Resident Challenging Town Intentionally Ignored

We've reported about the flawed deal Mr Feiner and his Town Board have struck with Sustainable Westchester, a paper company created by a host of lawyers. Roughly half of their board of directors is comprised of Village and Town leaders. Conflict of interest? Probably. Will anything come of all of this? It remains to be seen. But obviously Mr Feiner's example of open government and transparency are not true. One resident, in the Town, Ken Stahn, President of the Sprain Road Civic Association, has mounted a one man crusade for the truth from Town Hall after doing research about Sustainable Westchester.

Another issue is the lack of a cohesive plan with details and too many unanswered issues. Mr Stahn addresses a few of them in his letter below. Right from the beginning, Mr Feiner sent out numerous emails stating residents (and businesses) could save from $400 to $600 a year. Yet, the limited information that has been provided is not "sustainable" based on Mr Stahn's research. In fact we believe individuals may not save enough for a cup of java at Starbucks. A major contention is that Mr Feiner and his Board passed a resolution forcing ConEd to release their list of their customer's billing information, your information, to give Sustainable Westchester the number of participants they require to proceed. The right way to do this would have been to have residents and businesses opt-IN instead of having to opt-OUT of this scheme. ABG believes Mr Feiner, and possibly others on the Board, will receive a Board of Director position with the organization in short time.

Below is an email communication from Mr Stahn that have remained unanswered.

From: KGStahn@aol.com
To: pfeiner@greenburghny.com, fsheehan@greenburgh.com
CC: gtroyano@lohud.com, tbauer@lohud.com, tbauer@tbauer.com, eganga@lohud.com, skcolucci@news12.com, ssamin@dailyvoice.com, lleavitt@scarsdalenews.com, tlamorte@rivertownsenterprise.net
Sent: 3/16/2016 7:45:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Open and Transparent Gov't not alive Sustainable Westchster and Ardsley Chase

Paul,

I have been waiting for a response from you or Francis regarding answers to questions I sent you and Francis about the MOU that the Town has entered into with Sustainable.  After reviewing the video of the March 9th 2016 Town Board Meeting the game has changed.

What Mike Gordon suggested to us at least 10 public and work sessions with the Board was not what I heard at the March 9th meeting and you have refused to discuss it with me. He said a 2 year fixed rate of maybe 32 months, but we were told a variable rate for 3 years and now he is adding Green Energy at a possible higher price!

Fact:  The PSC has just released a statement that if a consumer goes with an ESCO on a fixed rate or that has more than 30% of renewal energy they will not be entitled to a refund should the Con-Ed regular pricing be less that what the ESCO is supplying.  

Sustainable has contracted with Con-Ed Solutions at a rate that follows:

7.381 cents for what we get now called Brown Energy (oil/coal/gas)

7.681 cents for Green/Renewable Energy

They have not added the tax to that supply charge.

My most current Con-Ed bill.

6.729 cents for what is called Brown energy

7.200 cents is what I paid with taxes added.

All these prices are per kilowatt hour.

Why was gas dropped from the process? We were told it would be included.

Please check your own Con-Ed bills and do the math. We have not even started and we will be paying more than we are currently being charged. How is that saving money?

Is that why you have refused to respond to my 2 phone messages to your office and 2 to your personal cell and one tweet?  Is that being open and transparent?

As for Ardsley Chase back in October of 2014, I met with Rich Fon and did a walk around with him.  Your number 2 person at the DPW.  We identified 10 issues.  Since then only 2 have been addressed and now several more have risen.  For the past 5 months your staff has given me the run around to 5 different departments with no resolutions and in many cases no response after my initial discussion with the person.  All fingers have pointed to Garrett Dequesne and for the past 30 days no response from him and since March 3rd since you said you would get him to contact me as of this e-mail no contact.

Again, no open and transparent government.

But you do have time to champion Mail issues and the Ardsley Dobbs Ferry Bridge issues, why so you can get positive press time as an activist. 

You’re on the wrong end of the Energy issue so you run and hide. Why not get press time and tell people they might want to check out this new energy deal and maybe opt-out because we acted too fast.

I would like to see the written plan the Town has for the three detention/retention ponds at the Ardsley Chase Development to control the mosquitoes to help ensure no West Nile or Zika viruses.  Including Ardsley Middle School, there are, on most days, about 850 people within .5 miles of those ponds. A concern for us that live near but apparently you do not share the same concerns.

Respectfully submitted.
Kenneth G. Stahn
644 Ardsley Road
Scarsdale, New York 10583
e-mail kgstahn@aol.com
 
The public was sold a bill of goods by Sustainable Westchester and Mr Feiner that is simply not true! The cost savings touted are not going to be anywhere near as large as they promised. The new suprise inclusion of utilizing renewable energy sources promises higher costs and less savings for residents. Opting OUT of this program may be the only way to stop the lies and manipulations of the political system. It must end. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Mayor: "Why We Voted No!"

We’ve posted numerous stories about Mr Feiner and his Town Board's insistence on moving forward with Sustainable Westchester’s Community Choice Aggregate plan. This plan offers to save utility users money by purchasing the energy supply through Sustainable Westchester, a 3-year experimental program that appears to be set to begin as a not-for-profit and changeover to a for-profit entity once they can prove out the concept using our money.

ABG is against this plan for several valid reasons: 1) all taxpayers are being entered into this plan and must opt-OUT if they don’t want to participate; 2) it has “big brother” written all over it; 3) the resolution adopted by the Town Board (presumed per Mr Feiner’s instructions) forces ConEd to release your private information from them to this company; 4) There is no guarantee that participants will save money. In fact, it’s been said that we may wind up paying even more; 5) Many have said since this is an experiment, let them prove it out with other communities and if it winds up being a good thing, let us opt-IN; 6) Many of the Sustainable Westchester’s Board of Directors are community leaders, Town Supervisors, Mayors and such. This seems like a conflict of interest to ABG staffers.

Here’s the letter from Croton-On-Hudson Mayor Dr Greg Schmidt as it appeared in the Gazette:

A LETTER FROM DR. GREG SCHMIDT, MAYOR, WHY WE VOTED NO, SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT - FEB. 4, 2016

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT - This letter by Mayor Greg Schmidt was published in this week’s (2/4/16) issue of the Gazette.

To the Editor:

Here in the village over the last two weeks, there has been a significant amount of discussion about a pilot program in New York State called Community Choice Aggregation (CCA). A good bit of this discussion has included inaccurate or outright false information. I’d like to set the record straight.

At the January 19, 2016 Village Board meeting, our board chose, as other communities in Westchester have similarly done, to decline to participate in this pilot program at this time. While all of the board members who voted against participation generally agree with what we believe are the goals of such a program, we voted against participation in the program at this time because of our principled concerns about the lack of public outreach regarding the details of the program in the months after the enabling law was passed by the prior village board, the uncertainty about whether residents and small businesses would actually save money, and the lack of transparency and accountability of Sustainable Westchester (SW), the not for profit corporation which will be the administrator of the program.

In addition, there was another, overarching concern. Our approval of the CCA as an opt-out program would change the relationship between Croton residents and Con Ed by inserting the Board of Trustees in the middle. This is unprecedented in New York State. Since most people pay no attention to the details of their Con Ed bill, we knew it was likely that many busy residents, senior citizens, small business owners, or anyone else who didn't respond to or understand the significance of the communications they received about the program – which in many cases would be their first and only direct communication from the village about it – could end up paying more for their energy costs because we opted them in without their express consent or understanding.

Although the NYS Public Service Commission approved the opt-out plan SW requested for the pilot program, it also stated that “the Commission has had a longstanding policy, underlying the Uniform Business Practices and implementation of retail choice programs, that affirmative customer consent is required in order for a customer to change suppliers.” We have made the decision that the village will not be joining the initial round of the CCA. However, to serve those village residents who wish to participate in such a program on an individual basis, we will continue to work with SW to prioritize the implementation of an opt-in option for Croton residents, and residents of the many other municipalities in Westchester which have chosen, as we have, to decline participation in the first round.

Dr. Gregory Schmidt
Mayor

Finally, as we continue to research this issue, we found another community that decided to opt-OUT. See what we uncovered below:

BREAKING NEWS: TOWN OF CORTLANDT DECLINES TO APPROVE COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION (CCA) CITING...

BREAKING NEWS: Cortlandt Declines to Approve Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Memorandum of Understanding. According to two separate sources the Town of Cortlandt declined to approve the CCA MOU at their most recent meeting, citing a need for additional information. It is not known whether that additional information will be forthcoming before Sustainable Westchester's newest deadline of 2/16 to enroll.

Many communities are voting to not participate and the list is growing. This is a tell-tale sign that leaders in other communities are doing their due diligence and letting the taxpaying residents remain confident that the process is working - for them. We believe that as other communities line up to oppose Sustainable Westchester, it requires a hard, laser-focused second look by Mr Feiner and his Town Board. In fact, it would prove that they have our best interests at heart should they come back and admit that they acted too hastily and are withdrawing their original approvals and endorsements. And, as many have stated, let them prove to us that this will work. Finally, let us opt-IN instead of having to opt-OUT! Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.

Pound Ridge Joins Croton and Says "No" to ESCO

ABG recently learned that Pound Ridge's leadership reviewed the proposal from Sustainable Westchester and voted against adopting it in their February 4th meeting. In watching the Board's meeting, the Pound Ridge officials expressed serious concerns about their program, some similar to those expressed by the village board majority and in Mayor Schmidt's recent letter to the Gazette (which ABG is trying to locate).

Additionally, new information has surfaced - in which it is detailed that Sustainable Westchester may not go with the lowest cost provider when narrowing down the bids list and is looking at solely "renewables", which one Pound Ridge official categorized as a "bait and switch". We also learned that Sustainable Westchester's CEO Mike Gordon was present during the meeting.

Watch the meeting here:

http://poundridge.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=13

Concerns about the administrative costs have also risen versus any alleged benefit, etc., given the fact that taxpayer funds would be utilized. Comments by Mr. Gordon about how other communities have joined this ESCO were essentially dismissed by Pound Ridge officials who described those decisions as having been made "will-nilly" given the obvious concerns about the program. 

The Pound Ridge board voted unanimously NOT to participate at this time, waiting to see if the initial roll-out goes well--if need be "18 months down the line". The Sustainable Westchester representative indicated that bids would go out on February 22, offering another "new" deadline, should the Pound Ridge Board could decide to re-vote before then. These officials clearly declined but apparently Sustainable Westchester is holding out for a last minute "hat-trick".

Please also note that on Sustainable Westchester's website, Croton on Hudson's approval of the program is still being shown as "pending" as seen in the screen capture image below. That is simply untrue. The vote was taken and the answer was no.

It remains to be seen how this will play out, especially given the volatility of the fuel industry of late. But it is refreshing to see politicians who have their constituents best interest at heart and not looking to merely ride the publicity wave. We can only hope to see this kind of concern someday in Greenburgh. Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.

An Experiment With Your Money

ABG was recently contacted by another concerned citizen through another blog to bemoan the actions taken by their previous Village leaders. Their blog site, EveryThingCroton, has posted about the Feiner-like shenanigans with the Sustainable Westchester organization in their community. Apparently, we are not the only lucky ones. But things changed for them when a new administration was elected, replacing the old guard. We’ve posted links (below) to two of their posted stories that seem eerily familiar. Initially, our first concern was that Mr Feiner and his Board were enrolling all Greenburgh residents into this program - whether they wanted to or not. Secondarily, there were no guarantee of savings, only guesstimates for savings (if any), and too many unanswered questions before undertaking this experiment.

EveryThingCroton has raised many of the same questions, issues and ethics of how Sustainable Westchester’s Board of Directors are operating. Croton’s new administration seems to have similar concerns.

http://everythingcroton.blogspot.com/2016/01/this-weeks-gazette-letter-on.html

http://everythingcroton.blogspot.com/2016/02/theyre-at-it-again-croton-dems-get-your.html

ABG has raised the issue of Sustainable Westchester’s Board members being Town and Village leaders throughout Westchester County. The unanswered question for ABG staffers is when and if Mr Feiner and his Town Board will become ordained by Sustainable Westchester and join the ranks of the paid non-producers? ABG also wonders how and why these other government leaders have been allowed to sit on a Board of Directors that their respective communities are actively doing business with? Or, maybe doing business for? Regardless, something downwind doesn’t smell like flowers.

The list accessible on the website for Sustainable Westchester shows the following Board members. We’ve highlighted in bold the community servants that we take issue with being Board members as their communities are utilizing Sustainable Westchester’s energy experiment. It seems very much like a conflict of interest.

We also have provided common-knowledge information about the others below (when we could find it). As always, you should come to your own conclusions.

- Noam Bramson (Mayor, New Rochelle)
- Chris Burdick (Supervisor, Bedford)

- Joe Carvin (President, One World United & Virtuous): a hedge fund lawyer, was the former Rye Town Supervisor who recently ran against Kristin Gillibrand for her Senate seat and lost.

- Dan Chorost (Environmental Attorney): He is a law partner who regularly litigates complex Superfund matters. Dan blocked construction of a natural gas pipeline through critical environmental areas of Westchester County on behalf of Cortlandt. ABG wonders if he does this to foster more returns for Sustainable Westchester?

- Sara Goddard (Founder, Rye Sustainability Committee): She authored the report on sustainability for Rye.

- Mike Gordon (CEO, Joule Assets): He is responsible for conceptualizing and developing products and services for Joule Assets. He specializes in serving end users in deregulated wholesale electricity markets.

- Peter McCartt (Media and Marketing, Business Development): Peter sits on the environmental committee for the Town of Eastchester.

- Herb Oringel: Is the Treasurer and one of the founders of the Northern Westchester Energy Action Consortium as well as Sustainable Westchester.

- Camilo Patrignani is the CEO of Greenwood Energy. Greenwood is in the U.S. and seven countries in Latin America. They are part of the privately owned international Libra Group which controls over 30 subsidiaries operating across six continents. Libra has substantial renewable energy interests as a prime operator in Europe. Greenwood has a strategic relationship with EuroEnergy which undertook the Libra Group’s first solar investment in 2005 through the acquisition of a local developer. Other Libra subsidiaries are involved in shipping, aviation, hospitality and real estate as well as a range of diversified investments.- Tom Roach (Mayor, White Plains)

Laura Rossi: is the Executive Director of the Westchester Community Foundation. Prior to her career in philanthropy she practiced law in New York City and Westchester, and worked for local and statewide nonprofits on behalf of women’s rights and farmworker rights.

- Nancy Seligson (Supervisor, Town of Mamaroneck)

- Mike Spano (Mayor, Yonkers)

Another article, linked below to the EveryThingCroton site, was subsequently posted as this article was being written. It is from the Croton Mayor detailing some reasons as to why they voted against Sustainable Westchester for their Croton community. Read about it here:

http://everythingcroton.blogspot.com/2016/02/a-letter-from-dr-greg-schmidt-why-we.html

While there is rarely any resistance to cavalierly going against a proposal with any scrutiny, if any, the Greenburgh Town Board usually seems to find themselves on the wrong end of many decisions as the abjectly follow Mr Feiner’s mandates. We believe this to be the case with Sustainable Westchester, especially, now that fuel and energy costs have plummeted for whatever the reason. It should be incumbent upon this administration to not jump into every suggestion put before them. Obviously, leaders from communities such as Croton are capable of doing their due diligence and making good decisions for their taxpayers!

Isn’t this the kind of politics most people complain about in disgust and why politicians are thought of so poorly? Of course it is. People are fed up with government and politicians being on the inside track and claiming this is just business as usual. It’s also very possible that while no one is technically breaking any laws, the appearance of impropriety is enough to question their motives. 

We seek to have these handsomely funded businesses with well-paid employees not be given an easy pass simply because they have the not-for-profit moniker. Many not-for-profits do legitimate and worthwhile work. This not-for-profit, during this upcoming three-year experiment, promises to become a for-profit business when this experiment concludes – on your dime! ABG is pretty sure this was never the intent for not-for-profit businesses. However, having lawyers and politicians working the system to their advantage until they can “prove out” their business model is just wrong! It must end. Croton is seemingly on the right path. Some day Greenburgh may follow. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

ESCO Approved! Cheaper Energy?

We’ve again received the daily campaign email from Mr Feiner, this time alluding to potential savings by mandatory participation in an ESCO or Energy Savings Co-Operative. He states you could save money up to 8 to 14%. What he doesn’t tell you is that it is 8 to 14% of your energy supply fee, one of the smallest portions of your energy bill. And, the claim is based on four New Jersey communities who are participating in an ESCO, not necessarily the same company he and his Town Board are forcing all of us into. The delivery charge is what is highest and Con-Ed just asked the Public Service Commission (PSC) for another increase of 1.8% of your current rate or about 4 dollars or per month. Mr Feiner needs to fight with the PSC if he really wants to help.

He also recounts the last Town Board meeting from Wednesday where, “...the Town Board unanimously approved a resolution authorizing the Town Supervisor to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") affirming that the Town and Sustainable Westchester, Inc. agree to participate in a Community Choice Aggregation program ("CCA") to procure energy supply from one or more Energy Service Companies ("ESCOs") for the residents of the Town of Greenburgh.”

In Mr Feiner’s email he repeats the same information multiple times, almost trying to convince everyone that this is a good deal. In fact, Ken Stahn of the Sprain Road Civic Association, met with, studied, and presented his findings to the civic associations’ umbrella organization, the Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations, the Town Board and others. However, despite Mr Stahn’s pleas to slow down the process to acquire answers before jumping into this, he was summarily thanked and dismissed by the Town leaders. It’s ABG’s belief that Mr Feiner told his Town Board how to vote and they did as they were told.

While Sustainable Westchester has a cool sounding, environmentally friendly name that would evoke a feeling of energy conservation and environmental friendliness, the reality is that this is an experimental program being started by a group of hedge-fund attorneys looking to initially do their testing as a non-profit and if they are successful, change to a for-profit venue. With Mr Feiner and other elected leaders blessing this operation without answers to important questions, people may be lulled into a false sense of security. Simply, Mr Feiner has made us all guinea pigs for this test program!

ABG, Ken Stahn and others have all questioned the logic of people having to opt-OUT of this scheme because Mr Feiner and his Town Board want it that way. What we and many others have been saying is that residents and taxpayers should have to opt-IN to this experiment. After all, government should not have the right to decide on what and how you spend your money. Opt-IN, not OUT should be the standard. Some of the community leaders that Mr Feiner has referenced that are participating in this experiment have been appointed to Board of Director positions on the Sustainable Westchester Board of Directors. Does this sound like a conflict of interest to you? What’ next, telling us which cell phone or television service we can buy?

Mr Feiner states that Sustainable Westchester is “leading the way...” and “Their application to form the first pilot community aggregation program has been granted, and the rest of the state is watching and waiting.” Mr Stahn had expressed reservations about being the first, again guinea pigs, and that we have the ability and luxury of waiting until this model is proven elsewhere and can supply real numbers instead of projected guesses. He also stated that the falling costs of energy around the world is making the entire project even more suspect and asked Mr Feiner and the Board to not rush into anything. A three year minimum commitment is mandated to all residents. ALL residents, you may ask? Yes, Mr Feiner has signed up all residents in the Town to participate. They must opt-OUT to be excluded. How will you know? The Town will mail you a postcard that you must return to be opted-OUT. Maybe he has another plan to improve post office performance.

The language used in the contract was boilerplate at best and wrought with mistakes and inaccuracies. Mr Feiner had no problem at that time accepting it until Mr Sheehan decided to slow that runaway train down. After rewording the contract, there were still problems and Mr Stahn remained vociferous about it. Yet, each time Mr Stahn sought to rectify issues and get clarity and answers, the ESCO representatives provided little if any. Mr Feiner, supposedly with our best interests in mind, did nothing to assuage these fears and questions.

Mr Feiner has stated in his campaign that he, “Will keep you updated on the company that Sustainable Westchester will enter into an agreement with and will advise residents how to opt out of the program if you do not want to participate. It's our hope that program will start later this year.” Mr Stahn had contacted Mr Feiner and said, “One last thing Paul is on the air waves pushing something that he has no idea yet what pricing the RFP has generated.”

Mr Stahn has told ABG that he is willing to discuss with anyone the details, strengths and pitfalls of this project if they reach out to him. Feel free to contact him if you have questions.

Kenneth G. Stahn; e-mail kgstahn@aol.com; cell 917-642-7516

This is a sketchy plan without any real safety net for residents. It’s also sketchy because we are all being forced in without having a say-so. The postcard option seems flawed. You may recall when you received the notice to have your home re-evaluated for the Town revaluation project. It looked like junk mail and many residents simply threw it away! That might be what these people are counting on to keep their enrollment numbers up to what they need. Time will tell. Until then, tell Mr Feiner and his Board that you will make your own decisions, not him. It is how we will get A Better Greenburgh.

Mission Accomplished!

When The Paul started the Citizens Committee meeting Monday night, there were the usual faces in the audience. Also in attendance were those The Paul can count on to lob him softballs and non-question questions. This fact was reiterated throughout the meeting and highlighted by one woman who claimed, “We have to take personal responsibility when a storm in coming to be prepared. To do this,” she continued, “residents need to go to “ready.com” for a list of items one might need.” While not bad advice, it’s like watching the TV news before a storm or before a holiday. They’ll start broadcasting what you should do, not do, for how long, and so on for days on end only to see people demanding help because they didn’t heed the advice. 

For the uninitiated, this was strictly a ruse for the public. The Paul sent emails to his devoted followers to attend. And, attend they did. ABG assumes he prompted them to ask “his” questions, offer advice and of course, dish out compliments where “they” believed appropriate. His ploy worked so well, the room began to list as resident and non-resident alike stated that ConEd was the villain. It was working. Most in attendance ignored the obvious: The Paul did nothing to help before, during and after the storm - again! It was more of his standard operating procedure as The Paul got unencumbered publicity before his end of the month publicity quota expired. Frenzied reporters scrambled to get photos and names of speakers, already knowing their medium would simply use The Paul’s press release talking points for the bulk of their articles. In fact, they simply could leave early since they had all they needed before they got there!

As the constant campaigner, The Paul has developed his craft of subtle campaigning into a well-honed and revered art form. When he was awaiting the court’s verdict in the Fortress Bible case, he needed to deflect attention from his illegal actions and fast! Thankfully, the TappanZee Bridge had entered the campaign season from Obama and Cuomo and gave The Paul a deflection subject better than he could have imagine: save the old Tappan Zee Bridge as a park. He wasn’t the first person to come up with this. But since he has unfettered access to the media machine in Westchester, they gave him the platform he needed and led this rally for a short time until the governor trumped him and cast him aside. But the deflection was working.

The Paul and the Town of Greenburgh were found guilty, with the decision appealed and upheld in Appellate Court, of violating the Church’s first amendment rights of free speech, free assembly, equal protection, due process, and the Town had discriminated against the church under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act or RLUIPA. The judge cited the Town for “intentional delay, hostility and bias towards the Church's application.” This is a damning decision as to what’s wrong with and the lack of quality of leadership in the Town!

Thankfully, The Paul’s the Tappan Zee bridge emergency fiasco and gifted him the “out” he needed as he became the lead proponent of morphing of the current Tappan Zee bridge into a High Line Park, similar to what NYC did to a much-different and safer rail track in Manhattan’s west side. But the park wasn’t the issue. Deflection from the Fortress Bible decision was. ABG wonders why there isn’t outrage throughout the Town demanding the resignation of The Paul and his corrupt partner from that event, Councilwoman Diana Juettner? ABG believes he told her to keep her mouth shut and he’ll get her out of this. She obeyed.

The Citizen’s Committee would not have stopped the illegal actions of The Paul, Juettner and the other Board and various Department members who answer to The Paul of bad and illegal behavior. But The Paul certainly could have asked felon and fellow-schemer Alan Hochberg to investigate by forming a Citizen’s Committee subcommittee (as opposed to the faulty Ethics Committee) that could continue The Paul’s deflection toward another (mis)direction. Sure, there would be the questions and legal challenges from the G10, but they would wither through time as the phony decision from the committee would find The Paul did nothing wrong. Can you say Tammany Hall?

New Castle Town Supervisor Susan Carpenter was one of the attendees as well as several New Castle residents. Why they were remains an inconsequential mystery. Could it be she believed she might get an education in solutions management or campaign strategies by attending? She said that her town of was faced with the same problems as Greenburgh. As if scripted by The Paul, she too berated ConEd, the Public Service Commission and offered no solutions. If we continue to elect the same people, listen to the same press conferences and never hold their feet even near the flame, we should not expect solutions or different outcomes!

So The Paul has anointed ex-convict Alan Hochberg to chair the do-nothing committee to find fault with others and assist in deflecting attention from The Paul’s illegal, immoral, and ill-conceived actions until the next fiasco rears it’s ugly head from the shadows. Whether it is the Fortress Bible decision ($8 million), the WestHelp debacle ($1.2 million), the Water Department deficit ($4 million), the Dromore Road decision, Cumberland Farms, Brightview Assisted Living Center, Stop and Shop on Rt 119, flooding in Fulton Park along the Bronx River, flooding on the Rt 9A corridor in Elmsford, 400+ new condominiums off of Taxter Road, 400+ new condominiums at Eastview (both adding to the Rt 9A flooding), 20 new McMansions in Tarrytown/Greenburgh across from Kraft Foods and last but certainly not least, the GameOn 365 Sports Bubble with it’s über-contaminated site on Dobbs Ferry Road, The Paul is costing us a fortune. It must stop! 

The meeting for the Citizen’s Committee concluded with little more than finger-pointing and no solutions offered and the promise to discuss it more. The unsuspecting committee will meet, proctoring some ideas gleaned from The Paul’s press releases and have Alan Hochberg dutifully hand them to The Paul, feigning interest. There will be the requisite pomp and circumstance and then the committee will fade into the rising flood waters until the next time. They’ll never provide a solution to any of Mother Nature’s fury, the Town’s inability to help it’s constituents and The Paul’s ineptness with dealing with anything that doesn’t require having someone else do something. The best we can hope for is for The Paul and his Board to resign. The least we can hope for is they step aside and let the residents provide solutions. We can only hope.