Why Was Sharon Lindsay Denied a Seat on the Planning Board?
- Details
- Hits: 8132
The announcements of appointees to Village Boards and Councils on Tuesday night April 12th, omitted one important appointment. It had previously been announced that former Village Trustee Sharon Lindsay would be given a seat on the Planning Board. In fact, Lindsay, who was also a write-in candidate for Mayor in the last election applied for the spot and was told that her appointment to the Planning Board was approved by the entire Board and Mayor Carolyn Stevens in early March. However Tuesday night’s agenda did not include her name and the former Planning Board Chair, Beverly Sved, was asked to continue to serve until another person is nominated.
Below please find the story from Sharon Lindsay, with comments from former Mayors Carolyn Stevens, Peter Strauss and Beverly Sved:
Here is a note from Ms. Lindsay:
“I submitted my CV for consideration for the position opening on the Planning Board in late January. I have an extensive interest and background in the type of land use and zoning issues that Board deals with and, frankly, have always wanted to serve the Village in this capacity. I studied planning and land use at University level and, while at Harvard Law School, worked part time with the Harvard Land Use Task Force at the Graduate School of Architecture on a wetlands evaluation project in the southeastern Boston suburbs. In Scarsdale, I have served as a member of the Board of Appeals for 4 years and went on to Chair that Board for another 4 years. I then became a Village Trustee and was a member of its Land Use Committee for 4 years and its Chair for 3 of those. During my years as Trustee, I also served as Board liase to the Board of Architectural Review and the Board of Appeals for one year each, and the Planning Board for the last three years of my term. This past Fall, I participated in Pace Law School programs on land use planning.”
“I felt I was qualified to apply to serve on the Planning Board and was delighted to hear that my appointment had been agreed upon by the entire, then sitting, Village Board in early March. I subsequently attended Beverly Sved’s retirement dinner on March 16th, at which it was announced that Jane Veron had been nominated by the Board of Trustees to serve as Chair in the coming year and that I had been nominated to fill the position created by Beverly’s retirement.”
“Having served on the Board of Trustees for the past four years, I am well aware that the nominations to Village Boards and Councils that were approved by the then sitting Board are routinely and unanimously ratified at the first meeting of the new Board. Frankly, it would be impossible for the new Board to fill the extensive roster of appointments that must be made at their first meeting in the few days they would have since being sworn in – just as the Village Budget is adopted at that first meeting, in trust that the prior Board had done its homework.”
"So, suffice it to say that I was shocked and surprised when I heard that Mayor Flisser had made efforts in the past weeks to remove my name from the roster of candidates who had been previously approved by the Board, of which she was a member at the time, and substitute someone else … and then, presumably because that effort failed, just remove my name altogether and make no appointment until some later, undetermined, date… which was apparently what the Board voted to do last night."
"At no time, before or after the March 16th announcement, did any then sitting Trustee who approved my nomination – including Mayor Flisser – or either of the two new Trustees sitting on the new Board – discuss with me my qualifications or my nomination. Had they, I would have been happy to discuss any concerns with them. This absence of communication is particularly surprising, since I have had several conversations with Mayor Flisser and several of the Trustees in the past several weeks at various Village and social functions, all of which I thought were quite amiable and during which this subject never was raised. I certainly had no reason to bring it up since I was under the distinct impression that I had been duly discussed and vetted and would have my suggested appointment ratified."
"I have no idea what has gone on here.”
Former Mayor Carolyn Stevens was asked to comment as well, and here is what she said:
“The Personnel Committee met in February and in early March (before the Village election) with the entire Village Board present – including Dr. Flisser. A few candidates were considered and eventually the Village Board selected Ms. Lindsay to fill the vacancy on the Planning Board that would be left with Ms. Sved’s term ending and Ms. Veron was selected to serve as chair. Dr. Flisser told me and the trustees of her intention not to appoint Ms. Lindsay several days before she was sworn in and informed her and the others of her intention to name Dan Hochvert to the post, but he was not appointed either.”
“What is at the root of Dr. Flisser’s failure to appoint Ms. Lindsay? Ms. Lindsay is clearly qualified .The entire Village Board agreed and she and the Planning Board as well as staff had been notified as is custom so that there can be a smooth and easy transition. One can only speculate about the motives.”
Former Mayor Peter Strauss added the following:
“It is certainly unusual to have appointments vetted and tentatively approved by an outgoing Mayor and Board changed by the incoming officials. However, since it is the responsibility of the new Board finally to approve the appointments, that is where the final decisions are made.”
“To miss the opportunity to utilize in a very critical role the service of an extraordinarily qualified and talented person such as Sharon Lindsay would be a terrible loss for the Village.”
And last, here is input from another former Mayor Beverly Sved, who just completed her term as chair of the Planning Board:
“I'm disappointed the Mayor did not appoint Sharon. With her extensive land use experience, she is a natural choice and would be a valuable addition to the Planning Board. Any thoughts on Mayor Flisser's action -- or inaction -- would be speculation on my part.”
Whatever the origins of the decision, it should be resolved when the Board of Trustees convenes a Personnel Committee Meeting on April 27th. More to come….
Scarsdale Student Awarded Prestigious Scholarship for Program in Turkey
- Details
- Hits: 4577
This June, Scarsdale High School Senior Robert Koch will travel to Turkey to represent the United States at People to People International's (PTPI) Peace Camp. Koch will join 29 other students, who will represent a total of 27 countries. More than 400 students applied to take part in Peace Camp, and Koch was one of only four Americans awarded the coveted scholarship.
Additional countries represented include Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Canada, China, Ecuador, Egypt, Germany, India, Israel, Latvia, Lithuania, Malaysia, Moldova, Morocco, Palestinian Territories, Panama, Romania, Serbia, South Africa, South Korea, Ukraine, Venezuela and Vietnam. Via Facebook, the selected participants have already begun communicating, discussing topics ranging from prom (or a similar concept in other countries) to an examination of hatred and violence sparked by the recent burning of the Koran in the United States and the reaction in Afghanistan.
While in Turkey, Koch will participate in 18 hours of curriculum designed to enhance listening, communication, and conflict management skills. The goal of the program is to create a safe environment where outstanding young people of different nationalities and religions may freely express their views and experiences. Students will discuss world issues, religion, cultural diversity, conflict resolution and other important topics. In addition, they will have the opportunity to travel throughout the country, visiting Istanbul, Cappadocia, Izmir and Antalya, learning firsthand about Turkey's people, culture and history.
“Being selected for such a prestigious program means the world to me. I am really excited to be traveling to Turkey this summer to meet fellow students from around the world” said Koch. Koch traveled with People to People Ambassador Programs last summer to Spain, France and Italy and this year, when he noticed that scholarships for summer travel were available he applied. During the trip Koch hopes “to learn about other cultures, especially those he has never experienced before in the Middle East and Asia.” He also “hopes to make new friends with whom he can share the culture of Scarsdale.” At home he enjoys playing the guitar, flying, photography and ceramics. At SHS he is active in “Missing in Action” a group that raises money to donate to children and families coping with grief. Bound for college next fall, Koch plans to major in International Studies.
The inaugural Peace Camp program was held in Egypt in 2005. It was the brainchild of PTPI President/CEO Mary Jean Eisenhower, who understands the importance of nurturing the next generation of emerging youth leaders, and instilling in them a greater understanding of the similarities between cultures, in order to ensure a more peaceful future worldwide.
People to People International, with World Headquarters in Kansas City, Missouri USA, was established by President Dwight D. Eisenhower on September 11, 1956 to enhance international understanding and friendship through educational, cultural and humanitarian activities involving the exchange of ideas and experiences directly among peoples of different countries and diverse cultures. Today, PTPI has a presence in 135 countries with more than 80,000 families and individuals actively participating in People to People International programs. Visit www.ptpi.org for more information.
Phot: Koch (plaid shirt) in Barcelona after learning how to cook Paella.
The CSEA Doth Protest Too Much
- Details
- Hits: 4894
I seem to have hit a nerve with my letter to the editor dated March 16, 2011 entitled, aptly as it turns out, In the Center Ring . Describing the machinations of our county board of legislators as a circus I attempted to explain the absurdity of the board's tacitly working in tandem with a public employee union as it pursued a lawsuit against the County Executive -in effect enabling a special interest group to sue the citizens of Westchester - whom they were ostensibly elected to represent.
In that letter I mis-characterized the status of the board regarding the union's lawsuit when I wrote;
"Although the CSEA is suing the County they are really suing you and me, the taxpayers, since we pay for all lawsuits - legitimate or not. So the CSEA is suing us - but your county legislature joined the suit - on the side of the CSEA ! That's right, against us, the tax payers. We are being sued and our county legislature is backing the union that is suing us. Or another way to look at it is - our legislators are suing the taxpayers."
"It gets worse, or better , depending on how much humor you find in these things. The board then sued to prevent Rob Astorino from using the county attorney, whom he appointed, to represent us, and again for whom we pay taxes. No, said our board, the county attorney must represent "the County"- which they define as the board of legislators -and join with them and the CSEA in suing us. Astorino,to defend us, must hire his own counsel."
I subsequently discovered the board did not yet “join” the CSEA suit at the time I wrote this-- nor had they yet decided whether or not to actually sue Astorino. So I was wrong. Of course when you're looking down the barrel of a gun the fact that the gunman has not yet decided to pull the trigger - while more desirable than the alternative - is none the less not exactly reassuring.
Before I could correct my letter - by deleting joined the suit and replacing sued with considered acting - a letter was published from Billy Riccaldo -Southern Region President of the CSEA. The letter called me to task for writing that the board had joined the suit - when they had not (yet). He then wrote my letter amounted to spewing inaccurate information in an attempt to turn the public against the victims in this case.
Well now - Any fair reading of my letter would conclude that it is the time wasting behavior of the board of legislators that is my target. I address those who've been engaged for more than a year in doing anything possible to thwart Rob Astorino's efforts – the value or merit of the matter at hand be damned. That has not changed. This latest tempest if anything confirmed my belief that the board was on the verge of publicly supporting the lawsuit, was in fact already actively involved behind the scenes and only backed off when the media got wind of it. It was Jenkin's own words that led me to that conclusion, which I'll explain shortly.
I was mulling my response to Mr. Riccaldo when an interesting document appeared over the transom ( h/t Alan Simpson ) e mailed to the publisher of this blog with instructions to forward it to me. It was a letter from early February - fully six weeks before board member Peter Harckham got all worked up on You Tube of all places in defense of his esteemed colleagues. The letter was from Chairman Jenkins to the County Attorney (remember him?) ordering him to not only not file a motion to dismiss on behalf of the board, but instead to answer the CSEA's suit by asserting cross claims against Astorino! Jenkins specified these claims “...would essentially mirror the 3 claims asserted by the CSEA”. I included the letter in it's entirety as a link so you can read it for yourself. It's unbelievable.
So the CSEA is getting all in a lather on this site demanding I apologize to the 38 members who were fired ( calling them “victims” ) for the "lies" I repeated, all the while knowing full well they've been working in tandem with Chairman Jenkins for at least 6 weeks now! More likely they've colluded from the onset since anyone who knows anything about the symbiotic relationship between democratic legislators and the public employee unions knows the CSEA would never have even commenced a law suit in the first place without the consent and participation of the elected officials in question. The fact that the CSEA included the board as a respondent was a red herring that should fool no one.
Regardless, there is now proof that Jenkins at least was actively supporting the union- against the taxpayers- since February 3rd. The question is – did he act alone - a rogue chairman if you will? When Peter Harckham got up and did his outrage soliloquy ( kind of a mash up of Khrushchev with the shoe and the Checkers speech ) was he aware that his chairman had in fact done the very thing of which he was outraged to have been even accused? If he was he should be ashamed of himself. If he wasn't he must be really really angry with Jenkins for making him look so foolish. Only Harckham can answer that.
Regarding the predictable responses that I'm an operative merely restating Astorino's talking points - in my brief bio when I stated up front that I was a former political operative I did not state for which party. Perhaps I should have. The fact is I'm a registered Democrat. Moreover since I first voted for Jimmy Carter I can count on one hand the number of times I supported a Republican.
Rob Astorino is one of those times. The thing that Jenkins and the CSEA isn't getting is that I'm not alone here. Astorino won decisively because many voters unaligned with either party chose him over Spano and, more important, so did many Democrats. The Democratic majority on the board does not have a mandate to ensure the County Executive we elected is rendered powerless at all costs. This scorched earth mentality does not benefit anyone other than the players who live to play such games.
I think my last letter provoked the response it did from readers, who apparently copied it and mailed it all over Westchester, because they find this behavior equally deplorable. Sending a CSEA paid employee to attack me for repeating talking points is beyond ridiculous when you consider the source. If my opinion of this mess is similar to the County Executive's ( and for the record I don't receive his fund raising missives – I imagine they're for contributors and Republicans – I'm neither) consider that it could be the only logical conclusion to which a reasonable adult can come.
All the CSEA's righteous indignation - on full display in this letter - is a sham – a ploy. The truth is they've been in league with the board all along and Ken Jenkin's letter is the proof. Now who owes whom an apology, Billy.
Charmian Neary is a bored housewife and former Democratic political operative from Rye New York who is much better at politics than homemaking.
Stop the Hypocrisy
- Details
- Hits: 4081
Here is a letter to Scarsdale10583 from Ken Jenkins, Chairman of the Westchester County Board of Legislators: The Democratic-led Board of Legislators enacted a 2011 budget that:
- Doubled the amount of tax relief the County Executive proposed to -2.2%, the second largest in County history
- Reduced spending by $30 million from 2010 budget
- Reduced the County workforce by 10% before job the cuts that were enacted in the 2011 adopted budget
In the 2011 Budget, close to 100 people were laid off -- that is in addition to the approximately 500 people who left voluntarily. There were layoffs in the 2010 budget adopted by the BOL -- before County Executive Astorino took office. The Democrats on the County Board have been about balance, shared sacrifice and responsible transitions.
So what’s all the fuss about from the Republican minority about the "conflict" determined by the County Attorney? It's nonsense. It's a false assertion that the conflict arose from 2011 correspondence - this claim is simply not true.
The County Attorney sought an opinion on whether there is a conflict between the position of the BOL and the County Executive in the CSEA lawsuit regarding the termination of the Section 8 program. The County Attorney hired an outside law firm without permission of the BOL as required by the County Charter. More taxpayer dollars wasted simply for the purpose of "playing politics."
I have attached the opinion of the law firm the County Attorney hired, Hinshaw and Culbertson. This opinion states there is a conflict between the stated positions of the County Executive and the County Board and that the County Attorney had a conflict because he gave the County Executive legal advice about these positions. This opinion states these facts create the conflict. This opinion issued February 28, 2011 does not reference any correspondence from 2011.
I will leave it to others to determine why the County Attorney had to hire an outside law firm to determine if there was a conflict. It was clear that there was a conflict. The County Board passed a resolution I introduced to waive the conflict so that the County Attorney could represent the County Executive and not have to spend taxpayer dollars on an outside law firm. The County Board has not taken a position against the County Executive in the CSEA litigation. So now what?The law firm that the County Executive hired, has filed motions which are wasting the taxpayers money. The County Executive should immediately cease using this Administration-connected law firm, stop wasting taxpayer money, waive the conflict and use the services of the County Attorney in this litigation. I would respectfully suggest to my Republican colleagues to do a little research instead of being spoon-fed talking points from the Administration.
Cursory research would show this is not the first time the County Board has taken a conflicting position than the County Executive in a lawsuit brought by the CSEA. In 1997, the Republican Chairman of the Board, now Chief of Staff George Oros filed cross claims against Republican County Executive Andrew O’Rourke in a CSEA lawsuit which outsourced specific jobs - sound familiar? These “cross claims” were similar to the cross claims considered but not enacted by the County Board. I have attached the cover page to the cross-claims lawsuit from the County Board.
I have also attached Resolution 10-1997 adopted January 6, 1997 which authorized outside counsel by a 10-7 vote.
I have also attached the signed verification from then Chairman Oros dated January 13, 1997 – 7 days later - for the cross-claims asserted in their verified answer. There are no documented meetings, no additional votes from the County Board on the Verified Answer and Cross-Claim of the County Board of Legislators.
It appears that some positions are being developed from limited sources without all the facts. I certainly am available to answer questions via phone or email.
The Laws of Westchester County makes clear the County Board sets policy, the County Executive executes that policy. The County Executive can make recommendations to the Board of Legislators for modifications of policy. The County Executive cannot simply ignore the law.
No one can pick and choose the laws they want to follow. As one of my Democratic colleagues has stated, the County Executive does not have a mandate to break the law.
In the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, late Senator from New York, "You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts."
A Conversation Starter from the Task Force on Drugs and Alcohol
- Details
- Hits: 3710
Here is a monthly conversation starter from the Scarsdale Task Force on Drugs and Alcohol. Start a dialogue by asking your kids...
Q: Why is it dangerous to drive a car after consuming alcohol?
A: Alcohol consumption by minors, even in small quantities, leads to impaired coordination, slowing of reflexes, and impaired judgment. These effects can be deadly when an intoxicated teen is behind the wheel of a car. Alcohol use is responsible for significant mortality among youth. Alcohol is implicated in a majority of teen driving fatalities. 25% of drivers ages 15-20 who died in motor vehicle crashes had been drinking alcohol.
The Scarsdale Task Force on Drugs and Alcohol is a community action group comprised of parents, students, teachers, school administrators; representatives from village, local and civic organizations; and religious institutions. Since its founding in 1984, the Task Force has worked in our community to educate youth and adults about drugs and alcohol, help people develop drug free attitudes and habits, and recommend resources to those whose lives are affected by drug and alcohol dependency.
