Friday, July 13, 2007

EXTRAORDINARY SECRECY, FAVORITSM, VIOLATIONS OF LAW

On July 9, 2007 Richard Troy, a principal of S&R Development Estates, filed an affidavit with the Greenburgh Zoning Board of Appeals contesting a determination made by the Town’s Commissioner of Community Development that the 1 Dromore Road property is in a particular zone. The underlying issue is whether this property can be developed as a multi-family structure or whether it cannot be so developed. The Town’s zoning map shows this property to be in a CA-1 zone, which permits prescribed multi-family development Without getting to the merits of the zoning issue, the affidavit, which everyone should read, reveals extraordinary secrecy, favoritism, avoidance of proper procedures, and violations of law by the Town Council. It also shows the power given by the Town Council members to Bob Bernstein and Michelle McNally to harm the rest of unincorporated Greenburgh in their secret dealings with the Town Council, and with Steve Bass and Francis Sheehan in particular. I am requesting that it be placed on the Town’s website at www.greenburghny.com, but in the meantime anyone who wants it can email me and I will send it to them.. pfeiner@greenburghny.com

POSTED UNDER SUPERVISORS DOCUMENTS-- FORM/DOCUMENTS www.greenburghny.com

The affidavit deals with the demands made by Bernstein and McNally earlier this year for a moratorium. The ostensible reason for the requested moratorium was to prevent an increase in the Edgemont school population. The real purpose appears to be much more devious and malign --to acquire property for a town hall for Bernstein’s plan for Edgemont’s secession from Greenburgh. These secret dealings with the Town Council are a threat to Greenburgh. While the entire affidavit is chilling reading, a few paragraphs bear special mention and I will quote them.



Paragraph 41 (relating to a January 27, 2007 a meeting between Mr. Troy and several of his associates, and Steve Bass, Francis Sheehan, Bob Bernstein and Michelle McNally.)



“Prior to the meeting, Councilmnan Bass directed that we could not have our attorney, Mark Weingarten, attend this meeting nor could we inform him that the meeting would take place. At the meeting Councilman Sheehan stated that if there was any discussion about this meeting with Supervisor Feiner he would ‘walk away’ from any agreement. Moreover, we were expressly forbidden to relate any discussion that took place at the meeting with Hal Samis, an outspoken commentator on Greenburgh politics. While we were uncomfortable with these gag orders and the ad-hominem attacks of Councilman Sheehan on Supervisor Feiner (“Feiner screws everything up. I have to stay up all hours fixing his screw-ups”) and their attacks on Mr. Samis, we reluctantly accepted these condition and proceeded with the meeting in the hope of working out an agreement to develop the Property. We reached an agreement that the EEC would create a new “park district” and accept a conservation easement covering a portion of the property...”



Paragraph 44



“Soon thereafter, S&R received a letter dated February 2, 2007 from Robert Bernstein of the EEC contemplating S&R’s gifting of the Property directly to him. He sent us his draft of a Gift Agreement (Exhibit 19).”



Paragraph 46



“On February 3, 2007 ... another meeting organized by Councilman Bass and attended by Councilman Francis Sheehan, Councilwoman Eddie Mae Barnes and Councilwoman Diana Juettner, Robert Bernstein and Michelle McNally of the EEC... Councilman Bass and Councilman Sheehan had suggested that it would be appropriate for Councilwoman Barnes and Councilwoman Juettner to personally meet the principals of S&R since they would be formally voting to implement the Agreement. At this meeting, the parties again agreed: (a) S&R would grant a conservation easement on a portion of the Property; (b) S&R would grant an option to the EEC to purchase the Property for a price equal to S&R’s investment in the Property inconsideration of: (i) the Town’s agreement to modify the language of the proposed moratorium so that the Property would be excepted from its application, and (ii) the agreement by the Town and EEC to support our development application of a ten-unit town home development instead of the contemplated 37-unit development if the EEC did not exercise its purchase option.”



Paragraph 47



“At the February 3rd meeting, Robert Bernstein said that he would have Edgemont purchase the property through a bond offering by an Edgemont Park District he would create....Bernstein indicated that initially he would want to lease the land to the GNC [Greenburgh Nature Center]; thereafter he would want to use the land as the possible site for an Edgemont Town Hall if and when Edgemont seceded from the Town of Greenburgh. He stated that Edgemont did not own any other land as the possible site for an Edgemont Town Hall in the future. Regarding the park district, Robert Bernstein explained that S&R would grant the conservation easement to the park district and after Edgemont raised the funds to purchase the balance of the land Edgemont would own the entire property and be able to create a new town hall for itself upon secession...”



Paragraph 54



“[At about February 21, Mr. Troy] received a telephone call from Councilman Bass, who told me that he wanted to arrange for a referendum to be placed on the September primary voting ballot to approve a bond offering for the to-be-created Edgemont Parks Board to purchase our Property.....He asked me to ‘trust’ him that the bond offering would pass in September and asked me to make a gift of the Property immediately, without first being exempted from the moratorium. I declined his proposal.



Paragraph 55



“On February 26, 2007, breaching our prior agreements and after his ‘Trust Me’ telephone call, Councilman Bass sent out a ‘blast’ e-mail (Exhibit 24) ... stating that our Property was zoned R-20 (single family homes on half an acre). He went on to write that ‘The Town Council understands that the Greenburgh Nature Center’s board and Edgemont residents may prefer to see the Dromore Road Property not developed at all and have it preserved as open space. The Town Council will continue to explore with community leaders that possibility.’ Councilman Bass’ arrogance and his capitulation to the EEC and GNC is evident in this sentence. He continues to assert that the GNC and Edgemont residents should get to control our property.”



What all this means is clear.



First, as has become their standard operating procedure, Councilpersons Bass and Sheehan operate in secret about matters in which the public has great interest. The moratorium, which was really directed only at the Dromore Road property, would have very significant effect on the Central Avenue area. Discussions cannot be kept secret, especially when the matters discussed have such profound impact. The January 27 meeting, at which Councilman Bass commanded that S&R could not even tell their lawyers about it, is extraordinary, almost as extraordinary as Councilman Sheehan’s threat that if the Supervisor and/or Mr. Samis were told about the meeting he would walk away from any agreement -- an agreement that he was not authorized to make. I will not comment on the disrespectful and improper exclusion of the Supervisor in this matter because it is so obvious.



Second, instead of having public discussion, the discussions were limited to Bass, Sheehan, and Bob Bernstein and Michelle McNally. The latter two are not elected officials. It has been noticed for some time that Bernstein and McNally effectively run the Town Council, but this is the first time that this has been documented.



Third, at the February 3 meeting, all four Councilpersons attended. This was a blatant violation of the open meetings law. It is required that whenever a majority of the Town Board meets on town business, it must be a meeting open to the public. All four of the Councilpersons know this, and thus their violation of the law is all the more severe. It is interesting, by the way, that Bass and Sheehan said that Barnes and Juettner were there because they would vote on the agreement when, of course, the Supervisor also would vote on the agreement, but the Supervisor was not even told about the meeting.



Fourth, at the February 3 meeting, Bernstein made it obvious that his intention was for Edgemont to acquire the property not for park purposes, or to keep Edgemont school enrollment down, but to acquire the only possible site for a town hall upon Edgemont’s secession from Greenburgh. I suspect that what was meant was the implementation of Bernstein’s long campaign to make Edgemont a separate village, though it is not impossible that he actually means to secede and make Edgemont a separate town.



Fifth, Bernstein’s secession plan was obviously approved by the four Councilpersons, all of whom were present when he made his announcement. This is further evidenced by the fact that Bass called S&R to expedite the agreement, even asking Mr. Troy to transfer the property on trust -- an invitation Mr. Troy wisely declined.



Sixth, this entire story demonstrates that the Councilpersons have essentially turned over their governmental authority to Bernstein and McNally, to the great detriment of the rest of the town. The secession of Edgemont, or its incorporation as a separate village, would dramatically reduce the tax base of the town. Edgemont, which has the most expensive homes in the town, obviously pays relatively larger town taxes than less wealthy areas. Edgemont’s town taxes would be cut by more than 90% if it becomes a village, and disappear altogether if secession takes place. This would cause the town to eliminate or sharply reduce many of its services and programs, to the detriment of every other section of unincorporated Greenburgh. The effect on Hartsdale, Fairview, East Irvington, Donald Park, Orchard Hill, North Elmsford, Mayfair-Knollwood, and every other area of unincorporated Greenburgh would be enormous and these areas would suffer greatly. And yet, the four Councilpersons were, and are, quite prepared to let it happen in order to give Bernstein and McNally what they would like, irrespective of the impact on others.



I urge you to read the entire affidavit. You will be shocked and angry. And you should show both your shock and anger to the four Councilpersons.



You may call or write to me if you have any questions.

PAUL FEINER

pfeiner@greenburghny.com






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL.com.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AOL now offers free email

259 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 259 of 259   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Garfunkel the shadow is deluded. Feiner took campaign money from the Town's auditors. Thats corrupt and indefensible. Feiner is not a problem solver - he is a problem that needs to be removed.

Anonymous said...

With regards to "anonymous-8:43am" who decries anyone who stands up and fights, I say get a life. I have had a wonderful one, with great, well-educated and successful children, a life-time of travel and experiences and a happy marriage of 38 years with oodles of friends. In fact I still play a great game of tennis, have a radio show, love to lecture and enjoy a good fight. I fight the "good" fight for Paul Feiner as a labor of love not hate. The low-lifes out there that make up the CABAL cannot seem to take the heat. They know their limitations and we are well aware of their desparate thirst for power. But the people still control their government through the ballot box, and the public is slowly awakening to the machinations of the CABAL and their puppets on the Board. Their time is limited. The "cat is out of the box." The deposition from Richard Troy will not go away. The curruption on the CABAL is now becoming exposed to the light of day. You, whoever you are, who hide your name, and spew your filth, fool no one. You hide in the shadows, because the light of day will destroy you. So rave on!

Richard J. Garfunkel

Anonymous said...

Richard - you need serious help. Seems you cannot dispute Feiner is corrupt so you rant and rave about conspiracies against Feiner. Please move back to Mt Vernon and take Mr. Feiner with you. TINC.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Mr. Garfunkel for indentifying yourself and your writing style. You just confirmed that you indeed do write about 50% of the anonymous posts on this blog! Nothing would be more entertaining than seeing the URLs for the posters and discovering that Feiner, Garfunkel and Bernstein are writing 95% of the "anonymous" postings. Can the blog administrator please release them for the amusement of the rest of us?

Anonymous said...

The shot heard round the world vs who would hear a tree falling in the middle of the forest.

What if One Dromore were located in some mythical section of Greenburgh, say the other side of town, but the back story bore certain similarities to current existing buzz.

The School District was "at capacity" and taxes were high.

The main "commercial" street was zoned as mixed use.

Residents who drive on this street complain about already existing traffic, the presence of weeds and several of the stores have "for rent" signs in the window.

A parcel of land is recently acquired and the Town Zoning map says it can be developed as multi-family.

Several Town officials, consulting this map, reach the same conclusion.

There are within the "district" several off-avenue parcels of land which could be developed as multi-family to yield the same number of units as can be produced at One Dromore's new location; hoewever the owners of these properties reside within the district.

The developer of One Dromore is not a resident.

Nearby resident "civic leaders" request a moratorium on a small stretch of this one road and just for this one part of Town. The moratorium is to prevent new residential development.

The County which "runs" the wide commercial road says that it is content with things the way they are, are being a mixed use zone.
Talk of a moratorium ceases.

Before the Public Hearing on the prospective moratorium is scheduled, no would-be developers announce plans for new residential development. Only One Dromore would be affected.

It is an election year.

The Town Hall has many conference rooms available for meetings and Town Hall, itself has other resources available which could resolve questions or problems.

A "meet" is set up by the developer.

This meet is not publicized, pains are taken to insure that news about it does not circulate and even the Town Supervisor is not invited. Attending the two meetings are the four Town Council members and two heads of the local civic Hydra.

At the meeting, the discussion centers on ________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________

Bloggers are invited to complete the hypothetical situation set in a mythical portion of Greenburgh.
Get into the game. It is more fun than the Sunday Times' double-cross(tic).

Anonymous said...

Dear Jim,

How do you feel about your friends Bob and Michelle making deals behind the backs of your fellow Edgemonters? By whose authority were B & M charged with the task of acquiring the Dromore Rd Proerty? When was the idea of a September 2007 referendum ever discussed by the Edgemont community? Did the Edgemont Community Council ever approve the Dromore Road Property to be deeded over to Bob Bernstein? These are the quesions that Edgemonters like yourself need to answer.

Anonymous said...

These posts about Bob Bernstein and Michelle McNally are getting hilarious. Feiner, are you still blogging anonymously? Garfunkel? Gooljar?

Nothing of any consequence happened here.

Anonymous said...

I want to thank all our allies out there who continue to expose light on the dark recesses where the CABAL seems to hide out and plan their next escapade. Over the years we have been bombarded by the bombast of an assortment of characters. Many, of course, you know. At one time it was Krauss, Preiser, or Renninger, and the faux heads of neighborhood associations that rarely met, but claimed an unencumbered right to speak in the name of their community, on any subject. Then we had Lasser, who ran in one of the last open elections when November counted, and was summarily crushed! McNally, O’Shea, and Sheehan, the self-styled documentary filmmaker, who sees himself as a modern day Bud Greenspan or David Wolper, led our next group He eventually got on the Board two years ago with his last minute McCarthylike smears of his opponents. He was thoroughly chastised and exposed by the Fair Campaign Practice Board. His short reign may end with resignation or for sure by the hand of the voters in 2009.

It was this group, now led by Robert Bernstein, the manipulating attorney from Edgemont who once claimed that he would spend endless hours per week to pursue his goal of removing Paul Feiner. We all wondered then what were the nefarious reasons behind his active and venal animosity. Maybe with the revelation of the Troy affidavit, the truth will start to bubble to the surface. Maybe with the acquisition of this parcel of land, Bernstein will establish his capital and his seat of power. Like Louis XIV, the Sun King, Le Roi Soleil, who was attributed to have said, “L Etat, c’est moi,” or “I am the state!” Bernstein will become the crowned head of Edgemontania. Maybe he will not only be able to secede from Greenburgh, but Westchester, the United States and maybe the Western Hemisphere. Hurrah and hail for a tax-free Edgemontania!

I can see it now, Edgemontania as a small principality, not unlike San Marino, where its income derives mainly from postage stamps and corporations, which reside comfortably in a tax-free atmosphere. I am sure he would rather reside in the Cayman Islands, with its famous Seven-Mile Beach, and tax-shelters, but unfortunately, Edgemontania’s only water front is the Bronx River, which is much more like a creek then the Caribbean. But so what, the hilly beauty of Edgemont is more reminiscent of the foothills of Albania. Albania used to have a portly sovereign at one time or another. One, Ahmed Zogu, with the support of Yugoslavia, became president in 1924 and proclaimed himself King Zog I in 1928. I am wondering if the sobriquet, King Bernie doesn’t seem to fit, and whether he should borrow Zog’s famous name and become Zog II. Let’s face it there have been many Kings with the names of Louis, Charles, Wilhelm, Frederick, and even Richard, but Zog!

Zog II, of the CABALISTIC Kingdom of Edgemontania It has a ring to it. I suggest a popular uprising at the pond in Edgemont to show popular support for a revolution. Off with Feiner’s head!

But of course all this is fable. Edgemont is the home to an unlimited amount of sensible people, and they would never allow a coup d’etat from this wannabe potentate. They are made of sterner stuff and when the news of his plotting comes out, his pipedream as the future King-Emperor will be dim as the smoke from his burning ambition rises to the stratosphere.


The Shadow!

Anonymous said...

TO anonymous at 1:13:
BRAVO!

Anonymous said...

Hey Hal, the Shadow is challenging you for Blog Supremacy!!!

GREAT POST!!!!

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Garfunkel,

Since you will be speaking to the authorities, could you please mention what Kaminer did to the School Superintendant in Valhalla. I know for a fact that Gil confessed in front of witnesses. All we need is an official investigation and Gil will expose which Town Council members ordered him to threaten the woman.

Anonymous said...

I suggest all of you lusty cast of characters that inhibit this blog show up at the real theater of the absurd and watch the un-crowned clown prince of Edgemontania, the faux King Zog II, and his band of merry mischief makers, twist this miscreant Board into another pretzel of their design on Wednesday night.

It should be a lesson to all of us when they must confront the evidence of their dark magic, now exposed to the light of day.

Maybe the 4th estate will finally take note of who really directs the Board. Maybe then the portly puppet-master, the uncrowned King, will pull another rabbit out of his black bag of Blackstone tricks.

The world waits in wonderment for this wannabe Prince to explain away his wheeling and dealing!

Let's find out how Bass was going to arrange this "no can lose" referendum. Let's find out how Edgemont will be bent to the will of Zog II and his dreams of a secessionist paradise beholden to no one.

How ironic is it that Queen Bee Suzanne, who knows virtually nothing of Greenburgh is the official head of this ticket of mischief makers, while the real power is Zog the 2nd who pulls all the strings.

Keep up the good work you literary pigmies. Keep on banging the empty drum of WestHelp, that's a good one. Keep up talking about Feiner's money! But don't forget about the "real" story, the one that is about greed, corruption, manipulation, law-breaking and arrogance. Don't forget about how Zog II gets everyone in line!

The Shadow knows!

Anonymous said...

"If TOG partially funds Edgemont Rec ..."

Does anyone know as a FACT that Greenburgh gives funds to Edgemont Rec? It just doesn't seem logical.

Anonymous said...

First let me say Bravo! to all of the very creative, entertaining bloggers here today. I just finished reading and I'm LMAO! Thanks!

Dear Anon 3:31.

'Tis truly a fact. I sent Paul an email yesterday asking about it. He confirmed that TOG “contributes” and said that he would get back to me with an accounting today or tomorrow. I haven’t received any more information.

Anonymous said...

Mike Kolesar gave us great information and a solution to the Bob Bernstein problem.

Why doesn't Bernstein make a separate village out of his own property -- an acre, a half acre, or whatever. Michelle McNally can do the same. Then each can be mayors of their own villages, and be the Zoning Board, Planning Board. They can even be the village justices.

What a fantastic solution. And since they will still be in the town of Greenburgh, because a village has to be in the town, they will be able to vote for Sheehan and Bass and the two silent women.

They might even be invited to join the Village Officials Committee.

Anonymous said...

The problem with that is they don't get to run everyone else's life like they are presently doing in Greenburgh.

Anonymous said...

Paul, at wednesday nite town hall meeting,please remain quiet. The council members have hung themselves, The same goes for Bernstein and McNally. Just remember silence is golden.Let the residents run the show.There is nothing that can say to justify their criminal act concerning Dromore Rd.I will be there to see the fire works.

Anonymous said...

Please note: The usual defenders of the Four Stingless Bees seemed to have gone away. Maybe they are busy like little drones working on the hive's protection tonight. Maybe, just maybe, it is starting to resonate with them that the problems that Bassgate is causing may not go away.

But in reality, Bernie the attorney, who writes all their claptrap is probably busy wondering if he'll be disbarred.

Meanwhile, back to the real world!
a) What was this deal all about?
b) Why is Barnes supporting Edgemont secession? Is she crazy?
c) Is Juettner really awake? What is a lawyer doing in illegal meetings?
d) Can Bass guarantee a referendum and a victory? Send him to the GOP!
e) What are the implications for S&R Developement and what did the Board really promise?
f) What happened if the property was given to Bernie the Attorney and he did not give it back?
g) Why was S & R led by the nose?
h) Do the people of Edgemont want their own Village with Bernie and Michelle as their Duke and Duchess?
i) Does the open meeting laws mean anything to the Board?
j) Why did Bass croak and choke on WCBS-880 this morning?
k) Is the heat in the kitchen getting to hot?
l) When will these people resign?
m) Why are they proposing an unconstitutional ethics law?
n) Should they all be prosecuted?
o) What control has Bernie have over these so-called elected officials?
p) Does he have pictures on Bass?
q) When will these public "servants" be sworn?

Tune in to more of the Son of the Shadow

Anonymous said...

The Shadow Watched Carefully!

The Town Board met last night and the storm that broke over Westchester returned with vengeance to 177 Hillside Avenue, There the story finally got out about the real ethics problem facing Greenburg. Suzanne Berger’s contributions! It was told that she got 33% of her campaign money from her law firm, Bryan, Cave, in the wake of her engineering the no-bid deal in Greenburgh! Now we are talking ethics! Let her deny the connection, let her plead that these contributors are only her friends, but they got their money’s worth in spades!

How about roly-poly from Edgmontania? Bernie the Attorney, aka King Zog II, came in loaded for bear and got a whiff of grapeshot blasted back at him. King Zog II expects to rule Edgemont one day as the Kingdom of Edgmontania. He wants to be a benevolent dictator, a philosopher king, in the Platonic mold. Maybe he needs a platonic friend? But boy were his hands shaking when he handed his papers over to Princess Michelle. But Barnes was quivering and silent! Why did she cave-in on secession for Edgemont? Where was Juettner? She never uttered a word, maybe she was just brain dead or asleep. But Sir Francis he was totally out of control, talking like a frightened magpie. Boy is that guy a bag of stale wind! Two and half years left to get him!

It was great theater on Channel 76, sorry I couldn't be there to enjoy the show!

The Shadow Knows!

Anonymous said...

Bass was asked the question repeatedly this evening by Supervisor Paul, and was asked to answer with a simple Yes or No.

"At any point during the meeting with the developer was anything ever mentioned about land for a Town Hall for Edgemont?"

He was asked repeatedly at least 5 times.

He refused to answer the question.
The other Board members refused to answer the question.

Citizens of Greenburg, is this what you want from your elected officials?

Why are they cow-towing to the Edgemont citizens, singulary?

WE don't need no stinking Ethics Laws, we just need our Town Board members to show some ethics.

An embarrasing display this evening by the majority of the Town Board.

Anonymous said...

Did anyone see candidate Berger yelling "Shut up" to an audience member during tonight's meeting?

Is this the type of character that you want to add to the disfunctional mix?

Anonymous said...

Berger is mean spirited, just like her mentor Francis. Can you imagine how vicious those two would be in tandem? The four Council members and Berger obviously support Edgemont incorporateing. This will cost every section of the Town money. This will be a major campaign issue.

Anonymous said...

Pharoh Bernstein says "So let it be written, so let it be done." Bernstein has wanted Edgemont to become a Village for years. Now he sees the opportunity to get the land for his Village Hall and could not resist involving himself in negotiations for it even though he was elected by no one to do so.

Anonymous said...

Nine Villages + No Unincorporated Area = Peaceful, Efficient Township

Hastings
Dobbs Ferry
Irvington
Tarrytown
Elmsford
Ardsley
Edgemont
Hartsdale
Fairview

Anonymous said...

Berger needless to say was very uncouthe ,Boy the Democratic party must be hot up to choose her as their chairperson. What has happened to our political system.
She does not have the hutspa to run Greenburgh and even less to be a judge. She should have taken some lesson from the judge who is leaving Greenburgh for a higher position,in his manner of speaking and his tone of speaking. He is a good representative of what a person should be like who is seeking a position in any municipality.

She didn't tell us anything new about Dobbs Ferry HOsp.that we didn't know. Yes she did not answer the questions put forth by the residents concerning monies made by her firm to the democratic party.There were many other questions that she didn't answer,not because she didn't know the answers but because she did not want to be truthful because it may prove that what she did was also unethical.

Anonymous said...

Berger's resume is for the birds. many a good person have degrees but do not act as she did last night at the town hall meeting. She trys to come accross as though she knows what is going on in all the areas of Greenburgh.What a pity.She seems to know only what is fed to her by those who too are seeking power,to govern Greenburgh.

Anonymous said...

Statement to the Greenburgh Town Board
July 18, 2007

My name is Richard J. Garfunkel and I live in unincorporated Greenburgh with a Tarrytown post office.
I want to thank the Supervisor Paul Feiner and the Town Board for having this hearing. It seems of course that the gist of this effort is to not only punish the Supervisor with this flawed ethics law but to create loopholes for others.

(PS: This is the copy of a letter from Pace Law School regarding this flawed and phoney new ethics code! rjg)

Hon. Paul J. Feiner
Supervisor
Town of Greenburgh
177 Hillside Avenue
Greenburgh, NY 10607

Dear Paul:

By letter dated April 2, 2007, you requested our review and comments on a draft of proposed changes to Chapter 570, Code of Ethics of the Town of Greenburgh. By letter dated April 19, 2007, we provided comments on those proposed changes. Thereafter, you advised that additional changes had been made to the previously reviewed proposed amendments to Chapter 570 and asked that we review those additional changes. On July 6, 2007, Town Councilman, Francis Sheehan, provided us with a red-line version of amendments to Chapter 570 that are to be the subject of a public hearing on July 18, 2007.

Given the limited time available for our review of those latest revisions, we have the following general observations regarding the proposed legislation:

1. We commend the Town on its efforts to ensure that public business is conducted without actual conflict of interest or the appearance of impropriety. However, a code of ethics must be easy for lay persons to understand and apply without resort to lawyers in order to achieve its primary purpose of providing guidance to officials, employees and citizens. Given the legislation’s complexity, the criminal and civil sanctions for its violation and the overbreadth and privacy concerns discussed below, we are concerned that this standard has not been met and that enactment of the proposed legislation may discourage persons from serving the Town.

2. Notwithstanding commendable efforts to ensure a pristine ethical environment within the Town, we are concerned that the prohibitions and mandates in §§ 570-4, 570-7 and 570-8 relating to the acceptance of contributions and the filing of campaign contribution reports may sweep too broadly, infringing upon the First Amendment rights of both contributors and candidates (see generally Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S.1 (1976); Randall v. Sorrell, 126 S.Ct. 2479 (2006)) and/or intruding into areas of campaign finance regulation where the State has preempted the field.[1]

3. We are also concerned that certain restrictions placed on the actions of elected Town officials will impair their ability to effectively serve their constituents and/or unduly restrict their use of information that is otherwise publicly available for the use of others. See § 570-4(L)(4) which would preclude or deter a Town Board member from appearing before the Planning Board or Zoning Board of Appeals to support a Town project or a project deemed to be in the best interest of his or her constituents; § 570-4(B)(1) which would prohibit use of information that is otherwise publicly available and § 570-4(B)(2), (3) which prohibits elected officials from publicly disclosing information potentially material to the discharge of their duties notwithstanding that such information is not made confidential by Federal or State law. Moreover, no provision is made to permit elected or appointed officials or employees to disclose conduct known or reasonably believed to involve waste, inefficiency, corruption, criminal activity or conflicts of interest even under circumstances where such disclosure is expressly protected by State law. See Civil Service Law § 75-b.

4. We recommend that the Town Board consider protecting the privacy interests of those who seek an advisory opinion from the ethics board and those who are required to complete and file financial disclosure forms. See generally “Running a Local Municipal Ethics Board: Is Ethics Advice Confidential?”, by Steven G. Leventhal and Susan Ulrich, Municipal Lawyer, Spring 2004. Confidentiality in the exercise of an Ethics Board’s advisory function is justified as a matter of public policy because it encourages officials to seek ethics advice without fear that the making of such inquiry will be used against them. The Committee on Open Government has opined that the advisory opinions of a town ethics board would be exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Law unless adopted by the town board as a final determination that the subject officer or employee engaged in official misconduct. N.Y.Comm. on Open Gov’t, FOIL Advisory Op. 8922 (1995).

Similarly, mandatory financial disclosure requirements must be accompanied by a “mechanism to prevent automatic public disclosure of all information provided.” Hunter v. City of New York, 58 A.D. 2d 136, aff’d, 44 N.Y. 2d 708 (1978). See also Barry v. City of New York, 712 F.2d 1554, 1564 (2nd Cir. 1983) upholding New York City’s revised mandatory financial disclosure requirements where provisions of that law enabled an employee to indicate upon submission of his or her financial disclosure information form such information that the person wished to remain confidential. Upon request for public inspection of the employee’s financial disclosure form, the Board of Ethics would evaluate the individual’s privacy request, and based on the personal nature of the information, whether the information was related to the individual’s duties, and whether the information involved a potential conflict of interest, the Board of Ethics would then determine whether to keep parts of the disclosure confidential. Id at 1561-1562.[2]

5. Consideration should be to given to including a waiver provision where strict compliance with a provision or provisions of the legislation would create undue hardship or where a waiver would not be in conflict with the principles and interests of the Town.

6. On a more technical level we have the following additional observations:

(a) § 570-4(L)(1) would appear to require recusal of Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals members where a merchant in town seeks an approval and the members have at one time or another purchased goods or services from such merchant. An application by a local supermarket could result in the entire board having to recuse itself.

(b) § 570-11 (A)(1) states inconsistently that the members of the Board of Ethics “shall serve at the pleasure of the Town Board” for “terms of three (3) years.” Typically, outside civil service, public officers or employees appointed for a fixed term may not be removed except for cause. By contrast, those serving at the pleasure of the appointing authority may be removed without such protection.

(c) § 570-4(A)(1)(a) could be construed to prohibit inter alia acceptance of a tax refund by a Town resident or the ceremonial acceptance of a gift to the Town, on Town property.

We hope that these comments and observations are helpful in your consideration of the subject legislation.

This memorandum is provided for informational purposes only and may not be relied upon as formal opinion of counsel.


Very truly yours,

Lester D. Steinman

By the way, while we are talking ethics and contributions, I have the recent filing for Ms. Suzanne Berger, the Greenburgh Town Democratic Chairperson, who is also a candidate for the office of Greenburgh Supervisor. Ms. Berger lists 98 contributions on her list, and 32 of those contributors work for her law firm and have contributed over 33% of her $20,958 political war chest. Of the $14,240 that is left over, $2400 comes from district leaders, political action committees, and Judges. This represents almost 17% of the balance that is left. I have no idea how many other lawyers have contributed to Ms. Berger’s campaign, but one could easily bet that this is the tip of the iceberg. In other words, at least 43% of her money comes from her law firm and her political connections in and out of Greenburgh. The question going forward that should be on everyone’s mind where the contributions from everyone else? Why is it law firms, political connections and people who want to do business with the Town.

Of course the law firm that Ms. Berger is associated with, Bryan and Cave, received a no-bid contract from the this Board, which Supervisor Feiner voted against, and one of her backers is Charles McNally, the husband of Michelle McNally, who seems actively involved in the Edgemont secessionist movement. It was also the McNally’s contribution and influence that seemed direct Councilperson Bass’s obstruction on the tree legislation of last year.

I have nothing against people exercising their right to give to a political campaign, but I wonder how much influence these power broker friends are buying? Usually one would ignore these contributions as business as usual coincidences. But, when the Chairperson of the Greenburgh Democrats is also facilitating a no-bid contract with the Town, more scrutiny should be observed.

I suggest that any new ethics legislation be held over until the partisanship and antagonism of this Board is settled.

Richard J. Garfunkel

Anonymous said...

Greenburgh Town Board Meeting
July 18, 2007

My name is Richard J. Garfunkel and I reside in the Watch Hill section of Greenburgh.

Again, I wish to thank the Supervisor and the Town Board for allowing this open forum for public comment. Recently the public has learned about a deposition given by one Richard Troy, a principal of S & R Development Estates, a company involved in land development.

In his sworn deposition, Mr. Troy charges that that he attended meetings with four members of this Town Board and Robert Bernstein and Michelle McNally for the purposes of arranging a moratorium regarding an effort to limit the increase of Edgemont’s school population, and to create a “deal” where he would be exempted from that moratorium, Edgemont through Robert Bernstein’s efforts would control most of the property and the location of a potential Village Hall for Edgemont would be created.

My first question is: Did members of this Board attend this meeting, in violation of State law, or do they wish to deny their attendance under oath?

My second question is: Was the intent of this moratorium aimed at the limiting of admission of minority students? And if it was why did not you object?

My third question is: Is Mr. Troy lying about his characterization of this meeting?

In my reading of the affidavit signed by Richard Troy, in paragraph 44, and witnessed by others, he asserts that Robert Bernstein sent S & R a letter on February 2, 2007 contemplating gifting the property directly to him.

Therefore my 4th question is: Was the Board conspiring to gift this land to Mr. Bernstein for his own purposes without the knowledge of Supervisor and the public?

In paragraph 46 of this same document “Councilman Sheehan and Bass had suggested that it would be appropriate for Councilpersons Barnes and Juettner to meet personally with the principals of S & R since they would be formally voting to implement the agreement.”

Therefore my next question is: Was this vote already decided in advance without public input or an open and recorded hearing?

In this same paragraph 46, S & R would grant easements on the property, would allow the EEC, led by Michelle McNally to buy the property (for what purpose) and would have a modification in the moratorium language so the property would be exempted from its application and allow the builder, with the support of the Town, to develop a 10 unit town house.

Therefore I ask: How come this was done in secret and without the Supervisor’s knowledge?

In paragraph 47, Robert Bernstein said that he would Edgemont purchase the property through a bond offering by an Edgemont Park District he would create. Bernstein indicated that he would want to lease the land to the Greenburgh Nature Center; thereafter he would want to use the land as a possible site for an Edgemont Village Hall, if and when, Edgemont seceded from Greenburgh.

Therefore I ask: Are the Board members, who were privy to this nefarious deal, supporting the secession of Edgemont?

In paragraph 54, Mr. Troy received a call from Councilman Bass, who told him that he wanted to arrange for a referendum to be placed on the September 18th primary day ballot, to approve the bond offering for the to-be-created Edgemont Parks Board to purchase the property. He asked me to “trust” him that the bond offering would pass in September, and asked me to make a gift of the property immediately. Troy declined.

Therefore I ask: Is this ethical to shove this down Edgemont’s throat, to guarantee an election’s result, and to link this referendum in September to influence Edgemont’s vote in the Greenburgh primary?

In my reading, I believe that this property was never intended for the Greenburgh Nature Center, or for S & R’s private interest in development. It was never intended for Edgemont to use this for park development, or for a buffer for the GNC. These were all subterfuges. They were all red herrings, they were all smoke and mirrors to put S & R in an economic box with nowhere to turn, and to convince the voters of Edgemont that they were acquiring the land for “green space.” The purpose therefore was to have the land acquired and made available for Robert Bernstein’s use or long-term goal to make Edgemont a village. It seems quite clear that his plan was approved by the four councilpersons, all of whom, were present when he made his announcement. This further was supported by the fact that Bass called S & R to expedite the agreement, even asking Mr. Troy to transfer the property on trust to him He wisely declined.

Now we know the real story of who controls this Board. I suggest that if this affidavit is true and the consequences of this nefarious deal went through, the Town Of Greenburgh would be virtually destroyed, Bernstein and McNally would get their way, and this Town Board would along with its government be rendered useless. Simply it was a coup d’ etat designed by Bernstein and McNally with S & R as their foil. Board members Juettner and Barnes either willing accomplices or were suckered into this maelstrom. But, ff this is how they really feel about this deal, than I wonder why they are running for re-election. I suggest they drop out of the race or resign if their attitude towards the rest of unincorporated Greenburgh is what this meeting indicates.

PS: No one answered any questions- The Three Blind Mice, go deaf and dumb!

Richard J. Garfunkel

Anonymous said...

Mr. Garfunkel,
One questions please. I dont' know anything about Ms. Berger, but if she is a partner at a major law firm like Bryan Cave, $20,000 is maybe two weeks pay, maybe less? Do you seriously think she would be swayed by that sum?

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Garfunkle,

So the developer has a signed affidavit that he attended meetings with 4 council member. Does this meen 1 meeting with 4 members or 4 meetings with 1 each, or 2 meetings with 2 members (and or private citizens at various meetings). Bob said no meeting with more than 2. Affidavit is unclear.

Affidavit says land to TOWN, not even school district or park district.

So please go away. Nothing illegal happened. So please go back to collecting as much money as you can from developers.

Anonymous said...

Where is Jim? Aside from his original post giving his buddies a pass, he has been very quiet.

Anonymous said...

Mr. 2:17 you can't spin this.

It has been established that the Town Council had a very cute meeting on February 3. All came. But they had a cute idea. Two were in the room, Then one left and someone else came in. Then another left and the fourth person came in. In other words, they had a round-robin meeting. Why? They knew that they couldn't meet without violating the law, so they tried a gimmick so that tyey could say, as the tricky Bernstein says, that there was not a meeting with more than two.

If and when they try that gimmick before a judge or jury they will get creamed. They were all there and they all participated. They knowingly violated the law. I'd love to hear their answers when they are under oath.

Since Sheehan came on the Board the law has been unimportant to them, except when they accuse Feiner.

Anonymous said...

Dear 2:17 pm Anonymous!

Please read the law! If the Troy affidavit is correct, then there was a meeting, and what he said was correct. If they met, in a revolving door fashion, how some are saying it could have possibly happened, the same legal cosequence exists. I'm in the insurance business, and to my knowledge, I have never intentionally met a developer or expect to. I was in the manufacturing business and have never had any contact with a developer in my active adult working life of about 40 years. So where you can draw that conclusion is beyond my ken. Therefore to answer your assertion, I do not and have never been paid directly or indirectly by a developer. S & R Developement has a right to exist, and a right to do what they want. They even have a right to meet with anyone they wish. They knowingly, it seems to me, did not violate any statute, the Board did. They (Troy) only claimed they met with the Board, McNally and Bernstein. If this happened, according to Troy's sworn statement, then case law, back by thousands of decisions, would reflect a violation. If the Board members disagree with Troy, under oath, someone has perjured themselves. It is either Troy or the Board. Let the Board be deposed, and let the DA determine who is the liar. Perjury is a serious crime in NY State and America. I am not a judge, a lawyer, or a jury, and I am just quoting a sworn document. Therefore the onus is on the Board that has been accused. I did not witness the meeting, and therefore I am quoting from the document. If you are concerned with Bernstein and McNally, ask them to swear out a deposition. I am only interested in fairness regarding this situation and the ethics of Town officials.

Supervisor Paul Feiner rejected S & R's effort to develop the property, he has that right. He and the Board have the right of approval or disapproval. But State law prohibits secret meetings with intent to hide "the public's business," plain and simple. Therefore do not be a fool and play this game, you are going down the wrong path.

Last night the Board was asked various questions relating to this issue, and they ducked out on answering, by hiding behind a legal "fig leaf." If they had nothing to hide, or this deposition was a fabrication, they could have addressed it directly. The truth is always stronger than taking a "5th amendment type of way out."

You should be very concerned with deception, phony ethic's codes and the manipulation of real estate in Greenburgh. There is no doubt that Bernstein has been working for years to secede from Greenburgh. This would destroy the Town, raise taxes on the new potential village of Edgemont and raise taxes on the rest of Greenburgh. I am not sure whether this would be pretty. In fact, it would be a disaster.

So keep on carrying water for Bernstein and you'll get what you do not want.

Richard J. Garfunkel

Anonymous said...

anonymous 2:13pm

She is of counsel of the law firm and obviously did not make partner. Her contributions, so far were $6718 out of $20,958, or 33%. These are significant numbers, by the way. I have no clue regarding her compensation, and neither do you. She will be given more contributions from the firm over the next two months, you can bet on that. Her facilitation of the deal with Greenburgh, will bring oodles of cash to Bryan, Cave, and she will benefit from those billings down the line. Many would regard this as a quid pro quo. This is what lawyers do, they bring in business and sell influence and make deals. But she is the head of the Greenburgh Democratic Party, and she has been a leader who has been partisan, unfair and divisive. She bent arms to wrest the nomination from Greenawalt, and she doesn't seem to have his support or the District Leaders that favored him.

Now when revelations about her connections come to the surface, she must defend her actions. The law firm has a right to bid on any job, but ethically her connection with the Party, and her nomination raise many ethical questions. If a citizen were concerned over a gift or two influencing a vote, one could then easily imagine a large, large, campaign gift rewarding past actions. If, by some strange chance, she wins, she could remain with the firm, hire a Town Manager for $150,000+ and collect her no-show pay, and continue of counsel at Bryan, Cave. Stranger things have happened. She knows nothing about holding office, has hinted she wants to hire a professional Town Manager, and with the support of a compliant Board, this could easily happen. So wake up!

My suggestion is vote for Feiner, and dump this Board as quickly as possible. First get rid of Bass and Barnes, and then we can work on the real destructive force, Sheehan.

Richard J. Garfunkel

Anonymous said...

Dear Democrats:

I understand that the Westchester Business School is offering a summer course in "how to act, look and feel like a town council member".

The six week course will include:

Why you should first read the Resolutions you have been "assigned" to introduce.
Class will be taught by Eddie Mae Barnes

How to create Resolutions of your own with special emphasis on making existing laws seem fresh, original and on the side of the angels.
Class will be taught by Steve the Mensch Bass

How to hold a secret Town Board meeting.
Class will be taught by Francis Sheehan.

How to get the best from a "power" nap.
Class will be taught by Diana Juettner.

How to fit an entire Town Council in your back pocket.
Class will be taught by Famous Lawyer.

How to succeed in being a candidate without really trying.
NOTE: This course has been cancelled.
The scheduled instructor was found to be lacking accreditation.

How to foil FOIL requests.
Class will be taught by Alfreda Williams.
NOTE: This class is only given in the afternoon.

Mr. Bass' and Mr. Sheehan's classes will alternate with those of Ms. Barnes and Ms. Juettner.
Mr. Lawyer classes are conducted at the Church of the Little Emperor, located on Elba.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Garfunkel,

Please don't forget to mention Gil Kaminer threatening the school superintendant from Valhalla. I can assure you Gil confessed in front of witnesses. If an official investigation is ever started, I pledge that the names of those witnesses will be revealed to the investigators. Kaminer will never commit perjury and risk imprisonment for Sheehan & Co. This is the opportunity to get the proper authorities involved in this case.

Anonymous said...

An interesting Zoning Board Meeting. I have one question: Whose initials are on the map that was dated with the notation March 2007? Since the Town Board is the only legal authority to be able to change a Zoning Map and since they did not vote on a change in March 2007, who made these changes? Whoever initialed the map seems to have violated Greenburgh Law and should be dismissed from their positions for doing so.

Anonymous said...

In today's Scarsdale Inquirer Bob Bernstein states that "We therefore welcome the fact that the town council was willing to work with us in Edgemont to explore whether the property could be protected."

At Wednesday's meeting Bob stated categorically that "no meeting took place." Well Bob, which is it? Did you meet with the developers without any approvals from the Edgemont community or did you not? Did you commit to costing Edgemont taxpayers millions of dollars without asking them first to create your Park District?

Jim, no defense for your buddies???

Anonymous said...

The ethics board should sit back for a while to see how the criminal acts against the four council members together with Bernstein and McNally turn out.The way the new rules read nothing will happen to the council as far as letting them go. They will get a slap on the wrist and that's it.We have to see if any ,law suit will be brought against all of them.The ethics laws are not only for accusations against the supervisor but they should include any town employee .
The scenery seems to have changed since Wednesday's night meeting. First there was no meeting now Bernstein admits there was a meeting together with the town council. Oh well the lies have finally caught up to the six.great they have proved how right many of the blogers have been right along. Gee it took such a short time to see how crooked the board has been. They had to make a mistake by golly this is a tremendous one. People were complaing about Edgemont right along ,They were all right.Nows the time to fight back since Bernstein and McNally want their own little village, puting a larger burden on the taxpayers throughout Greenburgh. Oh by the way Berger is also part of the scheme.She has yet to comment on any of the issues. Could she be that dumb?

Anonymous said...

richard garfunkel (feiner's campaign manager) says:

My suggestion is vote for Feiner, and dump this Board as quickly as possible.

Feiner has been in office 16 years. He needs to be dumped. Greenburgh has ceased to exist under his regime of corruption, incompetence and divisiveness.

Anonymous said...

"How to create Resolutions of your own with special emphasis on making existing laws seem fresh, original and on the side of the angels. Class will be taught by Steve the Mensch Bass"

LOLLLLLLLLL ... I can't stop laughing ... This wins as the best line of the entire blog since its creation ... It's soooo true! I used to get sort of annoyed by this, but now I think I'll just find it entertaining ... Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Anyone have any idea when the class on "How to save Darfur by a mere resolution" to be taught by Little Stevie Bass will be offered?

Anonymous said...

Is it me or did it seem that on Wednesday that our very own Edie Mae was "Lost In The Flood" (apologies to Mr. Springsteen)?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Lasser,

Your lack of a vigorous defense for your fellow Edgemonter's is most revealing. I'm glad that all Edgemonter's are not in favor of illegal meetings, creating park districts without anyone else knowing about it and having issues placed on the ballot in September without any prior consensus from the community being reached.

Good for you Mr. Lasser. Let Bernstein and McNally twist in the wind.

Anonymous said...

Paul,the new map has 2 sets of initials ,Could someone let us know who signed off on this document. This was mantioned at the zoning board meeting. These two persons went ahead and drew up a new map on Dromore rd, property.

Anonymous said...

Wake up Jim we are waiting for your answer.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Lasser was away on his honeymoon and returned this week. Still, he posted insightful comments above, if you'd care to scroll up or use the Edit/Find function on your browser. So give the newlywed a break.

Anonymous said...

I did not find Jim's comments insightful. His comments were weak at best. I have often found Jim to be the voice of reason on this blog, however on this subject he seems to be giving people a pass.

Anonymous said...

he seems to be giving people a pass?? the guy just got married! lighten up!

Anonymous said...

Paul,

It is public information. You should just give us the initials on the zoning map dated March 2007.

Anonymous said...

Jim's silence speaks volumes.

Anonymous said...

Jim's silence ... probably means he is enjoying his new marriage!!

Anonymous said...

Or,.....A little bit of both.

Anonymous said...

I have been silent because I am not in possession of any facts. Unlike the "anonymous" campaign managers, supporters and sycophants on either side, I have no need to rush to the defense of anyone. Mine is but one quiet voice which asks for facts on which to base a position. Absent the facts, no reasonable person can discuss the allegations. I have been deeply disappointed by the heavily politicized postings - and even more disappointed by the personally directed slurs and name-calling which have become commonplace in these exchanges. They are unnecessary and cloud the real issues which cry out for serious discussion. That does not mean there is no place for the occaisonal satirist (Hal Samis is talented - sadly the Shadow is just that) just that the use of pejoratives has been substituted for wit and I personally find it offensive.
I posted a brief note to Mr. Feiner in the "Ethics Gag Order" section at the top of this blog.

Anonymous said...

Jim -

Hopefully you will join the chorus demanding that the Town Council come foward and state definitely the circumstances of these meetings. I'm sure that you would agree that we all need to know what went on. Were there four council members present in the building with only two in the same room? We all ned to know. You state that you don't know the facts but the only true way of knowing the facts is to get the Council on record. Mr. Lasser, don't you agree?

Anonymous said...

the tory affidavit has been revised. feiner never posted the changed story the troys are now telling. why? probably because it doesnt attack bernstein and mcnally. feiner is about attacking citizens and not finding out the truth. he is unfit to be the supervisor. in fact, after 16 years in office, why do more and more people find his being in office a puzzlement?

Anonymous said...

Where do we find the revised affadavit??

Anonymous said...

In the Zoning Board file.
It corrects a date and only that.

Anonymous said...

only a date? troy said he looked at the 1996 map in affidavit #1

then he "found out" the 1996 map said the property was zoned single family

then he filed a "corrected" affidavit saying he made a mistake

all along mr troy has had a battery of attorneys assisting him

troy may have a claim against his attorneys or other advisors but not against the town.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 259 of 259   Newer› Newest»