Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Another Paul Feiner initiative to make Greenburgh the most open government in the United States!
Be part of the Dialogue...participate...tell us what's on your mind...!
The views expressed in this blog are the personal views of the participants who post comments on the blog and are not those of the town, town employees or town government. The Supervisors views are his alone.
Contributors
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(417)
-
▼
August
(25)
- TWN BD MOVES FORWARD ON 7 DAY A WEEK COMMUNITY CEN...
- TOWN BD AUTHORIZES E HARTSDALE AVE FLOOD STUDY
- GREENBURGH DEMOCRACY- POST YOUR COMMENTS = WEEK OF...
- REQUESTING BD TO APPROVE RESOLUTION WED - 7 DAY A ...
- library construction update wednesday night
- MARRIOTT TO CLOSE HEALTH CLUB TO COMMUNITY
- WEEK OF AUGUST 20-- GREENBURGH DEMOCRACY--POST YOU...
- 150 PEOPLE PARTICIPATED IN ROAD TO FREEDOM WALK
- 17 units of housing to be built on knollwood road
- LOTS OF INTEREST IN SEVEN DAY A WEEK POOL/COMMUNIT...
- ONE DROMORE LEGAL DEFENSE--USING OUTSIDE LAWYERS A...
- PROPOSED RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF 7 DAY A WEEK PRO...
- GREENBURGH DEMOCRACY week of August 13 Please pos...
- NEED TO BEAUTIFY E HARTSDALE AVE
- GREENBURGH GOOD HUMOR MAN CAN'T COMPETE AT COUNTY ...
- SAVE THE DATE: SEPTEMBER 9th DOG SWIM
- THANK YOU, BLOGGER
- POLICE CHIEF: STATE BRIDGES ARE SAFE
- ROAD TO FREEDOM WALK...AUGUST 19
- OLD TOWN HALL ALMOST ALL DOWN..
- PROCRASTINATION ALERT: PLANNING BD AND ZONING BD V...
- REQUEST MEETING WITH STATE/COUNTY OFFICIALS TO DIS...
- GREENBURGH DEMOCRACY--WEEK OF AUG 6. Please post y...
- 27 MAIN STREET, DOBBS FERRY-- WHAT SHOULD BE DONE ...
- STUMP THE YARD OUTDOOR MOVIE AT MASSARO NEXT FRIDA...
-
▼
August
(25)
56 comments:
I know Verizon cable tv was approved last year; wondering when it will be available. I've called Verizon a few times over the past year, but they have no info.
Entering Greenburgh from Yonkers on Central Park Avenue, the years of acummulated rubble, weeds and debris along the median strips make Greenburgh look horrible (between Babies R Us and Scarsdale Ford). Please, this week, assign a few highway department workers (broom, blower, weedwacker) to handle this rather simple and very necessary task.
Regula is getting deaf dumb and blind . We need an immediate change to get a clean Greenburgh.
FYI below, if anyone's interested in the safety of Greenburgh's bridges. The Town's DPW is not responsible for doing these three major repairs, but I hope that the DPW is actively advocating to make sure that the work is getting done.
---------------
Place Name: Greenburgh (Town of), New York
NBI Structure Number: 000000001044600
State Route 100A
Facility Carried: RTE 100A
Feature Intersected: RTE I287
Location: JCT I287 & SH 100A
Year Built: 2004
Owned and maintained by: State Highway Agency
Bridge Railing: Does not meet currently acceptable standards.
Structural Evaluation: Basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrective action
Sufficiency Rating: 37 %
---------------
Place Name: Greenburgh (Town of), New York
NBI Structure Number: 000000003348790
Facility Carried: ARDSLEY ROAD
Feature Intersected: BRP X
Location: 3.9 MI N JCT BRP & SBSP
Year Built: 1925
Owned and maintained by: County Highway Agency
Bridge Railing: Does not meet currently acceptable standards.
Structural Evaluation: Basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrective action
Sufficiency Rating: 45.3 %
---------------
Place Name: Greenburgh (Town of), New York
NBI Structure Number: 000000001077910
Facility Carried: RampI87N to I287E
Feature Intersected: RAMP 287I TO 119
Location: I87 NB RAMP X TO I287 EB
Year Built: 2003
Owned and maintained by: State Toll Authority
Structural Evaluation: Basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrective action
Sufficiency Rating: 37 %
----------
----------
There are many others Greenburgh bridges (too many to copy/paste here; see the state website) with average or above average overall sufficiency ratings but with designations of "Bridge Railing: Does not meet currently acceptable standards" and/or "Meets the minimum tolerable limits" and/or high scour (erosion of foundations by water flow).
Only a couple of the faulty bridge railings around Greenburgh are the Town's responsibility, but I hope that the Town is on top of all this data and the actions required by the various highway agencies.
Dear drama,
Good data
Dear Data not drama: I have requested the Town Board to schedule a work session meeting with state/county officials regarding these bridges. The meeting will be public.
Paul,
There is another problem that could be addressed. On the Sprain Parkway,[highway to heaven] North ,before the entrance to RT.287,there is a retaining wall that is leaning a little too much and it also has a crack in it. This should be checked also asap.
yea, i notice that exact same leaning wall on the sprain every day ... looks like it's going to just come tumbling down any second ... pretty scary!
i'm going to fill out an online complaint about it at the state dot site
https://www.nysdot.gov/portal/page/portal/main/form-challenge
maybe others might want to, as well, with state highway issues
Let me update the Dromore Road situation in case readers stopped reading the Greenburgh Democracy Week of July 30.
But before I do that let me remind you all of "just three votes".
Everything good or bad that happens in Town requires 3 of the 5 votes on the Town Board. The Town Council controls 4 of these votes. No matter who introduces a resolution, new law, payment request or zoning change, it needs 3 votes to pass or, conversely, 3 votes to block it. All of the members of the Town Board are over the age of 21, all can read and write, have adequate hearing and vision and all receive payment plus benefits for their efforts. Feiner can do nothing without their support.
And, Eddie Mae Barnes is running for her sixth term. Upon completion she will have collected town paychecks for 24 years. Paul Feiner is running for his ninth term. Upon completion he will have collected town paychecks for 18 years. Your vote this fall will address the question: "can you have one without the other?".
As for Dromore, where we left off after many, many hostile recriminations was that on the July 30 topic, after a week of "he said she saids", there was breaking news with the introduction of a previously unmentioned document, a document which Bernstein and friends knew existed but had decided not to bring forward. It is arguable that neither did the Developer; however the Developer is not a willing party to this blog, like the Bernstein crew are, being out in strength to attack Feiner on any and all points. That is, until they introduced a portion of an earlier draft gift agreement. Interestingly enough, my opponents have been quiet following my last posting so that is why I thought I would move the topic to a more recent venue.
For homework, go to the postings on July 30 Democracy week and read:
"Samis and Feiner continue to lie"
posted August 6 @ 3:48 PM
"anonymous said" @ 7:48 PM and
"Hal Samis said" @ 11:21 PM
But in a large nutshell, what has partially appeared on the blog is that Mr. Bernstein had written an earlier draft gift agreement which was rejected and thereafter he wrote a second version, the one which appears as an exhibit in the Developer's sworn affidavit.
All the previous comment on my part referred only to this second version as I was unaware of an earlier draft. As those following this topic will remember, I based my criticisms upon the only signatures requested (Bernstein drew up the agreement) were those of the Developer and Bernstein's, not as an agent for or nominee of the Town. That taken together with the section of the agreement which specified that the contents of the agreement be confidential known only to the Developer and Robert Bernstein AND the curious use of "may" as opposed to "shall" in reference (Bernstein or his designee which "may" be the Town versus the Town "shall") to who gets to pay for the property. All of the language notwithstanding, there is nothing on record anywhere that allows Bernstein any cause, reason or hiring to represent the Town. Or for that matter, there is nothing from the ECC that allows Bernstein to draft an agreement on its behalf to purchase this property.
So, I had earlier observed that it seemed like all the furious blog exchanges were like the blind men and the elephant and lo and behold I realized last week that Bernstein or those designees had "switched" elephants and were now bleating about a different agreement. It is obvious to me why Mr. Bernstein only reluctantly produced a sampling of the contents. It makes Bernstein out to be not only a bully but also one without any credentials. He essentially says to the Developer settle or I'll unleash the gale force winds of "my" moratorium upon you and then you'll have nothing and no paddle.
Nothing unless you cry "uncle" and settle. Saner minds, if allowed to be present, would point out to the Developer that only in Bernstein and McNally's dreams would they be able to deliver either the moratorium or the Town's agreement but no need, the Developer told them to take a hike so Bernstein went back to the word processor and came up with the draft agreement that has been posted on the blog; the one that I have been kicking the tires on for the past two weeks.
What is common to both versions is that the signatories are the Developer and Robert B. Bernstein.
Again Bernstein in this matter represents only Bernstein, not the Town, not Edgemont, not the Nature Center...just Bernstein.
But where did these agreements go?
They were not sent to Town Hall.
They were not sent to the Town Supervisor, he wasn't even told that Bernstein and McNally and the Town Council were meeting with the Developer to get to "know" each other.
They were not sent to the Developer's attorney because a condition of meeting was that the Developer did not tell his attorney about these meetings.
And certainly they were not sent to me because the Developer also had to agree not to tell me about the meetings. I believe that those insisting were Mr. Bass and Mr. Sheehan.
Who was allowed to attend?
Mr. Bass, Mr. Sheehan, Ms. Barnes, Ms. Juettner, the Developer, Michelle McNally and Robert B. Bernstein, and possibly one or two others. But definitely not Feiner.
Not because Feiner was against acquiring the parcel for Edgemont but because the organizers, Bass and Sheehan, did not want him to attend.
So where were these meetings? Again not at Town Hall where Town business is conducted.
Instead they were conducted at the Developer's offices in Harrison where private business is conducted.
When were these meetings? On two consecutive Saturdays.
Why was this not an "official Town Board meeting" as they argue? Because by coincidence three members of the Town Council (three is a quorum) on one Saturday (Bass, after setting up the meeting, found that he "needed" to be elsewhere) happened to arrive separately, around the same time in Harrison at the Developer's offices but were never in the same room at the same time.
If Rod Serling were alive, this might have been an episode.
But I have every confidence that this matter will not be lost as the election nears.
As for the draft gift agreement(s),
the issue remains: who empowered Bernstein to speak or commit for anyone other than Bernstein, why was he writing documents for the Developer to sign without his own Counsel while if Bernstein were acting as the Developer's attorney and as attorney for the other side, who gave Bernstein such consent to serve both sides. The conundrum is that Bernstein could agree to represent both himself and the Developer with the Developer's consent. Bernstein could represent the Developer and represent...who else with their consent? Absent the Town, absent the ECC, absent the Nature Center, who did Bernstein represent other than himself or his own designees?
I cannot prove anything only surmise especially as the documents were never executed but the successor draft agreement, as Bernstein wrote it, appears to me, a non-lawyer, very much how an agreement would look to allow Bernstein and/or his designees to make the required payments and assume title. And if the Town (a third party) were not made aware by virtue of the confidentiality agreement, who benefits from this? Not the Developer who only hopes to get his money back and leave Greenburgh for good but perhaps the other signatory.
Nothing has ever been put forth to show that the TOWN was aware or agreeing to any of the language in either draft version. And the damning evidence is that it is Bernstein's signature, alone, which Bernstein left a line for to follow that of the seller, the Developer.
What's at stake. At the time these agreements were drafted, it was assumed that the Developer could build 100,000 square feet of building. The Developer was interested in building multi-family but the assumed zoning also allowed other uses: office, retail, mixed use. At the bargain price of $2 million or $20 a buildable foot, this was a very, very good deal for the acquirer whether he/they were in the development business or not. Buildables can be sold. But perhaps an even better deal for someone who had cultivated friends on the Town Council. A very, very, very good deal. Even the rival to collecting "tens of thousands of dollars of campaign contributions".
Or it could have been perfectly legitimate and everything that Bernstein says it was. But if it was that, then Bernstein, being the very, very, very good lawyer that he tells us he is, would have some side agreements showing the interest, intent and participation or even the knowlege by the Town, that the Dromore contract or deed would be arriving via FED EX next day delivery. Maybe even the Town Attorney should have visited Harrison too since the Town was said to be acquiring this parcel. Since the necessary sections of the puzzle were missing, including the Attorney for the Seller and the Attorney for the Buyer (the Town), I think these are reasonable questions and conclusions on my part while gratuitous explantions from anonymous parties do not quite have the firepower or credibility of that coming from the lead actor. Since Mr. Bernstein is clearly not a Town employee, public or elected official or even Agency member (I could be cute and say call Town Hall, ask for Bernstein and see if Kaminer picks up) but absent belonging to any of these affiliations, Mr. Bernstein really should reply, a sworn affidavit will do; he is free to do so not being bound by any admonition of the Town Attorney because so far there is no "notice of claim" directed against himself.
I don't anticipate this matter going away very soon either.
If Bernstein acted as a lawyer it would be unethical for the applicants lawyer to have been prohibited from participating in the meeting.
Hal, get back on focus with the library. The politicos and wannabes will come and go, as they have for the last 40 years, but the library we will be stuck with forever.
What is the status of the Taxter Ridge lawsuits?
Let's see what happens with Dromore rd and Bernstein. His neck is on the chopping block for this fiasco.It's not in good ethical behavior what he did in this case since he is a lawyer.
Dear 8:54,
Either you're a fan or you're not.
If you're not, what you want to accomplish is to divert me away from reporting on Bernstein/McNally and the Edgemont mafia's antics. The noose is tightening and the Town Council have been caught as collaborators.
However, the Library? I can't resist. I am waiting for Mr. Regula, the Townie in charge of construction, to explain the seeming disparity between what was awarded for the original geothermal drilling contract ($500,000) and what has been decided to happen instead. The abandoned proposal called for 7,500 feet of pipe (5 wells, open loop, 1500 feet deep); the new version calls for 40,000 feet of pipe (40 wells, continuous loop, 500 feet deep).
But hey, while I'm waiting maybe the Town Council will care to share what they know. This "everything's ok at the Library" chorus line is a collaborative effort on their part also.
Maybe they'll even share that there is no money left for furniture or technology, the destruction phase is over and now construction starts; the project has already been debased from its origins by the imposition of cheaper alternatives to hold the spending at the current cost level.
Who know's, they may even have to sacrifice the cafe.
Is that the "golden cafe" or merely a starbucks?
yea, i wish mr samis would spend more time/energy on the library because 1) the town overall benefits from his library project wisdom/focus and 2) his anti-edgemont obsession makes me concerned about his overall mental health
Samis (and Feiner) are persisting in lying about the Dromore Road situation in order to hide the fact that Feiner has not only sided with the developer in his effort to change the zoning there from single family to multifamily so that the developer can make millions on a luxury townhouse development -- but Feiner's evidently promised to get the zoning changed for that developer if he and his "team" are elected.
Feiner evidently made this promise to Troy in exchange for Troy including in his affidavit politically motivated allegations that have nothing whatever do with whether the property was originally zoned single family -- and giving Feiner an advance copy of the affidavit so Feiner could use those allegations to launch political attacks against his "enemies" on the town's website and e-mail system.
Since then, Feiner and his "team" have been working to create the false impression publicly that town records don't really show that the property has been zoned single family when in fact the records (which they never discuss) all show exactly that.
Feiner's also agreeing with the developer that the moratorium that was proposed was aimed at the Dromore property when he knows it was aimed at both residential and commercial development, was proposed before any plans for developing the Dromore property were announced, would not have covered the Dromore property if it was indeed zoned single family, and would have covered a number of other sites identified by the town that could be developed residentially along Central Avenue.
Feiner is also making a point at town hall of insisting that the town attorneys working on the matter let him know exactly what the town is planning to do for its defense of the Troy's "notice of claim" -- so that Feiner can communicate that otherwise privileged information about the town's legal defense to the Troys' lawyers.
Feiner should be required to produce all his communications with the Troys, including all communications he's had via e-mail from his "Feiner98@aol.com" account, which he likes to think is off-limits from the state's Freedom of Information Law.
That way the public can see for itself just how much access and incredible influence over town affairs that Feiner has freely given to the Troys.
Sadly, this wouldn't be the first time that Feiner's sold out the community. The Edgemont School District and the Edgemont Community Council were on record opposed to the development of Stone Ridge Manor, a 40 unit luxury townhouse development off Central Avenue.
Records now show that Feiner accepted several thousand dollars in campaign contributions from the developer of Stone Ridge Manor, and two weeks later, Feiner led the town board in voting to change the zoning from single family to multifamily to allow the complex to be built.
The project was recently sold for $30 million -- yet another case where Feiner accepted thousands of dollars from a developer so the developer could make millions.
Dear 12:13 AM
The Library Project is already beyond saving because the "good people" of Edgemont chose to ignore the red flags I periodically posted.
Why?
Because the small group which profits from apathy was able to install itself behind the wheel and say that "they" speak for Edgemont. This group was 100% behind the Library plans and all the steps along the way leading to the current mess.
Why?
Because the need to "get" Feiner was so great that they were willing to sacrifice the $20 million project just because years before, Feiner was unwilling to host such a costly and ambitious expansion project, especially when common sense said that library square footage should be contracting rather than expanding. Even ignoring that side issue (let's not get into the library didatic), Feiner sought to slow down the rush to Library referendum because he accurately predicted that the Library "team" did not know their project and the expansion would benefit from the extra months of study that holding the referendum in November versus May would yield.
Library advocates saw May as when the project would pass and November (when more voters come out) as when the project would be defeated.
The "few" who claim to speak for Edgemont saw that it would be more profitable to their "cause" to turn the issue into Feiner is against the Library and thus anything that would prove him right had to ignored and rejected. Thus the Town Council, enlisted to further the Feiner sub plot, would not hear of any bad news and Al Regula was recruited as the perfect go-between and fall guy because he would contribute to the whitewashing and was protected by his career longevity and broad job title which provides vital, daily Town services. This choice of Regula itself would be odd because the two Town construcion projects that Regula headed had turned into disasters while at the same time Feiner had advocated hiring an outside, independent Project Manager. Note too that the Edgemont "leaders" had previously supported in an election, a candidate who had argued that the Town needs a professional Town Manager. But that was then and this is now. Thus began a period in which Regula would be summoned to Town Board meetings at which he would either assure the Town Board that everything was on schedule and on budget -- even as the project was collapsing under its own weight OR SAY I have to ask the Construction Manager or Architect, I'll get back to you. In his appearances, there was never a probing question from the Town Council.
Finally, as those few Edgemont "leaders" sought to enlist support for their projects, a "deal" of passivity was struck with areas such as Fairview in which one hand washes the other. Fairview, which had greater needs for the Library than Edgemont, would benefit from Edgemont's free ride Library stance while Fairview would not question a Central Avenue moratorium. Edgemont would look the other way at the problems originating from the Greenburgh Health Center and Fairview would support A/B issues or historic districts as advocated by Edgemont "leaders".
This was odd because one of the targets of Edgemont "leaders" (in Greenburgh 101) was their Edgemont tax dollars going toward sauporting the Community Center which they did not use.
If only the WESTHELP beneficiaries had the good sense to strike a similar deal with the Edgemont "leaders", they would not have been under the magnifying glass.
So, my quarrel is not really with all of Edgemont but with those few individuals whose public spirit is limited to that which aids Edgemont alone. That they chose to ignore the Library's $20 million expense, not only in the amount being spent but also in HOW the money was being spent, has brought the "bad mouthing" upon Edgemont because it has stood by while the "few" have stepped into the void and attempted to dictate town-wide policies based upon the presumption of their tax revenues and voter-turnout.
Interstingly enough, this group is supporting for Town Supervisor, a resident of one the Villages who has no opinion of how A/B expenses are to be determined.
What you characterize as my obsession would be lessened proportionately by a similar reduction in Edgemont based absurd propositions posted throughout this blog. One way to escape the fire is not to turn the gas on.
So, again, the Library misfortune cannot be stopped or even altered at this late date other than a tremendous fund raising effort by the Greenburgh Public Library Foundation to neutralize the budget deficit. Since there's little more to say until the Project is completed I'll mostly wait until that even but you can bet money that I'm an "I told you so" kind of guy.
Apparently everyone but hal realizes that had feiner not alienated so many people with this government by gimmick, he might have been able to convince voters of the need for a scaled back library project. feiner also compromised himself by taking money from sunrise (wasnt that another client of mark weingarten?) who wanted to use the town hall site for senior housing. while its true the library board was equivocal about its need for the sunrise property, feiner's attempted land grab (coupled with his once again taking oodles of campaign cash from those like sunrise with applications before the town) only fed into the perception that feiner was out to hurt the library. Again, read Hal's long post and you will not see one word indicating that Feiner is partly to blame.
As i recall, Sunrise was seeking to purchase the old town hall site at a price many believed to be below market. As was later discovered, Feiner was insisting that the Board vote to enter into exclusive negotiations with Sunrise – a vote that Mr. Feiner was insisting had to take place shortly after a major fundraiser held by Feiner and Weingarten for devlopers at Gregory's Restaurant in White Plains. Feiner was so involved that he set the minimum contribution amounts the developers had to pay to attend.
This fundraiser remains under investigation by the Town's Ethics Board as to whether Feiner illegally solicited campaign contributions from those with applications before the town.
Here is how Feiner reported the story himself:
The Feiner Report: Sunrise Facility Coming to Greenburgh, too. Posted on Wednesday, April 14 @ 00:14:38 EDT by jfbailey
WPCNR'S PAUL FEINER REPORT. By Greenburgh Town Supervisor Paul Feiner. April 14, 2004: This Wednesday the Greenburgh Town Board will vote to enter into an exclusivity agreement with Sunrise Assisted Living and resolution undertaking study as whether the old Town Hall site is unneeded for Town purposes and resolution authorizing the issuance of RFP’s for a real estate appraisal. Copies of the resolution are available via the Town Attorney’s office (smancuso@greenburgh.com). The Town Board meeting will be held at 7:15 PM at Greenburgh Town Hall, 177 Hillside Ave, Greenburgh.
Hal, if it takes "just 3 votes" where was the pre-Sheehananigans council? If only 2 of them had voted with Feiner there would have been no library...
Dear 2:29,
To be sure "no Library" was not the goal.
To be sure, the Library needed renovation, maybe even a bit more space. At the existing 22,000 feet, the planned 46,000 feet is not the Library of the future but the Library to justify salaries and staffing.
Even so. The issue is not the size; it is not even the cost. The issue was the poor design, the lack of understanding of the project, the lack of talent involved in making the decisions all in the context of a rush to get underway.
It would not have hurt to have waited until November. The extra 5-6 months from May would have gone a long way to work out the errors and omissions in a project construction estimate that was, start (October) to finish (November), presented to the Public in just a month's time. The rush was to meet what was originally hoped for as a March referendum which got pushed back to May only because of some problems over absentee balloting.
Certainly, the plan went forward without taking into consideration the NYC water aqueduct under the site and where to house the Library during the construction.
And, the residents are not only paying the price per referendum, they are getting a debased Library through cost concessions to stay within the approved spending cap.
That is not to say that more money is needed. It is if the Library is to open with furniture and technology. These items, in the original budget, won't be there because the money for them has already been allocated elsewhere.
If you still want them, send your donation to...
To lying 10:21 and 1:27,
I don't have the time to administer the truth antidote to your lies so I won't.
I have already discussed these matters ad nauseum.
What I do have time for is to discuss only the factual statements you have made. Thus I won't have to do very much typing.
In "Edgemont deserves to be screwed" at 10:21.
The project was recently sold for $30 million...(not including what follows thereafter).
Everything else in the posting is either an outright lie or a sentence beginning with a half truth leading to a false conclusion.
An entirely bogus posting. Must be more election year trickery from the Berger/Bernstein crowd, having no name attached. If Ms Berger cares to defend the posting, bring her on and I shall mop the floor with her over it; however chances are she is clueless as the topic refers to Greenburgh.
In "shady dealings from Berger supporters" at 1:27, again lies. But let me take a little time with this one because it has aged and readers may not remember the details.
I am just doing this quickly.
The town hall site was to be called surplus because the Library said they didn't need it.
There were two "senior" and or affordable living projects and the one from Sunrise was thought to be more acceptable to the Town Board after Public Hearings.
The Library and the neighborhood preferred senior living because it involved less traffic, fewer cars onsite. A wholly "commercial sale may have brought in more dollars but the idea was not to have another high traffic commercial use or an unsightly car dealer. And the Library sharing the plot was a consideration.
Sunrise reasonably requested exclusivity because of the expense in doing architecturals and engineering on a site that they did not yet own or have under option. No skullduggery or mystery here.
The Library got wise that they shouldn't have signed off on the site until they knew for sure that they didn't need it. This prevented going ahead with any other use for the property.
The cited RFP for an appraisal was required to determine if the property was worth more than "the bargain price" that has been coyly intimated.
As for the contributions, the matter is before the Ethics Board and as we know, accepting wrongful contribtions is not the behavior of only one candidate for election this year. One need look no further than Mr. Bass and Ms Berger.
Another blast from the past that simply doesn't work.
But time to go.
Think just three votes.
Remember that Bernstein drafted agreements that would allow him to buy the Dromore property; if you want to take issue with this, Bernstein could just as easily instead written the signature line as: ______________ for the Town of Greenburgh. He well knew what he was doing and it was no "joke".
And at the two meetings held to "chew the fat" the first one was attended by Bass and Sheehan and the second was set up by Bass (who "couldn't attend") but Sheehan, Barnes and Juettner filled in for him at the Developers office in Harrison on consecutive Saturdays. Feiner and the Developer's attorney were not allowed to know of these secret meetings.
And, Edgemont still sucks.
Will the Town Council revoke the contract with Suzanne Berger's law firm? Why should Berger's firm have received a contract from the town when other firms wanted the job and charged lower rates? Berger is the Dem party chair. Tammany Hall, Greenburgh!
As Bernstein is the unelected leader of Edgemont and is accused of speaking for an entire community without a proper mandate - so has Hal Samis become the unelected leader of a neighborhood so disorganized it doesn't have a recognizable name. Samis, you are no more a leader than Bernstein, and share with him the same mandate - a vociferous proponent of your own welfare.
9:26,
You seem to be confused.
I'd like to help you out, which way did you come in?
I am an unelected leader of a community which doesn't have a name (because it is disorganized) so when I speak I can't claim to represent anybody while I am a proponent of my own welfare?
You need a mandate to write on a blog?
But since Edgemont, being a School District, has a name and you have a need to put things in proper boxes, why don't you just file me under "Hartsdale".
Bernstein is a leader in the Edgemont community. Samis is a writer who tell the truth about town matters.
funny how Hal has been unable to respond to anon at 12:46 which puts some of the blame of the rush to build a new library squarely on feiner's shoulders. what happened to the hal samis of old who called for an investigation of feiner's violations of the town's ethics laws?
Get you facts straight. Feiner never wanted to build a new library. How many others on the town board violated the ethics laws. Did Samis go after the supervisor on any specific violation.your're just pulling on old straws. Was not a town board member a republican at one time and then for political power he changed over to the democratic party.
You see people do make changes.
Samis and Feiner are still lying, and lying bigtime, when Samis writes, "Remember that Bernstein drafted agreements that would allow him to buy the Dromore property."
The drafts did not allow Bernstein or anyone else to buy the Dromore property. Feiner and Samis know this but they keep repeating the lie.
The only entity that would have received the property under anything Bernstein was suggesting was the town. Again, Feiner and Samis know this but they keep repeating the lie.
If the money the developer wanted was paid -- and it didn't matter who made the payment -- the town got 100% of the property. Feiner and Samis know this, but they keep repeating the lie.
If the money was not paid, the developer was giving the town 80% of the property as a conservation easement, and developing the rest, subject to whatever Greenburgh's laws would permit. Again, Feiner and Samis know this, but they keep lying.
Bernstein would have gotten nothing out of the deal except the chance to preserve some remaining open space in Edgemont -- something Feiner and Samis do not want to see happen. Feiner and Samis know this, but they still lie.
But why do Feiner and Samis persist in their lying?
They lie because Feiner has done something far worse than anything he has accused Bernstein of doing.
Feiner has apparently promised the Dromore developer that, if Feiner and his team are elected, they'll push through a zoning change to convert the Dromore property from single family to multifamily, so that the developer will make millions. Significantly, Feiner and Samis nowhere deny this.
Nor has Feiner offered to let the public see all his back and forth email communications with the Dromore developer so that they public can see for itself how much unparalleled secret access and influence Feiner has given this developer.
This is why Feiner has publicly sided with the developer, won't discuss the facts favorable to the town's position, and insists on leaking to the Dromore developer's lawyers whatever the town is planning to do by way of legal defense.
Feiner has done this before in Edgemont, with the luxury townhouses at Stone Ridge Manor. After secretly getting several thousand dollars in campaign contributions, Feiner pushed through a zoning change from single family to multifamily to allow this unwanted 40-unit complex to be built.
Feiner's screwing of the community for a buck is not just limited to Edgemont either. Feiner's promised the Mayfair Knollwood neighborhood that if he and his team are elected, that $6.5 million in town revenues he illegally gave away to the Valhalla School District will be restored -- to the penny.
In reliance on those promises, and at Feiner's request, the school district has resubmitted their requests for payment as if nothing has happened.
Were that to happen, everyone else in town gets screwed, even taxpayers in the villages.
But that's not all. Feiner is now proposing to give away town-owned property in Dobbs Ferry to the village there. Common sense says that the property should be sold at auction so that all town taxpayers can get the benefit of the best price. The law says that a private sale of such property must still be for fair consideration and must also be subject to a permissive town-wide referndum.
But Feiner is prepared to violate the law, in the hopes of buying a few gullible votes in Dobbs. He's telling Dobbs voters that if he and his team are elected, he'll give away the property to Dobbs for a $1. All that reckless behavior will do is generate yet another another Feiner-inspired lawsuit.
Come on now how many more times must the zoning map be changed. It was changed in the beginning of this year,and now you say it will be changed again. Who's lying now.By the way was the map changed with the whole board's approval at a town board meeting This I don't remember taken place.What bernstein did was totally wrong, for any lawyer to think that this would be an open and shut case.proved to be a disaster.Feiner and Samis are not telling lies.The problem is the truth hurts to many residents in that one area.You could say what you want but what is done is done and maybe the actions concerning Dromore rd will be taken up at some later date.
The ignorant comments of anon at 4:21 confirm what is now becoming well known to all Edgemont residents and will soon become well known to all Greenburgh residents:
Feiner made up a cock and bull story last month about Bernstein and the town council to hide the fact that, in exchange for nonsensical and legally irrelevant allegations against his "political enemies," Feiner has indeed promised the Dromore developer a zoning change he's not legally entitled to that will make that developer millions of dollars.
He's done if before folks, and he's apparently done it again.
Why else does Feiner not highlight the undisputed town records from 1978 to 1997 to the present day showing that the Dromore property has been zoned single family all along? Why else does Feiner not tell the public that the zoning laws in New York cannot be changed by mistake? Why else does Feiner give to the Dromore developer's lawyers whatever privileged information he can lay his hands on concerning the town's legal strategy? Why else does Feiner argue that the map was changed illegally? Why else does Feiner refuse to turn over copies of his email communications with the Dromore developer?
If you thought Feiner behaved badly when, before the town settled its lawsuit, he met secretly earlier this year with representatives of Forest City Rattner, the developers of the massive Ridge Hill project in Yonkers - a meeting that Feiner at least denied having had -- this is worse.
By selling out his office in his fashion, Feiner has demonstrated just how low and comtemptible a local politician can be in Westchester County.
About the property in Dobbs Ferry I"m sure the villages know what they want done to that site. Feiner will not do anything against the law just to please a few. He will go with whatever the respective board members want. he will hope to accomplish. Today votes are not purchased as they were many years ago. So I think you should stop with the foolishness that Feiner will give them the property for $1 as you stated.Lies and more lies, do not help with an honest platform.
I haven't heard Bergers take on this site. Does she know where the street and building is.
5:15 you must be employed at town hall and maybe you are the spy that everyone is talking about. You were given a position to do what you know best, reporting. What you are trying to say about the supervisor holds no water.You put pieces together and assume that you are right. You know what they say about those who assume.You fit perfectly in that category.
By the way how close are you to the supervisors office, To hear some of his conversations. I suggest clean out your ears and stop picking up bits and pieces to suit whatever conclusions you want to assume that they are correct.
5:15 I don't know what planet you live on or where yor're coming from. Feiner CANNOT make a change on the zoning map for Dromore rd. The change must be presented as a resolution plus the entire board has to vote on it. Feiner cannot promise this to any developer. Are you trying to say that every developer is stupid and does not know how things are done by the books.
Anon at 8:45, wake up and smell the coffee.
Feiner's apparently promised the developer the zoning change he needs only if Feiner and his "team" are elected.
The developer knows that's the only way Feiner will have the three votes he needs to honor the promise he's made to these snakes in the grass.
The developer consists of two brothers who are lawyers, and their father is a lawyer too. They know they don't have a leg to stand on as far as their legal case is concerned. They know they've got no chance in court. Their only hope to make millions here is Feiner winning, along with his "team."
The plan is for Feiner and his "team," come January 1, to settle the developer's "notice of claim" against the town by voting for a compromise that re-zones the Dromore property multifamily so the luxury condos could be built. All it takes are the votes of Feiner and his "team" and the Troys have it made.
That's why they agreed to give Feiner these phony politically-inspired but otherwise legally irrelevant allegations against Bernstein and the town council.
And you won't be seeing Feiner deny he made this deal any time soon.
Gee if I've been concocting stories to take the heat off Feiner it hasn't worked out very well. You guys have seen right through me and managed to bring the truth out after all. Wow, how coulld I not guess that you would recognize my fiendish plan and pull the rug out from under me.
And you've managed despite my lying and smoke screens to float all your flotsam right out in the open.
That's why you'll have a field day when I remind everyone, like you, of just what Bernstein and the Town Council were trying to do. And you'll have your turn again to say I'm lying.
Bernstein was trying to buy the Dromore parcel for himself or for his investment group. Why? To build an office building of 100,000 feet, let the Edgemont Village Hall have a home and the payday for this effort would be owning an office building with about 70,000 feet remaining (after Edgemont Village Hall) that could be rented at $22.00 per foot or an income stream of $1.5 million which would be a very nioe return.
And not only would Edgemont have about 30,000 feet for use as a Village Hall and/or ECC controlled entities but the entire building would be office use, one of the approved development end products that Edgemont favors. A neat plan.
But how to make it work? How to throw the hounds off the scent? Why not "say" it is intended for the Town of Greenburgh or even the Greenburgh Nature Center -- just don't tell them they have a shot at buying it.
Of course being a figure in the limelight, what if something goes wrong and the scheme comes back to bite you on the tail? Best have a fallback position, an escape hatch.
Why not say that you really intended to make sure that the property was going to go to the Town and look here's all this language that says that...
But what if someone is persistent and questions how come Bernstein is the only signature and it doesn't say "as agent for the Town" or it doesn't say the TOWN SHALL pay the purchase price. What if someone argues that "Bernstein MAY" is not definitive, certainly lawyers know the differnce between MAY and SHALL. And that bit about the agreement will be kept confidential between the Seller and Bernstein or, in language of art, the party of the second and the first part while the Town might be a distant third if at all.
How would the Town know of this deal if the Seller and Bernstein agree to keep the deal confidential? This Bernstein drafted section was just another one of Bernstein's jokes?
And why would Bernstein want to do this -- because he recognized that whoever gets to buy the parcel which was thought then to yield 100,000 buildable feet at the fire sale price of $20 per foot, that party (party of the second, Bernstein) would make out like a bandit. Not to dredge up an old sore spot but WHO ARE Bernstein's daytime clients? WE are witness daily on this blog who Feiner's are assumed to be but maybe Bernstein is really doing some lawyering for real estate investors.
So we have the means (Bernstein's and his designees which could well be a veiled LLC, including him as a member), motive (profit and Edgemont Village Hall) and placed at the potential "scene of the crime" -- Bernstein wrote the agreements and to tie it up neatly, if you want to have these meetings, Mr. Developer, you can't tell the Town Supervisor or even your own attorney. It will be just our little secret. A lawyer writing in his own name as the party of the second part while the party of the first part is forbidden to have his own Counsel in attendance? That doesn't sound right.
When is Bernstein or Bernstein through his friends going to stop trading these insults on the blog and sit for his own sworn affidavit?
There I've said my piece again so stay tuned for "Samis lies" and is trying to hide the truth about Feiner.
They're going to have to scrape a little harder and stop manufacturing their own lies from which they then treat as truth.
Lie #1) The Bernstein/Berger team haven't seen any Feiner98 emails so how do they know there are communications with the Developer much less about deals to change the zoning in return for?
Lie #2) Feiner can't change the zoning without the votes of the Town Council and why would they want to do that? Don't they need Edgemont support at the polls?
Lie #3) What privileged information has Feiner given the Developer?
Lie #4) How can Feiner and his team restore money to Valhalla and Mayfair/Knollwood? And what is the source for this is what they intend?
Lie #5) Now you're saying the Developer and his family are liars. That the sworn affidavit is untrue. It must be an election year and you must be writing as anonymous. Everybody with a name is lying but people should believe anonymous posters.
Lie #6) The Developer will be given a zoning change he is not legally entitled to and he will make millions. The Developer is entitled to make millions, how many of you noble Edgemont residents have built your own homes or did someone before you do it for profit. If the Developer is given a zoning change, that change is what makes it legal. However, just how is Feiner going to do this without anyone noticing?
Don't we have an Ethics Board and brand new Ethics laws?
Lie #7 What is there in the Bernstein written draft that confirms that the Town even knows about the deal; that the Town is interested in pursuing the purchase; that the Town Attorney and not Bob Bernstein, a lawyer with no interest but his own, has been consulted; where is the authority granted Bernstein to act as the Town's agent? There is none and what you are left is a draft agreement that very clearly allows Bernstein to walk off with the whole deal while the Town, if it is made aware at all, only gets the property if it comes up with the money. The Taxter Ridge purchase took 3 years and this parcel was supposed to close in ten months which means that the Town has to agree to purchase, fund and close in record time. Private buyers such as Bernstein need not follow municipal protocols. So, even if he should, for appearances, tell the Town about this great open space deal, it would be unlikely that the Town would be able to close so soon and that would be the opportunity for Bernstein, lying in wait, to step in as the buyer of last resort. He was the signatory so he could retain his option (designee which "may" include the Town) if the Town couldn't "perform". Nice touch Bob.
Lie #8) "Feiner's done this before" at Stone Ridge Manor and he managed to have the zoning laws changed, thereby screwing Edgemont.
Isn't Stone Ridge right across the street from where Council member Barnes lives? Did she have any problems with this zoning change? Hey Edgemont she's screwing you too, remember not to vote for her this fall. The zoning change was the result of a lengthy public process. But allowing that this is what happpened won't get you votes for Berger will it?
Hey isn't this fun. Soon you'll have your chance at bat to dis me and Feiner. I'm sure that Bernstein and Edgemont are happy revisit memory lane too.
But before your team comes to the plate let me remind everyone out there that there is just one more piece of smokescreen to discuss -- that being the coincidence that Bass set up two meetings with the Dromore Developer, not at Town Hall where Town business is righfully discussed, but at the Developer's office in Harrison and on two consecutive Saturdays. By coincidence Bass and Sheehan attended the first, along with Bernstein, McNally and the GNC but the Developer had to agree not to tell Feiner or his own attorney. The second Saturday meeting, Bass was "busy" as was the GNC but by coincidence, Barnes and Juettner were out driving in their separate cars and happened to arrive at the same place as Sheehan and Bernstein but they didn't all "fit" in the room so someone had to sit outside. Coincidence?
Town meeting? A travel magazine Saturday drive recommendation?
Who would be meeting with the Developer to discuss zoning deals? Feiner, with personal emails that the Developer could hold over him? or those that met him face to face with no meeting minutes taken?
One can speculate about what Feiner does do or doesn't. One need not speculate about what Bernstein does thanks to the emergence of his agreement writing which requires sealed lips from the parties.
Such actions are not anyone's seal of approval. On second thought, maybe those seals are acceptable in Edgemont.
Take it away folks. I can play this game indefinitely.
But I do have an advantage in proving my case, I am not afraid to use my name.
And while all this tempest rages, does Ms Berger have any thoughts about what she would do about "her team" already in place waiting to welcome her to the Town Board. That would make Mr. Sheehan very, very happy. And voters certainly want Mr. Sheehan to be happy on the dais.
Ok Winkydink, let's put up the screen.
I feel bad for Mr. Samis. He's become so bitterly focused on Edgemont, and I can't really even follow his thoughts anymore. It might be nice if he directed that emotional energy more towards Hartsdale-related advocacy - maybe even forming a real village of Hartsdale and let Edgemont do whatever it wants.
Hal,
You should send in your Dromore Road expose to the editors of the Journal News and the Scarsdale Inquirer. Maybe you can teach them a thing or two about investigative journalism. At least you should send them to the Letters To The Editor Section. The reason why Berger/Bernstein/Sheehan are attacking you is obvious. YOU ARE RIGHT...AND THAT MAKES THEM SCARED!!!!!!!!! Keep it up but don't lose your cool. Less than forty days to Primary. Please include the lies of Sheehan in the last election for which he was cited for.
According to this week's Enterprise, Feiner put up campaign posters in violation of Ardsley's sign law (Berger's signs are fully in accord with the law).
Feiner was also exposed as having failed to turn over emails requested by the ethics board.
And Feiner wants another term in office?
Edgemont is welcome to do whatever it wants.
I am not a "civic leader" and I don't live in Edgemont but I do live in Greenburgh.
While Edgemont is still a part of Greenburgh, I have the right to make comments about Edgemont behaviors.
And, this is only a blog.
Perhaps Edgemont residents need to know what people who DO live in Edgemont are doing in the name of Edgemont. And these people need to speak out. Every time in history when a new dictator assumes his or her power trip, they do it in the name of people and afterwards when the manure has hit the fan, the people avow they "didn't know what was going on".
My object is to bring the news from Hartsdale to Edgemont in a more timely manner. Being a Journalism major, I know that you can no longer count on the media to bring all the news that's fit to print or even all the news that counts.
Blogs such as this encourage dialogue among residents. Unlike the media or Town meetings, there are no time limits and there is room for exposition.
Unlike the media and Town meetings, the participants don't have to identify themselves or submit their comments to public fact checking.
In a wonderful world, people with strong opinions would have the guts to stand behind them.
In an election year, all sorts of vermin crawl out from under rocks.
The problem that these anonymous folk share is a common zip code and in most cases it turns out to be 10583, the Greenburgh portion.
Nowhere in Samis's latest tirade does he deny that, in exchange for the legally irrelevant but politically motivated allegations in the Troy affidavit about Bernstein and the town council, Feiner did in fact promise the Dromore developer that, if he and his "team" are elected, Feiner will use his control over the town board to compromise that bogus "notice of claim" they've filed, and will ram that zoning change the developer wants down Edgemont's throat, like it or not.
Samis can't deny that this deal was made, and neither can Feiner, because there's no telling what the Troy boys might have in store for Feiner pre-primary if they do. Nor will Feiner produce copies of this communications he's had with the Troys on the subject.
Instead, Samis repeats Feiner's lies, spinning and spinning for Feiner like the paranoid crackpot he so ably proved himself to be on the library and so many other issues.
Now he says Barnes is to blame for the screwing of Edgemont on Stone Ridge Manor. Perhaps she is, if she's a mindreader. There's no proof that Feiner ever told anyone on the town council about the thousands of dollars he pocketed a few weeks before from the Stone Ridge Manor developer.
Samis has told us that it doesn't matter if he lies, that it's better to use innuendo and smear against Feiner's opponents than actual facts, because in Samis's crackpot world, and that of Feiner's as well, "the end always justifies the means." He's also said his anti-Edgemont rants are the fault of Edgemont leaders who didn't support his hysterical ranting about a long-overdue library renovation that he and Feiner had been fighting for years.
One could easily dismiss Samis, of course, as yet another local wingnut craving attention.
The problem is that bashing Edgmeont is nothing new for Feiner. Try as he might to deny it, Edgemont residents know that Feiner two years ago worked to defeat Edgemont's school budget.
And now they'll know about the thousands of dollars he took on Stone Ridge Manor and what's he cooked up with the Troys on Dromore Road.
So, this is not about Samis craving attention. It's about a nasty two-bit politician who's made a career of screwing Edgemont.
Gosh Bob,
Can your team really be doing you a service? Don't you think they've gone beyond way over the top? Such squealing confirms I have really nailed sensitive issues on the head.
The level of hysteria that they bring to the blog is the same kind of writing that can be found from former reporters or even those wonderful folks who bring you grassroots for greenburgh.
So, as the Primary approaches and Berger gets more desperate, I look forward to see even more foaming from their mouth. It makes me feel I am doing a good job getting the truth out there for the public to read and understand.
It has gotten really hard to distinguish their writing from that of Goolajar. Has he gone over to your side?
On the other hand, if this is the product of Edgemont teaching, perhaps I have over estimated the value of those schools. Reading comprehension apparently is one of the areas that they have cut back on.
"Samis has told us that it doesn't matter if he lies..." is just such an example. If reading my 11:44PM comments is the conclusion, then PM should take on the other meaning.
I omitted denying the allegation that Feiner and the Troys have a deal because the charge is so "have you stopped beating your wife" and absurd without any basis that I presumed it was self-imploding. Especially the "Feiner in fact did promise..." drivel because no such fact has been established. In truth, there is a limit to what I can assert because I am, like the poster, neither Feiner nor Troy. But they shouldn't have to defend every lie either -- it is just the worst application of the techniques of propoganda. Likewise "Samis can't deny this deal was made..." for the same reason, I'm not Feiner or Troy BUT more important: the anonymous pond scum (Crane?) can't support these big lies. When I speculate about Bernstein's activities I do so from reading his work, the draft agreements. What is the anonymous poster using for his source? Only the fear that Bass and Barnes (20 years collecting Town Council paychecks) will be booted out of office?
Barnes voted on the zoning change presumably because she understood it and favored it. The campaign contribution issue would change her opinion because the zoning change background was now wrong? And the contributions came too late in the game, following lengthy Planning Board and Public Hearings on the matter. Things are right or wrong depending on the facts of the matter at hand, not the sideshows. If the Town Council voted in favor of the zoning change, they did so because of the zoning application presentation; if not then get rid of all of them. I only single out Barnes because she lives across the street and would be presumed to be interested being an Edgemont resident. If she's too dumb to understand zoning issues or at least buy into your "company's line", take your grief to the polling booth. Don't vent your displaced agression elsewhere.
What I actually said about Edgemont "leaders" was that if they had no interest in Town-wide issues like the Library and the Greenburgh Health Center, that I would have little sympathy for poor Edgemont's spade work to gain support for its local, self-serving issues. And that perhaps they were really not "leaders" anywhere but in their own mindset.
And while readers will know all about Feiner and even Samis; at least they'll know about Bernstein's deal to buy the Dromore parcel himself, not for the Town as is alleged, and how the Town Council met secretly with the Dromore developer, perhaps in service of this goal.
And they'll know too about Berger's and Bass' illegal campaign contributions and they'll wonder why Berger is in hiding, leaving the dirty work to anonymous poison pens.
But what they won't know about is the "nasty deal" on Dromore because there is no proof that it exists. What might be more interesting to determine is why Bass, Sheehan and Bernstein made a precondition to their secret meeting with the Developer: that Feiner not be told of this meeting.
Clearly there is a lot of mind reading needed on this blog.
If you know of what you speak as far as troy and Feiner goes please produce what you are trying to slam down our throats. I think that your the liar .No one would think of doing what you are saying knowing that eventually it will be a court case. Troy is a lawyer and I;m sure a smart one at that. You can see he's keeping his mouth shut not like you,because he knows this will be decided in the courts.
Feiner and Samis are not telling lies about the whole Dromore Rd matter.it's you that is trying to cover up for the bad mistakes made by the town board councils and two from the holy area.
Lies will be told up until election ,We all would like to know who is feeding you all these untruths,I think that the one feeding you is running scared and making you believe all these lies.
Show us the proof.
This weeks Scarsdale Inquiror had some interesting items.
1. Apparently 50 years ago, Scarsdale Village asked Edgemont if they wanted to join the village. Obviously Edgemont declined. A bad decision. It appears that the issue was taxes. So now we have to carry the freight in Greenburgh with a supervisor who hates us and does nothing for us. Can someone ask Scarsdale if we can take them up on the offer? They would like some of our taxes to help pay for their indoor pool. We could join their pool, teen center, etc., share our Hartsdale parking spots with their Scarsdale spots. Please Mr. Bernstien and Ms. Mcnally, the only people who evidently do anything positive for Edgemont, can we pursue this?
2. Mr Feiner is complaining about people evidently taking down his campaign signs. First, let me say I respect private property, rights of free speech, etc. But what I found was more interesting in the article was the villages do not allow campaign signs on village owned right of way, but the town does. Why cant the Town have more attractive right of ways and do proper maintenance? Why cant our streets look nice?
The DPW is in charge of sanitation. How about directing your complaints to Al Regula.
Mr. Feiner says he is the "Problem Solver" -- so why cant we get the streets clean and maintained.
"How about directing your complaints to Al Regula."
1) Because Mr. Feiner is the Town Supervisor.
2) Does Mr. Regula have an email address?
"1. Apparently 50 years ago, Scarsdale Village asked Edgemont if they wanted to join the village. Obviously Edgemont declined. A bad decision. It appears that the issue was taxes. So now we have to carry the freight in Greenburgh with a supervisor who hates us and does nothing for us. Can someone ask Scarsdale if we can take them up on the offer? They would like some of our taxes to help pay for their indoor pool. We could join their pool, teen center, etc., share our Hartsdale parking spots with their Scarsdale spots. Please Mr. Bernstien and Ms. Mcnally, the only people who evidently do anything positive for Edgemont, can we pursue this?"
hahahahahahahaha! :D
6:48 at the moment to get what you are asking for one needs divine intervention. It's too late for either of the two to help you. They got their noses dirty trying to be smart.
Just a simple question brought to mind by the line that Feiner hates us (Edgemont).
Can anyone give a non-political and unemotional answer to how much power/aid/control the Town Supervisor and/or the Town Council (together the Town Board) have over school districts?
I had always assumed that school districts are independent of the municipal government: that the School Board doesn't get involved with the Town Board and the Town Board doesn't get involved with the business of the School Board.
This really is a question even though it may look like, to some, a trick question.
Given that Edgemont is a School District, what IS the responsiblity or obligation of the Town to get involved with their School District issues?
When the Town Board enacts or modifies zoning laws in Edgemont, aren't they changing Town zoning not school district zoning?
Are all the postings re "Edgemont getting a bad deal", just the legitimate grievances of a school district and are there limitations to what the Town Board can do in response?
I suspect that this a technical/legal question which needs some fine tuning around the edges. And it has to do with Edgemont, as a School District, also asking to be treated with a built-in duality of residency, similar to another section of Town, i.e. North Elmsford, Fairview, Hartsdale...
Are there things that the Town Board can and are there things that the Town Board cannot do for Edgemont because it is mainly a School District.
I know I shall be unable to convince anyone that this is a genuine question, not a smokescreen, and the answer will cause the chips to fall where they may. I honestly don't know.
No one beleives Feiner's smear campaigns against the council and civic associations. I guess he thinks the world is out to get him. Oh, and the courts and NYS comptrollers office also.
Ive spotted Berger campaigning along the streets,A small square on side properties with her name on it.
What a surprise,she really is campaigning . She should have put up a carboard statue at each sign this way one can see that she is truely a live person. What a dart board that would make.
Hal, Why is it that Feiner thinks it is OK to help other schools districts, like Valhalla, and not Edgmont? When will he stop pandering to developers?
Hartsdale will be happy to pay Scarsdale taxes, if are kids can go there. Do we have a deal? Mr. Finer help out here in Hartsdale, Please!!!
Post a Comment