Witholding Information and Selective Open Government

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

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

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

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

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

Ardsley Residents Victorious Against Jefferson

In a rare residential upset, Ardsley residents who organized the “Say No 2 Jefferson” campaign, will be celebrating after a hard fought battle and a sweet victory against The Jefferson. Originally in contract with Akzo Nobel, the leading global paints and coatings company and a major producer of specialty chemicals giant that used to own the property, the Jefferson’s original plan was to build a 296 units of single and two-bedroom apartments for Millennials, empty-nesters and first-time owners. After meeting with some representatives from the community, the Texas-based company scaled back the quantity to 272 units, to be located at Lawrence Street between Saw Mill River Road and the Saw Mill River Parkway.

Once the neighborhood got wind of the size and scope of the project, there was a backlash that was unforeseen from numerous players: residents, school board members, Village Board members and the Mayor. Normally, Mr Feiner and his Board will approve any project from almost all developers and residents be damned. But with roughly several hundred residents packing the Town Hall meeting, another conference room and the cafeteria, he couldn’t ignore their pleas.

An email to Mr Feiner stated the following:

Paul Feiner,  

This email is to inform you that Akzo Nobel has terminated contractual relations with a prior potential purchaser of its site at 1 Lawrence St. in Ardsley, NY and has commenced marketing the property for Commercial or Industrial development.

Regards,

Rick Rucoba 

Public Affairs Manager

Akzo Nobel

Not to be outdone, Mr Feiner did an email blast, using the GBList that he was ordered to turn over to the Worthington Woodlands Civic Association, announcing this update. Many other Civic Associations as well as the Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations had worked closely with leaders of the Ardsley community to assist them in the fight. Several of the issues were significant traffic congestion in Ardsley, parking problems, impact to the schools and flooding. We congratulate the Ardsley community for their steadfastness, spirit and resolve.

Last Day to File Tax Assessment Grievance

The last day to file a grievance to challenge your tax assessment is June 21 at 9 PM. A link that appears on the town website is below: cut and paste if the link doesn't work or visit our website Grievance deadlines are set by NYS. Grievance applications MUST be received by the 21st.

http://www.greenburghny.com/FCpdf/HOW%20TO%20CHALLENGE%20YOUR%20TOWN%20ASSESSMENT-2016.pdf

The Curse and Growth of Spot Zoning

ABG has previously written about spot zoning and its perils. In Greenburgh, for instance, Mr Feiner and his Board cavalierly change zoning on his whim to satisfy his developer friends. There aren’t any developers, larger ones anyway, who fear submitting a proposal in Greenburgh as long as Mr Feiner is at the helm with a submissive Board in tow. In fact, smaller contractors and builders have been said to avoid doing business in Greenburgh due to excessive taxes also known as fees and permit costs and extended review processes. The people who suffer are the homeowners, of course, who want to add a bathroom, deck or dormer to their home. The approval process can take up to a year between the different departments, the various fees, meetings etc., only to be refused at any point and force a restart of the entire process.

There is even more going on around us in Greenburgh and elsewhere throughout the County. Here in Greenburgh, the Town Board follows Mr Feiner’s instructions and rubber stamps whatever project he favors. Several years ago he announced he was in favor of an eight story commercial entity being built in a residential neighborhood. He had had the opportunity to simply sell off the property but chose to politicize it and play games against the residents of the area. Is this what we elect our leadership to do? Hardly. Then there was the over-sized assisted living facility to be built on what amounted to a postage-stamp parcel of land in yet another residential neighborhood. While the residents, current taxpayers that government should be protecting from outside interests, strenuously objected to Mr Feiner and the Board, he laughed in their faces and not only approved every aspect of the proposal, but let the projects attorney’s write what would later become the zoning code for assisted living facilities!

Now that an approximately two-year old assisted living zoning code exists, Mr Feiner and his spineless Board are pushing to approve another inappropriate assisted living facility. To top it off, they seek to ignore this recently adopted zoning code to accommodate another developer! Interestingly, this time, while the immediate abutting property owners are against the project, some of the residents in the area have spoken in favor of this sale. We believe they are speaking less in favor of the mega-proposal and more in favor of trying to help the owners complete the sale for retirement income. Regardless of the reason, the facility does not meet the assisted living zoning code and requires variances to proceed.

Rather than wait and follow the process, we believe Mr Feiner instructed his Board to prematurely initiate and subsequently approve a SEQR study/report. This bastardization of “the process” belies the hollow words heard from the dais at various meetings by Mr Feiner and his Board. They parrot him by saying that they want, “the public to have faith in the process”, “that they’ll do their due diligence” and more. The list of hollow expressions is almost unlimited.

Beyond the lies from our own corner office comes a growing trend, an agenda if you will, with housing and spot zoning. Excuses in favor of it abound as developers push community leaders to covertly endorse spot zoning. In North Castle for example, JMF Properties of New Jersey, is seeking to construct 200 high-rental apartments on 22 (of 36) acres on the North White Plains’ Jennie Clarkson school campus. Their argument they use for this is that there is an abundance of multi-family homes that already exist. Here’s their rub: empty nesters are looking to down size and young professionals – often referred to as millennials – don’t want to own a home yet. 60% of these proposed units would be two bedrooms and the remainder would be single bedroom, with twenty units set aside as affordable housing. The moniker might change but the only way to proceed is to pepper the proposal with enough buzzwords so politicians can jump on board: affordable, workforce, low income, welfare, senior, veterans, etc. The final nail in the coffin of the argument is that businesses are leaving the area because of a lack of housing for workers. Could it simply be they are leaving because they are overtaxed and over-regulated? Believe it.

The real issue here is that to build this huge facility would require several zoning changes. And, as luxury units priced at about $2,800 to $3,200, the affordability aspect seems a bit distant if not contradictory. These residents would have, according to one of the spokesman, “…fat wallets and they’re looking to spend in that local community.” That may appear to be justification to some, but to us it seems weak. It certainly does not qualify as a reason to spot zone an area, even if spot zoning is illegal. Using other words for it doesn't make it right.

Similarly, Purchase College, part of the State University of New York system, is proposing to build 385 units of housing for people ages 62 and older on 40 acres of its 500-acre campus. The proposed site — mostly weedy land that had previously been used as a dump for construction debris — is located south of the college's administration complex and west of Lincoln Avenue. The arguments for this project, while not as necessary because this is NY State property and not held to many of the same zoning and other standards as Towns and Villages, include 220 units of one and two-bedroom apartments in a four-story building and single-family, duplex and triplex homes; 36 beds for assisted living and 36 beds for memory care would be offered. The rest of what is being touted is merely window trimmings of sorts to increase the projects attractiveness.

In nearby Harrison, the Brightview “senior steamroller” received approval for their latest proposal for their contentious Brightview Senior Living facility. The necessary-to-proceed zoning amendment was passed by the Village Board, even though the Harrison mayor said, “…the zoning amendment passed Thursday did not constitute a fait accomplis.” He added, “It's all part of the process," he said. "We're not even at the 10-yard line. A lot can happen in 90 yards.” The project must now gain the planning board’s approval. The zoning amendment allows senior living facilities to be built in existing residential zones, with the planning board's approval. This move paves the way for any developer, but in this case, Brightview Senior Living, to build a four-story, Home Depot-sized senior living facility on the Lake Street Quarry site in West Harrison. The 7.3-acre project site is surrounded by a rural neighborhood of single-family homes. Once again residents in the neighborhood say the development would be too big and out of character for the area, comes too close to nearby homes and would cause traffic congestion on an already-busy street. And again, government is pursuing its agenda and ignoring the well-being of the existing taxpayers who have invested in the community from outsiders seeking to ravage it.

In Buchanan, the opposition to affordable housing for seniors was strong last fall. So much so that one of Westchester’s leading builders simply walked away, unwilling to invest any more time or money in pursuing his project. But now, seven months later, things have changed. The Buchanan Village Board, by a single vote, last week agreed to a zoning change that allows the 42-unit project, including 35 affordable units, to proceed for planning board review. Therein is part of the problem. When a developer wants a project to go through, they have resources and time that residents do not and can keep the onslaught going as long as they choose.

Finally, it must be mentioned that if the project is approved, it would help Westchester County meet its federal fair-housing goal. This is another part of the zoning change problem. Without reliving the entire Anti-Discrimination lawsuit against the County, the federal government and its housing monitor continue to insist that local zoning be changed to allow a whole host of zoning possibilities that frankly, zoning laws are designed protect communities from. If you need an example of imprecise zoning, simply look at the 9A corridor from I-287 northbound toward Mt Pleasant. Nothing matches, looks cohesive or has a flow of style that invites you to want to participate and even locate there. Zoning adjustments, such as changing a set back from 10 feet to 7 feet to allow a walkway or a deck to be built are certainly acceptable. Radical changes like the ones we’re being forced to accept because of political agendas, developer’s deep pockets, and a willfully ignorant electorate must stop – especially in Greenburgh. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

Happy Father's Day!

Town Wrong Again, Snubs Nose At Process and Residents

It's no secret that when Mr Feiner wants a project to go through, he will do everything possible to stack the deck for that project's developer. Such is the case with the Formation-Shelbourne's oversized assisted living facility project that would replace the Sprainbrook Nursery. It's the first proposal for an assisted living facility that clearly does not meet the Town Board's newly adopted (2-yr old) assisted living zoning code. It was adopted specifically to allow the Brightview facility to be built at Rt 119 and Benedict Avenue - another project Mr Feiner favored. In fact, after adopting the code change that Thomas Madden, then the Planning Commissioner, along with Mr Sheehan and others, insisted another assisted living facility could not be built anywhere in Unincorporated Greenburgh because there is no space that could accommodate it!

This debacle, highlighting the public's outcry that the Town Board follow the process and allow the project to proceed, or not, of its own volition, has routinely been ignored by a deaf Town Board. But since Mr Feiner wants this project to go through even though it violates the zoning, he insisted on pushing it through against protests of the taxpayers. He's again violated the process he so often refers to, claiming that the residents should have confidence in the process. Actions such as these reinforce the residents’ lack of confidence in any processes Mr Feiner and his Board may discuss. The only confidence they seem to get is the confidence game he and his Board are running against taxpayers! 

At this meeting, he had his Town Board vote to accept the negative declaration on the State Environmental Quality Review Assessment (SEQR) before it was required to be performed. The "neg dec SEQR" report means the project will not have a negative environmental impact on the project. Perhaps this would be the outcome anyway. But testing and reports are needed to make that determination. Mr Feiner and his Board have performed none and by not following the real process, are cheating everyone except the developer. Emboldened by the public's inability to stop them has created this nightmare scenario.

During the same Town Board meeting was a scheduled hearing for the 7-8 year old Comprehensive Plan that has yet to be adopted. The Town Board cancelled it. Why was the hearing cancelled? The Comprehensive Plan is the one official obstacle that might restrict Mr Feiner and his spot-zoning ways if adopted. However, changes to it seem to have watered down its effectiveness. It should provide a map for the Town's zoning which would slow and possibly stop Mr Feiner's wanton wholesaling of every piece of undeveloped land in Unincorporated Greenburgh. It's no wonder he decided to postpone the hearing. Every delay, change or review slows its adoption and keeps him in the driver's seat. He's spent the last two years throwing more considerations for them to review knowing it slows them down.

To add dramatic flair to the proceedings, Councilman Ken Jones had said at an earlier meeting that he had unanswered questions and wished to have a delay in the vote. This night, he said his concerns had been answered and he would support the project. No surprise there. ABG believes these theatrics were Mr Jones' turn to appear to be the “concerned Board member”. We believe that Mr Feiner instructs the Board members who can challenge and even vote "no" on any given issue. It was his turn. Ironically, Mr Jones' questions were less environmental and more traffic oriented. It was perceived and ultimately believed by many to be nothing more than a ploy for appearance sake.

Many residents have been concerned about increased traffic, accidents, emergency vehicle responses, flooding, lack of blending into the neighborhood and more. Others, including friends of the Sprainbrook Nursery owners have championed the sale. While we appreciate they're trying to help their friends, this is about adhering to the zoning code changes Mr Feiner and his Town Board adopted against many residents objections with valid concerns. He and his Board ignored that input and it was passed. Now, Foundation Shelbourne is asking for variances for some of those same concerns. They should not be allowed and the zoning code Mr Feiner and his Board passed should stand. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.

NY Legislature Passes 3-Year Phase In after Reassessment

We never believed that having a change in NYS law to accommodate a three-year phase-in for those people whose assessments during the revaluation were increased would ever happen. Apparently we underestimated the control Mr Feiner has over Andrea Stewart-Cousins, Tom Abinanti and now Sandy Galef. This must still be signed by Governor Cuomo to be enacted, so we’ll see how this finishes. 

While this story is unsubstantiated, Mr Feiner just took advantage of the Town’s self-controlled GBList and sent this email below out to residents. While most of the issue can be attributed to previous Supervisors as well, Mr Feiner ignore revaluation for the past 24-years of his term, adding to the impact the “reval” had throughout the Town. Here’s what he said:

“The New York State Senate and Assembly has approved legislation enabling the town of Greenburgh to phase in tax hikes over a three year period for those impacted by the reassessment. By the third year all property owners will pay 100% of their taxes.  The approved legislation now goes to the Governor.

Greenburgh is reassessing properties for the first time in 60 years. Although most residents of the town will experience no tax hikes as a result of the reassessment  - some have received bad news--significant tax hikes. In recent weeks I have met with property owners who have seen their taxes increases by 50%, 100%, 200% --even more. Neighborhoods most impacted were Irvington, Hastings & Edgemont. The phase in legislation only applies to tax hikes, not tax decreases. The legislation will help us have a smooth reassessment transition. Neighborhoods impacted negatively by the reassessment will be able to avoid panic selling. And, those residents who are being impacted by the reassessment will have little more time to plan what they want to do with their properties.  

I would like to thank State Senator Andrea Stewart Cousins and Assemblyman Tom Abinanti for working very hard on this initiative. A special thank you to Assemblywoman Sandra Galef, chair of the Real Property Committee in the Assembly for her assistance. All the Town Board members - Francis Sheehan, Diana Juettner, Kevin Morgan and Ken Jones - did whatever they could to lobby for the legislation.  This is a big victory and was difficult to achieve. Some bloggers posted on blogs that the chances of the legislation being approved by state lawmakers was remote.

The revenue that the school district will raise will not be affected by this legislation.  The tax levy will be the same; it will then be allocated as always based on the entire assessed valuation for the school district and the tax rate.  This bill will be revenue neutral for the school.

The legislation does not require the school district to take any action.    The assessor will finalize the assessment roll for the district, determine the tax rate and send out the tax bills as usual.   There will be no impact in this regard on the schools as well.

In 2009 and 2010, before the town decided to reassess, Assessor Edye McCarthy and I spoke before dozens of groups (village, school, civic groups) and discussed the reassessment process.  I indicated to groups that I met with that I would push for a phase in process if we implemented the reassessment. Earliert (sic) this year some residents sent me the video of my remarks - to remind me!  I am pleased that we will be able to keep the promises made to the community. 

If you are not satisfied with the assessment on your property please be advised that the last day to file a grievance at Town Hall (to appear before the Board of Assessment & Review) is next week: June 21. Town Hall will be open till 9 pm on the 21st.  Call 989 1520 (assessor's office for more info).”

Support the Tarrytown Halloween Parade

D-Day - Normandy 1944

It was 72 years ago today. We must never forget!
"On June 6, 1944, more than 160,000 Allied troops landed along a 50-mile stretch of heavily-fortified French coastline, to fight Nazi Germany on the beaches of Normandy, France. Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower called the operation a crusade in which, “we will accept nothing less than full victory.” More than 5,000 Ships and 13,000 aircraft supported the D-Day invasion, and by day’s end, the Allies gained a foot-hold in Continental Europe. The cost in lives on D-Day was high. More than 9,000 Allied Soldiers were killed or wounded, but their sacrifice allowed more than 100,000 Soldiers to begin the slow, hard slog across Europe, to defeat Adolf Hitler’s crack troops." -army.mil

Town Board’s Decisions Hurting Businesses

In another recent email blast, Mr Feiner all but admitted he and his Board have helped to hurt business along Central Avenue. He said, “The Austin Ave & Ridge Hill developments have hurt businesses located on Central Ave. And the soon to open up Rivertowns Square shopping plaza off the Saw Mill River Parkway will hurt local businesses even more.” Mr Feiner has never met a major project or developer he has not endorsed or supported. While these two examples were not approved by he and his Board, the Unincorporated Town is full of similar projects, showing his largess to developers by his actions. Although there is now one he's gone against, The Jefferson in Ardsley.
 
More importantly, many residents, business owners, the G10 and others concerned with all of the regulations, fees, fines, permits, etc., that business owners are faced with from the Town have warned of the ill-effects it will have on not only our retail businesses, but our service industries in general. One example several years ago was when the Town Board directly tried to create a fine through a “new regulation” addressed specifically against the Apple Farm.
 
It seems that one of the Board members had gone to the Apple Farm and saw the flimsy wooden and/or cardboard crates stacked on the sidewalk after being delivered that morning. Seizing on an opportunity to balance the Town’s budget given its lawsuit payments and fines, a discussion about safety ensued. Of course the end result was a new regulation with a fine. This was never about safety. And, the sidewalk is on private property and doesn’t even fall under the aegis of the Town.
 
There is little left in our Town that isn’t taxed, regulated, or fineable, has a fee attached to it or allows for simply something you can do without government overreach fondling our wallets. And when there does happen to be something not regulated, requiring a fee or is, perish the thought, free, there’s a politician researching how to write a new bill to allow government to tax it! Is it any wonder people are voting with their feet? But, it turns out Greenburgh is not alone.
 
The City of White Plains released their proposed budget several days ago. As do all politicians, they bemoaned the NYS 2% Tax Cap as the cause for their financial woes. The reality is the tax cap is superficial and the real issue is their lack of budgetary and financial savvy. Let’s take a look at a few of their budget changes. The low hanging fruit, if you will, are the successful businesses that won’t do more than balk a bit and then pay up. Case in point is the Cabaret Licensing that was just approved by the White Plains Council to the tune of a 400% increase from $500 per year to now $2,500 per year! In White Plains these cabaret licenses must be renewed yearly, effective July 1, 2016. Although, come election-time, you’ll hear them all profess, “I’ll fight for you!”
 
According to White Plains Common Council President James Kirkpatrick, “But we had a ridiculously low tax cap this year — one tenth of one percent — and we haven’t raised some of these fees in a long time.” So, there you have it, a valid reason to increase fees 400% - simply because it hasn’t been done in a while. He claimed that cabaret licensing required a significant amount of work by city staffers to review and administer these applications. Hello? This is why you have these staff members, to do the City’s work, review applications and paperwork. Why are some taxpayers being taxed a second time and forced to pay twice for services?
 
The state tax cap has limited the amount of money local governments can raise through taxes to two percent or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. For Greenburgh it is about the same as White Plains, which is 0.12 percent. However, all these various Boards must do is vote to go beyond the tax cap and then they can do whatever they feel the need to do. The real problem is fear. None of them want to be the bad guy who voted openly to raise taxes.
 
Fee increases are also coming for eateries that provide sidewalk seating and service during the spring and summer. Those businesses currently pay $7.50 per square foot of public sidewalk that is used. Beginning July 1, the rate will be $8 per square foot. Coin operated laundries in the city will see their annual licensing fee escalate from $50 to $150 for those with 30 machines or fewer, and from $100 to $250 for laundromats with 31 or more machines.
 
All businesses will be charged more for alarm permits, with the annual license renewal doubling from $100 to $200 a year. Businesses will also see an increase in the cost of the annual fire inspection required by city fire code, from $4.20 per $1,000 of assessed value to $5 per $1,000 — a 19 percent increase.
 
Most business owners never saw it coming. Commuters and residents won’t be spared from fee increases either, with the price of city parking permits going up by varying amounts, depending on type of permit and location of the lot or garage. The residential alarm permit application fee remains the same at $50, but the annual permit renewal cost has been doubled from $25 to $50. Also going up, from $7.50 to $10, is the cost of obtaining a police accident report. The price of a police Good Conduct certificate, which is sometimes requested by potential employers, is rising from $5 to $25. Look around in White Plains when you are searching for a parking space. There is no place you can park for free. Frankly, many have stopped shopping in White Plains for that reason alone.
 
So why does all of this matter? It’s simple really. Again, in his daily email blast, where Mr Feiner discussed Austin Ave & Ridge Hill developments and the impending Rivertowns Square shopping plaza off the Saw Mill River Parkway, his solution is to shut down one lane or one side of Central Avenue and treat it like a street fair once a month. Not only is this absurd, it would be a logistical nightmare from a safety, traffic, travel and crowd control standpoint. Frankly, it’s not a solution, it’s another Feiner deflection away from the real issue – over-development. Plus, all we need is one senior to drive the wrong way or get confused and turn into the wrong area and it was all for naught.
 
Here’s a better idea. Plan a budget that works within the amount of money the Town takes in through all of its current revenue streams. Then start reviewing those that have been inactive, unused or ignored and delete them. Then begin to incorporate a Comprehensive Plan for each city, town, village and community and adhere to it. Most important, however, is to have the politicians, who know nothing about operating a successful business, get out of the way of business and let them do what they do. They are the experts and they will figure out the solution.
 
Finally, Mr Feiner, as you approve these major building proposals throughout the Town, you have been told by many how these projects will affect business. Sadly, while you and your Board refuse to listen, many residents, especially those with kids, are too fearful to take a bike ride on our streets because you have over-developed the area and there is just too much traffic. There is no cohesive planning to develop and more importantly maintain walking and biking throughout our Town. Why fix it when you can talk about it? This has to stop. Only then will we get A Better Greenburgh.