they become subsidized housing, just like most Westhab facilities throughout the County. Is this the plan we want for the next twenty or more years?
Corner nodes are... hey,wait a minute... You don’t think Mr Feiner is pushing fire consolidation to get a jump on building a new Node at the four corners in Hartsdale, do you? Is he looking to close the Hartsdale Fire station near the four-corners to facilitate the reconstruction of Central Avenue with Nodes? Absolutely! The portion of the Comp Plan to construct nodes at corners such as the four-corners in Hartsdale, is exactly why Mr Feiner seeks to have a partial fire department consolidation. As he pushes his agenda of creating a new level of urbanization throughout our suburban Town, he violates the trust and wishes of the neighborhood who participated in ernest with the pre-Comp Plan meetings. This is not in keeping with Greenburgh’s history, culture, desires or residents’ requests and wishes. Nor do they approve of Mr Feiner and the Town Board’s history of continued spot-zoning.
We have just witnessed the affects of the Town Board’s gas-station tax on Central Avenue, a precursor to the Comp Plan changes in store. On Central Avenue, by Scarsdale Ford, a long-time gas station was recently closed as Mr Feiner and his Town Board tilted the playing field by literally driving an owner out of business with unnecessary fees that were really taxes. The G10 fought this move for months on end, trying to explain to the non-business savvy Board of the outcome that would be had if they enacted the tax. They would not listen, as usual, and proceeded to adopt this Central Avenue service-station only fee. Unfortunately, the G10 position was validated once again.
While service is really the mainstay of most service stations, the company funded Cumberland Farms gas station that was reopened after being closed for several years was given preferred treatment after losing their special zoning. Forget that the big company was underselling gasoline below what the "mom and pop" stations could purchase it for. Consequently, when the Town forced this new tax upon them, they were crushed. What’s next for that site? ABG has learned that through the new Comprehensive Plan (here it is again) information possibly leaked by Thomas Madden to the developer as simply "talk", the Central Avenue corridor will be changed to be more New York City-like. On the corners now are mostly single-story buildings of small retail businesses. What will be built on this small parcel promises to be the forebearer of things to come. This must be changed before the proposal is given to the Town Board for a hearing. Residents must get involved to slow this train wreck from changing the flavor of our Town. Only when this happens will we begin to see A Better Greenburgh.
Monday, May 5, 2014
Feiner Wins, Fairview and Hartsdale Lose: The Grand Plan (Part 2)
Our previous post explored the antics and lies of Mr Feiner regarding the career(paid) fire service in the Town of Greenburgh. So what is the Grand Plan? It’s simple, really. But to figure this all out, you’ll need to read and/or understand the Comprehensive Plan (remember this as it will be mentioned again), the budget shortfalls caused by Mr Feiner and the reshaping of our Town he seeks to destroy. Conspiracy theorists will do well to pull up a chair to this table as they are about to learn quite a bit.
Mr Feiner is pushing several seemingly unrelated issues throughout the Town. The mainstream media will publish what he provides, crafted well enough to appear to be standalone initiatives that are unrelated and innocuous directives for the Town. The fact that the media is abdicating its role as the public’s watchdog is not only sad, but one of the reasons sites like ours and others exist. It’s also why crooked politicians are able to scam their constituency and push their own agendas.
The first issue for Mr Feiner is to push a merger of only the Fairview and Hartsdale Fire Departments. When his handpicked Consolidation Committee was first tasked with developing a plan that would validate his predestined need for consolidation, all three paid fire departments in the Town were included, Fairview, Hartsdale and Greenville. Why limit the consolidation now to only the two? The report, committee and information has not changed since the original report was contrived. What changed?
Originally, Mr Feiner was touting a consolidation of the three paid fire departments, Fairview (the poorest), Hartsdale (reasonably affluent) and Greenville (affluent). Each time one of Mr Feiner’s illegal moves costs the Town more money in guilty verdict payments, the Edgemont section of Town, covered by the Greenville Fire District (affluent), protest and threaten to secede and incorporate as a Village. They have the money and expertise to do so. This would severely and negatively impact the Unincorporated Town’s finances and attractiveness for those financially able to move to Greenburgh. You’ll recall that Villages are for the most part immune to Mr Feiner’s illegal and bonehead behavior as they have a Mayor and Village Board of Trustees protecting them. We have Mr Feiner and his “gore-some foursome” hammering the Unincorporated taxpayers.
If Mr Feiner leaves the Greenville Fire Department out of the consolidation mix, he appears to be playing nice with Edgemont. But, beware of a wolf in sheep’s clothing. While Mr Feiner will not admit it, the Greenville FD has more resources, vis a vis Edgemont, than Hartsdale and certainly Fairview. In fact, Fairview maintains a staggering 49% of tax-exempt properties like a proverbial noose around their neck, forcing homeowners and other business owners to make up the difference in funds. Couple this with the money lost through the Fortress Bible Church multiple guilty verdicts settlement for $6.5 million (10 yrs of payments), the WestHelp affordable housing debacle for $3.6 million so far ($1.2M lost yearly), the failed Frank’s Nursery sale for $3.5+ million and remediation, the millions of dollars the Town and other taxing entities are forced to return to businesses through tax certiorari challenges each month. The list is long – too long and expensive to keep Mr Feiner in office. With all of his illegal, unethical and costly blunders, he knows the mainstream media will choose to follow his finger pointing and not his soiled path.
Mr Feiner has gone out of his way to attack many good, conscientious public servants, such as Chief LoGuidice, Fire Commissioner Simmons, her son Captain Simmons and others. While Commissioner Simmons was not required to recuse herself for the promotion of her son, she did abstain from the voting to promote him to Deputy Chief! Interestingly, Captain Simmons did recently pass the Civil Service exam for Deputy Chief and scored the highest score out of all of the candidates! Unlike Mr Feiner, unpaid Commissioner Simmons understands what doing the right thing means and recused herself although she was not required to do so. Ironically, Mr Feiner’s $140+ thousand dollar salary would be a better place to begin a consolidation effort instead of the Fire Districts. After all, we have Commissioners running each of the Towns Departments who routinely recognize the handicap of having Mr Feiner at the helm and interfere with their operations. In reality, Mr Feiner is nothing more than a talking head that we simply do not need. Those readers old enough to remember might make the comparison of Mr Feiner to Jerry Mahoney: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeJdMuOAZkw).
If Mr Feiner pushes the consolidation proposal through with a referendum, which he has the power and funds to do, things will change for the worse for Fairview residents first and Hartsdale residents next. While they'll appear to improve for Mr Feiner as he assumes control of the newly formed Greenburgh Fire Department, similar to the Greenburgh Police Department, They won't. Mr Feiner will have control and access to, and be able to screw up, the fire budget and funds as he has done with the Town for the last 22 years. But his real end-game will be to close the Hartsdale Fire station on Central Avenue near the four-corners. This will result in an opening of the space for affordable housing "nodes" per the Comprehensive Plan. This administration has mapped out their plan for themselves behind closed doors, without written correspondence to ensure no information “gets out” through the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests via concerned and informed citizens.
Rather than focus on one central avenue (pun intended) of change for the Town, Mr Feiner is juggling multiple schemes to reach his end goal. ABG doesn’t know why he is doing this but can see what is happening and will continue to expose it. Fire consolidation could be viable if an honest and truly independent study was done. Unfortunately, interested and informed residents will never know because of Mr Feiner’s agenda. Town-wide consolidation would also be a more viable option and is actually under the purview of Mr Feiner and his Board, so we know this will never happen!
There are many games being played throughout our Town and they are costing the taxpayers millions of dollars every year. They are the culmination of illegal actions taken by Mr Feiner as well as others in his administration. The unfettered internal “pay to play” schemes Mr Feiner has fostered in Town Hall has killed the morale of Town employees. It's also affecting the residents beyond just their wallets. It’s time for a change. Only then we we get A Better Greenburgh.
Mr Feiner is pushing several seemingly unrelated issues throughout the Town. The mainstream media will publish what he provides, crafted well enough to appear to be standalone initiatives that are unrelated and innocuous directives for the Town. The fact that the media is abdicating its role as the public’s watchdog is not only sad, but one of the reasons sites like ours and others exist. It’s also why crooked politicians are able to scam their constituency and push their own agendas.
The first issue for Mr Feiner is to push a merger of only the Fairview and Hartsdale Fire Departments. When his handpicked Consolidation Committee was first tasked with developing a plan that would validate his predestined need for consolidation, all three paid fire departments in the Town were included, Fairview, Hartsdale and Greenville. Why limit the consolidation now to only the two? The report, committee and information has not changed since the original report was contrived. What changed?
Originally, Mr Feiner was touting a consolidation of the three paid fire departments, Fairview (the poorest), Hartsdale (reasonably affluent) and Greenville (affluent). Each time one of Mr Feiner’s illegal moves costs the Town more money in guilty verdict payments, the Edgemont section of Town, covered by the Greenville Fire District (affluent), protest and threaten to secede and incorporate as a Village. They have the money and expertise to do so. This would severely and negatively impact the Unincorporated Town’s finances and attractiveness for those financially able to move to Greenburgh. You’ll recall that Villages are for the most part immune to Mr Feiner’s illegal and bonehead behavior as they have a Mayor and Village Board of Trustees protecting them. We have Mr Feiner and his “gore-some foursome” hammering the Unincorporated taxpayers.
If Mr Feiner leaves the Greenville Fire Department out of the consolidation mix, he appears to be playing nice with Edgemont. But, beware of a wolf in sheep’s clothing. While Mr Feiner will not admit it, the Greenville FD has more resources, vis a vis Edgemont, than Hartsdale and certainly Fairview. In fact, Fairview maintains a staggering 49% of tax-exempt properties like a proverbial noose around their neck, forcing homeowners and other business owners to make up the difference in funds. Couple this with the money lost through the Fortress Bible Church multiple guilty verdicts settlement for $6.5 million (10 yrs of payments), the WestHelp affordable housing debacle for $3.6 million so far ($1.2M lost yearly), the failed Frank’s Nursery sale for $3.5+ million and remediation, the millions of dollars the Town and other taxing entities are forced to return to businesses through tax certiorari challenges each month. The list is long – too long and expensive to keep Mr Feiner in office. With all of his illegal, unethical and costly blunders, he knows the mainstream media will choose to follow his finger pointing and not his soiled path.
Mr Feiner has gone out of his way to attack many good, conscientious public servants, such as Chief LoGuidice, Fire Commissioner Simmons, her son Captain Simmons and others. While Commissioner Simmons was not required to recuse herself for the promotion of her son, she did abstain from the voting to promote him to Deputy Chief! Interestingly, Captain Simmons did recently pass the Civil Service exam for Deputy Chief and scored the highest score out of all of the candidates! Unlike Mr Feiner, unpaid Commissioner Simmons understands what doing the right thing means and recused herself although she was not required to do so. Ironically, Mr Feiner’s $140+ thousand dollar salary would be a better place to begin a consolidation effort instead of the Fire Districts. After all, we have Commissioners running each of the Towns Departments who routinely recognize the handicap of having Mr Feiner at the helm and interfere with their operations. In reality, Mr Feiner is nothing more than a talking head that we simply do not need. Those readers old enough to remember might make the comparison of Mr Feiner to Jerry Mahoney: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeJdMuOAZkw).
If Mr Feiner pushes the consolidation proposal through with a referendum, which he has the power and funds to do, things will change for the worse for Fairview residents first and Hartsdale residents next. While they'll appear to improve for Mr Feiner as he assumes control of the newly formed Greenburgh Fire Department, similar to the Greenburgh Police Department, They won't. Mr Feiner will have control and access to, and be able to screw up, the fire budget and funds as he has done with the Town for the last 22 years. But his real end-game will be to close the Hartsdale Fire station on Central Avenue near the four-corners. This will result in an opening of the space for affordable housing "nodes" per the Comprehensive Plan. This administration has mapped out their plan for themselves behind closed doors, without written correspondence to ensure no information “gets out” through the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests via concerned and informed citizens.
Rather than focus on one central avenue (pun intended) of change for the Town, Mr Feiner is juggling multiple schemes to reach his end goal. ABG doesn’t know why he is doing this but can see what is happening and will continue to expose it. Fire consolidation could be viable if an honest and truly independent study was done. Unfortunately, interested and informed residents will never know because of Mr Feiner’s agenda. Town-wide consolidation would also be a more viable option and is actually under the purview of Mr Feiner and his Board, so we know this will never happen!
There are many games being played throughout our Town and they are costing the taxpayers millions of dollars every year. They are the culmination of illegal actions taken by Mr Feiner as well as others in his administration. The unfettered internal “pay to play” schemes Mr Feiner has fostered in Town Hall has killed the morale of Town employees. It's also affecting the residents beyond just their wallets. It’s time for a change. Only then we we get A Better Greenburgh.
Sunday, May 4, 2014
The Grand Plan: Feiner Wins, Fairview Loses (Part 1)
When we learned that Fairview Fire Chief Anthony LoGuidice had stepped down from his position of Chief, which he has held for three years, we were saddened because Mr Feiner, his media machine and his faux-concern for the Fairview residents have again triumphed through his willingness to exploit our willfully ignorant Greenburgh voters. The Fairview community in general will suffer with the loss of expertise and knowledge Chief LoGuidice offered.
Mr Feiner has spread copious amounts of false information about the Chief, the Fire District, Commissioners and its members. Mr Feiner, et al, have continued to maintain their adherence to an ill-conceived, outdated, intellectually flawed and unauthorized consolidation study. The consensus in the fire service and from community leaders is that Chief LoGuidice should not have received the treatment he did from Mr Feiner or the media. Mr Feiner consolidation talks is simply more of his deflection tactics to shield the public from his administrative inaccuracies, failures and guilty criminal behavior.
Ironically, the same transition issue that started with Chief Robert Mauro getting ill and retiring with then-Deputy Chief LoGuidice being appointed Chief and thrust into the position is precisely what Chief LoGuidice was trying to avoid with his successor. Chief LoGuidice explained to ABG that when he took over, he really could have used some help getting up to speed with what needed to be done; he figured it out eventually but the learning curve would have been quicker if he had had time to work with Chief Mauro.
Mr Feiner illegally used the Town's confidential email list to mount a personal vendetta against the Chief and the Board of Fire Commissioners, even though he has no jurisdictional involvement, control or say in the Fairview Fire District. That's exactly what he is looking to change and why he is mounting these attacks. Not able to act heroically himself, he must be content to resorting to attacks using his bully pulpit as Supervisor! It's similar to when he runs for office and has an opponent. The first thing he says is he welcomes the competition and then instructs others to get his opponent disqualified! Mr Feiner doesn't live in the Fairview Fire District and his gated-community home is protected by an all-volunteer department. The difference in cost for him compared to being served by a career fire department is about $150/thousand (career) as opposed to roughly $15/thousand (volunteer). And with a million dollar home in a gated community, well, you do the math.
Chief LoGuidice is suffering from cancer incurred while working at the 9-1-1 Ground Zero site and has experienced complications from his numerous medications along with a continued debilitating change in his health. Consequently, he has decided to leave his position before he becomes incapable of properly performing his job. Chief LoGuidice's actions to do what is best for the Department, District and taxpayers is something Mr Feiner has never done for the taxpayers. We wish the best for Chief LoGuidice in his retirement and hope his health will maintain long enough for him to enjoy a long retirement. Perhaps some day we’ll witness a heroic act performed by Mr Feiner. Until then, we’ll let Chief LoGuidice, a real hero, hold that torch.
Now that Chief LoGuidice has stepped down, Deputy Chief Howard Reiss has been appointed acting Chief of the Fire Department. Chief Reiss began his early firematic career with the neighboring Elmsford Fire Department, an all-volunteer department. He took the fire test, passed and was subsequently hired by then-Chief Robert Mauro for the Fairview FD. ABG also recognizes this as to be a positive sign that the volunteer members of the Fairview Fire Department will continue to flourish as they did with Chief LoGuidice. We also hope their Explorer/Venture Post program of junior firefighters continues as well. ABG endorses the Fire Districts decision with this appointment and congratulates longtime public servant Chief Howard Reiss as probably the best candidate for this position.
Speaking of volunteers in the Fairview Fire Department, the small group of critics of the Fairview Fire District bemoaned the high salaries of the officers and chiefs several meetings ago and yet continue to say they “support” the firefighters. Sorry, but they can’t have it both ways. These same detractors do nothing to help the fire district except to criticize it at Mr Feiner's behest, but never step up to be part of the solution. What they could do is become a volunteer member in the fire department and help to control their taxes first hand. They could "put their money where their mouth is" - but they haven't and probably never will. In point of fact, Mr Feiner has never volunteered in his Village's fire department or ambulance corps. He will however, volunteer to ride his bicycle to Albany. We just wish he would stay there.
Mr Feiner has gone out of his way to attack many good, conscientious public servants, such as Chief LoGuidice, Fire Commissioner Simmons, her son Captain Simmons and others. When asked at a Commissioner's meeting if she should recuse herself from voting to promote her son from Captain to Deputy Chief, Commissioner Simmons said she was only one vote on the Board and not required to recuse herself. It was asked if her son could run for the Chief's position by people who don't understand how the Civil Service system works. She explained that he did not qualify to run for the position as it requires a certain amount of time served as Deputy Chief or Executive Deputy Chief and is required to take and pass a Civil Service exam to qualify for either. Captain Simmons recently did pass the Civil Service exam for Deputy Chief and scored the highest score out of all of the candidates! Most importantly, Commissioner Simmons abstained from the vote to promote Captain Simmons to the position of Deputy Chief. Unlike Mr Feiner, unpaid Commissioner Simmons understands what doing the right thing means and did it. Ironically, his $140+ thousand dollar salary would be a better place to begin a consolidation effort instead of the Fire District.
The Town has had its share of costly and unnecessary blunders by Mr Feiner and his Board. Rather than address these self-induced and crippling problems, which cost the Unincorporated taxpayer millions of dollars every year, he's chosen, as he usually does, to go after others that he has no control or involvement over. His deflection tactics work because the populace in Greenburgh, along with his Town Board, allow him to. His talk of consolidation cannot work for numerous reasons but more importantly will never be implemented where it should be – at Town Hall. Why would that be? Because Mr Feiner has his own agenda that doesn't include actually helping the taxpayer. This must stop. Only then will we have A Better Greenburgh.
Mr Feiner has spread copious amounts of false information about the Chief, the Fire District, Commissioners and its members. Mr Feiner, et al, have continued to maintain their adherence to an ill-conceived, outdated, intellectually flawed and unauthorized consolidation study. The consensus in the fire service and from community leaders is that Chief LoGuidice should not have received the treatment he did from Mr Feiner or the media. Mr Feiner consolidation talks is simply more of his deflection tactics to shield the public from his administrative inaccuracies, failures and guilty criminal behavior.
Ironically, the same transition issue that started with Chief Robert Mauro getting ill and retiring with then-Deputy Chief LoGuidice being appointed Chief and thrust into the position is precisely what Chief LoGuidice was trying to avoid with his successor. Chief LoGuidice explained to ABG that when he took over, he really could have used some help getting up to speed with what needed to be done; he figured it out eventually but the learning curve would have been quicker if he had had time to work with Chief Mauro.
Mr Feiner illegally used the Town's confidential email list to mount a personal vendetta against the Chief and the Board of Fire Commissioners, even though he has no jurisdictional involvement, control or say in the Fairview Fire District. That's exactly what he is looking to change and why he is mounting these attacks. Not able to act heroically himself, he must be content to resorting to attacks using his bully pulpit as Supervisor! It's similar to when he runs for office and has an opponent. The first thing he says is he welcomes the competition and then instructs others to get his opponent disqualified! Mr Feiner doesn't live in the Fairview Fire District and his gated-community home is protected by an all-volunteer department. The difference in cost for him compared to being served by a career fire department is about $150/thousand (career) as opposed to roughly $15/thousand (volunteer). And with a million dollar home in a gated community, well, you do the math.
Chief LoGuidice is suffering from cancer incurred while working at the 9-1-1 Ground Zero site and has experienced complications from his numerous medications along with a continued debilitating change in his health. Consequently, he has decided to leave his position before he becomes incapable of properly performing his job. Chief LoGuidice's actions to do what is best for the Department, District and taxpayers is something Mr Feiner has never done for the taxpayers. We wish the best for Chief LoGuidice in his retirement and hope his health will maintain long enough for him to enjoy a long retirement. Perhaps some day we’ll witness a heroic act performed by Mr Feiner. Until then, we’ll let Chief LoGuidice, a real hero, hold that torch.
Now that Chief LoGuidice has stepped down, Deputy Chief Howard Reiss has been appointed acting Chief of the Fire Department. Chief Reiss began his early firematic career with the neighboring Elmsford Fire Department, an all-volunteer department. He took the fire test, passed and was subsequently hired by then-Chief Robert Mauro for the Fairview FD. ABG also recognizes this as to be a positive sign that the volunteer members of the Fairview Fire Department will continue to flourish as they did with Chief LoGuidice. We also hope their Explorer/Venture Post program of junior firefighters continues as well. ABG endorses the Fire Districts decision with this appointment and congratulates longtime public servant Chief Howard Reiss as probably the best candidate for this position.
Speaking of volunteers in the Fairview Fire Department, the small group of critics of the Fairview Fire District bemoaned the high salaries of the officers and chiefs several meetings ago and yet continue to say they “support” the firefighters. Sorry, but they can’t have it both ways. These same detractors do nothing to help the fire district except to criticize it at Mr Feiner's behest, but never step up to be part of the solution. What they could do is become a volunteer member in the fire department and help to control their taxes first hand. They could "put their money where their mouth is" - but they haven't and probably never will. In point of fact, Mr Feiner has never volunteered in his Village's fire department or ambulance corps. He will however, volunteer to ride his bicycle to Albany. We just wish he would stay there.
Mr Feiner has gone out of his way to attack many good, conscientious public servants, such as Chief LoGuidice, Fire Commissioner Simmons, her son Captain Simmons and others. When asked at a Commissioner's meeting if she should recuse herself from voting to promote her son from Captain to Deputy Chief, Commissioner Simmons said she was only one vote on the Board and not required to recuse herself. It was asked if her son could run for the Chief's position by people who don't understand how the Civil Service system works. She explained that he did not qualify to run for the position as it requires a certain amount of time served as Deputy Chief or Executive Deputy Chief and is required to take and pass a Civil Service exam to qualify for either. Captain Simmons recently did pass the Civil Service exam for Deputy Chief and scored the highest score out of all of the candidates! Most importantly, Commissioner Simmons abstained from the vote to promote Captain Simmons to the position of Deputy Chief. Unlike Mr Feiner, unpaid Commissioner Simmons understands what doing the right thing means and did it. Ironically, his $140+ thousand dollar salary would be a better place to begin a consolidation effort instead of the Fire District.
The Town has had its share of costly and unnecessary blunders by Mr Feiner and his Board. Rather than address these self-induced and crippling problems, which cost the Unincorporated taxpayer millions of dollars every year, he's chosen, as he usually does, to go after others that he has no control or involvement over. His deflection tactics work because the populace in Greenburgh, along with his Town Board, allow him to. His talk of consolidation cannot work for numerous reasons but more importantly will never be implemented where it should be – at Town Hall. Why would that be? Because Mr Feiner has his own agenda that doesn't include actually helping the taxpayer. This must stop. Only then will we have A Better Greenburgh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)