Friday, July 11, 2014

Plan Snubs Ecological Questions --- By James Flanigan



From the Times Union, July 11, 2014:

"Several months ago, when representatives of Saratoga Gaming and Raceway first met with town officials to discuss the possibility of locating a casino in East Greenbush, two decisions were made, one of which may eventually prove fatal to their application.

The first decision was to treat the East Greenbush project as an elaborate public relations effort. In this public relations campaign, the firm turned to SKG Knickerbocker, a Washington-based communications firm with a specialty in political campaigns. Not surprisingly, the East Greenbush casino effort bore strong similarities to the political campaigns we are inundated with every fall. Newspaper, TV and radio ads were placed, slick fliers were mailed, lawn signs distributed and news releases were issued, all aimed at giving the project a positive "spin."

The casino strategy also called for downplaying any negative information. This led to the second, and potentially fatal, decision to minimize public input and delay starting review of the project under the State Environmental Quality Review Act.

As the casino proponents may soon learn, the strategies that work in a political campaign for state Legislature are very different from the strategies that are required to convince a skeptical community to accept a large and complex change in their town.

Through the SEQR process, a structure is provided for town officials, developers and members of the community to identify potential environmental impacts, analyze their magnitude and develop plans to mitigate any adverse impacts. However, instead of starting this dialogue between the developers and local citizens, the town board first tried to slip through without public input a generic resolution supporting a casino. When the state rejected this approach, the town board passed a site-specific resolution without even starting the SEQR process.

It is safe to say there are significant environmental issues with the Saratoga Gaming and Raceway proposal. The proposed site for a casino and multi-story hotel is on a parcel over an aquifer, containing federal wetlands, adjacent to a Girl Scout camp, near an elementary school, zoned for low-density residential use and on a narrow residential street that dumps traffic onto an already congested section of state Route 4. Wastewater is planned to be treated at a plant that currently operates under a consent order from the state Department of Environmental Conservation. Converting open fields to parking lots and rooftops will generate storm water that could inundate residences, shopping centers and neighboring communities. Police, fire, EMT and social service agencies can also expect to be impacted.

Saratoga Gaming and Raceway's reaction to all this could be seen in the response by its spokesman, Morgan Hook, to a lawsuit filed by a group of East Greenbush residents over the town board's failure to do a SEQR review of the casino project. Hook, a senior vice president of SKD Knickerbocker and a former press officer for Gov. Eliot Spitzer, displayed an arrogance reminiscent of his former boss as he dismissed the lawsuit as "silly and meritless."

Fortunately, it will be up to the courts, not Hook, to determine the validity of the complex environmental issues in this case and the need for a SEQR review.

Meanwhile, if the State Gaming Facilities Location Board allows the East Greenbush Town Board and Saratoga Gaming and Raceway to get away with replacing the SEQR process with a political-style public relations campaign, they will be reinforcing such behavior and setting a dangerous precedent for future casino projects in our state.

James Flanigan is a former town board member and supervisor in North Greenbush. He lives in Wynantskill."

56 comments:

  1. This is an excellent analysis. I think the Saratoga people were stunned by how quickly members of the Town Board rolled over and they thought this town was there for the taking. Pro-casino people dream of 'silent majorities' but they know the truth. We don't want this thing here and we've proven it. Every summary article about the Capital Region applications points to staunch opposition in East Greenbush. Other places are now starting to kick up a storm but we set the tone and the pace. The obstacles that Jim Flanigan identifies in this piece probably didn't seem insurmountable when the Town Board agreed to conspire in the PR charade but they must seem that way now.

    Have you noticed that the glossy mailers and commercials have stopped? The project's been downsized at least twice already. On submission day, Save East Greenbush got more publicity than Saratoga Casino & Raceway who refused to even comment on their application. The Executive Summary they submitted is sloppy and half-hearted. Now they need an extension on the PDD application because they're not ready. It looks like this project is sinking under the weight of its own excrement. Two months ago I would have predicted we were getting a casino. Now I'm thinking we're not. Has East Greenbush been saved?

    ReplyDelete
  2. On Friday July 11, 2014 the Times Union printed an opinion piece by James Flanigan, former Town Board member and Supervisor in North Greenbush. Mr. Flanigan noted “if the State Gaming Facilities Location Board allows the East Greenbush Town Board and Saratoga Gaming and Raceway to get away with replacing the SEQR process with a political-style public relations campaign, they will be reinforcing such behavior and setting a dangerous precedent…” Interestingly, the SEQR process has not even begun as of this date.

    In a related matter, Feathers and the Town Board had to know that the land on Thompson Hill required a zoning change to allow the construction of a hotel and restaurant, because an R-B zone does not allow such uses. Now, at this late date the Board has before it (possibly on July 16th) an extension of time to file a PDD application because of the required zoning change.

    So in the middle of July, two weeks after casino developer’s submissions are due, this East Greenbush project has yet to begin the required environmental review and it is “discovered” that the Town’s land use plan has to be amended. Does it look to anybody like this might be a candidate for the use of “political leverage” to accomplish the goal, rather than following the law? That’s nothing new around here. Maybe Feathers will attempt to call in some chits from his friend in the Executive Chamber across the river. Wait and see.

    ReplyDelete
  3. SEQR could very well be our new best friend and "OUR" town board's worst enemy. What are they afraid of? If they had nothing to fear they would've done it already and could've saved themselves and Feathers the embarrassment of promoting a casino that may never happen because the land they picked isn't zoned for this kind of development for a reason. How is that sunset looking now, Feathers?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Is it possible that somewhere in the obviously flawed state legislation is a provision that would cut out the possibility of a local agency like the town board having lead agency status ? I seem to remember that possibility being mentioned at a very early board meeting. If so that takes care of any SEQR and zoning issues and does explain why they seem to be a non-issue in the eyes of the town and the developer ??????? How can state approval be given in just a few more months to a project that has not addressed these two major issues ????

    ReplyDelete
  5. This column is an absolute MUST READ!!!

    http://leftatthegate.blogspot.com/2014/07/saturday-morning-casino-news-and-notes.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. We're still waiting for the link, but Fred LeBrun has an excellent column in today's Capital Region section - bottom of the first page - entitled "Minds once lost can be found again." Great quote about East Greenbush......

    ".....It hasn't always brought out the best in local governments. Ask the residents of the town of East Greenbush.

    Pulling an end run around its own citizens to give Capital View Casino developers the town board approval needed for a successful application is bad enough. But it now appears that zoning and master plan hijinks may also be required before the casino site can be approved. It will be instructive, and painful, to watch the contortions the town board is willing to go through to back up its bet, should such hijinks become necessary. When the developers say jump, it's how high."

    So Fred's got your number, Town Board. Feathers is "running you. But you have a chance - again - to put a stop to this mischief. Just say NO.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Weren’t casinos prohibited except on tribal lands or race tracks (racinos) prior to the Constitutional amendment and enactment of the Upstate New York Gaming Economic Development Act?

    Would any zoning law have previously allowed for a casino?

    Did municipalities throughout the state scramble to amend their zoning laws to allow casinos on the hopes that they would be among the chosen four?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe that just about all zoning codes in NYS would not permit casinos, and that's the reason the enabling legislation following Prop 1 overrides prohibitions against casinos in local zoning codes. Gambling establishments are the only venues addressed however. That's why local codes still prevail for other uses. The East Greenbush R-B zone does not allow for hotels or restaurants, and that's the reason Feathers is in a pickle on this one - along with the SEQR environmental review not even being started. As Fred LeBrun says, we'll see what kind of hijinks the Board gets into to try to solve this one.

      Delete
  8. Concerned ResidentJuly 13, 2014 at 2:02 PM

    Excellent blog post!

    ReplyDelete
  9. This town is becoming the laughing stock of the region. Run by the Keystone Kops or the Gang that Couldn't Shoot Straight." No due diligence on mitigation, just a one and a half page letter from the developers with a list of what the casino "expects to contribute." (From the FOIL I picked up on Friday.) And that was before the two subsequent down-sizings of the the project. And then we have SEQR not even begun and some big zoning and master plan issues. Is anybody thinking? Or was it all supposed to be solved under the radar with one big "FIX?" Like somebody suggested to a friend - "by the Governor with his phone or his pen."

    ReplyDelete
  10. Here's the link to Fred LeBrun's article in the TU yesterday:

    http://www.timesunion.com/default/article/Fred-LeBrun-Minds-once-lost-can-be-found-again-5617614.php

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dear Mr. Gilbert:

    When you defend the indefensible you lose credibility. You can rationalize yourself, your actions and everything else to your heart's contentment. Smart, caring, aware people are unconvinced.

    You and your buddy really and truly shot yourselves in the foot with your absolutely disgusting blogs. How about, for a complete change, being open and honest about that? Just like your T-U writings you fooled no one then and you are fooling no one now.

    ReplyDelete
  12. A few weeks ago, in a blog comment, I listed the names of the members of the Planning Board and the Zoning Board, suggesting that as the casino process goes forward they will have their fingerprints on the policy decisions made regarding our community. In the light of Fred LeBrun's article yesterday suggesting that some hijinks might have to be in the works related to zoning and the Town's Master Plan, I think it might be appropriate to list those Planning and Zoning members again. (The lists are taken from each Board's Minutes.)

    Planning Board Members:

    Matt Polsinello, Chairman
    Judy Condo
    Mike Bottillo
    Ralph Viola
    Kelly Sambrook
    Matt Mastin
    Paul DiMascio

    Zoning Board Members:

    Jeff Pangburn, Chairman
    Bob Seward III
    Tom Calamaras
    Joyce Lapham
    Lou Polsinello III
    Domenico Pirrotta

    ReplyDelete
  13. This was written on the Capital View Casino facebook page today:

    "Friends & Supporters - With the executive summaries posted online, our final application has a few revisions. We’ve been getting questions about these so we wanted to share an update with you.

    The plan submitted to the Gaming Commission is a result of a months-long 24/7 research and design process that prioritized community input, including from local businesses. The final proposal remains a $300 million project and will create more permanent jobs than any single Rensselaer County development in decades, resulting in a $39.2 million annual payroll.

    As a result of significant local outreach, we entered into partnerships with existing local hotels and entertainment venues that will lead to cooperation and partnership, rather than cannibalizing local businesses and causing job losses elsewhere. By proposing a 100-room boutique hotel, we’re able to provide a new experience and service that doesn’t already exist locally, which allows us to work in partnership with local operators rather than compete with them.

    We’ve worked hard to be the most open and communicative casino development team in this region and have shared our plans as they developed throughout the research and community outreach phases. This level of transparency meant that local stakeholders were aware of changes as they occurred, and that we were able to refine our proposal to reflect community feedback as we designed the best project for East Greenbush and the region. We firmly believe that the final proposal is the best one for generating increased foot traffic and economic development in this community and region."

    I'm amazed they didn't post a link directing the supporters to the Gaming Commission website so they could read the summary for themselves to see the "pockets of distress" and the actual number of jobs proposed since they didn't mention that above. Then, they could be the open, local, trusted and transparent team that they claim to be.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Can not wait to see what the Town Board will do tonight trying to make it look ok that the casino did not finish it's proper paperwork. Of course they will agree to an extension just like they have agreed to everything else the casino people "Feathers" has wanted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OOOps. Looks like Feathers wants something new today. Last minute change to the agenda, again, and again, and again, and again.

      For the casino? Then I'm sure you are disappointed in Keith Langley who screwed up your deal. Remember this if he is foolish enough to run again.

      Against the casino? Then I am sure you are disappointed in Keith Langley who brought you this deal (even if he couldn't close the deal). Remember this if he is foolish enough to run again.

      Oh, and never forget the behavior of Ed Gilbert during this whole mess.

      Don, I urge all of your readers to remember these people in the candidate selection phase of the political process. I believe it would be unwise to sign a petition for either of these men. Lets strive to have good choices on our ballot on election day.

      Delete
  15. From tonight's town board agenda

    XX-2014 Resolution Authorizing the Signing of a Stipulation of Agreement with
    Capital View Casino and Resort, LLC Extending the Application Deadline for the
    PDD to August 20th 2014

    The applicant has withdrawn their application

    ReplyDelete
  16. Waiting to find out exactly what this means......

    ReplyDelete
  17. Mr. Gilbert:

    I wish I did not have to share this with you but you are the rankest form of a hypocrite.

    If McCabe, O'Brien, Mangold, Malone and any other democrats were doing exactly what you and the republican majority have done, and are doing, you would be crying foul to the high heavens.

    And that, sir, is the perfect, living definition of a hypocrite.

    ReplyDelete
  18. It was painfully obvious tonight that what has been happening with regard to the casino initiative is a bunch of "water carrying" for the Republican establishment in Troy or some local Democrat establishment people who wanted to make a real estate killing. Nobody was listening early on to the realities of the matter - just carrying the political agenda. And these people doing this have created nothing but havoc in the Town.

    It's time to walk away from the people who have done this to us. Feathers and company can go pound sand. Crist and DeFruscio and the Dem entrepreneurs on Thompson Hill have driven a wedge in this community which they should be ashamed of. Langley and Matters and DiMartino and Malone and Mangold should have listened to CONSTITUENTS instead of the machine operatives. But they didn't. Back to Civics class, I'd say.

    Still time to turn this around. Just make sure that the attempted process for SEQR and a zoning revision takes till Hell freezes over. There are plenty of us who are going to make sure that any attempt to fast track an environmental review or a change to the Town's master plan will fail miserably.

    Any attempt to do a political "fix" on this matter will not just have us in opposition. It will have the TU and a whole bunch of well funded casino competitors who will be watching.

    Un-invite these SOB's. We don't need their kind in this town.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And Langley tonight on Channel 13 still stands behind the political mantra. Sorry Keith, you're history.

      Delete
    2. Tom Grant, the elderJuly 17, 2014 at 12:01 PM

      Dear Gadfly,

      Unfortunately, it has become all too typical for Supervisor Langley to speak only to the TV reporters for a quick sound bite either before or after Town Board meetings instead of respectfully sharing his views and taking the time to answer questions posed by his concerned constituents during Town Board meetings.

      While I seldom agree with Ed Gilbert on substantive issues (at least recently) and believe it is inappropriate for him to comment in a partisan manner due to the position he holds as Ethics Chair, he at least is willing to speak in public before the attendees at Board meetings.

      Be well,

      Tom

      Delete
  19. Tom Grant, the elderJuly 17, 2014 at 9:11 AM

    Kudos to Councilperson Mary Ann Matters for her courageous and highly principled decision to remove herself as Town Board liaison to the fatally flawed and politically partisan Ethics Board. You could hear a pin drop in the room as she made her well reasoned remarks.
    Bravo Councilperson Matters! Well done!!

    ReplyDelete
  20. I parrot Tom Grant's comment! Thank you Mary Ann Matters!

    ReplyDelete
  21. At last night’s Town Board meeting I was a witness to Deputy Supervisor Ed Gilbert’s response to a citizen statement regarding the lack of an Audit plan or an Audit in our town. Since Mr. Gilbert is always guaranteed the last word and even a rebuttal by his boss and mentor, Keith Langley, it is difficult to publicly point out the errors in his remarks in the public. I would like to thank the Gadfly for this opportunity to respond on his blog.
    Mr. Gilbert (after a very long sigh) explained that “we’re working on it” in reference to the Audit. Who is included in the “we “? Is it the Town Board? I think not: the Town Board members have requested, with urgency and frequency, to see the financials and it appears that and those requests have fallen on deaf (dumb?) ears. Is the “we” a citizen advisory group, like the CFAC? I think not: the CFAC has not been recognized by the Langley administration and, sadly, the citizens who would like to help create fiscal wellbeing in our town have been disrespected and marginalized. If the “we” is Mr. Gilbert and Mr. Langley, we go right back to the original statement made by the citizen. The process lacks transparency and that is unacceptable. Not good, Mr. Langley, not good.
    Mr. Gilbert further stated that “we” inherited a mess. I would like to point out that Mr. Langley inherited the “mess” two and one half years ago. As a result of his election, Mr. Langley became chief financial officer of the town and has, therefore, been responsible for fixing the “mess” for quite a long while. Mr. Langley himself promised to shed some light on the financials “in a few weeks” when he made a rare comment at the December 2013 Town Board meeting. Shortly thereafter he promised there would be news after a few weeks during a private meeting with a citizen (that news was expected in late January). It is now six months later and questions about the town’s finances are met with scowls and sighs. I also remember that Mr. Gilbert’s erstwhile role as an appointed official in our town began when Mr. Langley appointed Mr. Gilbert to the CFAC. Unfortunately, Mr. Gilbert had only minimal contributions before he stopped attending the CFAC meetings. He seems to prefer secret, back room hijinks, to open, public discussion. Not good, Mr. Langley, not good.
    It is time to address the financial situation in the Town and to do in publically. Anything less is unacceptable.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Way to go, Ann Taylor!!!


    "Good morning Mr. Huber:

    You probably don't remember me. My name is Ann Taylor and I was one of the first to write posts for the East Greenbush blog. Jim Letzeltzer introduced me to it.

    When I penned posts for the blog while I was running for office, you instructed me (as well as Michael Cristo) that we were not permitted to write posts that were political. Eventually, since we were running for office that became impossible. We had a polite disagreement with you and jumped off the Times Union blog and created our own blog.

    That opens and explains my question which is why do you allow Ed Gilbert to write political posts and political comments? He holds a politically appointed and compensated position for the Town of East Greenbush and readily admits it in his post "Pleased To Meet You". Have the blog post writing rules changed and if so, why? I have no ill feelings towards Mr. Gilbert but you and the Times Union were adamant with the "no political blogging rule", so adamant in fact, that it caused Michael and me to part ways with the blog and give birth to our own blog. Mr. Ed Gilbert seems to use the Times Union blog for political writings in the majority of his posts. Please explain why I received a prejudice with this and Mr. Gilbert does not.

    Sincerely,
    Ann Taylor
    East Greenbush resident



    Hello Ms. Taylor.

    I do recall your time blogging with us. So much has changed in East Greenbush since then.

    The East Greenbush blog is going on break for at least a couple weeks while I evaluate whether we seek new writers to keep it online or take it down.

    Sincerely,

    Mike Huber"


    ReplyDelete
  23. So Mike Huber has done the right thing. Your move Supervisor Langley...

    ReplyDelete
  24. Publius is exactly right about Ed Gilbert having the last word at meetings. One of his worst moments was at Ginny O'Brien's last board meeting after 25 years of public service. A number of people, myself included, got up and thanked Ginny for her service. She appointed me to the Board of Ethics and I was very grateful for that. When the residents finished their tributes, Mike O'Brien got up and thanked everyone for being so kind to Ginny on her last night. It was the logical end of the public comment period. But then Ed got up and launched a personal attack on Ginny that was way out of line. You didn't have to agree with Ginny or even like her to know that the civilized thing to do was say thank you and good luck. But not Ed. That night I refused to let him have the last word and I insisted on speaking after him so that the last words Ginny heard on her way out the door weren't all venom and vitriol.

    I applaud Ann Taylor for contacting the TU and I hope they do the right thing. But there is another way: Ed Gilbert should wake up, resign from the Board of Ethics, and learn to talk to town residents with respect. He shouldn't have to be forced, or taken off the blog, he should know to do it because it's the right thing.

    My hat is off to Mary Ann Matters. She brought hope and a new range of possibilities to our town government last night. She showed courage and leadership. It was also the first time I felt like someone was actually listening to the dozens and dozens of people who spoke against the casino. I was a big fan of her husband's when he sat on the board and I could get very used to the Mary Ann we saw last night as well. Change is coming to East Greenbush and it won't be in the form of a casino!

    ReplyDelete
  25. The problem is that the wrong person resigned.

    Time for Ed to do the right thing.

    Pete Stenson

    ReplyDelete
  26. It appears that Capital View Casino & Resort is stuck in a time warp back in 1997 as they posted this on their facebook page today in 2014 from the American Gaming Association website:

    "Good news for local business, restaurants, and workers:

    “When casinos are developed, all aspects of the local food and beverage business increase: the number of establishments increases, the number of people employed increases and payroll increases at an even greater rate than the first two.”
    (“The Effects of Casinos on Local Restaurant Business”, University of New Orleans)"

    The supporters are still falling for the hype and yet I always feel like I have to Google everything they post lately to see where (and when) they get their research and it keeps coming from the same source. If they have to stoop so low to reference information from 17 years ago on their page and after witnessing the town hall meeting last night, I'm getting the impression the dominoes are starting to fall down.

    ReplyDelete
  27. "East Greenbush – The Wrong Place for a Casino

    The intention of the 2013 Upstate Gaming Economic Development Act was “to enhance the financial condition of localities in the State that have suffered from economic hardship.” East Greenbush is a prosperous middle-class community of nearly 17,000 people. It is a good place to raise a family because it is safe, has excellent schools and a strong sense of community.

    Statistics prove the town is not suffering economic hardship, especially in relation to other communities who are bidding for the casino license in the Capital Region. The median household income of $75,986 is nearly double that of Schenectady. East Greenbush has an unemployment rate of 3.5%; in Schenectady it’s 6.3%, in Amsterdam 8.2%. The percentage of persons below the poverty level is 4.1% compared to 22.5% in Schenectady and 24.6% in Amsterdam. The Buffalo Business News listed East Greenbush as the 40th most affluent municipality in Upstate New York. Schenectady ranked 814th.

    The startling contrast between East Greenbush and other potential locales reflects the robust nature of the town’s economy, which stands in contrast to the poor fiscal health of our Town government. Years of mismanagement, the failure to apply generally accepted accounting principles and the Town’s inability to determine its own bottom line do not constitute economic hardship as defined by the Gaming Act. The placement of new casinos is intended to address economic concerns which do not exist here. It is not intended to bail out elected officials who lack vision and have failed to adopt a comprehensive plan for financial recovery despite the humiliation of nearly five years with a municipal bond rating in junk bond status.

    Selection of the Town of East Greenbush as the site for a casino does not fulfill the intent or purpose of the Gaming Act. East Greenbush is not suffering from economic distress, it’s a town whose municipal finances have been mismanaged. The solution to the problem is good government, not the surrender of our community values and secure neighborhoods to the failing casino industry.

    -------- Jack Conway"


    "On Friday July 11, 2014 the Times Union printed an opinion piece by James Flanigan, former Town Board member and Supervisor in North Greenbush. Mr. Flanigan noted “if the State Gaming Facilities Location Board allows the East Greenbush Town Board and Saratoga Gaming and Raceway to get away with replacing the SEQR process with a political-style public relations campaign, they will be reinforcing such behavior and setting a dangerous precedent…” Interestingly, the SEQR process has not even begun as of this date.

    In a related matter, Feathers and the Town Board had to know that the land on Thompson Hill required a zoning change to allow the construction of a hotel and restaurant, because an R-B zone does not allow such uses. Now, at this late date the Board has before it (possibly on July 16th) an extension of time to file a PDD application because of the required zoning change.

    So in the middle of July, two weeks after casino developer’s submissions are due, this East Greenbush project has yet to begin the required environmental review and it is “discovered” that the Town’s land use plan has to be amended. Does it look to anybody like this might be a candidate for the use of “political leverage” to accomplish the goal, rather than following the law? That’s nothing new around here. Maybe Feathers will attempt to call in some chits from his friend in the Executive Chamber across the river. Wait and see.

    --------- Suzanne Aiardo"

    ReplyDelete
  28. Is Mary Ann Matters going to continue to show the courage she showed at our last board meeting, and help block this casino that Langley wants so badly? We need you Council-person Matters don't let us down. Welcome back.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not so sure that Langley and "mini-me" Gilbert really want a casino so badly. Their activities are more akin to following orders from the "machines." There's really not much (if any) independent thought revealed in anything they do. More like following marching orders and mouthing the mantra from the slick brochures. Nobody crunched any numbers to test the claims, did they?

      Perhaps Mary Ann and Deb can re-read their Advertiser pieces from the campaign and return to their platform. That's where the solution to East Greenbush's fiscal problems lies.

      Delete
  29. At this point it is a matter of too little, too late. I doubt we are getting any casino and even if people on the board pull back on it now...they are all done come the next election. All of this ridiculous in-fighting amongst the townspeople can cease. It should have never even been a consideration.

    ReplyDelete
  30. After Wednesday's board meeting, I sensed that MAM is jumping Captain Langley's ship before it submerges completely under the water. She showed gumption we've never seen before. What happened? Will Deb have the gumption to follow her lead and detooth Langley and Eddie Haskell (I mean Gilbert)? What does MAM peeling off and going her own way mean for the town?

    ReplyDelete
  31. I'm starting to get veiled threats from the Republican machine establishment aimed at the independence and courage shown by Mary Ann Matters at the last Board meeting. Like this one from Life Long Republican....."MAM better know how to swim. It's a long way back to shore. Not good for MAM. Not good at all."

    This is consistent with the "total loyalty" mindset promulgated by DeFruscio and Langley for the last two and a half years. A real fascist approach to Party operations. If you want to be on the "inside," do as you're told. It's one of the reasons this casino fiasco got as far as it has. No questions, no independent thinking. That's the way Ed Gilbert operates too.

    I think that Mary Ann Matters may have begun to see the error in this approach to politics. And she and Deb DiMartino did get elected on the basis of what they published as their Platform over several weeks in the Advertiser during the campaign. Langley even signed on. You may remember that I printed a summary of that Platform back in January. Here it is in "This Space Available II" at this link:

    http://eastgreenbushgadfly.blogspot.com/2014_01_01_archive.html

    It would be a game-changer for the better for all of us if they returned to those roots. We could get rid of this casino madness and get down to the business of accountable governance.

    ReplyDelete
  32. There's no doubt that Mary Ann Matters faces a hard road ahead because of the way the 'game' of politics is played in this town but I think she'll be overwhelmed by how much support she'll have moving forward. Through the years I've had several people threaten me but that's just little people playing little games. Mary Ann should realize that she holds all the power on the Town Board now because she's the swing vote. Having one independent member of that board will be good for everyone. We only need four more and next year we can get three in one shot. The best case scenario includes not getting a casino and having a public that will no longer settle for the garbage that passes for political discourse in this town. Two years from now we may point to Mary Ann Matters' declaration of independence as the moment when the fog began to lift.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Looks like MAM woke up and realized that cooperating with the three stooges (Langley, DeF, Gilbert) is NOT the Smart Way Forward. Instead of threatening her they should be talking with her to resolve their differences but that won't happen because they don't compromise, they only dictate and expect two intelligent women to be Bobble-head dolls. They are fools.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I know MAM. She really tried to make it work but she was struggling with the rigidness of the Supr. Whenever she had an idea of her own or disagreed with him, he would send Gilbert to straighten her out. She was treated like a child. If she made the Supr, angry he would stop speaking to her. He can't tolerate disloyalty esp in the form of having a mind of your own. He's very psychologically abusive and controlling. I'm so glad she's away from him now. Now she can use her brain and her best judgment to benefit the town. The Supr was keeping her down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 2:09 PM

      You are SO correct about Langley's need to control. He asked me to be his appointee to the CFAC. But there were conditions:

      No writing on the blogs or The Advertiser or anywhere else.
      No speaking at town board meetings or anywhere else.

      It was like the Bill of Rights had to be suspended to stay in his good graces.

      I won't pretend to try to analyze his behavior. But, to me, it seems to be not the personality well suited to public office and engagement with the very people who elected him.

      Delete
    2. Ray,

      That did not come from Langley, it came from the people or person that controls Langley.

      Delete
    3. Jim, in my one on one dealings with him I have never, ever met a more vulgar, profane, loud and obnoxious individual than Keith Langley.

      When I objected to how he was speaking to me Langley told me that is how he spoke to his friends. I reminded him that I was a taxpayer, citizen, voter, constituent and not a friend.

      In my political beginnings I never imagined the town could be run worse than it had been run under the McCabe administration and the democrat controlled majority.

      Langley, Gilbert, Defruscio, DiMartino and Mary Ann Matter have proven me woefully incorrect.

      I have the deepest respect for my former neighbors - Rick and Mary Ann Matters. I hope that Mary Ann steps up to the leadership level she is perfectly capable of and shows her peers on the town board how to do the right things the right way.

      Delete
  35. What about Deb DiMartino? Is he doing the same thing to her? Let's hope she has the courage to get out too. Who does this guy think he is?

    ReplyDelete
  36. Mary Ann has put her self out there. Now it's time for Rick to get behind her and support her. Rick has always been a good soldier to his party but he has to see the way Langley and Gilbert try to dominate everyone around them. Mary Ann and Debbie have a lot to offer and I think they finally realize it. Mary Ann and Debbie just make your decisions based on what you feel is the best interest of the town. Resist being pushed into doing something you know isn't right. Good luck to the both of you and may God Bless.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Yes, this is America, not a place where women are second class citizens! I also wonder who this guy thinks he is. If MA and Debbi are so important to his need for control then why would he treat them bad? It does explain why he surrounds himself with flunkies like DeF and Gilbert. The guy makes no sense. But good for MA and the rest of us. Let's see what she can do to shake things up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hopefully MA can put a stop to this casino once and for all and send Feathers back to where he came from.

      Delete
  38. MAM and DiMartino took the time to actually speak with their residents after the last meetings. They made it a point to reach out to some people and their concerns and actually talked with us. I can't say anything can make up for them voting yes, but they can make progress now moving forward and make changes for our town.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Tom Grant, the elderJuly 19, 2014 at 9:56 PM

    Dear Gadfly,

    I am not a parliamentary procedure expert by any means, but I believe it is possible that, since both Mary Ann and Deb originally voted in favor of Ed's Ethics Board appointment, they might now be eligible to move and second a superseding motion to reconsider the appointment of Ed Gilbert to the Ethics Board. If that new motion prevailed, Ed's appointment could be rescinded.

    I, of course, defer to the Town's legal team for their opinion on this matter, but it does raise some interesting parliamentary possibilities.

    In any event, Ed should do the right thing and resign his position as a member of the Ethics Board.

    Be well,
    Tom

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But, Tom, I believe that town law states that one of the members of the Ethics Board must be a town employee. So, we can't jettison Gilly until we have someone to replace him. The answer is to change the law so that it is not a requirement for a town employee to sit on the board.

      Delete
    2. Let's hope Mary Ann and Deb consult with outside counsel on a pro bono basis and look into what Tom Grant said. It's worth a shot.

      Delete
    3. Tom Grant, the elderJuly 20, 2014 at 9:55 AM

      Dear 9:17 AM and 9:35 AM,

      Perhaps the pro bono outside counsel might also be willing to look at your proposed amendment to Town Law. Thanks for posting.

      Be well,

      Tom

      Delete
  40. DeFruscio (and Langley) co-opted the reform movement in East Greenbush - for a while. We had successfully discredited the Dem Machine and the McCabe bunch. Unfortunately the Reps (machine types) didn't see the opportunity to begin a new era in EG politics. Well they did some stupid stuff. Experience is after all the best teacher. Machine politics is OVER here. Jimino and Crist thought East Greenbush was ripe for another FEDEX. Just tell them what to do and say. May take a while to learn, but if Mary Ann and Deb, after seven months can cut loose from the losers, perhaps we have a chance.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Ed Gilbert doesn't get it that he has no duties as Depty Supr unless the Supr is unable to perform his duties. That's why Jack couldn't get a description of his duties, becuz he has none! Therefore, by Gilbert throwing his weight around like he does, it's clear that his special job is to be nothing but an irritant to the residents and an embarrassment to the Supr. Everyone seems to know this except the Supr. who pays this guy $3K a year for being nothing but a liability to him. Another brilliant use of tax payer dollars that we won't soon forget.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Thank you Mary Ann! You have shown great courage and self respect! We the citizens are behind you! Thanks again!
    I was out of town and therefore I missed the meeting and that I do regret.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I recently reviewed the FOILed notes regarding the series of half hour meetings that were held with each Town Concil member. As everyone knows, one of the reasons for meeting this way was to avoid the State's open meeting laws. However, there was also a second reason for these meetings; to obtain a commitment of support from each individuals Board member.
    As I re-read the notes, I asked myself as a former Town Board member (of another Town) how I would have voted. I looked at several factors;
    -As a relatively new Board member, I had spent a lot of time dealing with fiscal problems. Now, I was looking at a chance to solve those problems.
    -They were talking about creating thousands of jobs.
    -I was only being told one side of the proposal. Environmental issues were glossed over by Feathers and his p.r. Consultant.
    -We were in competition with several other municipalities in our region.
    -We had to act quickly, the State had a June 30th deadline.
    -I only had 30-45 minutes to make a decision. There was no time to look at the site, read the zoning laws or talk with Town residents.

    Under these circumstances I would probably have said yes and given my support for the project.

    Now, thanks to the bungling incompetence of the casino people, the Town Board will be given a second chance. This time it will be different and much more painful for everybody involved. They will have to apply for a rezoning to B1 or B2. They will have to go through SEQR. There is strong and vocal opposition. The opponents have an attorney who fully understands the issues. There will be no secrecy or back-room deals. The State has established deadlines that will be almost impossible to meet. The chances of getting a casino have dropped from the 60% Feathers predicted to less than 10%. The State Comptroller and bond rating agencies are warning that casinos may be a poor bet.

    I would be asking why put myself and the community through all of this? This time I would say no to a casino.

    ReplyDelete
  44. The Town Board is actually being given a THIRD chance. After they approved the resolution for a casino presentation, NYS said the muni's had to approve site specific resolutions and this Town Board did that. They held a Public Hearing that overwhelmingly proved to be opposed to a casino, there was a Special Mtg that also proved overwhelmingly to be opposed to a casino, there was a Board Mtg that proved to be overwhelmingly opposed to a casino and they still forged ahead with a YES vote the second time and that was after all of the zoning and environmental factors came to light. Now they have a third chance to do the right thing. Hopefully the third time is the charm.

    ReplyDelete