Monday, July 23, 2007

WEEK OF JULY 23rd--Greenburgh Democracy POST YOUR COMMENTS

Please post your comments about town issues.


Anonymous said...

How many catch basins has Regula and his crew cleaned out.What street is he working on. Has the building dept. checked on construction jobs that have been going on for some time. All these jobs that have been neglected for years attribute to the clogging of catch basin throughout Greenburgh.

Anonymous said...

Seems like Al and his crew did a good job today. little flooding! Thanks, Al

Anonymous said...

The town's catch basin neglect situation is not a "good job today" kind of thing! No one should be thanked/congratulated for last-second attempts to address years of ongoing neglect. The reimbursement claims that will come in as a result of today's storm will all likely be a result of neglect allowed by town management.

There should be one person making the rounds with a street-sweeper throughout the town thirty-five hour a week, every week, on a predictable, street-by-street, monthly schedule. This is (should be) a simple part of municipal highway department operations. The highway department probably does some things well, but when it comes to routine expectations of taxpayers (weed-wacking, street-cleaning, etc.), the department appears to be operating quite poorly.

Anonymous said...

Suzanne Berger is running against Feiner.
Berger's law firm, Bryan Cave, contributed most of the money to her campaign.
The town council should recognize that there is a conflict. They should hire another law firm, one that is not political.
Is it true that the firm was not interviewed by any of the Town Board members prior to being hired?
Is it true that the firms hourly rates are higher than other firms?

hal samis said...

Tim Lewis, just 3 votes.
Mark Stellato, just 3 votes.
Jim Heslop, just 3 votes
Al Regula, just 3 votes.

What a wonderful world it would be.

bryan cave, the town and feiner said...

is it true that bryan cave was the unanimous choice of all town officials and department heads?

is it true bryan cave was lauded by the town board for its previous work on its behalf ?

was it true that mr feiner never once suggested that other law firms be interviewed until ms berger has seeking to run against him?

all true

Anonymous said...

Feiner was not given the opportunity to interview other law firms because Sheehan had his mind made up for some time because Berger made her mind up that going for the position of supervisor was just a stepping stone for her. She is looking for a judgeship position. In doing this Sheehan would step into the supervisors position. THIS IS WHY HER LAW FIRM GOT THE CONTRACT. I think the night that is was voted on, Bass declined to vote also. You can see who is running the show in Greenburgh" Sheehan."

Anonymous said...

Mr.Samis was correct. if a citizen makes a complaint they will be intimidated the way the law reads now. Feiner wanted to wait to pass the ethics laws but was outvoted. What's the rush with these board members. Do they think they will go free from punishment because the law is in their favor. They should remember that there are stronger laws on the books, that will be punish their wrong doings.

The corrections that Samis put forth should have been enough for the board to study what was said,but the board poopooed his recomendations .WHY. What are they afraid of.

hal samis said...

In case anyone asks, Suzanne Berger still lacks issues.

It is 10:30 at night and all is well in Greenburgh. But do Bob and Francis know where there candidate is?

Anonymous said...

Steve Bass had expressed disappointment with the work Bryan Cave did for the town and voted with Feiner against the no bid, no interview firm that Suzanne Berger is counsel to.

hal samis said...

The fabulous new Ethics Laws, part 1 (of a series)

From 570-11 D (page 16 of the multi-color version) distributed Tuesday afternoon.

Because residents have been told by the Town Council that the laws are one step forward for mankind and have been vetted by the volunteer Ethics Board (appointed by the Town Council), read yourself, the maerial in caps are my comments.

This section is the fabulous addition so that now the Public can go directly to the Ethics Board which "may" hear their complaint, but first..with further ado, may I present the new Ethics Law.

"The Board of Ethics, with respect to Article 18 of the General Municipal Law and/or this Code of Ethics, shall render findings, conclusions, opinions, advisory opinions and recommendations, as appropriate, upon...


(1) the written request of the Town Board
(2) the written request of an actual or prospective Public Officer, Employee, or Agency Member or,


(3) the recepit of a verified complaint by any resident of, or property owner or lessee in, the Town. Such verification, which is a sworn statement under oath, shall be filed with the Town Clerk and shall set forth, subject to the laws of perjury in the State of New York, that the information alleged in such complaint is believed in good faith to be true and correct to the complainant's knowledge, information and belief"


If this warning looks intimidating (and it didn't come from Pirates of the Carribean), it was meant to be. And the Ethics Board can't even claim credit. This was the handiwork of the Town Council and that means the heavy hand of Francis Sheehan. Not inconsistent with what other bloggers have noted about him regarding unrelated matters.

But the real reason that the Ethics Laws must be passed speedily is the fear that someone other than Samis, someone with more clout is going to recognize that the 3 or 4 Town Council members will be judging themselves should the Ethics Board ever get interested in what went on at the Dromore Road would-be developer's office. Bass, arranging the meeting, says he was out of town for the meeting (Tim Lewis has just got to protect his clients better against the ruthless badgering of The Scarsdale Inquirer) but present were Barnes, Juettner, Sheehan, Bernstein and McNally. Now this may or may not be a good example but if the Ethics Board found a violation, if the Ethics Board made a recommendation; both the finding and the recommendation would go to the Town Board where Bass, Barnes, Juettner and Sheehan would vote on their guilt. Any bets on the outcome?

That is as Ian Drury would put it, a reason to be cheerful. That is another reason why the vote on the proposed laws MUST be as soon as this Friday (3 day notice of Special Town Board Meeting). That is why the customary "close the Public Hearing and leave the written record open for a week" was not forthcoming. Because it absolutely, positively, definitely MUST, no doubt about it, MUST. And we can always change it down the road so remember to hold onto your receipt. You will need it to remind you of why you may not choose to vote the Democrat line this time.

The local Dems really do have the cutomary liberal "platform"; the problem is that those they expect to run don't remember or understand what it means.

The new first for Greenburgh is the Town where Democracy was murdered, even without a shot fired.

Anonymous said...

My man Hal with the Ian Drury "Reason to be Cheerful" reference....1.....2....3!

Does it get any better than that!

Thank you for the reporting.

I can see people having different opinions, that's what democracy is all about. Explain to me however how anyone themselves with any tiny bit of ethical character, can look at this travesty of "law making" and say it is OK?

What exactly am I missing?

Reasons to be cheerful:

One : Bass ...............going
Two : Barnes............going
Three: Berger...........back in hiding.

Tell us Jim said...

When was Bob Bernstein or Michelle McNally ever authorized by the Edgemont Community to explore the possibility of acquiring the property at Dromore Road?

Anonymous said...

The way the ethics law reads, the four council member will go scott free as far as the meeting with Bernstein and Mcnally goes. Is this legal. They all should be punished,if they are found guilty,But the law reads that the four council members have the last word on who's right and who's wrong.This is not a good example to be set,and to be implimented by the ethics board.Change the ruling asap. There will be more cases heard in the higher courts than they have now if this change is not made. Everyone will be suing in one court or another,making things worse for our town. We all know that we have a disfuncional four member board, this is why the ethics board cannot make them judge and jury.

Anonymous said...

Bernstein keeps repeating the same story about a developer in his area. He's pissed off because the guy went ahead and did what he wanted to do.Who is Bernstein and co. to tell the people what they could do and what they cant. The man was not building a tree house. He bought the land to build his own house and if possible another to sell. He had enough property to this. Change you tune.If I were the developer I would sue all of you,for harassment then and now. This is a free county, as they say who died and left you boss.

Anonymous said...

As a developer I feel that we try to make properties look better and better as we go along. This man Bernstein and company, should mind their own business as what we do.about trees on property to be built on. We cannot build arround the trees or on top of the trees.Don't these people have better things to do than stop progress. Let them try to stop me ,I will own their homes and businesses in the blink of an eye.The developer should have sued them and he probably would have won. Edgemont is not America it's only a dot on the westchester map.

hal samis said...

It is not even a dot.

tree preservation is essential said...

Thats some vision - a treeless world.

Preserving trees is not folly.

Trees have a great deal of financial value, from increased property values to various environmental benefits. Trees stabilize the soil and control water pollution, yield advantageous microclimatic effects which conserve energy, preserve and foster air quality by removing carbon dioxide (C02) and airborne pollutants, abate visual and noise pollution, and provide a natural habitat for wildlife. They also provide welcome shade to people and add color and interest to the urban landscape. Trees provide a psychological boost to suburbanites. People are generally more satisfied with their neighborhoods if there are trees. The benefits of established trees in our communities are subtle and often overlooked.

hal samis said...

Whenever the going gets rough, it seems like "someone" sends out the word to change the subject.

Thus an endorsement for trees.

Coming next: the life story of a larva to leader, the Suzanne Berger story or, moth to myth.

As for trees, DPW honcho Al Regula who is supposed to be on top of those trees which don't concern Con Ed or the State DOT which Mr Abinante is trying to ride to newsprint, will have an easier time now that they are falling down in his backyard. Last night the 8 civilians who attended the Special Town Board meeting, were treated to the sight of a DPW truck removing a fallen tree from the parking area of Town Hall. Fortunately the tree was in the area where the Town cars now park.

Al and the Town arborist are probably very busy looking over the shoulders of Con Ed and the DOT but maybe someone should give a look around Town-owned property which is to be campaign contribution free but still a danger to taxpayers.

But, remember Al, even if you see some loose limbs, don't touch the tree until the stars are in the right place overhead and the tree doc says it is the right "time of month" for any surgery.

If all this seems exciting, then watch the fall premiere on must-see tv, especially if you like medical shows with quirky characters. "Tree Surgeon" is the exciting story of those doctors who make on-site calls during hurricanes and other disasters, attempting to save trees when all others have abandoned hope. All others save 1:19 pm.

quiet please said...

some people create noise because they can't stand silence. some people have to comment on everything for the same reason. sometimes silence is golden, a notion lost on 4:23.

hal samis said...

On the contrary I agree wholeheartedly because we are witness to so many, many comments from someone named anonymous. Why can't anonymous just shut up?

Equally true is the kind of person who makes the effort to go to a blog seeking "silence". I would suggest that this person hie thee hither to, say, a monastery. And I happen to know of one nearby, located at the end of Dromore Road.

Anonymous said...

11:42 seems to be right. silence is golden. even on a blog. the evil here is desperation to have the last word on any subject even one as absurd as attacking trees.

proud to be anon.

hal samis said...

Dear 3:49,

Will I really get the last word in?
Tell you what, I'll shut up on this topic if you can extract from my posting any of the desperation that is portrayed from what you see in my absurd attack on trees.

Attacking you however, I have zero qualms.

Try reading my posting on "trees" again, if you will, and then point out what you interpret as an attack on trees.

Failing that opportunity, there may still be open slots in summer school classes for the reading challenged.

Anonymous said...

From Richard J. Garfunkek

How to chill speech
From the Journal News
(Original publication: July 24, 2007)
Gotta love the Town of Greenburgh government. The officials are always up to something, usually each others' throats. For a taste, visit the town's Web site. Among headlines viewed yesterday: "EXTRAORDINARY SECRECY, FAVORITISM, VIOLATIONS OF OPEN MEETING LAW BY TOWN COUNCIL." Posted by some gadfly? Hardly. That one's from the town supervisor, Paul Feiner. And just above the notice of an upcoming event for "Greenburgh singles," there is this: "Supervisor uses Town email for political attack," which was posted by a "disappointed" Town Council - Eddie Mae Barnes, Steve Bass, Diana Juettner and Francis Sheehan. Such back and forth is commonplace between Feiner and the council. We suppose it would all be very amusing, if they were still in junior high.
Against this backdrop Greenburgh is considering a host of new ethics code changes; a public hearing on the proposals is scheduled for tonight. While more needs to be learned about exactly whose ox is being gored by specific measures, we join the chorus voicing concern about two provisions, one a proposal to ban town officials from accepting any campaign money from those seeking permits from the town, their lawyers, consultants and affiliates; and the other a rather Orwellian-sounding proposal targeting the "Abuse of Information."
In the first case, the campaign-finance provisions simply go too far; they would bind politicians and contributors in a manner neither contemplated nor likely permitted by the First Amendment. Having candidates disclose every nickel in contributions is necessary and altogether proper, but the wide ban on giving effectively shuts up both recipients and contributors, denying some the right to be heard in local governance. Greenburgh can't do that. Moreover, the contributions ban would not apply to political challengers; only actual officeholders - such as Feiner - would have to play by that rule. A restriction of such limited application should set off Greenburgh residents' fairness meter.
The "Abuse of Information" provision sets off our "1984" meter. It would call for sanctions including removal for officials who release any information "to which the public may be denied access" under the state's Freedom of Information Law, unless release has been authorized by the Town Board. To whom do you think that's directed? Feiner - he very often plays the roll of whistle-blower in Greenburgh, or odd man out - opined that the "Abuse of Information" provision could have a "chilling effect" on free speech. We agree. We also can imagine Valerie Plame-type inquiries into who leaked what to whom. There would be depositions. Perhaps lie-detector tests. The Greenburgh Web site would need to be expanded just to handle all the recriminations.
It would be worse than junior high. Greenburgh should think twice and again for enacting these changes.
A Journal News editorial
The Journal News offered the above editorial on Tuesday, July 24, 2007

From Richard J. Garfunkel:

In today’s Journal News, on the editorial page, we were able to observe two distinctive points of view. Mr. Steve Bass, an appointed Town Board Member, who ran unopposed in the last election cycle, has articulated his support of a draconian and possibly unconstitutional ethics code proposed by his and the Town Board’s hand picked group. During the regular Wednesday Greenburgh Town Board meeting, held on the 18th of July, the public excoriated both the “code” and its supporters, specifically Town Board members, Bass and Sheehan. Juettner and Barnes remained strangely silent.

During a subsequent hearing, the new, so-called “Ethic’s Board” withdrew their “anti whistle-blower” provision. With regards to that action by Supervisor Feiner, in today’s paper, was able to frame the background that brought about his actions. He stated, “Meeting in secret, meeting without the Supervisor, negotiating with two residents without letting the other affected residents know, planning a referendum in secret – all these are inappropriate to say the least, a violation of public trust for sure and violations of law. My e-mail alerted the town, and just in time.”

There is no doubt that Mr. Bass defends this clandestine conduct. He supported the inclusion of the “anti-freedom of speech, and anti-whistle-blower” provision until his own “select” Ethic’s Board withdrew it under public pressure. Thank the heavens for “Freedom of the Press!” Now he wants an “ethics law” that would limit incumbents from receiving contributions, but not limit challengers, like their candidate Suzanne Berger. It was pointed out in the Journal News, just today, that a large percentage of her contributions came from out of Greenburgh, some from out of state, and much from her law firm that benefited from a “no-bid” sweet heart contract pushed by Berger, in her role as the Greenburgh Democratic Chairperson, and by Francis Sheehan, a member of the Greenburgh Town Board. Supervisor Feiner voted against that “deal.”

It seems to me, because of this obvious conflict of interest, Ms. Berger should resign from being Chairperson of the Greenburgh Democrats, and should return those tainted contributions from her so-called friends. She claimed at the Town Board meeting, last Wednesday, that these were friends for twenty years. But her law firm only merged with Bryan Cave in 2002. Were most of the contributions only from her associates from the old law firm? She should answer that question.

Mr. Bass claims in today’s op-ed that the new “ethics law” poses absolutely no threat to the First Amendment. Where did Mr. Bass get his law degree? Since when is Steve Bass an expert on the Constitution? It seems to me that he should worry about his own legal status, in lieu of his clandestine and illegal meeting with the Board, without the Supervisor, and with two town residents. He should worry about the consequences of his secret effort to promote and push through a “phony” referendum on a moratorium on housing for Edgemont. We all know the details of that moratorium, and we all know that it was not over housing in the least, or the public schools in Edgemont. It was a backdoor, clandestine effort to fool the voters of Edgemont, get them all riled up over housing and obfuscate the true reality of the scheme. The scheme, articulated in the Troy Affidavit, that the Supervisor was given, and he exposed to the public, was to provide public funds to purchase land for a Edgemont Village Hall, and “grease” the way for secession. This was the plan of Bernstein and McNally. Ironically Juettner and Barnes, who attended the meeting or meetings, were oblivious to the true reality of their efforts.

So now they all support the “non-break-up” of Greenburgh. Where were they when this clever web of intrigue was first proposed? People who want Edgemont to secede from the Town of Greenburgh designed this scheme. What else is new?

Richard J. Garfunkel

Below is Supervisor Feiner’s full statement:

Acrimony mars Town Board
(Original Publication: July 27, 2007)

I agree with much of the Tuesday editorial "How to chill speech," about the ethics law proposed by the town council. Your editorial also commented on an e-mail I distributed titled, "Extraordinary Secrecy, Favoritism, Violations of Open Meetings Law by the Town Council." It happens that my disclosure of the events described in that e-mail was among the most important disclosures that I have made, and it has received the most significant public outpouring.
Readers of your paper should recognize that the action that the town council members took was, if true, highly inappropriate and disrespectful of the public trust, and a violation of the requirement that meetings are required to be open to the public. A sworn affidavit by Richard Troy, a principal of S&R Development Estates, claims that members of the town council secretly met with a developer several times and prohibited the developer from discussing the meeting with me or anyone else.
Present and participating at these meetings were Bob Bernstein and Michelle McNally, both of the Edgemond Community Council, an umbrella group for all eight civic associations in Edgemont. The purpose of these meetings was to provide a method for transferring the developer's property in Edgemont to Edgemont so as to provide land for a village hall if, as planned by Mr. Bernstein, Edgemont became a separate village. This matter of the utmost public concern was done secretly.
(The subject of the online exchange between Feiner and Town Board members was addressed in a July 15 article, "Developer claims Greenburgh officials conspired to derail housing plan; the matter was also addressed in a Wednesday letter by Bob Bernstein, "Feiner fails to protect open space." The accounts of what transpired at the meeting have varied. - Editor.)
Meeting in secret, meeting without notifying the supervisor, negotiating with two residents without letting the other affected residents know, planning a referendum in secret - all these are inappropriate to say the least, a violation of public trust for sure and violations of law. My e-mail alerted the town, and just in time.
One of the serious implications of the plan was that if Bernstein's long-proclaimed vision of making Edgemont into a separate village - a vision he has publicly articulated for years - and which now seems to have the support of this town council, the rest of unincorporated Greenburgh would suffer mightily. If Edgemont becomes a village, the impact on the rest of Greenburgh would be enormous. Town taxes would either have to be raised steeply, or else deep cuts in services would have to be made. For the town council to give support to Bernstein is outrageous. I hope that by notifying the residents of Greenburgh of this plan, I have halted the movement toward such a calamity. I believe that my doing so deserved commendation.
The town council members may deny that they support Mr. Bernstein's plan to break up the town and to make Edgemont a village. To admit it would be political suicide. Let us trust the old maxim that actions speak louder than words.
Your editorial rightly noted that there is acrimony in the town government. The reason is that the four councilpersons, led by Messrs. Steve Bass and Francis Sheehan, but supported by Eddie Mae Barnes and Diana Juettner, have decided to substitute a town council form of government in place of a Town Board form of government - a patently illegal act. Your editorial has opened this up, but I think that more watchfulness is in order. I hope that you keep that watch.
The writer is Greenburgh town supervisor.

hal samis said...

For those of you interested, I have filed my "advertised" complaint to the now fully consituted Ethics Board. Details will be forthcoming.

Anonymous said...

Is Feiner now forming his own political party? Is this a way to get around the limits on contributions? His party can solicit contributions -- which he would be the sole one to distribute?

garfunkel stymied said...

We are still waiting for richard garfunkel to explain why feiner takes campaign contributions from the town's outside auditors.

Michael Kolesar said...

Dear Garfunkfel stymied,

Don't forget that Mr. Bass has also accepted money from the town's auditors.

What's his explanation???

Anonymous said...

12:31 Anon
Usually one should igore anonymous remaks, but:

As it has been noted - that outside auditors give to all. They are equal opportunity givers. Much comment has already been addressed on this issue.

I would be much more concerned with the influence peddling of Ms. Suzanne Berger and her alliance with Francis Sheehan and the contract with Bryan, Cave that runs into oodles of greenbacks.

You, whomever the hell you are, (hiding from all of us, and do not have the courage to sign your name)
better start making the connections with contributions and actions.

Where is the smoking gun with Feiner? Where was he compensated? What did he gain, incumbency? He runs for election on his record, for better or worse. Most think it is a good record, and that is why he will be re-elected.

What are the issues? Please articulate them clearly! Is it the bond rating, is it the parks, the rec dept., the tennis bubble being stalled by Bernstein, the A/B budget which is delineated by State law, is it the Town Hall?

Maybe you should spend some time in the other towns like Eastchester, where taxes are through the roof, and services are not any better, in fact worse. Or maybe you should look at the taxes in Scarsdale, Rye, Bronxville, Pound Ridge, etc. and understand clearly that it is expensive to live in towns and villages with a "no-growth" philosophy.

Richard L. Ottinger, a terrific Congressman that served Westchester for decades, and for whom my wife and I worked(she was the staff person) said, "the problem with every region, and certainly ours is, do you save the river or the factory?"

He understood the delicate balance that included working for both. You and you friends are "hung up" on contributions. Maybe it would be better to limit every politician to "no" gifts and let the millionaires run everything. Next you'll tell the Supreme Court to reverse its latest rulings on "freedom of expression," regarding the giving of money to oneself's campaign, duh!

You just don't like Feiner, plain and simple. Maybe it is personal, maybe it is political, or maybe you are Bernstein, Sheehan, Bass or one of their henchmen/women.

I could care less. I am not particularly interested in answering you, but putting my spin on you silliness.

If you are sincere and not one of the above brigands wake up!

Richard J. Garfunkel

Anonymous said...

"Maybe you should spend some time in the other towns like Eastchester, where taxes are through the roof, and services are not any better, in fact worse."

WHAT?! Eastchester township is like heaven in comparison to Greenburgh township, ESPECIALLY in regards to services. Certainly support Greenburgh if you want, but making comparisons to other townships is not an effective strategy.

The reason I don't complain much is that I understand that you get what you pay for. My taxes here in Unincorporated Greenburgh are not too high, therefore I don't pout too much about substandard municipal services (highway department, for example; I can't imagine any worse). But I can't afford Eastchester township or Scarsdale township right now, and so I understand that I don't receive the high quality municipal services.

garfunkel dodges the truth said...

Mr. Bass saw the light and returned the money. Garfunkel runs from this serious issue. One can now see the fantasy world a true believer like Garfunkel lives in.

From the illegality of Taxter Ridge and WestHelp, to the destruction of Webb Field, to Feiner's relentless and corrupt solicitation of money from those with applications before him, to the musical chairs of comptrollers and others who could not work with Feiner, to the disaster of the 2007 flooding of hartsdale (see 2005 memo warning of the danger), Feiner's recent tenure has been a wholesale mess. Thats why his slate two years ago was trounced and Feiner almost lost the primary to Greenawalt. The Town is at standstill so long as Feiner remains around. He has just stayed too long. He is as he has been described - a public servant for himself. Garfunkel - please get yourself some good strong coffee at Coffee Labs Roasters in Tarrytown - time to wake up - you hero is no more.

Eastchester - top place to live said...

Eastchester was just rated the 27th best place in the country to live.

Anonymous said...

One of the things Eastchester has which is great is a Town country club, with golf, tennis and pool. Feiner only cares about open space -- not about active recreational space. Why should he care about active recreational needs? He lives in a gated community whcih provides for such.

eastchester's other benefits said...

unlike greenburgh, the town facility including the pools are open to all residents (villages of bronxville and tuckahoe and unincorporated easthester).

why should feiner care - his gated community has a pool.

what does feiner do all day? said...

Feiner claims to be a supervisor. Can anyone give me any examples of how he supervises anyone or any dept in the manner it is done in the private sector? Or does he spend all his time running for office?

hal samis said...

Dear 4:35,

Maybe I need new eyeglasses but did you really mean to give the impression that Feiner has a golf course in his gated community and thus has no need to provide recreation for others? You opened with "Eastchester has a golf course" and I guess you just forgot to remove it from the list when you started writing. Does Feiner's gated community also have tennis courts?
Unless you a real estate broker with for sale listings, maybe you want hire a fact checker before your next posting.

But since you brought it up, I do want to mention something that I saw last night while waiting for the Library Board of Trustees meeting to begin (I am a mere resident auditing the course and not on the Board). I took a short walk around Veteran Park (Library Board meetings are held at the multi-purpose center) and saw the pools and tennis courts which I hadn't been to in many years. I remember the mud-slinging (and I might have been one of them at the time) that went on when Feiner announced his intention to redo the "kiddy" pool by adding an interactive water system. The kids and their parents who were still there at the time were loving it and even as an observor I can say that I was impressed with what had been done -- and how the kids were enjoying it. Perhaps thanks to Gerry Byrne and Paul Feiner (even if he lives in a gated community with a pool) are still in order.

I also wanted to see the snack bar menu because someone had complained on the blog about the high prices being charged. However at 6:30, the place seemed closed and I didn't see any menu posted.

Now having presented the ying let me also mention the yang. Apparently there are residents who use Rumbrook but I still argue about how many taxpayer dollars are being poured into a site which is sinking. However the Town Board has ok'd their capital budget and this location too represents another active recreational space.

But since this blog inevitably must mention the Villages because you have cited Eastchester as a sportman's paradise, please tell us on the blog which of Greenburgh's Villages pass your test for active recreation-concerned public officials: Which of the six villages within Greenburgh have a golf course?

But if you really want to have a Town golf course, and I play too, then complain not only to Feiner but also to the County, the State and the Mayor of East Irvington, Danny Gold, that you want Taxter Ridge to become a golf course. I'll sign your petition.

hal samis said...

New topic!

It is 8:00 Friday night and where are Suzanne Berger's issues?
I guess everything is ok and all's well. With her insight, I would support her for the empty Trustee slot on the Greenburgh Public Library Board. She would feel at home there because everything is ok there as well.

gaffe-funkel - wrong again said...

Gaffe-funkel writes in quoting Ottinger:

"the problem with every region, and certainly ours is, do you save the river or the factory?"

this is not an insight and is in fact illogical - sometimes you save neither - sometimes both.

its only when your thinking is two dimensional do you see this as analysis.

Still Waiting Jim said...

So Jim, we are all still waiting to hear from you to tell us when Bernstein and McNally were charged by the Edgemont Community with the task of seeking open space in Edgemont, specifically the Dromore Road Property.

Anonymous said...

Jim will not answer you,since these two are his close friends. I do not think the residents of Edgemont knew what they were up to. Our town attorney and supervisor were also kept in the dark. They do not represent all the people who live in Edgemont ,so please do not think badly of the majority.

hal samis said...

two comments.

One, it is Sunday night and the weekend has not produced any issues for Suzanne Berger. I guess everything is ok and the old broom is doing a good job afterall.

Two, Mr. Bernstein has vanished from the blog. Could it be that the posting of the gift agreement was his Waterloo? A small problem resulting when residents became aware that the Town was never intended as the recipient thanks to the "may" and the agreement that Mr. Bernstein and the developer keep the document a secret. A secret that would rule out the Town knowing about the deal; that despite language which "appears" that the Town was to be offered the property, the real position is that Mr. Bernstein and his "assigns" could be the only intended buyers.
It may be a new Greenburgh first, but apparently Mr. Bernstein is abiding by the "gag order" imposed by Town Attorney upon the Town Council; this must also apply to the "5th" Council/Column member, Mr. Bernstein.

Anonymous said...

Will the Town Council have the courage to revoke the contract with Bryan Cave on August 15th--the next Town Board meeting? Will they have an open bidding process?

Anonymous said...

You have got to be kidding,the town council revoke the contract given to Bergers firm .That's Sheehan ace in a hole.I guess you didn't see the town meeting when he insisted that this firm be chosen without interviewing other firms. Sheehan is counting on Berger to be the winner in November's election for his own future in politics. As things stand now he will be on his way out the next time arround, but if Berger follows her dream of becoming a judge he will step into the role of supervisor.I guess we all know that he is a dreamer.

Anonymous said...

With regards anon: 3:33,3:36, 3:43, etc, there are fees at Lake Isle and they are $630 for a resident family to swim and be a card-player. To swim, play golf and tennis, if they want, it costs $2180 for a family. In fact it is not free for residents. Taxes are very high in Eastchester and the government has been run by the Republican Party for many years. Maybe Francis Sheehan and his other faux Democrats would be more comfortable there.

I was not slamming Eastchester, but their schools have been under pressure for years, they have a great deal of traffic. Their Route 22 shopping corridor helps their local propery taxes. In fact I played basketball in their gym in 1960-1-2 and I haven't seen a wholesale change in their facilities since. But, i could be wrong!

With regards to the quote by Richard L. Ottinger, I stand by its meaning. While I was out working for him 25-30 years ago, as a "real" Democrat, Francis Sheehan was a registered Republican.

Personally I think the facilities are pretty good here and the services seem second to none. Greenburgh is a big sprawling area and it is much, much different then the Town of Eastchester, which is basically three contiguous villages.

But rave on McDuff! The Supervisor has an excellent record, and I see that East Hartsdale Avenue is opening up again, and nature is not easy to control.

Richard J. Garfunkel

Feiner not a democrat anymore said...

A real democrat?

Feiner is busy starting a new political party and you have the nerve to accuse others of not being "real" democrat. Feiner's democrat days are over.

Feiner -- true or false -- you are gathering signatures for your new party?

Anonymous said...

Attention all ye fools!

Anon: 9:38 says that because the Supervisor will be on a second line he is not a Democrat! But double whopper Berger with cheese has the "Independence" Line the old Galosano ticket. If you haven't looked, feeble-minded that is a conservative group. But the double whopper told another fib when she stated that she would not run if she were defeated in September. Well, frankly, Ms. Non-Issue Campaign will be defeated handilly and her second line will be worthless, but her poor choice will be remembered. Maybe Franfurter the Last will seek that line after he is disposed of in 2009.

The Son of the Shadow, who sees all, and goes everywhere, sees a landslide in the making. The people of Greenburgh will be taking their government back from the uncrowned King Zog II, Sir Francis of Duckland, Princess Double Whopper with Cheddar Berger and Kate Smith aka the Conscience of Greenburgh who must have the last song at every public hearing.

The Son of the Shadow!

hal samis said...

It is a very simple resolution.
The Democratic Party is used to winning in Greenburgh. Winning big.

The Head of the local chapter of Democrats is Suzanne Berger. She had a choice when announcing her candidacy: to step down as Party Chair. She chose not to do so.

She may win or she may not win the Party Primary in September.

If she wins, she will have handed the Democratic Party their first defeat in many, many years in November. This is not a good thing for the local Democratic Party. Certainly it does not bode well for reviewing her judgement as head of the local chapter and whether she should continue to hold this post. Democrats, like any other Political Party, like winners not runners.

This year's election is not only about dividing the Town but also about dividing the Democratic Party.

If she loses the Primary, then a vote attacting Democrat will continue to keep the winning tradition alive.

The equation is thus: if the head of the local Democratic Party chapter wants to respect her job as Party head, she should drop out of the Supervisor race (some would argue she has from the start) now and start working the traditional paths to getting a Democrat in office. One that will win where and when it counts.

If she wants to play the ego-ergo-candidate game, she should resign as Party Chair. Everyone who votes in September will remember who she was. The distinction is that the Party Chair should not let her resume overrule her judgement of what is best for the Party; which is to back the candidate who will win where it counts. Freed from this Party obligation, perhaps she can then focus on Greenburgh issues. That would be a novel approach.

Anonymous said...

Ethics for Sale

It is interesting how Suzanne Berger, a lawyer for many years, and the Chairperson of the Greenburgh Democratic Town Committee, seems to not understand the law when it comes to contributions. Of course, she talks of “ethics” and her main patron and supporter, one Francis Sheehan, a member of the Greenburgh Town Committee, has crafted his own version of the Town’s new loop-hole infested “ethic’s code,” but she doesn’t seem to practice what she preaches.

A review of her latest campaign filings shows contributions from “Friends of Judge Ecker,” “Judge Berliner for Supreme Court,” and “Colangelo for County Court.” This seems to be not only unethical, but also illegal under New York State law. One would think a lawyer would know better? Besides those gifts, why is she receiving gifts from the Yonkers Democratic Chairman’s Trust Fund and the Mount Vernon City Committee? Greenburgh certainly has been in conflict over roads, development, and large future projects with its neighbor Yonkers. Does this mean that a potential Supervisor Berger would have to recuse herself from negotiations with Yonkers? I also see that Tim Iodoni and the Oxman, Tulis law firm also made contributions. Why are these Judges, politicians and Democratic Committees taking sides in a primary?

Ms. Berger also said at the last Greenburgh Town Board open meeting that the 38% of her political gifts, which came from her law firm, Bryan, Cave were from people she knew for twenty years and were friends, but her previous law firm merged with Bryan, Cave in 2002! Could it be that these were rewards for her work in securing a six-figure contract through a no-bid process engineered by Town Board Member Sheehan? Was there a payoff to him also? These are significant “ethical” questions that must be addressed. Is this influence peddling at its highest level? I hope that this “insider” contract is removed at the next Greenburgh Town Board meeting.

Richard J. Garfunkel