tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post1149710765155691492..comments2023-10-30T06:13:34.382-04:00Comments on Supervisor Feiner: WEEK OF JUNE 18 GREENBURGH DEMOCRACY POST YOUR COMMENTSPaul Feinerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17087805120754057844noreply@blogger.comBlogger115125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-37958445756229792632007-06-25T11:54:00.000-04:002007-06-25T11:54:00.000-04:00I am calling on Supervisor Feiner, the town’s Chie...I am calling on Supervisor Feiner, the town’s Chief Financial Officer, to make a clear, unambiguous statement that all unspent WestHELP monies that were deposited in one of the town's bank accounts but not accounted for in the totals of either the General (A) Fund or the Town Outside (B) Fund be moved to the General (A) Fund and properly credited in the budget. That amount is $1,448,349.11.<BR/> <BR/>Normally, when the books are closed out each year, any unspent monies are added to one of the town’s fund balances, which are printed in a year-end budget that is widely distributed to the public. With the WestHELP money, however, I have learned that the rent money received but not spent remained in one of the town's bank accounts but was not added to fund balance totals. In a November 10, 2006, article in The Journal News, Supervisor Feiner is reported as saying that he didn't include $500,000 of the funds in the budget because he wanted to retain flexibility on how the money is spent. The amount that currently has this "flexibility" is $1,448,349.11. Such flexibility with taxpayers' money must end. That amount needs to be moved to the General (A) Fund immediately, and normal year-end accounting measures followed.<BR/> <BR/>The Town Comptroller has been relentless in stating how troubled he is in how the WestHELP money has been handled, following a practice that pre-dated his being hired in June 2004. At last Tuesday’s work session, the Town Comptroller specifically asked for direction. After "directing" the Town Comptroller to move WestHELP money to the General (A) Fund, unless overruled by the Town Board, the Supervisor would not disclose to the Town Council (Eddie Mae Barnes, Steve Bass, Diana Juettner and Francis Sheehan) and the public present how much he wanted transferred or where the money was currently located. Even though numerous questions were asked at the audiotaped meeting, the Supervisor said he did not have to answer, but would answer in a "carefully worded written opinion" to the Town Comptroller, an "opinion that is thought out." The written opinion that followed was neither carefully worded nor thought out. It required a series of follow-up emails from the Supervisor labeled "clarification." They too were neither carefully worded nor thought out because they had conflicting directives, resulting in the Town Comptroller and the Town Attorney seeking further clarification. In the most recent email, the Supervisor still wasn't certain of the amount to be shifted. <BR/> <BR/>It is time for Supervisor Feiner, as Chief Financial Officer, to put this highly unusual accounting procedure to an end by ensuring a full accounting for the $1,448,349.11 that is in a bank account but is not part of any fund balance total, and by adding that amount to the General (A) Fund budget total, consistent with the NYS Comptroller's Report of Examination 2006M-156. Such a clear directive, if given, would allow our Town Comptroller to properly close the books and disclose all money in the town's bank accounts.<BR/> <BR/>Francis Sheehan, Councilman<BR/> Town of GreenburghAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-28054864248250427622007-06-25T10:43:00.000-04:002007-06-25T10:43:00.000-04:00Dear Mr. Bernstein and the "groupie" at 8:29,Altho...Dear Mr. Bernstein and the "groupie" at 8:29,<BR/><BR/>Although I have no objections to the company and I'm not firsthand familiar with their positions relative to hiring independent counsel, I do know that I have never made any statement, for or against, hiring independent counsel. Please correct your files, Bob.<BR/><BR/>Heslop as "hero"? Heslop (according to Bob) reported dutifully to the State Comptroller all the dubious transactions but "decided to maintain the status quo until the State Comptroller completed its audit and made his recommendations".<BR/><BR/>Who is the Town's Comptroller, Heslop or the State Comptroller.<BR/>Mr. Heslop says (per Bernstein) that he identified faulty bookkeeping within days but decided to perpetuate it until the State Comptroller agreed it was faulty.<BR/><BR/>If Mr. Heslop knows what he is doing, he should apply his knowledge on the behalf of those who pay his salary. There is no excuse for maintaining a tainted system. However, Mr Heslop clearly is not a thinker, an innovator. He prefers the comfort level of doing it the way it was done in the past, tainted or not, and will only change it when someone else (State Comptroller) shows him how to do it.<BR/><BR/>Firing Mr. Heslop is exactly what the Town needs to do.<BR/><BR/>Whether Feiner is at fault or responsible is not the subject of my posting. Voters will have to make that determination. What I have been attempting to do is point out that the office of Town Supervisor, Feiner in this case, cannot do anything "wrong" without the help, assistance or "complicity" of other Town employees (Town Council and staff). For six months I have been repeating, "just three votes" as the proposition that if problems are so apparent after the fact, then it is the job of the Town Council not to prevent the "after the fact" quarterbacking from ever occurring. They can do this simply by defeating the red flagged matters or even implementing their own legislative fix. But they do not.<BR/><BR/>The second stage of this is to get rid of the town employees who provide the adminstrative support which permits these "dubious" transactions to be implemented. If these policies are as clear to everyone as they are to bloggers, then good employees, employees with guts, will just say no.<BR/><BR/>Assuming that the Town Council will support those employees who either refuse to perform illegal duties or "blow the whistle", then who would get fired for doing their job? Department Heads, if not their staffs, can only be fired "for cause". If the only staff we have are toadies, then Greenburgh cannot afford them.<BR/><BR/>Waiting to collect the buck from its point of origin is a two-year cycle. By then the "buck" has accrued an additional expense item, "interest". If you really want to save bucks, then the responsibility is that of the Town Council and the Town staff.<BR/><BR/>This is still a Democracy and the Public is entitled to have their choice assume the elected office.<BR/>And citizens are also allowed their right to quarrel with the result. However, so far, residents have been offered no choice because even though a name has been proffered, Ms Berger has not emerged as anything more than a hollow shell. <BR/><BR/>Just three votes AND<BR/>fire the toadies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-58747501167695519032007-06-25T10:42:00.000-04:002007-06-25T10:42:00.000-04:00Oh, how the rabid reach.1. I don't call it "defer...Oh, how the rabid reach.<BR/><BR/>1. I don't call it "deferred revenue." The Comptroller does. ASK HIM BEFORE FOAMING AT THE MOUTH. That is the way the Comptroller handled it. And it is wrong. It should be transferred to the budget as real revenue. The reason it hasn't been transferred to real revenue is because the Town Council knows that under the State Comptroller's opinion, and the opinion of their own Town Attorney, this money is town-wide revenue. The Council would like to break the law and put it in as B budget revenue. That's why nothing has been done.<BR/><BR/>2. When did I ever say that I see nothing wrong with Feiner taking "tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from developers with applications pending before the town." If the lying writer can show me where I have said that I will deliver to him a certfied check for $10,000. The writer and his friends need to lie in order to cover the weaknesses in their ludicrous attacks.<BR/><BR/>3. The writer says that I don't "see anything wrong with Feiner's illegal $6.5 million giveaway of town revenues to the Valhalla schools." I am amazed that the writer and his patrons use such flagrant lies. In my 12/21/05 memo I told the Board that the Valhalla School grant was "political gift" and an "illegal gift" that was unconstitutional. I stood up before the Town Board at a meeting and told the Board that they have no right to give money to the Valhalla School District. Interestingly Bernstein got up later and said the same thing, even acknowledging that I made that statement and that he agreed with me. I used to think that these people believed their lies but now I know that they repeat these lies because if they stop lying they go up in smoke, because there is nothing else there.<BR/><BR/>What garbage will the writer write next?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-18786204536491573892007-06-25T10:06:00.000-04:002007-06-25T10:06:00.000-04:00The facts are that Rosenberg admitted lying to the...The facts are that Rosenberg admitted lying to the town council. It's in the police report. <BR/><BR/>Rosenberg doesn't make sense when he calls Feiner's $500,000 slush fund "deferred revenue." That is Rosenberg's "white lie" way of whitewashing what Feiner did. <BR/><BR/>Rosenberg meanwhile sees nothing wrong with Feiner having taken tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from developers with applications pending before the town -- presumably because those applications don't affect him, a village resident. <BR/><BR/>So if Feiner violates the town's ethics laws -- and thumbs his nose at the ethics committee's investigation -- it's no skin off his nose. <BR/><BR/>Rosenberg also doesn't see anything wrong with Feiner's illegal $6.5 million giveaway of town revenues to the Valhalla schools. <BR/><BR/>For someone who supposedly makes "sense," the irony here is that Rosenberg insists on the one hand, that such revenues belong in the town's "A" budget, so village residents can share in the windfall. <BR/><BR/>Yet on the other hand, Rosenberg supports the re-election of Feiner and his running mates, all of whom are pledged to send that $6.5 million in town revenues right back to the Valhalla schools as soon as they get the votes to do it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-44168143682979332132007-06-25T08:40:00.000-04:002007-06-25T08:40:00.000-04:00Because Rosenberg makes sense and he states facts,...Because Rosenberg makes sense and he states facts, that's why.<BR/><BR/>I remember that when the police investigated this they found no problem and the Journal News slammed the Town Board over it.<BR/><BR/>So stick to facts, mister.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-48594637121502841732007-06-25T08:29:00.000-04:002007-06-25T08:29:00.000-04:00Whatever credibility Rosenberg may have had in Gre...Whatever credibility Rosenberg may have had in Greenburgh was lost last year when he admitted lying to the town council about Feiner having leaked him confidential material. <BR/><BR/>He said he was just trying to coverrup for Feiner because he didn't want to see his friend get into trouble. <BR/><BR/>Why should anyone believe "white lie" Rosenberg now?<BR/><BR/>The answer is that no one should.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-52722046223341738042007-06-24T23:12:00.000-04:002007-06-24T23:12:00.000-04:00I said that it is unwise to get into a pissing con...I said that it is unwise to get into a pissing contest with a skunk, especially the well-known skunk who keeps dodging the facts and distorts all over the place -- something he has to do because the true facts are against him. I am sure that this response, which will be my final response, will get further distortions but I cannot keep on trying to pick up slime.<BR/><BR/>1. Mr. the bucks still stops here (for shorthand I will use the general initial “B” to refer to the blogger, for the sake of saving space) forever tries to discredit the SCOBA Report. I invite readers of this blog to read it and see for themselves. I think it is still available on the town’s website. If not, let me know and I will email it to you. It will not be difficult to see B’s distortions.<BR/><BR/>2. I learned that the $500,000 is in a deferred revenue account in the fund balance by asking the Comptroller, after the SCOBA Report was issued. It is something B can also do, instead of throwing out innuendos, rumors, and falsehoods.<BR/><BR/>3. I don’t assure that only $500,000 is “off the books” as B puts it. I have no knowledge of any other amounts. If there are any other amounts then B should so state, instead of continually referring to rumors -- rumors which, I suspect, he has started and is perpetuating.<BR/><BR/>4. I do not hold Feiner blameless for not putting the $500,000 into the budget. Quite the contrary, I have been critical of Feiner as well as the Town Council, and the Comptroller as well, for continuing to keep the $500,000 in the fund balance. I have met with the Town Attorney and the Town Comptroller to discuss it, and I have written more than once to Feiner and the Town Council about it. As I have said more than once, the Town Council pays no attention to anything that isn’t acceptable to the Edgemont royalty.<BR/><BR/>5. B is right that SCOBA was appointed by Feiner and not the Board. The Board was not interested in any study because any idea that Feiner has is automatically rejected by the Town Council. In fact, Steve Bass was so insulting to SCOBA that important members from the unincorporated area described him as a rude fool.<BR/><BR/>6. B can continue to call the $500,000 which is in the bank a “slush fund.” He is reduced to this kind of name-calling as a substitute for reasoned discussion. That is the way it has been with him right along.<BR/><BR/>7. “Why did Rosenberg keep so quiet?” Obviously B doesn’t read or pretends that facts have not been written. The SCOBA Report wasn’t quiet. My December 21, 2005 email to the Town Board (with copies to the Town Attorney and the Town Comptroller) wasn’t quiet. Will B ever speak the truth? He says that “only after the town council took action did we hear from Rosenberg.” The Town Council took action in the fall of 2006, about a year after SCOBA and I informed the Town Council of the improper accounting and the existence of the funds originally intended for the civic associations which were not properly accounted for.<BR/><BR/>Have I left anything out? Oh, well, enough said about B’s almost rabid spinning. It will never stop because, like a shark, he must keep moving. But I have no intention of continuing this contest with a skunk.<BR/><BR/>Regarding B’s efforts to discredit Samis, I will let Samis answer that one. All I will say is that the distortions and weird explanations that B makes in his response to Samis are not worthy of a professional.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-85640701694647706592007-06-24T23:05:00.000-04:002007-06-24T23:05:00.000-04:00For those like Rosenberg and other Feiner apologis...For those like Rosenberg and other Feiner apologists out there who refuse to recognize the fact that Feiner got caught maintaining an illegal "slush fund," here's Wikipedia's definition of "slush fund." <BR/><BR/>"Slush fund is a colloquial term which has come to mean an auxiliary monetary account or a reserve fund. However, the term has special meaning within a context of corrupt (including but not limited to) political dealings by governments, large corporations or other bodies and individuals. Slush funds can have particular elements of illegality, illegitimacy, or secrecy in regard to the use of this money and the means by which the funds were acquired."<BR/><BR/>Feiner has admitting keeping hundreds of thousands of dollars of town revenues off-the books so that he would have "flexibility" in spending it on behalf of the Mayfair Knollwood Civic Association. <BR/><BR/>He knew that if the money he promised to spend for the association came out of the town budget, his giving it to the association would not just be illegal, but unconstitutional. <BR/><BR/>So he kept the money off-book and off-budget. That's what made it a slush fund.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-85864869560191362722007-06-24T21:27:00.000-04:002007-06-24T21:27:00.000-04:00Nowhere in what Rosenberg quoted from the SCOBA re...Nowhere in what Rosenberg quoted from the SCOBA report (which by the way was buried in a footnote) does it say that the town is illegally maintaining hundreds of thousands of dollars "off-the-books." <BR/><BR/>Rosenberg says the money wasn't "off the books" but in a "deferred revenue" account. Oh really? Where'd he get that from? It doesn't say that anywhere in the town budgets that Feiner submitted. There is also no mention of any such "deferred revenue" account anywhere in any of the financial statements that were certified by the town's outside auditor. <BR/><BR/>Rosenberg assures us the only amount that Feiner kept off-the-books is $500,000. There are some who say that an examination of the actual bank account shows the amount of money held there was much greater than that. Has Rosenberg actually seen the bank statement?<BR/><BR/>But assuming it was only $500,000, that, and Feiner's comment that he needed to keep the money off-book to maintain his "flexibility" in how he spent it shows appallingly bad judgment.<BR/><BR/>Yet Rosenberg holds Feiner blameless. Why? <BR/><BR/>SCOBA was a committee appointed entirely by Feiner to assist him -- not the town board -- in drawing up the budget. This was not a committee whose membership was approved by the town board. <BR/><BR/>In fact, Rosenberg is a pro-village advocate who wouldn't allow unincorporated area civic association heads to participate because he thought they'd be "biased." Maybe that's why the report didn't get the attention Rosenberg thought it merited.<BR/><BR/>In any event, the SCOBA report was issued in the fall of 2005. <BR/><BR/>Even if Rosenberg had understood that he had stumbled upon an illegal slush fund, which as is obvious from the SCOBA report he did not, why didn't he get Feiner to stop the practice in time for the 2006 budget?<BR/><BR/>And for goodness' sake, why didn't he get Feiner to stop the practice before Feiner put out his 2007 budget? <BR/><BR/>Why did Rosenberg keep so quiet? <BR/><BR/>Only after the town council took action did we hear from Rosenberg. Rosenberg then pressed his anti-council agenda, as if the town council were responsible for Feiner's misdeeds. <BR/><BR/>Samis likewise refuses to acknowledge Feiner's wrongdoing. Instead, like Feiner refusing to acknowledge his own responsibility, Samis attacks the town staff for not doing its job. <BR/><BR/>So Samis points the finger at Heslop. However, Heslop made clear that he found out about the off-books revenue within days of his taking the job -- when the state comptroller's office notified him that the entire WestHELP deal, including the town's accounting for its revenues, was under investigation. <BR/><BR/>Not knowing what he should do, he told the state comptroller's office all about the slush fund and decided to maintain the status quo until the state comptroller could complete its audit and made its recommendations. You don't fire town staff for making that kind of judgment.<BR/><BR/>Instead, you ask how it happened that Heslop inherited this mess in the first place. Hopefully, we'll know for sure when the independent counsel -- which Rosenberg, Samis and Feiner all fought -- issues her report.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-65350625888091883032007-06-24T20:55:00.000-04:002007-06-24T20:55:00.000-04:00Looks like Rosenberg is telling it right and Berns...Looks like Rosenberg is telling it right and Bernstein is telling it wrong. Good to know.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-45589212943758259542007-06-24T19:10:00.000-04:002007-06-24T19:10:00.000-04:00If you inherit bad genes you are said to be "at ri...If you inherit bad genes you are said to be "at risk" for certain diseases.<BR/><BR/>If you inherit bad bookkeeping, and you are a CPA and a Town Comptroller, you are, by any measure of professional standards, supposed to fix what's wrong.<BR/><BR/>If you don't fix it or at least bring the bad news to the Town Board that "Greenburgh, we have a problem", when the cars with the flashing red lights roll up with the men in dark suits and grim looks on their faces, you will find yourself in deep doo-doo.<BR/><BR/>Mr Heslop has prepared two Town Budgets since Ms Berg's departure.<BR/>Have we seen any accompanying footnotes that some of the line items may have to be restated? I might be able to excuse him for not knowing what he was doing if I didn't know that he earns $130,000 for apparently just copying the work of the previous Comptroller.<BR/><BR/>But when he looked the other way and allowed $309,000 in 2007 for Library building maintenance (no library, remember) and did not change it when the error was brought to his attention at two Public Hearings on the Town Budget,<BR/>this attitude kind of eliminates any sympathy/courtesy that otherwise one might want to extend to him. And, makes me skeptical that he would not want to change things which he knows are wrong if that is the way they were done before. In this case, his predecessors had the good fortune to have an operating library in an operative building which might have explained how THEY assigned building maintenance. <BR/><BR/>"But we can't blame Heslop" 5:18pm says the comedian, 5:18, with the paper bag over his head because "Heslop is on record that this is a mess he inherited". Other than my immediate reaction to say 'doesn't this sound like passing the buck', I feel that as a good citizen I should warn the Police Chief that, if his men arrest anyone, the arresting officers should be prepared in case the perps say "I didn't do it". Apparently in blogland, writers are unprepared to deal with this contingency.<BR/><BR/>And why should they have to struggle with troublesome reality? If everything is Feiner's fault, then that makes the conclusion simple. And in that these bloggers are on the same page as Heslop and Tim Lewis.<BR/><BR/>Finally, it is nice to see that Mr. Rosenberg will grudgingly be allowed to continue his "obsession" with who pays, A or B. I'm sure Herb will cherish 5:18's "that's important too" even more than earning an A or a B for his comments. Feiner got his usual F and it looks like on this particular round I am getting a "bye".<BR/><BR/>That's it for now because I've got to make sure my clock is working. I don't want to miss the show Wednesday night. All Talking! All Singing! All Dancing! Diana Juettner is scheduled to speak on the Library.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-86609923644782294232007-06-24T18:26:00.000-04:002007-06-24T18:26:00.000-04:00The blogger who at 5:18 PM wrote under the name of...The blogger who at 5:18 PM wrote under the name of "the buck stops with Feiner" and previously (many times) wrote under the name "Anonymous" but whose identity is not in doubt for a nanosecond, has gone overboard in his vitriol and rancid imagination. It is, as I have had occasion to say before, a situation that every time he is confronted with a fact he must go wild with untruths, exaggerations, inventions, and bile. His comments about my alleged behavior are absolutely nutty. I won't, and can't, try to answer such nuttiness. I long ago learned that it is unwise to get into a pissing contest with a skunk. I will simply quote verbatim the knowledge that SCOBA and I imparted to the Town Board in 2005.<BR/><BR/>The SCOBA Report of 9/20/2005 (which is not my document, by the way, but a report worked on and approved by 16 members of SCOBA, 9 of whom were residents of unincorporated Greenburgh) decided that we would not make recommendations but present facts and leave it to the Town government, Town Attorney and Town Comptroller to take the facts and act on them.<BR/><BR/>On page 17 and 18 of the SCOBA Report there appear the following statements:<BR/><BR/>"Because the Town was advised by the Michaelian Institute that the grant of Town funds to a civic association was unlawful, the grant to the civic association has not been paid and the funds so allocated have been segregated and are in an account at a financial institution."<BR/><BR/>"We suggest that the Town Attorney consider (i) whether the substantive and procedural requirements have been met for the grants to the school and the fire districts, and (ii) the appropriate budget placement of the funds (now held in a reserved account) originally granted to the civic association."<BR/><BR/>"We note that this transaction is recorded on a “net” basis, i.e., the net rental after the grants. We suggest that the Town Comptroller consider whether this transaction should be recorded on a more transparent basis – i.e., that the entire rent of $1,222,844 be recorded as revenue and the grants be recorded as appropriations."<BR/><BR/>On 12/21/2005 I wrote an email to the Town Board on several matters, including the WestHELP rentals. That email included this sentence:<BR/><BR/>"In that connection, you should be aware that the $100,000 that was to be a “political” gift to a civic association, until the Town Board was advised that such a gift would be illegal, is sitting in an unidentified account."<BR/><BR/>The $100,000 was the annual gift, totalling $500,000 and referred to by the obsessive writer as a "slush fund." The funds were always in the B fund balance as a "deferred revenue" (and still are) but the writer must always put things into such a lunatic anti-Feiner mode that whatever merit he may have gets lost in his ranting.<BR/><BR/>The facts are simple. The Town Board made a mistake in doing the WestHELP deal, at least the way it was done. It wasn't evil, it was illegal. In 2005 the Town Board was advised by SCOBA that there may be illegality and by SCOBA and me that moneys originally meant for the civic associations was being held in a separate account and not being allocated to the town's budget. The Town Board did nothing about it -- they asked no questions and gave no answers. In late 2006 the State Comptroller submited his audit report and then, and only then, the Town Council suddenly got religion. Feiner, who has the quaint notion that a promise ought to be kept, has asked that the WestHELP deal be renegotiated. I make no comment about that whatsoever.<BR/><BR/>Those are the facts, and all of the mysterious but well-known agenda-driven writer's spinning and insults and attacks won't change the facts.<BR/><BR/>In short, what I was trying to say, in response to his earlier comments at 1:12 AM, is that the Town Council cannot claim that they didn't know, as the writer maintains. They knew because they were told, but they did nothing, as is their custom. And they should admit it and take responsibility.<BR/><BR/>I repeat that the writer is a conscious and intentional liar and I will reprint the worst of his lies which I wrote about in my earlier posting.<BR/><BR/>"And when you say that "when they found out about it, they made sure the money was put back on the books and hired independent counsel to investigate how this was allowed to happen" you are again making things up, typically. The money is still in the fund balance and has never been transferred to the budget as legally required."<BR/><BR/>It says a lot about Mr. Anonymous, Mr. the buck stops with Feiner, also well-known by his real name, that he cannot argue honestly about anything at any time. His poison has done incalculable damage to the town.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-48182467174123786962007-06-24T17:18:00.000-04:002007-06-24T17:18:00.000-04:00Rosenberg is deluding himself, as usual, when he s...Rosenberg is deluding himself, as usual, when he says his SCOBA report blew the whistle on Feiner's slush fund. <BR/><BR/>The report did nothing of the sort -- even though the scandal was staring at the Feiner-appointed SCOBA members in the face -- and if Rosenberg now wants to claim he wrote some memo which did the trick, he ought to post it for the world to see what he actually wrote instead of what he says he wrote. <BR/><BR/>In the fall of 2006, when Feiner proposed his budget for 2007, Feiner was still recognizing only $380,000 of the $1.2 million in town revenues from the WestHELP contract, and Feiner's $500,000 slush fund (which is now rumored to be a much bigger dollar amount), was still off-the-books. <BR/><BR/>So what did Rosenberg do? The answer is nothing. Not wanting to undermine Feiner politically, he smugly kept his mouth shut. <BR/><BR/>So who came in and undid what Feiner was trying to do yet again? <BR/><BR/>The Town Council did -- because if they hadn't, Feiner would claim they were as much to blame as he is.<BR/><BR/>And Rosenberg "doesn't recall" Feiner being against the hiring of independent counsel to look into this? Rosenberg was not only in the room, but he himself was so opposed to the hiring of independent counsel that he started screaming at the town council members, refused to sit down when his five minutes was up, and later had to apologize for his rude behavior. <BR/><BR/>And as for Feiner, even though the counsel was recommended by the dean of Pace Law Schoool, Feiner didn't like the person, he didn't like the cost, and he insisted on total control over what was being investigated. <BR/><BR/>That's when he threatened to hire his own counsel -- Chase Caro, the suspended Mayfair Knollwood lawyer who recently pled guilty to felony charges. <BR/><BR/>And who was to blame for causing the mess in the first place?<BR/><BR/>Samis wants to blame Heslop, but he's on record saying this was a mess that he inherited. <BR/><BR/>Should we blame his predecessor? Ms. Berg, the former head of a state association of town comptroller's, quit after just four months on the job, saying she couldn't work for Feiner. Sounds like she might know something. <BR/><BR/>Perhaps then we should blame her predecessor? But she quit too -- right around the time she would have had to account for the WestHELP money. Was she being asked to do something improper and refused? If so, who asked her to do it? And when she left, did she make a report of the wrongdoing to state authorities? (Rumor has it that she did exactly that).<BR/><BR/>And what about her assistant, the deputy comptroller, who was acting comptroller before Heslop joined, and before Ms. Berg joined? She quit too. <BR/><BR/>What are we to make of all this? <BR/><BR/>It doesn't take much to infer that Feiner himself is responsible for the fishy accounting. His quotes in the Journal News certainly make clear he saw nothing wrong in dong what he did. <BR/><BR/>As the JN reported:<BR/><BR/>Supervisor Feiner says he did not include the money in the budget because he wanted to maintain "flexibility" on how the money is spent.<BR/> <BR/>"Once it's in the town budget, you can't say it's for one neighborhood," Feiner said. "Then it's in a town fund, and we had indicated we would give priority attention to Mayfair-Knollwood."<BR/><BR/>Keeping hundreds of thousands of dollars out of the town budget each year so Feiner could have "flexibility" he wouldn't otherwise have in how its spent is the very definition of a slush fund. <BR/><BR/>Putting aside Rosenberg's obsession with whether this money belongs in the A or B fund, which is an important issue too, this gross error in Feiner's judgment is huge. Very huge -- and those like Rosenberg and others who continue to defend Feiner over it are as much a part of the problem as Feiner himself.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-51665278213228536912007-06-24T15:53:00.000-04:002007-06-24T15:53:00.000-04:00Bobby B. has been posting under his professional n...Bobby B. has been posting under his professional name of Anonymous. Sometimes he uses another non-name. His writing and insults are unique and instantly recognizable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-9293768970408728902007-06-24T15:12:00.000-04:002007-06-24T15:12:00.000-04:00Dear "Feiner's to blame……."-Please pass this messa...Dear "Feiner's to blame……."-<BR/><BR/>Please pass this message on to Sir Francis & Bobby B. (chuckle, chuckle):<BR/><BR/>1) News Flash: Supervisor Paul may be a person of interest in the Lindbergh baby kidnapping, too; and<BR/><BR/>2) Have the police department check to see if anyone put a "mickey" into Steve's coffee right before that Dakfur resolution was introduced. They may find out that whole scheme was Supervisor Paul's fault too.<BR/><BR/>You know Young Kaminer walks around a lot behind the Town Bored dais; was he anywhere near Steve's coffee cup that night? Even if he is caught, no need to worry, he can tell that old gag about another Town Bored member putting him up to it.<BR/><BR/>And for the record, I never have seen any anonymous poster who has cleaned Mr. Samis' clock, or clocks for that matter. As far as I am concerned, he has been pitching shut-out ball here for as long as I can remember.<BR/><BR/>PS - Do you think Bobby B. might discover this blog one day and start posting?<BR/><BR/>You can now return to the "stupid" name calling now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-85414074732622739832007-06-24T13:12:00.000-04:002007-06-24T13:12:00.000-04:00And besides, in September 2005 the SCOBA Report de...And besides, in September 2005 the SCOBA Report described the bad accounting that was not disclosing the full WestHELP rent (which Bernstein typically twists to make it seem that it doesn't do what I just said) and urged more transparent accounting to show the full rent and the disbursements from it, and the entire Town Board received a copy. There is certainly no indication that they paid any attention to it.<BR/><BR/>Furthermore, in December 2005 I sent an email to the entire Town Board, in which I specifically pointed out the accounting problem and the unaccounted money. As with the SCOBA report, there was dead silence from the Town Council.<BR/><BR/>So, Mr. 1:12 A.M., whoever you are (and you are certainly not really anonymous)the Town Council certainly did know of the $500,000 -- the thing you and your cohorts consistently call a "slush fund" -- which was being kept aside in the B fund balance, and if they didn't, as they now say, it is bbecause they weren't doing their job. You may choose to believe them, but the evidence is against them on that one.<BR/><BR/>And when you say that "when they found out about it, they made sure the money was put back on the books and hired independent counsel to investigate how this was allowed to happen" you are again making things up, typically. The money is still in the fund balance and has never been transferred to the budget as legally required.<BR/><BR/>I don't recall Feiner being opposed to hiring an independent counsel. But I do know that the independent counsel was hired many months ago and so far there is no indication of what, if anything, they found, or indeed, whether anything is being done by them at all.<BR/><BR/>If you signed your name to your innuendos and falsehoods you know that you couldn't get away with this kind of stuff. So keep posing as anonymous. We know.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-91955557746333087512007-06-24T12:21:00.000-04:002007-06-24T12:21:00.000-04:00Dear 1:12,The Town's Comptroller is named Jim Hesl...Dear 1:12,<BR/><BR/>The Town's Comptroller is named Jim Heslop. His office is on the second floor, just past the temporary library children's room.<BR/><BR/>You can get to the Comptroller's office by stairs or elevator or by phone or by FOILable email.<BR/><BR/>Any member of the Town Council is allowed to stop by and ask "Jim, before I vote on this issue, is there anything I should know..." or<BR/>"Jim, is there any unreported money being parked anywhere? If so, how much and where is it?"<BR/><BR/>And, if any of this is true, which member of the Town Council has found the votes to dehire the Town Comptroller? Whereas I don't necessarily disagree with all of the conclusions arising from the questions, I wonder why nothing punitive has followed. Business as usual seems to be the order of business. Whereas Feiner may be the Town's CFO, he does not handle the books, make the entries, move the money around. The first step in setting things rights is to root out the employees who created the dead ends, the false leads, the improper entries etc. Why are they still receiving pay checks?<BR/>If this is really an important issue, why is the Town Council not acting? Because I am not privvy to the back story, nor are other bloggers, the longer that nothing is done; the integrity of the allegations becomes diminished.<BR/><BR/>Why is Mr. Bass bringing us Resolutions to duplicate State law?<BR/>Why is he not, instead, bringing us a Resolution or at least hosting a Hearing on what happened and what steps are being taken to prevent it from recurring? Of course, it is not fair to single out Mr. Bass when there are three others, Barnes, Juettner and Sheehan to ask the same questions.<BR/><BR/>That nothing is happening, at any level, makes the blog comments and blog rumors become questionable themselves. If bloggers really care, they, in turn, would spend less time with me and more with getting answers from the people involved and have the power to cure.<BR/><BR/>And why is no one starting with Heslop as though he, being the Comptroller, isn't enough reason? Because, just as Feiner has never practiced law even though he holds a law degree, bloggers still have a field day trying to hold Feiner responsible for legal matters even though there is also an employed Town Attorney, Tim Lewis. But one thing that Feiner clearly is not, having no resume line to support this, is an Accountant. The title CFO goes with the job but no one has ever said that an accounting or auditing background is the requirement to hold the dual position, Town Supervisor/CFO.<BR/><BR/>Lest I forget, both the Town Comptroller's office and the Town Attorney's office have all kinds of underlings reporting to their Department heads. With all the problems and shock that the Town Council registers with each new unearthed incident, who has been fired within these Deaprtments?<BR/><BR/>We know that the Police Department<BR/>takes it Departmental responsibilites seriously.<BR/><BR/>Feiner is the man at the top; in theory the buck stops with him but, in the real world, we know that this is seldom the case. What I do not understand is why when we're talking about big bucks, not one Town employee has been punished? Feiner can't be doing everyone's job in the Comptroller's office. Feiner must be a very busy person making ledger entries, running to the bank to make deposits, transfering money among accounts, writing checks and getting everyone's cooperation in looking the other way.<BR/><BR/>If Feiner is the bad apple that has spoiled the bunch then the voters will deal with this at the polls. In the meantime, what is the Town Council doing about the hired guns, the rotten apples that can be thrown out without voting machines?<BR/><BR/>You can only keep a balloon aloft for so long, eventually you use the last of the ballast. Either these financial matters are going to deflate under their own weight or the ballon is going to crash. The Town Council acts merely as ballast and, with every hint of a breeze, they panic and climb over one another to flee as though a hurricane had just attacked Town Hall. We need a Town Council that is willing to steer and take pre-emptive, versus reactive, actions. So far they have remained silent. Why haven't they gone after the bad apples on which they can perform triage?<BR/><BR/>True to form, I predict that anonymous bloggers will respond saying I'm shielding Feiner and blaming everyone else. Who will be impartial enough to argue for what is the proper, logical and doable first step -- get rid of the Town Comptroller?<BR/><BR/>Finally to 11:58,<BR/><BR/>Dream on.<BR/><BR/>Stupid is a very good word. People have a really clear mental picture of what the word means. And when they read the blog, the confirmation of this descriptive term appears right in front of their eyes.<BR/><BR/>Generally speaking there is nothing wrong with having a clock cleaned, even when the clock is keeping accurate time. Just like when you go for a physical, even without reporting chest pains, the doctor still checks your ticker. However, there is no one on Feiner's blog who has cleaned my clock yet. Saying it is so, just isn't the same as proving it. One thing is clear, in 2003 Feiner did clean Bernstein's clock. Ouch!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-23566756137450701242007-06-24T01:12:00.000-04:002007-06-24T01:12:00.000-04:00Did the town council support Feiner's having solic...Did the town council support Feiner's having solicited tens of thousands of dollars in contributions from developers with applications pending before the town?<BR/><BR/>The answer is no. They jump-started an effectively defunct ethics board which is now investigating Feiner's violations of the town's ethics code -- and according to the published minutes of those meetings, Feiner's not cooperating. <BR/><BR/>Did the town council support Feiner's illegally giving away $6.5 million in town revenues from WestHELP to the Valhalla schools?<BR/><BR/>Yes. But when the state comptroller pointed out that it was illegal and that Feiner had no evidence to support his rationale for giveaway, they canceled the gift. Only Feiner voted the other way. And if Feiner and his running mates are elected, town taxpayers from both the town and the villages can kiss that money goodbye.<BR/><BR/>Did the town council support Feiner maintaining a secret off-the-books slush fund containing hundreds of thousands of dollars in town revenues from WestHELP?<BR/><BR/>No. Town council members said they didn't know Feiner was setting the money aside and keeping it off-the books. When they found out about it, they made sure the money was put back on the books and hired independent counsel to investigate how this was allowed to happen. Feiner was opposed. <BR/><BR/>And rumor has it that the amount of money in the slush fund was far greater than the $500,000 that's been publicly reported.<BR/><BR/>Feiner seems never to take responsibility for these gross lapses in judgment. He blames the town council for letting him get away with it. Or he blames Bernstein, as if he were somehow to blame for Feiner's problems. <BR/><BR/>The town council has learned that Feiner is so untrustworthy these days that they can no longer take his word on just about anything anymore. <BR/><BR/>And forget about taking his word on anything. We taxpayers are finding out that we just can't afford him anymore.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-80807904445210554372007-06-24T00:47:00.000-04:002007-06-24T00:47:00.000-04:00Every action that bernstein criticizes feiner for ...Every action that bernstein criticizes feiner for implementing had the support of the other members of the town board. feiner can't act alone.<BR/>Bernstein may think he has the support of the town council. they may yes him to death but actions speak louder than smiles.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-24729357839469689102007-06-23T23:58:00.000-04:002007-06-23T23:58:00.000-04:00Someone out there keeps cleaning Samis's clock -- ...Someone out there keeps cleaning Samis's clock -- something Samis clearly isn't used to -- and all Samis can say in response is that the writer is "stupid." <BR/><BR/>Samis writes like a spoiled child who's annoyed that his balloon popped. <BR/><BR/>I wonder... when Feiner looks in the mirror, does he see Samis smiling back?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-78043677216284726482007-06-23T19:17:00.000-04:002007-06-23T19:17:00.000-04:00Dear Stupid at 3:50,Actually a gadfly is a persist...Dear Stupid at 3:50,<BR/><BR/>Actually a gadfly is a persistent, irritating critic, a nuisance, one that acts as a provacative stimulus; this description fits you like a glove. If you're not sure of what a word means, there is always the dictionary. <BR/><BR/>Is "anonymous" that you thank yourself a family member because inbreeding is said to pass the stupid gene along?<BR/><BR/>Otherwise how to explain that socking it to Bernstein in 2003 has anything to do with the vote of the Town Board? Or even accepting campaign contributions?<BR/><BR/>Read your own posting again and see if any reasonable person would not reach the same conclusion: that you must harbor a death wish to embarrass youself so badly in public. Even if you don't sign your name, it certainly doesn't help your "cause" to have nothing you write have any basis or exhibit any of the logic or common sense that you say you value. Perhaps you need to show your work to a friend before you post again; until then, stupid is still the operative word.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-54815720673503434152007-06-23T16:46:00.000-04:002007-06-23T16:46:00.000-04:00Samis, I'm glad that you are informing the public ...Samis, I'm glad that you are informing the public and that you know what you are talking about. Don't worry about people like the guy who wrote at 3:50 P.M. Others have pointed out that whenever someone tells the truth about any of the Town Council the same old bunch starts their repetitious attacks on Feiner.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-17791280043883793562007-06-23T15:50:00.000-04:002007-06-23T15:50:00.000-04:00What Feiner did in 2003 in refusing to honor e-mai...What Feiner did in 2003 in refusing to honor e-mailed FOIL requests speaks volumes about his behavior in 2007.<BR/><BR/>I'm glad anonymous pointed it out. <BR/><BR/>How else can one explain Feiner's $6.5 million illegal giveaway of town revenues to the Valhalla schools, his $500,000 off-the-books slush fund for a civic association, his taking of thousands of dollars in contributions from developers with applications pending before the town? <BR/><BR/>As the Journal News pointed out earlier this year, Feiner thinks there's one set of rules for him and another set of rules for everyone else.<BR/><BR/>There are two kinds of gadflies out there: those who believe in open government totally, and those who, because they think they're smarter than the rest of us, believe in open government only selectively, i.e., when it suits them. <BR/><BR/>Gadflies like that usually end up costing the rest of us lots of money. <BR/><BR/>They're also the ones who, when logic and common sense fails them, simply call those who disagree "stupid." Samis uses that word a lot. <BR/><BR/>It's clear what kind of gadfly Feiner is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-77298831454745239632007-06-23T12:06:00.000-04:002007-06-23T12:06:00.000-04:00Anonymous at 9:50,IN 2003,open or closed, Email wa...Anonymous at 9:50,<BR/><BR/>IN 2003,<BR/>open or closed, Email was unsigned, much like your posting is also unsigned.<BR/>IN 2003.<BR/><BR/>IN 2007,<BR/>Email became allowed under the law.<BR/>If you haven't been reading, Spitzer made Email permissable by signing such a law.<BR/>Unlike Steve Bass and Alfreda Williams, he did not sign a law which already existed.<BR/><BR/>In 2003, Bob Bernstein lost the Court case he brought to argue that Email was the equivalent of writing. He has been "smarting" ever since from this spanking. One would assume that he would prefer that is allies would not create reasons to remind him of his defeat. I am happy to be the vessel to respond to this silliness.<BR/><BR/>Thus, once more, that Samis is right (or wrong) is not the issue. The Court said in 2003, that "Feiner" didn't have to accept Email FOIL requests.<BR/>Bernstein, who believed the opposite was true and went to Court for substantiation, lost.<BR/><BR/>Personally, as one who uses FOIL often, it often is more convenient to use Email for filing and if it were allowable earlier I would have had not objections. Certainly having documents sent by Email saves the charge for photocopying. But it is not fair to accuse Feiner and the Town Council of breaking existing laws while at the same time accuse him and the Town Council of failing to follow non-existing laws.<BR/><BR/>This whole flap started over my accusing Steve Bass and Alfreda Williams of self-promotion by saying Greenburgh needs to pass a local law which allows FOIL requests to be processed by Email.<BR/>Since it is popularly perceived that Feiner sits on one side of the fence and Steve Bass and Bob Bernstein sit on the other, I just can't understand why those on the Bass/Bernstein side of the fence can maintain both arguments:<BR/>**Feiner is against open government because he wouldn't accept Email FOIL requests AND<BR/>**Greenburgh needs a local law to make Email FOIL requests legal, even though NYS recently passed the same.<BR/><BR/>What is really scary is how some bloggers give "anonymous" a bad name. One would think that more people would use their real name if only to disassociate themselves from the level of stupidity that comes from the keyboards of anonymous bloggers such as 9:50.<BR/><BR/>Hopefully this will end now; it is an open and shut case. That was then and this is now. Or you can remain forever stuck in 2003, as an 11 year old.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-57081850380371041332007-06-23T09:50:00.000-04:002007-06-23T09:50:00.000-04:00So Samis defends Feiner's refusal to honor e-maile...So Samis defends Feiner's refusal to honor e-mailed FOIL requests? <BR/><BR/>Let me get this straight: He and Feiner think that a written e-mail request is not a request "in writing." <BR/><BR/>And they take this whacko position because they can't be too sure whether the sender, who presumably signed his name, along with an address and telephone number, is a real person?<BR/><BR/>You gotta be making this stuff up.<BR/><BR/>If Samis is right,I'm shocked and disappointed. I really thought Feiner was one of those "open government" types. If Samis is right, then Feiner's just posing as someone who wants "open government." <BR/><BR/>It's "open" when he wants to expose something he doesn't like, but "closed" if it has to do with anything else, including mistakes of his own, like maybe not complying with the law.<BR/><BR/>If Samis is right, having someone like Feiner in office, is downright scary.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com