After Smoke Clears, Mayor French Releases Statement
Friday, 10 February 2012 10:37
To put it lightly, the February 8 City Council meeting was contentious. It’s no secret that Mayor Doug French and Councilman Joe Sack have not seen eye-to-eye, but the vitriol bubbled over Wednesday evening as the two Republicans traded verbal blows.
Their remarks, aimed squarely at one another, were the result of the decision leveled recently by the Board of Ethics, which determined the Mayor did not receive preferential treatment as it related to building violations at his 13 Richard Place property and the improper STAR exemption he collected for the residence. The complaints were originally brought to light by Hen Island provocateur Ray Tartaglione.
On Friday, Mayor French e-mailed the following to The Rye Record:
"There was a clash of philosophies the other night at the Council meeting. Joe was a regular critic of the last administration under Mayor Otis and that has carried through to this administration – and criticism is welcomed. But he continues to take it to a level that questions the integrity of the people he works with who are simply trying to get things accomplished; the people who work at City Hall and those that serve on this board. And he has taken it to the degree in his comments, letters to the editor, and Council communications over the years that assumes that people have the wrong motives – comments that parrot much of the ones made by the regular critics of our City for the past four years.”
He continued, “Rye is too small of a community to have that kind of destructive discourse to the point that we are unable to pursue the real important business at hand; like flooding, infrastructure, and fiscal matters. Our management and administrative employees are spending hour upon hour wasting time and tax dollars responding to issues of a very vocal minority. We had gotten past that last year, but now it is again being supported. The City is moving forward to work together and put the interests of Rye first. I hope everyone joins us."
When reached for a reply, Councilman Sack responded, "My reputation speaks for itself. I was just re-elected by a large majority of Rye voters because of my reputation. The Mayor’s comments are beneath the office of the Mayor."
-- Jim Byrne
Comments
The continual bombardment and abuse directed by the tiny group of the disenfranchised, coupled with the enormous waste of resources as we serve their information requests as they seek their imaginary conspiracies are annoying and serve no useful purpose.
Sack clearly believes he is positioning himself for better things, but his contrary and smug view is petty and again serves no purpose. Whether he colludes with the mischief makers or not, he certainly does not work for the interests of our community - He will not have my vote in the future.
This will undoubtedly be followed by a litany of missives from the tiny group - The conspiracy, your freedom of speech, your mistreatment, the plotting of the mayor and our public servants...If you don't like Rye, please move away...There are other places to live!
See it here.....
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/lohud/access/2289142191.html?FMT=ABS&date=Mar+10%2C+2011
GHE,
If you fully look into this matter before shooting your self in the foot, you will find out that Mr. Glass fully disclosed his relationship with me to the town Supervisor (Mayor), the town attorney and the zoning board chairman (All gave the green light to vote) before the vote took place. Try again my friend.
If you like I would be happy to supply you with the letter...
Ask these questions: How did the public find out? Did I hide it, obfuscate it, ask others to cover it for me or in any way leave it buried? No: Mr. Bernstein and everyone else found out because *I* re-disclosed the matter (for the third time) in the ZBA’s "executive session." The three other Board members that night were all attorneys, the ZBA’s attorney was present at the meeting, and no one said I should not participate in the vote. That's how the public learned about it (again), since those sessions are open to the public (it's just that they can not comment during those discussion times). I had also disclosed it as a member of the public several months before.
You're also not considering one of the many things that happened next: Mr. Bernstein only reported one-half of part of the alleged conflict transaction – the allegedly damning half. He was then called to task by the Ethics Board's own attorney (who was brought in from Katonah), because, as it turned out, the relevant "deed" Mr. Bernstein tried to hang me with (~1991) was superseded by a later deed (~1996) which he withheld from the Ethics Board (oops) and which exonerated me from that part of the claim.
I even once alluded to this to the Rye City Council (it’s on video) when I told them that I understood the attacks of political office. I don’t attack people personally and I don’t enjoy addressing some of these issues. I think they are important and I am – long ago fully disclosed – hired to promote environmental issues and to bring the to the public’s attention matters which various members of the public view as being important.
I believe the Mayor is entitled (as are all employees, officials, and citizens) to be presented with a claim of charges, not innuendos, and that he should be entitled to answer them and have a full and fair hearing about them. I’ve said so more than once.
More importantly, I’m not holding myself out as a political representative of anyone, I’m not in office, not running for office, etc. In Greenburgh when it became clear I had made an error, I admitted to it and that was the end of it. The fact that I had already disclosed the issue multiple times, including in writing, and that I was given incorrect advice from City officials didn’t change that I may have erred, so I took my lumps and went on.
Now, if you want to make it personal as well as professional, hear this: as part of my practice I help victims of various kinds of abuse (mostly but not always unpaid). I have a particular empathy for people who have suffered at the hands of officials. In my view, what Paul Shew did to Bob Schubert was among the worst attempts to perpetrate a crime on a citizen (who happen to also be a friend of mine ) that I have come across in the past 17 years. Bob Schubert may be dead, but his death has no bearing on whether what was done to him was wrong. You can attack me all you want, but when it comes to Bob and what Rye did to him, I’m not going away.
I’ll put my clay feet up against your poison pen any time. Here’s the difference between us: I’m aware of my frailties, I endeavor to err less today than I did yesterday, and to tread upon others less tomorrow than I did today. You, whoever you are (and with no courage to post your real name), are more interested in conflict than resolution, more interested in dismembering than remembering, unable to admit incorrectness, are yet another person who sought to accuse of a crime but did not report the full findings, and generally without ethic, spine or integrity. We all err ... the question is often not what we do, but what we do about it.
Can I assume you failed to mention your employment with HealtheHarbor in your letter? Are you being compensated from HealtheHarbor for your services as their attorney? Wouldn't it be extremely unethical to withhold that relationship in your letter to the Town Supervisor and Greenburgh board? Did you mention you worked for HealtheHarbor?
“The court found that the majority of town employees and consultants who testified at the trial had significant credibility issues; changing the testimony they gave at depositions or providing testimony that was untrue. Furthermore, the Town Board destroyed evidence and documents that were relevant to the trial and failed to produce evidence that did exist. The town was sanctioned $10,000 for their spoilation of evidence and failure to comply with discovery.”
http://scarsdale10583.com/201008151007/today-s-news/court-finds-greenburgh-guilty-in-fortress-bible-church-case.html
Here the federal judge completely nails the crack municipal legal team of Kevin Plunkett, Kristen Wilson and Darius Chafizadeh for their “service” to the Town of Greenburgh.
And not only did the judge pretty much throw the book at the town, its elected officials and its lawyers - but he took the extraordinary step of ordering sanctions because "the record is replete with evidence regarding defendants' intentional destruction of evidence and disregard for discovery obligations.” Sound familiar?
Readers of the above article (and there are many others) will find multiple patterns and parallels with Mamaroneck’s infamous Westchester County Day School case which bled their taxpayers dry and - of course - to the so called “legal advice” we’ve all been told to stomach here in Rye in the Schubert Pond fiasco.
Wilson as Rye City Attorney? Really? Schubert claims without merit? Really?
You are right tedc.
However, you left out the Mamaroneck Beach club legal fees windfall for Plunkett and friends.
How in the world did we end up with Wilson? Are we on Candid Camera or did we get "Plunked" by French?
Dearest “Tax Payer” -
Enough of this! (loud stamping of foot heard) Our representatives and public employees are doing their very best to cover up for our local political class crooks, er, community.
The continual bombardment and abuse of statute directed by the tiny group of city council members, wholly disenfranchised from the truth and most human decency, coupled with the enormous waste of resources, as we taxpayers dutifully serve Harris Beach and their billing statement requests whilst they create fictitious and pernicious “back stories” for honorable volunteer committee members who seek ONLY THE FACTS – not imaginary recreations – these kind of self serving city council members are annoying, public liabilities and serve no useful purpose.
These self deceiving, resentful haters of Mr. Sack clearly believe they are positioning themselves for better things (if they can even stick around much longer with prices here rising so rapidly), but their contrary and smug public view is wholly parochial, petty and again serves no purpose but to prolong widespread honest taxpayer misery. Whether Mr. French’s council bench “fun bunch” directly colludes with him and his influence peddling facilitators, or not, His Dis-Honor certainly does not work for the interests of this community - he works hard to obfuscate, deceive and protect his own secret benefits – not all of which have yet been revealed - now and in the future.
This will undoubtedly be followed by a litany of missives from the same compromised tiny “fun bunch” group and their miserably dedicated fans – growing smaller and smaller daily. “The conspiracy, your freedom of speech, your mistreatment, the plotting of the mayor and our public servants”...to you from us idiots, us low life’s, us nattering nabobs of negativity we say – things here are just getting going. And if you don't like Rye, please move away...we know you intend to do so as soon as you can because since you weren’t born here, didn’t grow up here, don’t know any real history here, came here for the benefits our forefathers worked very hard to create - WE can tell YOU with assurance - there are other cheaper and more law abiding places to live – because we know you came from them to use us.
July 1, 2011 – Violation #V0000758 – Building Without a Permit.
MATCH the recent Public Meeting “Misstatement” - to the Rye City Official:
A. “We’ve had this conversation so I think let’s not play to the cameras. You’re not telling the truth and at least you can sit here and tell the truth.”
ANSWER: this would be – the City Manager
B. “We’re here to do the city’s business – the accusations you’re making are false.”
ANSWER: this would be – the Mayor
C. “Unless this is city business I don’t think it’s appropriate for you to present it to us.”
ANSWER: this would be – the Deputy Mayor
D. “If I got an exemption I wasn’t entitled to absolutely” – (Follow-up question: Do you know if you got that exemption sir?) - “Um, I’m gonna find out.”
ANSWER: This bonus question was 3rd grade level easy since the speaker (and the City Assessor) knew 8 months before this question was asked that he had in fact received that exemption – and for 10 full years - pocketing in excess of $10,000 in improper benefits.. And none of it had been paid back nor acknowledged until he was “outed.” The speaker here is – the Mayor.
Please view the appropriate Rye City Council Meetings here -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCRJfm3CJv8 time codes 6:19-6:23, 7:29-7:36
and here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySsAAcf7KxE&feature=related time codes:48-:53
and here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSqIOZYCuok&feature=related time codes 6:41-6:48
Last week the administration had to admit it again “misspoke” to the public and city council for 2 weeks about the existence of a recording by Rye TV of the Fire Department Meeting (which perhaps certain people thought got too hot for adult viewing). – I didn’t see that story in The Rye Record yet. But until it comes you can see it here - http://bit.ly/xFNesc
Tonight, after being kept secret all this week – The City of Rye admits erroneously releasing employee social security numbers to a third party and failing to promptly notify the employees that their personal information had been compromised. – I didn’t see that story in The Rye Record yet – but until it comes you can see is here - http://bit.ly/x5hYBb
So are the big wigs on the ninth floor in county government. It all started when French refused to get behind Sack in the last election, and it went down hill from there. The Mayor’s “clash of philosophies” is now affecting our relationship with county government. (Thus the reason why we have such poor communication with the County.) Communication is essential for the progress of Rye. Many issues in Rye circle around County Government. The County just issued statements they are releasing 9 million dollars for flood mitigation. Why is rye not a partial recipient? The recent cancellation of the route 76 bus without notice was a message from White Plains to French.
We will be facing some large decisions in the near future with regard to Playland and more, it is not going helpful if French is steering the horse.
Maybe you can send over one of your neighbors to vandalize Councilmen Sacks car like your neighbor Gary Stone did to me when I spoke out against you. You do not have to worry the police would not arrest him if he gets caught, even if he is photographed in the act. We have pictures of him in action and the police didn‘t seem to care.
Just for the record Doug; Although this did happen and I have photographs and police reports to prove it, I really am not advocating to do this to anyone. Just trying to point out what happens when you speak out against the Mayor in Rye.
There are many here in Rye who do not believe in monarchies, especially corrupt ones. Corrupt monarchies are not easy to topple. They use their deceit and taxpayer paid propaganda to defend their improper actions, use City funds to influence the press and to prop up their own twisted agendas.
French will go down. The French always do. Whether it's by white flag or by guillotine is up to him.
“WHO ARE YOU GOING TO BELIEVE – ME – OR YOUR OWN EYES?”
July 1, 2011 – Violation #V0000758 – Building Without a Permit.
In the recent Board of Ethics “Do Over” session, with the previously recused City Manager and City Attorney ex-officio board members now specifically declining to recuse themselves again, the Chairwoman wasted little time (1 min, 45 seconds) in moving for the public to leave the room. But Judge Alfano and Former Mayor Dunn were not so eager to comply. And so viewers can watch the previously recused City Manager and the City Attorney prod and cajole these somewhat reluctant participants into ‘moving along’ into a so-called Executive Session – and getting the public out of the room. Thus the public gets a 13 and a half minute glimpse of how the issues were being reframed, and by exactly whom, and who raised objections, and who gets promised what - if the process results were later questioned, before the public finally gets evicted and a 90 minute closed door session begins.
A. “In this matter, um, again, because this is a SEPARATE MATTER from what you had, um, discussed previously, um, the corporation council and I have discussed this and WE FEEL that this is a matter based on what the council had asked that we would participate in this discussion.”
ANSWER: this would be – the City Manager.
B. “What right now is before the Board of Ethics is to respond to 2 specific questions from the Deputy Mayor and our oblication is to answer those questions TO HIM. Notwithstanding what THE PUBLIC or anyone else might think or might not like, you’re I think that the process that’s been followed so far as its written in the code and it’s OUR JOB to look at those questions and respond.”
ANSWER: this would be – the City Attorney
C. “The obligation or the right to investigate lies with the City Council and when I got that letter my gut reaction was to kick it back to him and say: Well? WHAT ARE THE FACTS? Usually when an issue is presented to an Ethics Committee, they write out the facts and you give an opinion based on those facts.”
ANSWER: this would be – Judge Alfano
D. “I’m worried because there are allegations of favoritism or whatever to be criticized for asking either hard questions, softball questions or leading questions. I’d rather have INDEPENDENT COUNSEL asking a question.”
ANSWER: this would be – Judge Alfano
E. “If we as our committee, without written depositions, without stenographers, without additional counsel - if we meet go thru our proceedure as the Ethics Committee and come to a conclusion will they accept that conclusion?..I guess all I’m trying to avoid is our going thru a process and then being told afterwards that ‘that’s NOT AN ‘ACCEPTABLE PROCEDURE.’”
ANSWER: this would be – Former Mayor Dunn
(See “The Do Over” - Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3spwYSwPOE )
City officials admit to taping controversial fire workshop after all
Written by CHRISTIAN FALCONE
Thursday, 09 February 2012 18:51
A meeting to discuss the sensitive subject of reorganizing the fire department was criticized for not being televised. However, as of this week, city officials did an about-face and admitted that a tape did in fact exist.
The footage, as of Tuesday, had been uploaded onto the city’s website, nearly two weeks after the meeting was held.
The Jan. 25 workshop was recorded, but not done for broadcast purposes, said Nicole Levitsky, access coordinator for Rye TV. The meeting was taped as a backup recording to the city clerk’s audio recordings something often done, according to city officials.
However, that contradicts public comments made by City Manager Scott Pickup, on Jan. 25, where he told the council that the workshop hadn’t been recorded because there was no staffing available. But Levitsky said this week that Pickup was unaware at the time of the workshop that it was being taped.
The sound on the broadcast is barely audible and the video was only shot from one camera, not the typical three-camera recordings that Rye TV uses for council meetings. “That’s why you get what you get,” the city manager said, adding that the footage was converted last Friday and then uploaded at the request of Republican Councilman Joe Sack. The two city officials met last Friday over the issue, and according to a source inside City Hall, an argument ensued.
Sack said on Monday that if there was some sort of miscommunication, he was willing to chalk it up to that. “The important thing is if it was taped [to] get it on the website so everyone can have access to it,” the councilman said.
The fire department workshop was considered an explosive one by Rye standards due to the undertaking of potentially revamping the fire department and creating a public safety commissioner position to oversee both police and fire operations. A heated exchange took place between Republican Mayor Douglas French and Councilwoman Catherine Parker, the lone Democrat on the council, over an analysis of the fire department that she had planned to co-author with Councilman Sack. Sack did not attend the workshop.
Councilwoman Parker was also upset to learn, at the time, that the meeting had not been recorded. But upon word that in fact, a tape had surfaced, Parker said, “I’m all for transparency and open government. I think having our meetings taped is an important part of the process so the public can make up its own mind. I was very disappointed to hear that the fire department meeting was not videotaped. I will say I am very glad there is a record of the meeting.”
The city manager said recording a backup is not unusual, even pointing to the 2009 City Council resolution that speaks to it.
The resolution formalized “the policy of the council that all regular meetings, special meetings and workshops will be televised live on RCTV and be recorded for subsequent rebroadcast on RCTV, and for streaming on the Rye City website.”
Drafted by then-Councilman George Pratt, a Democrat, it also stated “when staff is not available, the meetings will be audio taped and made available to the public through the same media as video recorded meetings.”
However, The Rye Sound Shore Review has learned that several members of the press and volunteers with the fire department inquired to the city if the meeting had been taped. And they apparently were told, in the days following the meeting, that footage of it did not exist, fueling speculation that the city tried to suppress the tape.
The current city administration has come under increasing scrutiny amid concerns over transparency and open government. Those pillars were part of the platform that Republican Douglas French ran on successfully during his 2009 mayoral campaign.
Rye Sound Shore
Are you referring to the French Record or the French Connection?
Keep up your blather guys...It's all nonsense...
Is that the same cake that he supplied for your wedding? If you really have nothing to hide, and you are a true supporter of the Mayor, how about using your real name instead of “your blather”? Mayor French stated in his updates “The people of Rye have been very supportive” However, it seems that the only support French is getting is from his neighbors on Meadow Place and I understand even some of those are jumping ship.
WHERE THERE’S SMOKE -
WHERE THERE’S SMOKE -
Mayor French claims all work requiring permits at 13 RICHARD PLACE was done by prior owners and the illegally converted attic is currently not being used as a bedroom.
Yet the sales flyers he provided show that HE apparently converted the heating system from OIL to GAS – with no permits or inspections on file at Rye City Hall.
Now there are few substances on earth more flammable than natural gas. And third floor attic bedrooms without egress windows, sprinkler systems or fire escapes can be downright deadly.
Mayor French told the public last week that unless someone has the will or power to stop him, he’s just going to continue renting that house and push thru the paperwork to absolve himself of everything.
DAD EYES SUIT IN YULE FIRE HORROR – NY Post, today
“After the fire, probers learned that the house had no certificate of occupancy, the smoke-detector system was not hooked up, and the last city inspection of the construction site was early last summer.”
Read More: http://nyp.st/A4Afgw
With the recent tragic loss of 5 lives in a roaring Christmas Day house fire in Stamford CT, anyone sane might question the wisdom of allowing an illegally converted residential attic to serve as a bedroom with no fire escape, sprinklers or egress sized windows.
But if you are the Mayor of The City of Rye New York, jeopardizing the lives of rental property tenants (and potentially firefighters) is apparently no big deal - since records indicate that the Mayor himself secretly made just such an illegal attic conversion over a decade ago - and then rented out the house to the general public, taking in over $50,000 a year with this new attic bedroom featured as a benefit according to MLS records.
And, to add insult to injury, apparently since its Mayor Douglas French's own rental house that has now come under the spotlight, senior Rye City officials have stepped up sharply to his defense by denying that this structure has any violations of state or local building or fire codes at all.
Yet Mayor French's investment property at "13 Richard Place" lays out an entirely different view of the matter - along with much evidence of apparent municipal code wrongdoing by the Mayor. Rye City Manager Scott Pickup and Rye City Corporation Council Kristen Wilson have publicly and repeatedly claimed that the Mayor's rental property at 13 Richard Place has no official notice of violations of local and state building codes.
In the months after the October 18th council meeting, the City of Rye has taken no official action to stop the rental or sale of this illegal home to the public nor has it brought any fines or sanctions on Mayor French for his past illegal and secret construction practices.
In the meantime, as we now all know, the horrific Christmas Day fire that claimed the lives of 5 people, 3 of them small children, in nearby Stamford specifically included a 3rd floor bedroom for the children that played a critical and fatal role in the tragedy. And, as of this writing, the Stamford Building Department is investigating if the house was even legal for occupancy given it's under reconstruction status.
So is Rye's Mayor French - along with Rye City Manager Pickup and Rye City Attorney Wilson - even interested in public safety? Or was just another Rye City cover-up exposed - and the usual public relations damage control is now underway?
If the "Town Supervisor and other members of the highest board in the land of Greenburgh" told you to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you do it?
Does French owe Pickup a lifeline for all he did for him?
http://myryesoundshore.com/index.php?option=com_joomdoc&view=docman&gid=54&task=cat_view&Itemid=65
http://lausdeo10580.typepad.com/
Leo Tolstoy
Russian Writer
RSS feed for comments to this post