tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post5297543807770463758..comments2023-10-30T06:13:34.382-04:00Comments on Supervisor Feiner: ETHICS BD NEEDS 5 MEMBERS, ONLY HAS 3Paul Feinerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17087805120754057844noreply@blogger.comBlogger152125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-62017175634505175662007-07-09T21:47:00.000-04:002007-07-09T21:47:00.000-04:00Agreed Feiner was behind the lease, even suggestin...Agreed Feiner was behind the lease, even suggesting a "bank" as a tenant as far back as 2000 when the building across from Town Hall had been proposed for the Town Hall.<BR/><BR/>Incidentally, there should be a brass plaque denoting that site as historic, where Samis cut his teeth on the first Town issue.<BR/><BR/>And this may come as a surprise, but there are issues that I do not excuse Feiner for, issues which still have not been adequately explained to my satisfaction. This is one such issue.<BR/><BR/>However your conclusion is of your making. Snookered is your opinion.<BR/>What I wrote was why with the existence of the cancellation clause, did no one employ it when the Library so desperately needed more temporary space?<BR/><BR/>I have no quarrel with the lease terms, I would call them fair and reasonable to both landlord and tenant. However, if you go to the trouble to write in a cancellation clause, then why wasn't it used. Both sides were represented by Counsel. I would certainly hope that a Credit Union which takes in money from the Public is professional enough to understand what they have agreed to. There is no language to protect the tenant against the invocation of the termination clause, i.e. "this clause shall be effective after ____ years. So, on the second day their lease could have been terminated on six months notice.<BR/>That would be the risk in renting space in a municipal building in an area of growing population.<BR/><BR/>The only thing that might stop the terms from being enforced if there were some undisclosed side agreements which cancel out the language of this specific passage.<BR/>Notwithstanding such, perhaps there is a "gentleman's" agreement that the Town won't ever invoke this clause.<BR/><BR/>If so, then what stopped the Town Council from accepting the Lease.<BR/>What stopped the Town Council from saying to the Credit Union, nice knowing you, you've been a great friend but our children need a larger library so that they can study, get into business school and run their own credit unions someday.<BR/><BR/>So yes Feiner wanted the Credit Union but unlike the other issues that he "alone" wanted and the results have been confused by both sides, this issue is simple.<BR/><BR/>The entire Town Board at lease signing is the same Town Board that sits on the dais. The Town Comptroller and the Town Attorney at lease signing are the same people who hold these positions today. The Library needed more space. The Town was aware well in advance that the Library would be coming to Town Hall. etc.<BR/><BR/>Every Resolution has a sponsor. Steve Bass sponsored the Darfur Resolution for example. Similarly, Feiner was the sponsor of renting the space to the Credit Union.<BR/><BR/>BOTH Resolutions passed 5 to 0.<BR/><BR/>The following is just an example.<BR/>Would you argue that Juettner was secretly against Darfur but voted for it? Would you argue that Juettner was secretly against the Credit Union but voted for it?<BR/><BR/>All 5 must take responsibility for their vote whether the Resoultion came from Feiner or any other member of the Town Board.<BR/><BR/>If it was wrong, then it is right to make them all responsible.<BR/>Just 3 votes would have stopped the Resolution dead in its tracks.<BR/>I don't understand why every time I repeat this, someone comes along to throw it back to Feiner's front door. If Feiner is everything, why does the Town spend $120,000 plus benefits for the Town Council plus $55,000 for their aide plus benefits IF they are responsible for NOTHING? Why do we have voting at all if there is always someone to say, sure they voted but they either didn't understand or they didn't mean to vote in favor. Once, ok. Twice, maybe. But in almost every vote, there are at least three votes joining with Feiner. So, cut the crap out.<BR/>Just 3 votes.<BR/>And the whole Credit Union lease still stinks. There was no purpose served by the indignity of renting out our Town Hall to tenant(s). Certainly, no economic reason at $25,000 per year.<BR/><BR/>Even though no one got "snookered" that didn't want to be, this was not an example of being snookered.<BR/>But it certainly is a text book example of the actions of a cooperative Town Council at the age of consent.<BR/><BR/>So if you think you scored points with asking who was behind this lease and granted it was Feiner and it was evil, then I would expect the Town Council to rise as one and say "Get thee away from me, Satan". Instead the Town Council made their littke speeches saying what a good thing for the Town this lease was.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-85929843430064153252007-07-09T17:48:00.000-04:002007-07-09T17:48:00.000-04:00And who, dear Samis, was behind the lease? Why no...And who, dear Samis, was behind the lease? <BR/><BR/>Why none other than your friend Feiner. Why don't you ask HIM why he allowed the town to get snookered like this? Why must the story always be it's the town council's fault for NOT catching Feiner in time to avoid being snookered? Why is that state of affairs always okay for you?<BR/><BR/>Wouldn't it be nice if Greenburgh's supervisor were actually competent?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-2703631440190508102007-07-09T16:40:00.000-04:002007-07-09T16:40:00.000-04:00Re the credit union lease.I was and am still again...Re the credit union lease.<BR/><BR/>I was and am still against it.<BR/>More problems with little income coming to the Town. Surely Mr. Sheehan, speaking for the Town Board, didn't really mean that taking in commercial strays was such a win-win to give up the singular function and bragging rights of a spectacular Town Hall. $25,000 represents a tax savings of about 15 cents on the average assessment. <BR/><BR/>I FOILED a copy of the Lease and yes I would agree that it is fair market. And yes there is a cancellation clause on six months notice. But that is not the entire story. <BR/><BR/>When I pointed out that the Lease did not specify the designated premises, that in fact the entire Town Hall had been rented for roughly $25,000 per year, it took Town Attorney Tim Lewis about five minutes to understand, read and reread the Lease and recognize that his abilities had been, to put it mildly, somewhat over taxed. And of course, the Supervisor put his faith in Mr. Lewis, a practicing lawyer, and signed the Lease, he too failing to read and comprehend what he was told was ok to sign. Nor was this the first issue I have had with Mr. Lewis and his "in my opinion" sloppiness.<BR/><BR/>Mr. Lewis has cited obsolete laws to curtail the right of the public to speak at Public Hearings. What he forgot to identify were the more recent but still aged Open Meeting laws which nullified what he sourced.<BR/><BR/>Mr. Lewis similarly ok'd for Feiner's signature the original Triton Contract regarding their Library employment which. in the version that Lewis vetted, was $68,000 higher than their RFP proposal.<BR/><BR/>Blog readers will recall that I have oft called for the firing of Town Comptroller Heslop, DPW Commissioner Regula, Planning Commissioner Stellato, Mr Lewis and Town Clerk Alfreda Williams (darn, she is an elected official). And I have been criticized for picking on Town employees; Mr. Sheehan has been quick to defend them en masse. Their "unblemished" records no doubt reason enough for the Town Board to reward them with annual raises at Town Budget time. Perhaps, the Town Board will be able to justify an even larger annual pay increase were these employees to really screw up something big. Taxpayers, don't despair, the opportunity to increase their pay is at hand when the Fortress Bible suit concludes or a pedestrian is killed on Knollwood Road. <BR/><BR/>But a contract is a contract and a Lease is a contract. The credit union lease commenced March 2006. In early September 2006, it was confirmed that the Library would be moving into Town Hall, occupying somewhat less than 5,000 feet while the old Library was 22,000 feet. To obtain the realized space, a training room was eliminated and the lunch area was removed. You might say for the convenience of cashing their pay checks, the employees had to give up their lunch and break room -- so there was for them, at least, no free lunch. To fit the smaller space, the bulk of the Library's collections were put into dead storage at an expense to the Library. Six months notice given on September 15 2006 would mean that the credit union space would be available for Library use by April 15, 2007 and thus the services, programs and resources of the Library need not have been curtailed as sharply. Neither the Town Board nor the Library Board could see this outcome as a possibility.<BR/><BR/>But at least Town Hall would have been restored to its sole rightful use: to provide services and space to all residents, not just those who would use the credit union.<BR/><BR/>And bloggers may recall that there has been discussion of Town Hall work sessions being televised as well as Zoning Board back room discussions and Planning Board pre-Hearing work sessions. Perhaps, the credit union space could have been molded into a meeting room which would serve these broadcast functions better than their existing locations.<BR/><BR/>But as ever, the mystery remains as to why the credit union needed so badly to be located in Town Hall; that they would wait for almost two years to be allowed in the front door for the privilege of paying market rent for second floor space in a building that was not available on a 24/7 basis -- as opposed to renting available vacant storefronts or second store offices on Tarrytown Road. Such a location would have provided walk-in traffic in a visible location, something that all other banks and credit unions seek.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, who can dispute the convenience and accessibility to the Town Comptroller who need just stroll across the hall if he wanted, say, to deposit any unused Town monies.<BR/><BR/>Of course the Town Council will argue that they have no clue but perhaps they will want to get up to speed quickly so they cannot be blamed for allowing a festering mystery to remain unanswered.<BR/><BR/>And the Public can expect their reply to read as, "we were snookered again". This time Mr. Sheehan was leading the pack and Mr. Bass can wonder why he reversed what may yet prove to have been the proper stance.<BR/><BR/>For want of a nail, the kingdom perished. From the other side of the table comes this question: can a kingdom perish because wanting to hammer $100 worth of nails caused splintering?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-24076736986507599782007-07-08T22:15:00.000-04:002007-07-08T22:15:00.000-04:00Glad to see that Samis is back.Glad to see that Samis is back.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-60690123902892618582007-07-08T20:26:00.000-04:002007-07-08T20:26:00.000-04:00NO RESUME and someone was selected to serve on the...NO RESUME and someone was selected to serve on the ethics board. Who's his sponsor,If this is the correct way of choosing someone for this position, I have a lawyer friend who will be getting out of jail that could be of service to you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-13375409062214188732007-07-08T13:09:00.000-04:002007-07-08T13:09:00.000-04:00Had to scroll up and check that I opened the right...Had to scroll up and check that I opened the right door, the one marked Ethics Board comments. Seems like the direction of new comments is a continuation of where I have just come from, the Edgemont pre-school topic. It also seems like activist bloggers must feel that their comments will be read by a larger audience if they post them everywhere however inappropriate.<BR/><BR/>Now the Town has a complete Ethics Board. Needless to say that I am happy on one hand and saddened on the other. First the Happy Face.<BR/>Now the "Board" is a Board. Of course, the Chairman and the Secretary should resign and be re-elected just to make it "appear" that their own behavior is consistent with their roles. With just 3 members voting for themselves, we had a majority of 2 (of 3) electing 2 Board adminstrative positions. Once 1 of these slots was filled, then the remaining slot was chosen from the remaining field of 2. This had been troubling from the beginning especially with no consideration to the idea of calling themselves "Acting Chairman" and "Acting Secretary".<BR/><BR/>Now all that remains to be functional is the creation and adoption of the new Ethics laws.<BR/>The Town Board, without discussion even when presented with the first hard copy draft of the proposed laws just two hours before the Special Town Board meeting Friday, voted to accept the draft so that it could be presented for a Public Hearing at the Town Board meeting Jukly 18 with the intent that the Hearing be closed and the laws be adopted at a new Special Town Board Meeting. Again, a Special Town Board Meeting (no provision for Agenda in Town law) is the same Town Board Meeting as is held regularly on Wednesdays; the only difference is that it occurs on a different and "unique" day. As such, before the Agenda items are voted upon, there should be a Public Comment section just like the regularly scheduled Town Board meetings. Lately "Work Sessions" have allowed the Public to comment but this should be a regular feature of Special Town Board meeting agendas. On Friday, there was no provision for Public Comment, there was none by the Town Board and the entire meeting was over in 5 minutes.<BR/><BR/>Now the Sad face. To escape or neutralize criticism for running the Ethics show with only 3 members in place, the Town Board filled the 2 remaining slots. I cannot argue hastily; I cannot argue they did so without deliberation; I cannot argue that the field of applicants was immense: the Town Board made their choice based upon conducting a reasonable number of applicants.<BR/>However, the last interviews were conducted on Tuesday prior and there was no Public meeting to see a vote to choose the appointments to be voted upon at the Friday meeting. Tuesday's work session and Special Town Board meeting were adjourned without such discussion.<BR/><BR/>However, what I can argue is the following:<BR/>1) As Town Board member Eddie Mae Barnes herself lamented, I would have preferred to see at least one female on the Ethics Board.<BR/>2) I only attended one session in which 2 applicants were interviewed. One of these, Bunting, was selected despite his own questionable actions before the town's Zoning Board (Mr. Sheehan residing) but more importantly, Mr. Bunting stated most repeatedly and clearly that his first priorities are to his family, golf and his law practice, the three things which occupy all of his free time, yes his law practice intrudes at night and on weekends. Thus it is doubtful that, regarding his own acknowledgement, that the Ethics Board will really have more than 4 members attending and that Mr. Bunting was elected to a three year term. A great resume item for a lawyer but not likely a sincere effort forthcoming for the Ethics Board. We shall see. However, despite what it says on all Town Board meeting agendas, regarding would-be applicants for volunteer Boards should submit a resume to the Town Clerk for consideration, Mr. Bunting appeared without a resume but agreed that he could supply one. The other applicant that I saw interviewed was rejected and I have no quarrel with that decision.<BR/>So, now we have a "5" member Board.<BR/><BR/>Going back a few steps, consider that it is the Town Board that selects the Ethics Board members.<BR/>Let's be real, most of the cases that are going to be presented to the Ethics Board are for actual or presumed infractions of Ethics laws by the members of the Town Board. Could we have not created a 4 or 5 member NOMINATING panel of concerned but neitral citizens, say a representative from a School District, a member of a Civic Association, a member of the Courts, a Lois Bronz or Tom Abinanti type etc.? Should not an Ethics Board, particularly one born amidst controversy, be nobler than Caesar?<BR/><BR/>Then too let us examine the actual Ethics Laws being proposed? Are they not mere tepid slaps against those found guilty? With all this Ethics talk, one would assume that elected Officials would be especially careful, if not REQUIRED to be knowledgeable about transgressions, and thus any violations of these laws would be treated in a most severe manner, ignorance no longer a permitted excuse. No, that is not what the Town Board has in mind for itself. Do these laws, insomuch as they in part concern themselves with wrongful acceptance of contributions and favors, address requirements for knowing who has applications before the Town. I have suggested that applicants before the Zoning and Planning Boards be REQUIRED (applicants with business before the town and the most important step for real estate developers) to divulge the names secreted within the Corporation or LLC. How else can we match contributions with a giver if the LLC is not itself the giver. And how foolish would that be?<BR/><BR/>If a corporation or an LLC applies for a mortgage, the Lender is going to ask for the identities (and financials) of those holding at least 10% ownership. And because we are a municipal Agency rather than a private business, we should extend that, going beyond to lesser interests which are related by blood or common interest (six or even fewer 9% interests, say a family, may have a control relationship) Do we have any similar language anywhere in Town law, including the new Ethics Laws, for requiring this? Why is an APPLICANT before the Zoning or Planning Board treated less cautiously than an APPLICANT requesting financing from a Lender?<BR/>Do we not also talk about the Town knowing the parties that it does business with? This has been used to protect the Town from doing business with convicted felons or those participating in unfair labor practices. However when it comes to ferreting out those who may be in a position to influence decisions or gain advantage (via campaign contributions), the Town Board decides to forgo such reporting as though it didn't want to know. The present rules which identify an LLC solely as c/o of an Attorney is not a clue to its membership and serves no purpose other than to confound the proposed Ethics laws. So much for tough new Ethics Laws which are fraught with loopholes. And, if identities of parties is not what Ethics Laws are about, then where is the accompanying Resolution for Local Law to achieve the desired result? Or is preserving the loophole the real intent? Both of the Town and the Ethics Board. <BR/><BR/>But, one thing that should be clear is that the Ethics Laws presented to the Public is that these laws are the laws of the Town Board, not the laws of the Ethics Board, even one of just 3 members. The Ethics Board made suggestions but the final product is the Town Board. And if the Ethics Board wants to say no, no we had as much to say as the Town Board, then I remind them that they then also had as little to say. <BR/><BR/>What the new Ethics laws are mostly concerned with is protecting the rights of low level Town employess to give wedding gifts or retirement gifts; in other words in marketing terms (80-20 rule), the new laws concern themselves most carefully with matters that affect the 80% of the market which is less likely (20%) to have any effect upon dubious transactions and "excuse" the 20% (the elected officials) which will likely cause 80% of the violations such as they are.<BR/><BR/>So you can see that there are things which may be viewed as controversial when the Public Hearing opens (and closes as the Town Board seeks) on the one day during in mid July (when hopefully people are away on vacaction) and little will be said or noticed.<BR/><BR/>Remember that the Ethics Laws should have lots to do with looking at how the Town's elected officials, the Town Board, conducts its business and how the individual members can or cannot be shown to be affected by their acceptance of campaign contributions. It is not a violation of law for contributions to be offered; the onus for wanton behavior is born by the receiver, i.e. the members of the Town Board.<BR/><BR/>It seems like the Town Board does not want to have these matters be subject to much scrutiny and thus the rush. Perhaps the looming pollings, September Primary and November election are the real reason to need to rush these laws into place so speedily without full airing in Public. Note that any contributions made to candidates would not influence any candidates because without having the office to issue their appropriate "thank you" from until after November or even January 1, 2008 when the new term takes effect, the new laws will have little use in July. There is always August, September and October to pass these laws, properly; well thought out and effective. Why would the new Town Board -- all five members -- want otherwise?<BR/><BR/>Finally, there are many words that need being said regarding the phrase "appearance of impropriety".<BR/>If anything smacks of the denial of Constitutional rights it is this phrase which goes right to the heart of "innocent until proven guilty". It is one thing to judge criminality (in another venue) but this is just downright anti-libertarian in town and moves Greenburgh into the territory of defending itself in Court as the first community in Westchester to deny the United States Constitution guarantees (of course we have also learned in Greenbrugh that a contract/agreement is not a contract). The language needs some toughening up and while the need may be reasonable, the execution is not. <BR/><BR/>But, a few hours on a hot July night can work wonders. Right?<BR/>Chalk this one up as a no finisher.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-80982099398014730932007-07-08T13:06:00.000-04:002007-07-08T13:06:00.000-04:00It's never Bass, it's always Feiner.It's never Bass, it's always Feiner.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-20173616722270153142007-07-08T12:19:00.000-04:002007-07-08T12:19:00.000-04:00Bass raised two important questions prior to agree...Bass raised two important questions prior to agreeing to the credit union lease. <BR/><BR/>First, he wanted to know if the town was certain that it didn't need the space for itself because the credit union lease wouldn't make any sense if the town had to lease space elsewhere for its own needs. <BR/><BR/>This was a serious issue. At the time, the police were using the second floor for training purposes and because of overcrowding at the court, which had just expanded from two judges to three, there was consideration being given to allowing the court's new third judge to use the space. <BR/><BR/>Bass turned around after Feiner assured the town board that the town really didn't need the second floor space -- query whether that was really true -- and after the lease was modified so that if the town did need the space, the lease could be terminated.<BR/><BR/>Bass also questioned whether the lease terms were at market value. Again, Feiner assured the town board that the terms were fair. Again, one wonders whether that was really true. <BR/><BR/>The problem with the lease, however, is that once the town board authorized Feiner to sign it, it turns out Feiner never read it. <BR/><BR/>How could that be? <BR/><BR/>Because Feiner was so anxious to sign the lease that he did so bothering to check to see that the lease itself never defined the specific space in the building that was being leased out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-88108185683714607112007-07-07T23:16:00.000-04:002007-07-07T23:16:00.000-04:00Bass was leading the opposition to the credit unio...Bass was leading the opposition to the credit union lease application until he received a campaign contribution from them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-56420169304526123802007-07-07T21:29:00.000-04:002007-07-07T21:29:00.000-04:00Taxes will likely go up, because Feiner has not ha...Taxes will likely go up, because Feiner has not had maintenance done on town buildings. He has spent $$$ on parks which are of minimal benefit. Feiner's Folly costs will be with us for years. All we can do now is stop then from growing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-39550213134923798942007-07-07T20:40:00.000-04:002007-07-07T20:40:00.000-04:00Well it's about time that people are starting to s...Well it's about time that people are starting to see what Edgemont is all about. The residents were happy up until Bernstein and his group took over town hall together with four board members. They keep saying that they represent the residents. How many residents?Edgemont is tasting victory with the up coming election,this way they can rule all of Greenburgh in the manner that they see fit. Wake up voters and do the right thing. If they have it their way , you could rest assured that you will be taxed out of your homes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-69346427807203407602007-07-07T20:39:00.000-04:002007-07-07T20:39:00.000-04:00The courts seem to be agreeing with Bernstein's in...The courts seem to be agreeing with Bernstein's interpretation of the law. So what you are saying is the Villages would rather the Town keep milking unincorporated Greenburgh. Which is understandable. What is not understantable is a Supervisor who has decided that the Town decisions will be made by the courts, instead of trying to come up with a plan and a budget that is in accordance with the law and acceptable to all parties.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-45682669334917558572007-07-07T20:20:00.000-04:002007-07-07T20:20:00.000-04:00garfunkel in dreamland says that Feiner "has lead ...garfunkel in dreamland says that Feiner "has lead Greenburgh into a blind alley with all of its parts seeking to leave."<BR/><BR/>Let me correct him. The villages want to leave because of Bob Bernstein and his lawsuits against the villages, not because of Feiner. Edgemont wants to leave because Bernstein wants to be Edgemont's mayor. Until Bernstein came along with his threats and lawsuits and demands nobody wanted to leave.<BR/><BR/>Put blame where it belongs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-62260187065243926782007-07-07T19:59:00.000-04:002007-07-07T19:59:00.000-04:00garfunkel is blinded by the trees and cannot see t...garfunkel is blinded by the trees and cannot see the forest - his pal feiner has become a cynical (some would say corrupt) political careerist whose only interest is self promotion. feiner's sole goal in life is to stay in office. his reformer days are well behind him. he has lead greenburgh into a blind alley with all of its parts seeking to leave. none of garfunkel's posts say one word about feiner's inability to account for millions of dollars in westhelp funds. TINC but where is the money richard? better see an eye dr - the feiner you knew is long gone. the feiner of today either must account or resign.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-81502989874893878172007-07-07T16:49:00.000-04:002007-07-07T16:49:00.000-04:00My wife Linda met Paul Feiner when she was teachin...My wife Linda met Paul Feiner when she was teaching at Sleepy Hollow HS in 1972. She taught American Studies and in that year eighteen year olds were first allowed to vote. She called the Board of Elections to request that someone come to SHHS and help explain registration to her senior students. Paul Feiner came by bicycle. He was a teenager, and that is how we both learned about his interest in public service.<BR/><BR/>We have both followed his career closely. We were Democratic District Leaders for many years in White Plains, and my wife resigned from a party position, when she was appointed by Mayor Michael Keating to the White Plains Human Right's Commission. Contrary to the slurs about my stances on civil and human rights, we were involved deeply with these issues, and I continue to be involved at Mount Vernon HS with these concerns.<BR/><BR/>Paul Feiner changed the political calculus in Westchester County, starting with his demands for reforms regarding the all male Scarsdale Town Club. He has been a progressive and a reformer all of his career, and he has always fought against the status quo of "business as usual" politics. He has been attacked over the years by many of the people that he defeated in primaries. He has been attacked by many of the political "hacks" that permeate and populate party politics, and he has been the target of abuse and and a lack of fairness by the current Democratic Party Chairperson. At a Kerry Rally at Rudy's Beau Rivage, which she emceed, and was under the sponsorship of our assemblyperson, I asked her why the Town Supervisor was not allowed to address the crowd of loyal Democrats. She just ignored me and said, "he wasn't on the list!" I said he is the Supervisor! That meant nothing to the Town's Democratic Chairperson. She just didn't give a damn.<BR/><BR/>She was a witness to many Town Board sessions where the CABAL, and its friends, excoriated the Supervisor, and members Weinberg and Juettner, but she sat silent and felt comfortable and mixed socially with these blowhards and character assassins, while the Board was lambasted. By the way, only Town Board member Bass was ignored by these individuals. I asked her about her actions then and she basically ignored my concerns. She ignored Sheehan's racial taunt that he had thrust at Don Siegel and her ambition has blinded her judgment and required fairness.<BR/><BR/>She has manipulated herself in with the Board, she has received a no-bid contract courtesy of Francis Sheehan, her patron, and now she wishes to be leader of this pack. <BR/><BR/>Paul Feiner has enjoyed the support of the vast number of Greenburgh residents, of all political persuasions and racial and ethnic groups for 24 years. There is a reason for that. The reason is non-parisan 24/7 service to the public, not just one party. He, like his early mentor Cong. Dick Ottinger, runs his office with the attitude of the public comes first, politics comes last.<BR/><BR/>If the slanderers of the CABAL and their friends, and fellow travelers continue to insult the intelligence of the general public they will make their defeat even more decisive.<BR/><BR/>Richard J. Garfunkel<BR/>Tarrytown, NYAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-37746320080520442612007-07-07T15:22:00.000-04:002007-07-07T15:22:00.000-04:00That's the only reason why Sheehan made sure that ...That's the only reason why Sheehan made sure that her firm received the contract,because he knew that she would be on the democratic slate for supervisor. The first thing that should be investigated by ethics board is Sheehan and Bergers wrong doing with awarding of this contract.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-63460284099557384632007-07-07T15:16:00.000-04:002007-07-07T15:16:00.000-04:00I understand that the ethics board is completed,I ...I understand that the ethics board is completed,I do hope that there were enough questions asked of them to represent each of the residents that may bring a complaint to the board. If someone has a tainted past he or she should be thrown off as soon as possible.I hope that there were many interviews and that SHEEHAN DID NOT MAKE THE LAST DECISION AS TO WHO SHOULD BE CHOSEN. REMEMBER WHAT SHEEHAN DID IN AWARDING THE CONTRACT TO BERGER WITHOUT INTERVIWING other law firms. This should be a problem to be given to the ethics board. Her firm should not have gotten the contract, since she knew that she would be running for town supervisor.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-69436333387298020452007-07-07T15:07:00.000-04:002007-07-07T15:07:00.000-04:00WHAT DOES ABORTION have to do with our townboard,i...WHAT DOES ABORTION have to do with our townboard,in running this disfunctional town. I have never heard a resolution put on docket concerning abortion. Come on OUR CANDIDATES ARE NOT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT,they are running to make a big difference in Greenburgh alone.If that's the only reason that someone will not vote for Morgan then he or she does not know what good government is all about. Yes maybe you too believed the lies that Sheehan told. too bad, 10:00 you have a lot to learn about politics. I do not think you heard what Morgan said. Ask your friend Sheehan what he thinks of abortion,and then answer my comment...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-79537980596552134112007-07-07T12:59:00.000-04:002007-07-07T12:59:00.000-04:00Cabal is a tough word and often it is used unfairl...Cabal is a tough word and often it is used unfairly. As one commentator said, it is often used by people who hate someone or some group in order to harm them.<BR/><BR/>But when you have a group of people, consisting of Bass, Sheehan, Bernstein and a few others including Barnes and Juettner, who constantly vilify the Supervisor who was, after all, elected by the voters of Greenburgh, and try to render him powerless, overexploit every opening, real or contrived, accuse him of financial misbehavior, try to muzzle him, and on and on, wouldn't you say that this is a cabal who does these things out of hate? It sure seems that way to me. And I voted for Greenawalt, Juettner and Sheehan in 2005.<BR/><BR/>I think there has been a cabal of haters and I won't support any of them this year or ever. I hate what they have done to my town.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-64096039812779794262007-07-07T12:32:00.000-04:002007-07-07T12:32:00.000-04:00lets all agree - cabal is a nasty word and richard...lets all agree - cabal is a nasty word and richard garfunkel's continued use of it is no surprise - his postings and personal history (most recently in white plains) show him to be a mean spirited and generally pugnacious character. memo to garfunkel - TINC and your use of this disgusting word to describe those who disagree with mr feiner is unfortunate. memo to mr feiner - dump garfunkel unless you want to lose.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-70154944698306477312007-07-07T12:21:00.000-04:002007-07-07T12:21:00.000-04:00I agree with the blogger who commented at 11:51. ...I agree with the blogger who commented at 11:51. I am Jewish and I lost relatives in the holocaust. I hate false charges of anti-semitism to smear others almost as much as I hate anti-semitism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-37985216182041433312007-07-07T12:00:00.000-04:002007-07-07T12:00:00.000-04:00Morgan's got several strikes against him. Not onl...Morgan's got several strikes against him. <BR/><BR/>Not only is he anti-choice, but he's also a developer and, on top of that, he's running with Feiner and that means taking advantage of the tens of thousands of dollars in contributions that Feiner solicited from developers with applications pending before the town. <BR/><BR/>Add all that up, and you've got an automatic yes vote for Feiner on the town board. That means that when it comes to putting the interests of Feiner's contributors who are developers against those of the people, Feiner's contributors will win hands down every time.<BR/><BR/>Even worse, we'll have a return to the bad old days when Feiner just acted contrary to law, like when he illegally gave away $6.5 million in town revenues to the Valhalla schools, or when he lied to the Westchester County Board of Legislators by saying that the state comptroller told him it was okay to give town revenues from WestHELP to private civic associations, or when he decided that the millions of dollars in town funds used to acquire Taxter Ridge should come from only the unincorporated parts of town.<BR/><BR/>If Feiner's group is elected, town taxpayers, including those in the villages, can kiss the millions of dollars in town revenues from WestHELP goodbye -- it's all going back to Valhalla. <BR/><BR/>In fact, Valhalla's resubmitted to Feiner its old requests as if the state comptroller's report had never been issued. <BR/><BR/>Not having an independent voice on the town council is how Greenburgh seems to have gotten itself into trouble in the first place.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-16854079743224561012007-07-07T11:51:00.000-04:002007-07-07T11:51:00.000-04:00Cabal is not an anti-semitic slur. It is an age-o...Cabal is not an anti-semitic slur. It is an age-old word that is used to describe any group's views that one doesn't like, it has been used by anti-Semites and it has been used by haters of any group.<BR/><BR/>The people who are making entirely unjustified charges of anti-Semitism against Mr. Garfunkel (whom I don't know at all, but whose writings do not show even a hint of anti-Semitism), are effectively saying that the age-old word "cabal" is out of the English language because it has been used to defame Jews. That is a foolish standard, and if it is used a number of words would have to be taken out of the English language because they are seen by some as anti-Semitic, anti-African-American, anti-Hispanic, anti-Italian, anti-anything.<BR/><BR/>Reading this blog, I know that it is almost useless to try to talk sense and logic to those people who have a hatred for Paul Feiner. But please, make your arguments with facts and reason, not insults and nasty twisting of words.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-90883357821718768102007-07-07T11:41:00.000-04:002007-07-07T11:41:00.000-04:00But what does one's view on parental notification ...But what does one's view on parental notification have to do with being on the Town Board? Have you noticed that the Town Board's function is to make policy for the operation of the town government, and medical decisions are way outside of that role?<BR/><BR/>Oh, I forgot. We have Steve Bass, who thinks that Darfur is within the Town Board's jurisdiction. I guess he may propose a rule disapproving parental notification, and then what would Kevin Morgan do.<BR/><BR/>Let's elect Town Council people who can bring some good town government and not be derailed by such irrelevant stuff as parental notification views. I disagree with the need for partental notification, and if it was something the Town Board had any authority over, I would take a candidate's views on that into account. Since the Town Board does not have any such authority, I will not take a candidate's views on that subject into account.<BR/><BR/>Since I care about the actual government services of the candidates, I wil certainly not vote for Steve Bass, who has been a prime mover in making our Town Board such a nasty and non-performing body. Ditto for Eddie Mae Barnes, who mouths platitudes but supports Bass every time.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33594888.post-30685416006533639272007-07-07T11:33:00.000-04:002007-07-07T11:33:00.000-04:00Garfunkel can be a member of a 1000 synagogues, he...Garfunkel can be a member of a 1000 synagogues, he is still using a word - cabal - that is a perjorative most commonly associated with anti-semitic bigots. obviously garfunkel's mt vernon education is still showing.<BR/><BR/>here is another example from scotland:<BR/><BR/>Anger over Dalyell's 'Jewish cabal' slur<BR/>TAM Dalyell, the Father of the House, may be referred to the Commission for Racial Equality after claiming a "Jewish cabal" operating in both the United States and Britain is driving the governments of both countries into a war against Syria. <BR/><BR/>"A Jewish cabal have taken over the government in the United States and formed an unholy alliance with fundamentalist Christians," he said. <BR/><BR/>The members of this cabal, he said, are Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defence secretary, Elliott Abrams, a member of the national security council, Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, and John Bolton, the undersecretary of state.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com