Pagan and Ryan Meet at LWV Debate
- Details
- Written by Joanne Wallenstein
- Hits: 3173
Seven-term County Legislator and Democrat Bill Ryan faced off with Republican challenger Iris Pagan at the LWV debate on Wednesday, October 19 at the Scarsdale Library. Pagan, a newcomer to politics is a teacher who worked her way through college at Pace and ultimately earned her doctorate in education from Columbia Teacher’s College. In her opening statement she said she was running because high taxes threaten the American dream. Ryan, the former Chairman of the County Board of Legislators and an experienced voice in county and state government asked voters to re-elect him so that he could continue to “find the best answers” to confront declining revenues, high taxes and budgeting in the face of the 2% tax cap.
The format of the debate allows for only short statements and rebuttals and in many instances forced timekeepers to cut off the candidate’s comments before they could be fully developed. The League posed questions about affordable housing, the tax cap, Medicaid and the stagnant economy and here is a recap:
Affordable housing: In Ryan’s view the $51 million dollar affordable housing settlement, signed in 2009 allowed Westchester to buildhousing and avoid paying estimated damages and penalties of up to half a billion dollars to the U.S government. According to Ryan, Westchester is ahead of schedule on the construction of these units and is doubtful that Scarsdale will play any role in fulfilling the mandate for 750 units. He reassured the audience that the county had not found any discriminatory local zoning and did not plan to challenge the localities.
Pagan was determined to raise a red flag about housing and repeatedly cited a May, 2011 letter from HUD that added more stipulations
Though Ryan pointed out that a July letter from HUD had clarified these issues, Pagan insisted that the “Ryan/Spano” settlement had morphed into an “integration plan,” and called for the audience to “stand up against federal housing” which in her view threatens to bring affordable housing “next to neighborhood schools.”
In response to a question about how the county could meet the 2% tax cap, Pagan said she “would focus on social services and making sure that programs are running efficiently and effectively, adding “We need to look at the recipients to be sure that funds are going to their targeted use.”
Ryan called the cap a “budgeting nightmare” that does not keep pace with the average rate of growth of expenses or mandated costs. He said that the cap allows counties to raise $90 million to cover $280 million in mandated expenses.
In a question about stagnant local revenues, the candidates parried back and forth about why White Plains does not have it’s own Industrial Development Agency (IDA). Pagan argued that an IDA would bring more business to the area while Ryan contended that White Plains is covered by the county IDA and that forming an additional IDA would be redundant.
Next the conversation turned to moving Medicaid costs from the county to the state level. Currently, 40% of the Westchester County tax levy goes toward funding mandated Medicaid payments. Assemblywoman Amy Paulin is one of the sponsors of a bill with bipartisan support that would shift the responsibility for Medicaid to the state over a nine-year period. In total, $211 million in expenses would be removed from the county budget. The state’s Medicaid Redesign Team would look to generate savings through reform and a new payment model. Pagan argued that the shift would mean lower county taxes but higher state taxes for local residents.
The question and answer period touched on safety concerns, consolidation of services, tax reduction and the housing settlement with little new ground covered. Ryan’s familiarity with the issues and the numbers resulted in a smooth, logical presentation while Pagan struggled to form complete thoughts and sentences and fell back on canned phrases and rhetoric. However she did have a dedicated group of supporters in the audience; a mix of Scarsdale and White Plains Republicans who cheered and clapped with vigor at Pagan’s efforts to state her views. Perhaps their enthusiasm will invigorate the November vote.
At one point in the evening, judicial candidate Ed Borelli stopped in to introduce himself to voters. He is running for NYS Supreme
(Pictured at top: Bill Ryan and Iris Pagan)
Photos by Sara Werder
Who's Representing You In Scarsdale? Go Figure!
- Details
- Written by Joanne Wallenstein
- Hits: 4069
There is no doubt that most Scarsdale residents are confused by how we elect our mayor and trustees. No matter how many times I explain the Non-Partisan system to my very intelligent friends, it’s never clear to them why we elect a “non-partisan” committee of nominators to nominate candidates for a “no-contest” election.
For many years, Village governance had little impact on most Scarsdale residents, and so it was left to the few who cared to take the lead. But last year was different. When the Citizens Nominating Committee named their slate of candidates for Scarsdale Mayor and Village Trustees, two non-party candidates decided, for the first time in recent memory, to challenge them. Scarsdale suddenly had a contested election on its hands, and voters were galvanized.
And galvanized in a big way: 1,028 votes were cast in 2011, compared to just 150 in the 2010 contest.
Why was 2011 different? Several factors contributed:
1) Many absentee ballots were included in the CNC election for nominators. Some charge that the candidates themselves delivered these absentee ballots in bulk to the Procedure Committee.
2) Many repeat performers were elected to the nominating committee, some with conflicting allegiances. From the outside, the committee looked like a group of self-selected insiders.
3) Though proceedings are supposed to be confidential, there were rumors that unsubstantiated charges about one of the candidates were made right before the voting, with no opportunity for rebuttal.
4) The voting procedure for mayor and trustee at the CNC was also called into question when some contended that the names of one or more leading candidates were dropped during a final election round.
The result? Voting grew nearly tenfold. Village Hall was overwhelmed with voters, many of whom did not know how to cast a write-in vote. There were poll watchers on site, as well as police. Though the CNC candidates emerged as the victors, the entire non-partisan procedure was called into question.
This year the TVCC leadership appointed David Brodsky and Michelle Lichtenberg to chair the Procedure Committee. They had the tough job of addressing the issues that arose last year, crafting any necessary amendments to the Non-Partisan Resolution and restoring confidence in the Non-Partisan system. The committee worked diligently on drafting amendments to address some of the issues that were raised. These are not easily distilled to a few words, but here are the essentials of their proposed amendments:
1) Only one member of a household should serve on the Citizens Nominating Committee (CNC) at a time.
2) A former mayor or trustee should not run for the CNC directly after their service ends. The amendment calls for a cooling-off period of one year and seven months. They originally proposed a three-year waiting period but reduced it after comments from the community.
3) No one can serve consecutive three-year terms – however those who filled a vacancy can run for an additional three years.
4) No member of the Procedure Committee, the School Board Nominating Committee, the School Board Administrative Committee, the School Board or the Village Board can run for the CNC.
5) Absentee ballots will be sent to a PO Box in individual envelopes.
6) If last minute information about a nominee is introduced at the last session of the CNC, voting should be deferred to a subsequent meeting unless the chair is overruled by a 2/3 vote of the committee.
Are these amendments far-reaching enough to restore confidence in the system? Probably not – but they are a good start.
In my mind they fail to address some key problems with the system:
1) The Chair and Vice Chair of the CNC are not elected, but chosen by the TVCC. (In fact, the TVCC President herself usually chairs the
2) The TVCC appoints eleven people to serve and run the Procedure committee, none of those elected by residents.
3) The rules do not prohibit repeat service on the CNC – which often results in members of the TVCC serving over and over again – along with former trustees and mayors. Wouldn’t it be better to widen the membership of the committee to the broader community and seek out those who may not already have a long record of service to Scarsdale? Perhaps they would bring new blood to the pool of candidates for mayor and trustees and take a fresh look at Village issues.
4) The amendments do not stipulate how voting should be done within the committee –a complex process that is open to interpretation by the Chair and Vice Chair and gives them power to sway the results.
However, the amendments are a good beginning and I recommend you vote for them when we elect the new members of the nominating committee on November 15.
But what is written above is just the background for the discussion at the meeting of the Scarsdale Forum on Thursday night October 6th, where Brodsky and Lichtenberg presented the Procedure Committee amendments and discussed their merits on a panel with Larry Bell. Bell chairs the Non-Partisan Procedure Committee of the Forum who drafted its own Non-Partisan Procedure Report.
Why was a second report necessary? After all the official Procedure Committee already included 11 appointees from the TVCC. Why would the Forum (formerly TVCC) Executive Committee charge the Non Partisan Procedure Committee with drafting their own set of amendments, which were then published expeditiously before the official Procedure Committee could even issue their recommendations?
Puzzling indeed. Especially since many members of the TVCC Committee had served on the CNC during the prior years when the CNC’s actions had been called into question. Were they trying to rewrite the rules to prevent themselves from abusing them?
Even more puzzling was Bell’s presentation. He largely agreed with the Procedure Committee’s amendments and also recommended the formalization of the confidentiality policy in regards to “refuting allegations” and facilitating due diligence. However he took issue with the proposal that would prevent members of the same household from serving simultaneously (Bell and his wife both currently serve on the CNC, and Mr. Bell is a former chair of the committee). Bell contended that voters should have the right to choose whoever they like to represent them. He said that Scarsdale10583 had published a “hit list” of those who should not serve on the CNC, referring to a list on this site of the conflicting allegiances of last year’s CNC committee’s members.
Then he brought forth a seeming allusion to Nazi Germany, quoting Martin Niemoeller with the words,
“First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—
and there was no one left to speak out.”
At that point, the audience looked stunned. As far as I could tell, no one was quite sure what Bell meant by this quote. Did he feel that he was being personally singled out by the amendments? What was he saying about the Procedure Committee?
Of all people, Larry Bell has had ample opportunity to air his views. As a past president of the Scarsdale Forum, he was contemporaneously the chairman of the CNC. He serves on the leadership committee of the Heathcote Five Corners Coalition, and is an elected member of the CNC, the same nominating committee over which he formerly presided. He is also on the Executive Committee of the Scarsdale Forum.
Though a few questions were posed during the Q&A session that followed, the room was relatively quiet. In a discussion about why the TVCC Committee disagreed with the one person/one household rule, Bell turned to Brodsky and Lichtenberg and charged, “You wanted to throw some people a bone – and that’s the bone you threw in. Let’s get down to the real issues!”
Perhaps the “real issue” with the Non-Partisan System is not the system at all. Could it be that a few persistent members of the Forum are over-reaching and dominating the CNC deliberations and the voting process? The TVCC committee’s efforts to shadow and second-guess the official Procedure Committee is a good example of the lengths they will go to undermine the process itself.
In my view, they befuddled a conversation that was already too complex; one that I have trouble interpreting myself -- no less explaining to a friend.
(Pictured at top: Larry Bell, Bk Mungia, Michelle Lichtenberg and David Brodsky)
Photo credit: Bruce Wells
Trustees Appropriate Funds for Heathcote Stormwater Study
- Details
- Hits: 4177
Infrastructure issues were top priorities at the Scarsdale Board of Trustees Meeting on September 27. Flooding, sewage overflows and crumbling roads are plaguing the Village, and with limited funds available Village Managers are spending what they can to address these issues.
Mayor Flisser reported that she attended a meeting with Barry Road residents accompanied by Village Managers and the Superintendant of Public Works Benny Salinitro to discuss what could be done about the stagnant Hutchinson River tributary at the end of Barry and Tunstall Roads where there is a recurrent sewer overflow. There appears to be a need for a stormwater management program in this area that is also affected by the City of New Rochelle and the Town of Eastchester.Residents shared photographs that showed the condition of the tributary and new construction nearby.
After discussion, the Village staff agreed to the following:
- Contact New Rochelle to determine what they are doing to maintain the river and to find out if they can identity the source of the blockage. New Rochelle has taken recent action to clean up debris on their portion of the stream.
- Set up an inspection of the river in cooperation with New Rochelle.
- Contact the US Army Corps of Engineers to consider de-silting or other projects for the river.
- Check into eligibility for County grant money to fund projects that will reduce flooding associated with the river.
Salinitro agreed that dry sweeping the road after a sewer overflow is only a partial clean-up solution. He will research methods to sanitize the road surface as necessary. A follow up meeting will be held around October 20th.
In the Public Comments section, the conversation turned to flooding of the Sheldrake River Basin around Cayuga Pond. Doug Ulene, Neil Tucker and Alissa Kanowitz urged the Village to act quickly to find a solution to the problems in that area. Kanowitz, who has experienced major flooding three times in the past month alone showed pictures of the overflowing pond, her submerged swimming pool and yard to the Trustees. She said, “The problem is getting worse. We cannot afford to wait for years. We need to fix this immediately. We have only been here for one year and we never would have come had we known this problem existed. “
In response Trustees passed a resolution appropriating up to $47,000 for a study of the Sheldrake River Basin that would identify the problems and offer solutions. The funds will allow engineers from Dvirka and Bartilucci to do a preliminary plan for a stormwater improvement project for the area. Once this is completed, Trustees will have what they need to evaluate the issue, analyze improvement plans and estimate the costs.
Roadwork: The Village also passed a resolution to appropriate an additional $400,000 for road repair, resurfacing and curbing. The original 2011 -12 budget only included $320,000 for road work, a steep reduction from the $990,000 spent in 2011-12. This new appropriation will bring funding for roadwork to $720,000.
Last, Trustees passed a resolution to allow the Scarsdale Youth Football league to use lights on the field three times per week from October 1 through November 12. The lights will give the league extended playing time and will be turned off by 7:30 pm.
Trustee Brodsky announced a Public Hearing on Tuesday October 25th at Village Hall to review amendments to the Village Code on affordable housing.
Are Secret CNC Deliberations Undemocratic?
- Details
- Hits: 3397
Here is a letter to the Editor from Harry Reynolds of Bradley Road: Dear Editor: In August, I filed objections to the proposed amendment of the Non-Partisan Resolution because the amendment (a) deemed secret the identities of persons seeking the system’s nominations and (b) deemed secret what those applicants said, or failed to say, when they appeared before the Nominating Committee, and what the members of that Committee said to them.
Some in the Village were taken aback by those secrecy provisions which seemed unjustified because of the lack of any supervening cause that would sanction them for the public good. Indeed, there is no electoral system in the free world that provides for them.
The Procedural Committee killed the secrecy provisions, leaving it to its chairperson to inform the Inquirer last week that “We decided to table the confidentiality amendment until next year”. The attempt to encase secrecy in the proposed amendment was simply swept out of the public view. Secrecy provisions for which the Procedural Committee had eagerly sought the public’s favor were left by that Committee without any explanation for its decision to table the proposed secrecy amendment until “next year”, notwithstanding that a formal renunciation of that secrecy by the committee would affect the conduct of the system’s business in the intervening year.
Is it possible that the Procedural Committee could not decide whether the secrecy provisions, repellant on their face in a democracy, were not condemnable out of hand?
Put another way, what would our voters, to say nothing of our high school and middle school students, think of our Non-Partisan System’s belief that political parties should not be part of our village’s electoral system and, therefore, Scarsdale voters should not be told the identity of applicants for electoral office and should not be told what those applicants know, believe, plan, or desire concerning the public office that they seek? Would they not say that the necessary price of avoiding the rancor of political parties is not, and must not be, the creation of a village of politically ignorant voters?
It may be argued that the Procedural Committee’s tabling of the secrecy issue to next year was so unreasonable as to raise a question of the trustworthiness of the judgment of the Non-Partisan system. However, there is no reason to question the good faith of the Committee and the tabling of the issue suggests that there is support for the objections that have been raised against the secrecy provisions. Accordingly, it has been decided that the running of an opposition candidate in order to place the issue before the voters will await the Committee’s decision.
Harry Reynolds
Bradley Road
Procedure Committee and Forum Propose Changes to the Non-Partisan Resolution
- Details
- Written by Joanne Wallenstein
- Hits: 4078
Each year, following the elections for the Citizens Nominating Committee and the general election for Scarsdale Mayor and Trustees, the Procedure Committee meets to consider any changes to the Non-Partisan Resolution that could improve the process. This year, the Procedure Committee has adopted a draft of proposed amendments to the Non-Partisan Resolution. After receiving public comment the Procedure Committee amendments will be finalized by October 7th and voted on in November.
This past year following the election for the nominators and the CNC’s deliberations to select Village Trustees and Mayor, questions emerged about the voting process for the nominators, the make-up of the committee, confidentiality and the voting process of the CNC. The Procedure Committee sought to address some of these concerns with their recommendation for amendments.
In addition, the Scarsdale Forum drafted their own Non-Partisan Procedure Report with their recommendations on some of these same issues in June. This report as well as the Procedure Committees recommended amendments will be considered at a Scarsdale Forum meeting on Thursday October 6th at 8 pm in the Scott Room of the Scarsdale Library. At that meeting, both the Procedure Committee and the Forum's Non-Partisan Procedure committee will present their proposals in a panel moderated by Forum member Seth Ross.
Here are the recommended changes from the Procedure Committee, and recommendations from the Forum Committee on those issues, if any:
Membership on the Procedure Committee:
Proposed Amendment: Prohibits any person who is a member of the Citizens Nominating Committee, the School Board Administrative Committee, the School Board Nominating Committee, the School Board, or the Village Board from simultaneously being a member of The Procedure Committee.
Forum Report: “ A sitting voting member of the CNC should not be an appointed member of The Procedure Committee.
Mail-in Ballots:
Proposed Amendment: To allow residents to vote by mail-in ballot, accompanied by certification of eligibility to vote, to be received by the Procedure Committee by the day before Election Day.
Forum Report: The current use of absentee ballots (with restriction on use) should be repositioned as mail-in ballots. The Committee agrees that these mail-in ballots should be made readily available throughout Scarsdale for those without ready access to the Internet. The Committee also recognizes that increasing voter participation through the use of mail-in ballots must be balanced against the importance of maintaining election integrity. The Committee recommends that guidelines for use of mail-in ballots forbid candidates to touch completed mail-in ballots. Mail-in ballots should be delivered and received prior to the close of the election.
Eligibility to Serve on the Citizens Nominating Committee:
Proposed Amendment:
a. Prohibiting anyone from running for election to the CNC if his or her election would or could cause more than one person from the same household to serve as a voting member of the CNC.
b. Prohibiting a former Mayor or Trustee of the Village from running for election to the CNC unless more than one election cycle (approximately 19 months) has passed since the person last served in such position.
c. Prohibiting any person from serving as a voting member of the CNC for more than three consecutive years, provided, that a person elected to fill a one-year vacancy in the CNC shall be able to run for and succeed himself or herself with a full three-year term.
d. Prohibiting any person from serving as a voting member of the CNC who is at the time of the election a member of The Procedure Committee, the School Board Nominating Committee, the School Board Administrative Committee, the School Board or the Village Board.
Forum Report: “The Committee believes that persons should not be disqualified for eligibility for the CNC for being related, by blood or marriage, to another CNC member, nor for being active, currently or formerly, in Village activities or for having taken a position on a Village issue.”
“The Committee recommends that a person who is elected to fill a two-year vacancy in the CNC should not be able to run and serve again, succeeding himself or herself with a full three-year term, but that a person who has been elected to fill a one-vacancy should be able to run or succeed himself or herself with a full three-year term.
Voting at CNC Meeting:
Proposed Amendment: To provide that no vote for any nominee for a particular office shall be taken at a meeting at which a Committee member has presented new information as to a nominee for such office based upon the Committee member’s personal experience.
Forum Report: If the CNC chair determines that a CNC member has raised allegations that require verification which cannot be accomplished during the normal course of the meeting, no further vote for any nominee should be taken at that meeting unless such determination of the chair is overruled by two-thirds of the voting members present.
Rules of Procedure:
Proposed Amendments to Article V, The Citizen’s Nominating Committee, Section 5, allowing The Procedure Committee to make recommendations to the CNC with respect to its Rules of Procedure, which shall be consistent with the purpose and provisions of the Non-Partisan Resolution, and providing that any questions of compliance with the provisions of the Resolution regarding Rules of Procedure shall be ruled on by the Chairperson, whose decision can only be overruled by a 2/3 vote of the voting members present.
Discussion:
The Procedure Committee recommendations address conflicts of interest, irregular voting practices, repeat membership on the committee as well as the timing of voting for Trustees, Mayor and Judges at the CNC proceedings. The Forum report is in agreement with the Procedure Committee on several issues and diverges on others.
Eligibility: Last year’s Citizen’s Nominating Committee included a married couple, a former Trustee, the wife of a sitting Trustee and five vocal members of the Heathcote Five Corners Coalition. By barring members of the same household from serving together and barring membership on the CNC to active members of a host of Village Committees, the amendment seeks to minimize conflicts of interest.
However, the Forum committee took issue with this suggestion, stating that the strength of the CNC is their members’ inside knowledge of the Village. In their words, “The strength of The Procedure Committee has been its ability to recruit individuals who are willing to participate in contested elections for the CNC. Certain members of the Committee who have recently served on the CNC noted that the make-up of the CNC seems to be more diverse than was historically the case, with members being a diverse mix of residents with varying involvement in Village activities. Those CNC members more active in Village activities are more likely to have first hand knowledge of Potential Nominees, and be less reliant on third party information.”
Mail-in Ballots: Both reports address irregularities in the voting process for the CNC, when candidates could personally deliver absentee ballots to the committee. This allowed candidates to obtain absentee ballots, ask friends and neighbors to complete them and then deliver them in one batch to the Procedure Committee to be tallied. The Procedure Committee seeks to prevent this in the future by requiring absentee ballots to be mailed in accompanied by a certificate of voter eligibility. The Forum Report also calls for “mail-in ballots” and forbids the candidates from touching the ballots.
Due Diligence: In response to claims that the CNC vote was swayed by last minute information about potential candidates, the Procedure Committee is recommending that voting be deferred if a “Committee member presents new information about a nominee.” This would presumably give the nominators time to evaluate the information and do their own due diligence before voting.
In the Forum report, in a section titled “Dealing with Surprises,” the Forum recognizes the potential for committee members to throw out new information or unsubstantiated claims that could affect the vote. However, they advocate adhering to the current rule. Here is their conclusion:
“If the CNC chair determines that a CNC member has raised allegations that require verification which cannot be accomplished during the normal course of the meeting, no further vote for any nominee should be taken at that meeting unless such determination of the chair is overruled by two-thirds of the voting members present.”
It is important to note that the Forum Report also addressed breaches in the confidentiality of the proceedings, and recommended that those who are found to have violated confidentiality could be sanctioned, publically censured and barred from further service fro three years.
The Forum Report states, “Any member of the Citizens Nominating Committee voting or non-voting, can report a breach of the CNC Confidentiality Policy to The Procedure Committee for review and possible sanctions. Such sanctions could include public censure, removal from the CNC and/or making such person ineligible to serve on the CNC and/or The Procedure Committee for not less than three (3) years from the expiration of such person’s term.”
The Procedure Committee does not address this issue, perhaps because the Forum’s recommendation would turn the Procedure Committee into a court for disputes and might also serve to discourage residents from running for the CNC. The Forum report also clarifies the role of the Scarsdale Forum in the proceedings. Since the President of the Forum chairs the Citizen’s Nominating Committee proceedings, some have charged that the Forum is has undue influence over the process.
Some believe that the Non-Partisan Process, in place in Scarsdale since 1930, serves the Village well as it eliminates partisan elections that can be divisive. However, critics argue that since the process is secretive and does not allow potential candidates to air their views on the issues it is undemocratic. After the election last March when two write-in candidates made substantial inroads at the polls, the Village was in an uproar about the process and the partisan nature of our “non-partisan” system, where a committee names nominees, rather than candidates seeking office.
The Procedure Committee recommendations as well as the Scarsdale Forum report seek to clarify the rules and restore confidence in the process. The full text of the Proposed Amendments is posted here and everyone is invited to a panel discussion about the process on Thursday, October 6 in the Scott Room of the Scarsdale Library at 8 p.m.
If you have comments on the amendments or the process, please post them below:
