Thursday, November 13, 2008

GREENBURGH HEALTH CENTER WON'T MOVE...TOWN BD CHANGES ZONE TO REQUIRE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING

The Greenburgh Neighborhood Health Center worked long and hard to obtain permission to build a new and larger Neighborhood Health Center on Knollwood Road. Although they received final approval to build, the long approval delays, escalating construction costs and horrible economy took a toll. The Health Center does not have the funds they need to build their new building. As a result, the Health Center has put up the Knollwood property for sale. They will stay at 330 Tarrytown Road for the time being. The Health Center provides a wonderful service to the community.

The Town Board unanimously approved a new Zoning Code amendment last night expanding affordable housing. Any new residential development in three zones (PUD, Central Ave & Urban Renewal Zone) must have 10% affordability. In the past the requirement was only in multifamily zones. There is a lack of affordable housing for seniors, young families who are starting their careers. This new law was proposed by members of the PLanning Board who have been working on this initiative for at least four years. The current law has resulted in two affordable housing units being built on Knollwood Road. 44 units will be built when Avalon is complete. The new zoning change will probably result in additional affordable housing opportunities in the years to come. Affordable housing is not low income. Families eligible to purchase homes will have pretty good incomes but won't be making enough money to buy market rate housing (80% AMI).
PAUL FEINER

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

Will there be prefernce for Greenburgh people?

Anonymous said...

I would have hoped we would have learned our lesson with the GHC, and stop with the spot zoning. But oh no, westhab.

shame on feiner said...

The town's amendment last night to the zoning code makes a mockery of affordable housing. It was passed solely to block development of a 51-unit luxury condo project along Central Avenue in the Greenburgh Central school district.

To dress it up so that it wouldn't look like the town was amending the zoning code to block a particular project, the town pretended that the zone change applied not just to the Central Avenue zone, but also to the PUD and Urban Renewal zones.

That was a crock. The town's Urban Renewal zone already has affordable housing and the zone itself is a throwback to the 1970s when properties were being condemned to build housing projects. The town's PUD zone already gives the town's planning board the discretion to require affordable housing it if wants.

The town then claimed that there were several properties along Central Avenue where multifamily housing projects could be built, all of which were in Edgemont. But Feiner announced at the Edgemont meeting last week that he would oppose the construction of any new multifamily housing along Central Avenue in Edgemont.

So, was Feiner lying to the group in Edgemont about not wanting any more multifamily housing along Central Avenue or is he lying in today's announcement when he looks forward to the day when new multifamily projects with "affordable housing" along Central can be built?

Anonymous said...

He's probably lying to both.

feiner screwing fulton park said...

It's amazing to see that the same law firm that represented the health center in its ill-fated effort to get a zoning change approved that would have allowed methodone clinics on East Hartsdale Avenue and near Edgemont's elementary schools is now representing Westhab, which is asking the town for a zoning change which would give it the right to build up to 28 units of housing for the homeless in the Fulton Park neighborhood.

What's truly amazing is that Feiner supported the health center zoning change that would have allowed the methodone clinics and he is now supporting a zoning change to give Westhab the right to build homeless housing.

Feiner also refuses to reopen the public hearing on Westhab so that the public can see and hear for itself what contempt the town has for its long-time residents.

Who is this law firm that wields so much influence? Why it's none other than Feiner's largest campaign contributor.

Anonymous said...

Are you stating that if someone has a piece of land along central ave he or she will not be allowed to build buildings because Edgemont civic assoc. say no.

Let's see what the judges have to say since the law covers once again the north end of town.

Anonymous said...

The Edgemont Civic Associations don't decide what buildings get built on Central Avenue; the Town of Greenburgh does. Get real if you think otherwise. Since when has any civic association in Edgemont wielded any influence in Greenburgh? Name one example.

Disgusted said...

The Edgemont Civic Associations don't have any say - but neither really does the Town Board. If Feiner decides he wants it, he pushes for it without worrying about the long term effects.
The final word comes down to Weingarten/DelBello's clients needs and ability to contribute to Mr. Feiner's retirement fund.

Anonymous said...

Bob Bernstein neglected to say in his above posts that the zone change to allow for more affordable housing was not recommended by Feiner but by the Planning Board (which consists of Edgemont representatives).

Anonymous said...

Don't understand how Bob Bernstein figures into the discussion. The only representative on the Planning Board from Edgemont is Hugh Schwartz who opposed the Planning Board's 10 percent set aside recommendation for Central Avenue. Feiner supported it.

we did good said...

Amid budget talks in Peekskill, concerns grow over layoff rumors
By Marcela Rojas • The Journal News • November 14, 2008

Post a CommentRecommend Print this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up! Text Size: Normal | Large | Larger
PEEKSKILL - Dozens of city employees showed up in force at a Common Council meeting this week troubled by reports of possible layoffs.

More than 40 city workers turned out at Wednesday night's budget meeting after many had heard that up to 12 department heads were expected to be dismissed. Several employees approached that evening declined to comment on the matter.


"I can't remember a budget meeting where I've seen so many employees and citizens. Staffing is not where you should cut," said Vincent Vesce Jr., a lifelong Peekskill resident who works for the Port Authority. "I've never seen so much concern for the administration and how Mayor Mary Foster is running the city."

Foster said at the beginning of the meeting that they were discussing the budget and that rumors, including one call she received that 14 people would be fired or laid off, were untrue.

"If those of you are here because you believe that we are looking to lay off or fire rank and file, we're not," Foster said to the crowd.

Yesterday, Foster offered little insight on the subject.

"There are no union positions being discussed for layoffs," she said.

Some Peekskill workers expressed concern about losing non-union directors, including ones in the personnel, public works and parks and recreation departments.

The Common Council is in the midst of hammering out its 2009 budget that must be adopted by Dec. 1. Acting City Manager Marcus Serrano's tentative $48 million budget calls for an 11.99 percent property-tax increase next year. Under the tentative budget, residents with an average assessment of $10,000 would see a $255.48 increase in their tax bill.

Councilwoman Cathy Pisani said the city council has not had any discussions about layoff plans. She said she heard that there had been a staff meeting on Wednesday about layoffs.

Deputy Mayor Don Bennett stressed that the council has not talked about terminating any city employees.

"Whoever started this rumor should come forth and apologize," Bennett said. "It's a shame that it shook up our employees, that they had to come to a meeting."

Meanwhile, one proposal on the table is to eliminate 10 vehicles from the city's fleet. These cars are mostly used by department heads for both personal and professional purposes, Foster said. The measure could save taxpayers roughly $100,000, she said.

"I think it's been a nice personnel practice, but in these hard economic times this personnel benefit is hard to justify," Foster said. "It's got nothing to do with how hard our department heads are working because they all work hard."

Peekskill now has 22 vehicles, seven of which will remain in use by the police and fire departments. The plan is to get rid of the 10 vehicles and keep five for in-city use, Foster said. One consideration, she said, is to sell those 10 cars, the majority of which are sport utility vehicles. Serrano said it costs about $36,000 to fuel the entire fleet per year.

"These are tough times out there," said Councilwoman Patricia Riley. "I'd rather cut stuff like this than people."

Reach Marcela Rojas at mrojas@lohud.com or 845-228-2271.

In your voice

new rochelle has it worst said...

Fewer trash pickups not a good idea
Having just read the Tuesday article, "New Rochelle seeks 8.25 percent tax hike," I'm wondering if anybody with common sense is "watching the store" in New Rochelle.

Our wonderful city manager, Charles Strome, is suggesting one way to save money is 2009 would be to cut garbage collection from twice to once a week. There's a new show in New York City called, "What's That Smell?" You got it.


And, since when has the Sanitation Department ever bagged leaves? Never. We bag our leaves. So who's going to pick up these leaves once they're bagged? They do this now. Where's the savings?

If Mr. Strome is thinking of cutting back, I suggest he rethink once-a-week garbage pickup. It will take twice as long to pick up all that garbage and possibly take two days to do it. And where do we keep all this garbage? Think sidewalk. I repeat - what's that smell?

Judith Mantovani

New Rochelle

Anonymous said...

Why is it that other towns are wring on the blogs with their woes.

We have enough and worse to handle.

Paul by changing laws left and right you are leaving yourself opened for complete failure.

I'm glad that during you stay here in Greenburgh you took time out to see what type of work was done by every department.
Was there one that you liked I hope so because the way you are proposing changes you will have to look for a position doing manual labor.

Anonymous said...

Boy all of a sudden things are great at the center.
Parking is great.
The space occupied within is more than enough.
There is no problem with people walking or crossing to get to the center.

How miraculous is this change?

The same lawyers tht fought for the move are now at your door askong for a zoning change to suit their fancy.

What happened to all the traffic problems?

Who paid for all the studies that were made concerning the move.
Paul you have fallen into a trap with what you keep oking the changes that this law firm demands.

WHY WHY WHY I keep saying to myself this is an instance where Money talks and BS walks.

I'm right aren't I.

Anonymous said...

WOW stop the use of take home vehicles sounds like a great idea. Better than what CT. is doing with the dimming of their lights. I think Peekskill must be on the rite track. Maybe Paul can have a study on this to see how much money it will save the town if they do away with the non essential take home vehicles.
It seems the town employees address this at town board meeting why is it such a concern of theirs.

Well i'll tell you this, and it wont take a study to prove it if you eliminate the use of certain take home vehicles it would limit gas and ware and tare on vehicles. In a poor economy perks need to be cut back, and this is one of them.

PAUL FEINER said...

Shortly after I took office I issued a directive prohibiting employees from taking home cars. There were about 5 exceptions in police, public works. If you know of violations please e mail me at pfeiner@greenburghny.com.
Please provide me with license number, date of alleged violation, where you saw car, if you have a date stamped photo of car at location (some proof of abuse), etc... I will follow up and will advise dept heads and employees that they are to comply with regulations (which I assume they have been complying with).

we did better than most said...

Proposed Mount Vernon budget would raise taxes over 13 percent
By Hannan Adely • The Journal News • November 15, 2008

Read Comments(1)Recommend Print this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up! Text Size: Normal | Large | Larger
MOUNT VERNON - The city's proposed budget for 2009 would raise property taxes by 13.17 percent, meaning the average homeowner would pay $420 more next year.

The $87.4 million spending plan is up $3.5 million from this year, largely due to an increase in salaries for city employees. The budget proposal includes $5.5 million in surplus that the city will use to offset part of the property tax increase for 2009.


Mayor Clinton Young yesterday said the budget was still a work in progress, adding that he has asked department heads to revisit the numbers and see where they can make cuts.

"I'm not advocating anywhere near that amount as a tax increase," Young said. "This is where we're starting from."

At $50.3 million, salaries are the largest expenditure in the plan, up $4.5 million from last year.

The largest departmental increases include an additional $1.2 million for the Police Department and $521,000 for the Fire Department, nearly all of it for salaries. The budget plan also includes an extra $400,000 for the Mount Vernon Public Library.

Other departments that could see the biggest spending increases include the mayor's office, which would be bumped up to $584,000 from $394,000 this year. The increase is mainly to cover salaries for three new positions created in that office this year.

The city is also seeking an increase in funds for the Department of Management Services, where Young recently appointed his sister, Mary Young, as commissioner. Under the budget plan, spending would go up in that department by $300,000.

The mayor said increased spending in that department is needed to bring computerization and technology to City Hall. Such improvements will help City Hall catch up with the times and can help cut costs and generate revenue, he said.

The city is also seeking $225,000 for the Office of the Inspector General, a department created by Young. The money will cover the salary of the inspector general and a secretary.

The mayor is proposing cuts to the funding allocated for miscellaneous items, which dropped from $6.8 million to $5.3 million. Overtime costs for the Fire Department were also cut by $80,000.

Part of the reason the tax impact per home is so high is because total assessed valuations, or total property values, are expected to go down by $3.8 million next year, which drives up the tax rate, officials said. Also, the city does not expect additional revenue on its investments next year, because of low interest rates, said Comptroller Maureen Walker.

Walker said that a 13 percent increase in the property tax rate, if passed, would be the biggest increase in 14 years.

This week, the Yonkers mayor said the city was facing 200 to 300 layoffs in the current budget year as its financial picture worsened. But in Mount Vernon, Young said he expected to be able to reduce spending before the budget is finalized, adding that he would lay people off only as a last resort.

Residents will be able to comment Tuesday on the budget at a hearing before the Board of Estimate and Contract. The board expects to vote on the budget the following Friday. After that, the City Council must review the budget, hold a public hearing, and approve a budget plan by year's end.

Reach Hannan Adely at hadely@lohud.com or 914-696-8456.

hal samis said...

To Paul Feiner re his post,

"I will advise..." says Paul Feiner.
Never mind that the correct form is "I shall" because Paul didn't have the benefit of the Xposure program, what Feiner is doing is more of the same old, same old --- nothing.

He states that he "assumes" they are complying with the regulations.

To me that is an acknowledgement that there are rules and that he supposes his department heads are aware of them. What a fabulous job of supervision is being done by this supervisor.

So now we have a supevisor who assumes that rules are being followed and if the public comes to him and demonstrates that they aren't, he will advise the wrongdoers that they should play by the rules because they got caught.

Note to Chief of Police: please advise all perps that they should follow the laws and then let them go.

What Feiner obviously lacks is leadership and management qualities. Furthermore, look at his hires and appointees and you will see how starting with his own shortcomings in management, this is perpetuated by his choosing those who agree to follow in his footsteps (one major exception noted).

Even in his own posting, he demonstrates his lack of understanding of the problem. The allegations of cars going home at night has been on this blog for months. Now when Feiner finally chooses to respond, he hasn't even bothered to make himself aware of the regulation(s).

Think about a Supervisor who finally gets around to responding to the problem and writes: "There were about 5 exceptions (to this regulation)..." What is he saying or not saying?

1) he doesn't know and hasn't bothered to check. After all, about 5 is not such a big number that he can't be certain; I could understand confusion of say around 45 or 50, but about 5? A Manager would write: there are 5 exceptions and they are Bob, Frank, Sue, Steve and Jim.

2) when he writes that this was a policy that went into effect "shortly after he took office" and that THEN there were about 5 cars, this provides for the likelihood that twenty years later there are considerably more allowed such license and he wants the public to think he is exercising a tight ship by saying about 5 but the reality is the opposite. A lawyer's answer, right?

3) the above is true and he simply hasn't bothered to find out how many cars are leaving the grounds protected by the interpretation, allowance and permission of the various department heads.

In short, Mr. Feiner is not supervising and doesn't even care to pretend that he functions like a supervisor. He hopes that by asking the rat to guard the cheese, that even though he no longer sees the cheese in the parking lot, he hopes it is still there.

Here's how Mr. Feiner can demonstrate his willingness to do the job he was elected to. (damn, another sentence ending with a preposition)

Answer these questions on this blog:
1) how many cars are allowed home at night?
2) how many cars actually go home at night?
3) who are the persons who are allowed to take town provided cars home (name and title)?
4) how far away is their home?

If the number is anywhere near 5, this should not be such a difficult job for you, Mr. Feiner.
And you do have a "confidential secretary" to assist you.

Time to do some work.

Anonymous said...

Paul you say only Police and DPW take home cars. If this is true do you consider parks and recreation to be part of one of these two departments. From my understanding their is a vehicle taken home by the superintendent I believe the vehicle number is 97 it is a white suv. This vehicle is two years old and has well over 50,000 miles on it WELL over. Please explain on this blog and not through email why said vehicle is used to do this much mileage per year when most of it is just for their commute back and forth to Sloatsburgh ny. I need not send you any pictures all you have to do is take a ride over to AFV and look in the vehicle for yourself. In the parks and recreation department the commissioners don't take home their vehicles yet the superintendent does. Please explain the need for this vehicle to go home at night, and if you cant Paul maybe a department head or even the superintendent can explain the need for this.

Anonymous said...

Hal,

This is no different than the Supervisore suggest we find out if Silver Streaks is paying its bills by asking them. Do you ask your borrowers if they are paid up by asking them?

hal samis said...

Dear 11:32,

It is similar in the respect that this unresolved question has been aging like wine with the Town Board as guardians of the vat. However, our guardians don't want to look in the vat or sample the fermentation.

So, despite the aging process, the matter of the Silver Streaks remains unanswered because the Town Board doesn't want to know the answer. And when it gets asked in public time and time again, the Town Board ignores the question because they have don't like being caught in the gotcha trap -- even though they had the questions and the answers in advance.

However it also dissimilar in that unlike being caught in the headlights, the Town Board at its
Town Board meeting had all the resources at its disposal, save one. The one being the fired employee, Ms. Roper, who had the guts to speak out unlike some 33 year employees elsewhere who grin while not unbaring it.

So picture if you will, the question being asked at a Town Board meeting, not for the first time, and present in the room are the Town Departments heads who are requested to be there in case they are needed to answer questions (I'm assuming that they would rather be home than remaining at work to 11:00) and this question is asked: How much do the Silver Streaks still owe?

Let's see, we have the Town Board (Feiner, Juettner, Sheehan, Morgan and Sonja Brown - liaison to the Community Center where the pool is located), Town Attorney Lewis and Town Clerk Beville) all present and not one of them knows?

We also have the Community Center acting Director Whitehead present and she doesn't know.

We also have Town Comptroller Kolesar present who may not be privy to the TDYCC books but he certainly isn't asked because if he isn't asked to speak about the 2009 Town Budget during the Public Hearings on the Budget, he certainly isn't going to be asked about this matter.

The only who answers is the Director of the Silver Streaks who offers the equivalent of "the check is in the mail". However, no one in the Town government can answer this and the Silver Streaks didn't bring their receipt with them.

A few years ago there used to be a tv commercial for the Hair Club for Men. Its product was spray-on hair which did a better job of deceiving than a wig. The commericial ended with a before and after shot of a man who said, "why would I lie, I'm the president of the company".

The connection to Greenburgh is that the Town Board is a great believer in spray-on truth. Especially as advertised on tv.

Anonymous said...

Paul is doing a good job. I enjoy living here. Get a life!

ed krauss said...

This "age old' question about how many town vehicles are "authorized" to be taken home- as far as I can read, Mr. Feiner says five...but he's not exactly sure-and how many are taken home without authorization should be viewed from another prospective.

As a town, we have hundreds of vehicles- cars, vans, buses, even a cybermobile. I hope all of them are insured, and insured to the max.So, if Mr.Feiner "assumes" five are authorized, and, I'll add in all police vehicles -on duty- plus emergency vehicles of all kinds, that leaves an unknown number of passenger vehicles which are not town authorized during non business hours; vans which are not; and buses which are not.

Since they are most likely insured for use during business hours, logic suggests they are not covered during non business hours.

If that is the case,I seriously doubt our insurance carrier would cover any mishap that occurred during non business hours, weekends and holidays.

So, I would think it is incumbant on the supervisor, the town board, the department heads, and the town attorney, to know exactly how many vehicles we're talking about; who is driving them, where they are going after hours; and, if only five are "authorized," why are those non authorized vehicles being used when they definitely shouldn't be, and who gave the driver the OK to use it.

Not that long ago, a husband and wife were driving on Central Avenue in the Edgemont section of town. A tree fell on their car killing the husband and rendering the wife a quadriplegic. Since the town-astonishingly- only carried $3,000,000 in liability insurance- and the case settled for $9,000,000 the town, including the six villages experienced a $6,000,000 shortfall.

The same and worse could happen in a G-d forbid situation. Let's say a bus is "borrowed" to transport 44 kids to a (fill in the blank,) and there's a violent accident wherein one or more of the chilren are killed or maimed for life. $6 million will seem like chump change.

I know it's me, Ed Krauss, bashing the supervisor and the board, yet again. However, this kind of "loose" management, at best, exemplifies how this town is run: in a slip shod manner.

This has to stop. And stop now. We can no longer afford "feel good" government. The buck has to stop with those calling the shots. There is no excuse for "assuming" things are done, all the while, checking once every 20years.

I demand to know what is happening, chapter and verse, with our vehicles. If I'm going to be responsible for paying for another "tree falling on Central Ave." I want to know that those in charge are REALLY IN CHARGE.

I can't imagine there are those of you out there who will go after me for this posting, but I suppose there are a handful.Before you do, please, please, think about the scenario and then come to your own conclusion.

we got it good.. said...

Ossining works to cut 18% village tax increase
By Sean Gorman • The Journal News • November 16, 2008

Read Comments(2)Recommend Print this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up! Text Size: Normal | Large | Larger
OSSINING - Village officials are cutting costs from their tentative budget plan in an effort to lower a proposed 18.1 percent tax increase.

Village Manager Linda Cooper wrote in a letter to the Board of Trustees this month that though Ossining is "not quite in the straits of Wall Street," the municipality's financial picture this coming year is still sobering.


Ossining faces a drop-off in revenue while expenses for items like employee benefits and energy costs are rising.

"We've never seen anything like this before where you have such reduction in revenues hitting all municipalities at a time when people are still asking for ever-increasing services," Cooper said last week.

The village is holding a public hearing Tuesday on the roughly $28.3 million spending proposal.

The tentative plan would spend about $2 million more than this year's budget.

The village tax rate next year would be $163 per $1,000 of assessed value under the tentative budget. For a home assessed at $18,000, the village average, that would translate into a tax bill of $2,934 for next year, an increase of $451.

Mayor William Hanauer said last week that village officials have been examining the budget and have "significantly" lowered the proposed tax rate, but he couldn't say where it now stands.

"We're curtailing purchases like cars, and if we don't need to replace a truck, we won't replace a truck, that sort of thing," Hanauer said.

The problem, Hanauer said, is that Ossining faces a lot of expenses outside its control, such as fuel costs and health insurance for village employees.

The cost of employee benefits for things like medical insurance, retirement and workers' compensation is rising $593,652, Cooper wrote in her letter to the board.

Energy-related costs are projected to rise $332,721.

Among the revenue challenges is a $500,000 expected decline from property taxes because of tax assessment cases, Cooper wrote.

Ossining also faces a $390,000 decline in income from interest on village investments.

Building Department income is expected to drop $398,000 because the village isn't collecting building permit fees for Harbor Square, a long-awaited luxury condominium development on the waterfront that still hasn't been built.

Ossining also is reducing the amount of surplus used to help pay for the budget. Next year's preliminary spending plan calls for using $500,000 of the general fund balance.

By comparison, the village used $600,000 from the surplus to help pay for this year's budget.

Cooper noted in her letter to trustees that all village departments already had their budgets cut by about 10 percent in July.

Bobby Williams, an Ossining homeowner, said a tax increase would have an effect on him. But he said he's in better shape than some people because he still has a full-time job.

He worried about how higher taxes would affect residents who might be facing rising mortgage payments.

"Anything over a 5 or 6 percent (tax increase) is unacceptable," said Williams, who is 62.

Tuesday's hearing will be held at 7:30 p.m. at the Police/Court Facility at 86-88 Spring St.

The budget can be found at the bottom of Ossining's home page at www.villageofossining.org.

Reach Sean Gorman at sgorman@lohud.com or 914-666-6481.

In your voice
Read reactions to this story
Newest first Oldest first
imawatchin wrote:

"We're curtailing purchases like cars, and if we don't need

Anonymous said...

Could someone tell me how all of a sudden the health center can accomodate the doctors ,nurses and all it's customers..
Were the walls stretched.
Did they find extra parking in the basemaent or on the roof.

Boy this is a real crock .
Change zoning for one and you can be assured that many more will follow.

Anonymous said...

why is it that some town vehicles have markings on them to let you know they are town vehicles and others don't. Im not talking about police vehicles. At the least if the vehicle is going to go home, some kind of town insignia should be on the vehicle and gps should also be installed just like the police vehicles, to curb any excessive use.

Anonymous said...

The Greenburgh Health Center has a great staff.

Anonymous said...

The Health Center provides Greenburgh taxpayers with good health care service.

Anonymous said...

Posting Thurs at 1 pm? Paul, i would get fired from my job for posting on my private blog during work hours.

Anonymous said...

Providing the public with information is part of the job.

Anonymous said...

1PM can also be lunch time! also I think Paul puts in above and beyond
the amount of time he should. I have no problem what so ever when Paul makes a post or answers a question on this blog, as long as he keeps up the good job of answering questions.

Anonymous said...

Paul's posts are made from his blackberry - while he's driving!
He nearly caused an accident last week at the Fenimore Road bridge as he was making a right turn onto Fox Meadow Road.
Dear Mr. Supervisor -
The law prohibits texting while driving - even for you.
The law also prohibits stealing other people's copyrighted newspaper articles. Cutting and pasting is copying and therefore, theft.
If you can't tell what is right or wrong, please take a few years off the public teat to figure it out.

concerned citizen said...

Paul must go, his time has come. Like Obama said we need "Change".

Anonymous said...

to the moron who wants to know how the Health Center streching walls etc.The answer is they cannot,but now those patients who are waitnig one to two hours for treatment will wait longer or maybe the cant or wont wait for treatment.When that happens they will go on working in the resturants you eat in,cutting your grass,raking leaves etc.






but they will be carrying germs that you and your family wil catch.


well maybe there is justice in the end.

Anonymous said...

If the town was well run, two years ago they would have explained that the Knollwood Rd cite was zoned residential. GHC could have looked for another site instead of spending money for lawyers and their loan running out. Blame it on Paul.

Anonymous said...

The person that you refer to as a moron attened many meetings concerning this health center as I did where it was explained that there was not enough room in the present building to accomadate all the users.
The health center is a needed facility but when they were in the process of asking for variences because they needed more
room ,more parking spaces,certain things that the state required of them I too question how come all their demands are now gone.