Tuesday, September 30, 2014

The Phantom Majority and What’s Left of Their Casino by Jack Conway



Two illusions predominate the thinking of casino supporters.  The first is that in spite of carefully documented, voluminous evidence to the contrary, they continue to have hallucinations of a ‘silent majority.’  Their second problem is that the casino they support doesn’t really exist anymore.  Willful ignorance has its price and these illusions are the currency of denial required to maintain support for a project based on a corrupt process, an inept Town Board, and the deceit of shysters who will tell you anything in order to tell you nothing.

Save East Greenbush submitted 856 pages of documentation of community opposition to the Gaming Commission.  There were 37 pages of narrative detailing the rationale for opposition, 228 pages of statements of opposition, a copy of the Article 78 lawsuit filed to annul the resolution of support (and amended to include a cause of action against Sue Mangold for conflict of interest), and, most importantly, a petition with 3,058 signatures.  This documentation was collected by hundreds of East Greenbush volunteers who gave of their own time, talent and money.  Despite efforts to disinform the public, none of this work was funded by outside entities, and in answer to Mr. Featherstonhaugh, not a single ‘Save person’ is from Saratoga.

Saratoga Casino & Raceway submitted 49 pages of documentation of community support.  There were 19 pages of statements of support and a petition with 678 signatures.  This, despite three glossy mailers, radio and TV ads, fraudulent public presentations, provision of free yard signs to supporters, and the support of both political machines in town.  The petitions were sent to Julie Miner of Saratoga C & R so anyone interested in where outside funding is coming from regarding this project has to look no further.  No funding yielded 3,058 signatures, unlimited funding 678.  But Ed Gilbert talks to residents every day and he can tell you they support the casino.  This is a phantom majority, not a silent one.  The truth is that a significant and growing majority of town residents oppose the casino.

Then there’s the question of the ever-shrinking project that this non-existent majority supports. In its original form, it featured a 300-room resort style hotel, a full complement of exciting dining options including fine dining, casual dining and buffets, multiple entertainment venues including a 1,700 seat entertainment space, 20,000 square feet of high-end retail and convenient parking, including two covered parking structures and surface lots.  Initial estimates projected 1,700 permanent jobs and 1,700 construction jobs.  This is the project that the Town Board voted to support. 

Unfortunately, these numbers have the same claim to truth as the notion that a majority of residents support the casino.  The 300-room resort hotel is now a 100-room three star boutique-style hotel.  20,000 square feet of high-end retail has been reduced to a 500 square foot Thruway-style gift shop.  One of the two covered parking structures is gone.  The 1,700 seat entertainment space is now a Special Events Hall that can seat 500 people. The multiple fine dining options have been reduced to single steak house.  The promise of 1,700 permanent and 1,700 construction jobs is now “approximately 1,000 permanent” and 825 construction jobs.  Since we know these numbers were massively inflated to begin with, there’s no reason not to assume the same now.

To summarize, the project has seen reductions of 67% in the number of hotel rooms, 41.2% in the number of permanent jobs, 51.5% in the number of construction jobs, 70.5% in seats in the entertainment venue, 50% in the number of covered parking structures, and an extraordinary 97.5% in retail space.  The golf course is gone.  This isn’t the world class destination resort sold to the Town Board, it’s a glorified racino with intractable zoning and environmental problems. 

It’s impossible to trust the anecdotal disinformation spewed by apologists trying to salvage the reputation of people whom they trusted to act in the public interest but failed to do so.  Casino developers are liars by definition.  But elected officials have an obligation to seek the truth and not pretend that this project is intact or that the sycophantic whining of their court followers is a valid measure of community support.

54 comments:

  1. Any response Supervisor Langley??

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mr.Conway: Thank you to you and all the Gadflies- past, present and future.

    For the last 8 years or so the Gadflies have forced accountability . And those same Gadflies have done so in a completely non partisan manner. Commendable!

    Every single resident and taxpayer of East Greenbush owes a deep appreciation for what the Gadflies have accomplished in the face of pressure, ridicule and intolerance from the entire spectrum of pure juvenile delinquents who claim to be our town board - past and present.

    ReplyDelete
  3. After seeing all the numbers it is logical that when the projected earnings have stayed the same there is one big lie that has not been corrected. It does not take a rocket scientist to know that the number the developers are claiming is patently false.

    ReplyDelete
  4. From the Troy Record.....

    RESIDENT GROUP ATTORNEY IN LETTER TO GAMING COMMISSION: REJECT CAPITAL VIEW; EAST GREENBUSH RESIDENTS ARE "UNEQUIVOCALLY OPPOSED"

    East Greenbush, NY (September 30, 2014). In written comments submitted yesterday to the Gaming Commission Facility Location Board, Save East Greenbush attorney Jeff Meyer states in no uncertain terms why the Capital View application should be “summarily rejected from consideration.”

    "It is evident that East Greenbush residents are unequivocally opposed to the siting of this team's casino on Thompson Hill Road," said Meyer. "It should be remembered that the residents of Saratoga Springs rejected this team, as well. Clearly these developers have had not a few missteps in their bid for a license in the Capital Region."

    Meyer delineates further reasons for rejecting the Capital View application, including but not limited to: incompliance with local zoning and intended land use; impossibility of necessary infrastructure improvements; violation of the intent of the Upstate Gaming Act to locate a gaming facility in a host community in financial need; and standing litigation regarding the Town Board resolution of support. Additionally, Meyer scrutinizes Capital View’s market analysis.

    Meyer: “The market analysis required in the Application was supposed to detail the recapture rate of gaming related spending by existing residents traveling to an out-of-state facility. The analysis and materials presented instead focus on maintaining existing video gaming revenue and preserving the profitability of the Saratoga Racino. Throughout the licensing process we have been inundated with propaganda on how the market is not saturated and the region can support multiple casinos, yet they constantly argue for their Capital View Casino based on the potential negative impacts to their existing business. Capital View Casino as proposed is simply another Saratoga Racino filled with video gaming machines. It is designed to keep the existing racino gamblers residing in the Albany area from frequenting a more convenient location.

    “The Applicant should not be able to use the cannibalization argument as both a shield and a sword. If the market is not saturated, then Saratoga Racino should be able to remain profitable no matter where or to whom a gaming license is ultimately issued. They will have the opportunity to negotiate and structure agreements with any operator to further their own business interests. As they like to say, let the market decide, not the Gaming Commission through approving a local monopoly on gaming facilities.”

    ReplyDelete
  5. As always, thank you Jack for the great words and analysis.

    Bonnie K.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thank you Jeff Meyer, Jack Conway and Gadfly for giving truthful, intelligent, factual arguments as to why a casino should not be in our town. There defiantly appears to be a sinister side in the political/developers-gambling realm that is trying it's damest to attach itself to our town. WE WON'T HAVE IT! Bonnie L.

    ReplyDelete
  7. And now the latest smoke and mirrors ad proclaims the partnership of Capital View with various arts and theatre venues in the Capital District. Reasons: to keep Capital View from competing with them and promote these various arts and entertainment venues to Capital View customers. First off, consider the list - among them - Albany Institute of History and Art, Times Union Center, Albany Symphony Orchestra, Troy Music Hall. All are different in size from Capital View and do not provide the type of programming Capital View would likely have. Their ability to draw any quality entertainment is questionable. Ever been to Vapors? A 500 seat theatre cannot compete with the Times Union Center.Their offer to advertise and promote these venues to Capital View customers is beyond hilarious. I would like to see a study of the average gambler's cultural interests. I doubt the advertising would draw a large group of customers to the Symphony, Modern Dance or Ballet Programs or art exhibits. Who are they kidding? Illusion and carefully worded promises full of air. I can't believe they are still insulting our community with such blathering. Make it stop!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jack great piece!!!
    I still can't believe that certain people are still in favor of this, what a joke people wake up.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Please read Elizabeth Wade's letter in the Advertiser tomorrow morning. It makes some strong points for supporting the legal efforts of Save East Greenbush. The fact is that much of the victory which will be ours if we persist will rest with litigation activities. That means we have bills to pay. As Elizabeth points out, we have been passing the hat. We need to pass the hat to a broader group - like all those who gave Jeff Meyer the ovation last week at the ZBA meeting. Everyone who is benefiting from stopping this casino fiasco should be making a contribution to the legal effort. I have printed Jeff Meyer's first letter to the ZBA, and there's another one which I will put up soon. Please help us in this effort. The future of our community depends on it. If we don't win this, East Greenbush will be a "company town" run by casino interests. Think West Virginia coal..... Our town administration has demonstrated that it lacks the intelligence to look out for our interests. They sold out months ago.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This casino fiasco is the product of a conspiracy between political insiders and financial interests and was foisted on East Greenbush in secret. Nobody asked the people. Nothing but imperialistic BS by politicians and supposed "shot-callers." We need to show them the door. Please help with the legal action activities.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This casino is looking more and more like "Bingo City 2.0!" Wouldn't be surprised if it ended up shutting down the same way...

    ReplyDelete
  12. Suzanne, all the casinos signed an agreement with the theatre group. It was only after the public comment section did the capital view agree to it. At the time of the comment period Philip Morris the head of the theatre group rightly stated that Capital View did not sign the agreements. All the other groups agreed to not interfere with the theatre group long before the comment section. It was to save the theatre group, but Featherstone chose not to do it till late in the game. Made him look very bad. In fact he was one of two in NY state that chose to not sign the agreements.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This is the statement from Mary Ann Matters at the Special Board Meeting called to receive the Supervisor's Tentative Budget:

    "I’d like to bring to your attention the fact that the town’s persistent failure to have had its personnel roster and payroll certified for 2014 by the Rensselaer County Civil Service Commission may have an impact on the 2015 adopted budget. The certitude of budgetary expenditures related to personal services assumes that ALL positions are properly established, classified, salaried, and filled; however, without appropriate action by civil service, such certitude is not possible. As a result, it would be irresponsible to make a budgetary commitment that was related to such expenditures. Inasmuch as the 2015 tentative budget is predicated upon existing town positions and corresponding payroll as being copacetic in all respects, it is absolutely imperative that we seek civil-service certification of the town payroll as soon as possible, and this needs to be made a top priority.

    Additionally, the unveiling of the tentative budget today brings a general sense of uneasiness that is easy for many to understand. In a November 2, 2013 blog post, just days before the last election, Jack Conway said “We need a town board that acknowledges our problems and resolves to take firm action to address them even if it proves unpopular with their base,” but after nine months into 2014, are we that board? I’m asking because it scares the heck out of me that most of us at this table this afternoon don’t know what we don’t know. We’re like pilots with no instrument training. We’re flying but where are we? Are we doing okay or are we about to crash into the side of a mountain of trouble where paid for but non-existant audit reports, the current state of the town’s finances, and little or no adherence to civil services laws, rules, and regulations are concerned. In short, most of us at this table have nothing, certainly not in the way of numbers or reports, on which to base a decision regarding this budget in the millions of dollars despite repeated requests from the residents, board meeting after board meeting, for this information. I, for one, feel like I’m flying blind. In that same 2013 blog post, Don Johnson said, “I’m concerned that there is a real possibility for the “same old, same old” if the majority changes.” As much as I hate to admit it, I’ve come to be concerned about that, too."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately, Langley and DeFruscio somehow thought governing a municipality was the same as running a patronage/cronyism operation. Remember how important it was to be seen as "driving the bus?" Well Chris, the bus just crashed. You and Crist need to retire.

      Delete
  14. Tom Grant, the elderOctober 2, 2014 at 6:33 PM

    Dear Gadfly 5:41 PM:
    And most telling, there was no response at all from Supervisor Langley to Councilperson Matters' trenchant statement. After the meeting was adjourned, Mr. Langley quickly left the room without answering any questions from the general public.
    Kudos to Councilpersons Mangold and Matters!! They stayed after the meeting and took the time to talk to their constituents regarding a number of concerns. They provided a clear and welcome contrast to the Supervisor's "drop and dash" approach to governance.
    All the best,
    Tom

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And Tom, they could have had it all....if they had listened and watched what was going on around them. (Failure to integrate data, I'd say.) The previous administration collapsed just because of the kinds of things that Langley/DeFruscio are sponsoring now. And it's not that they didn't have the material and fair warning. The stack of OSC reports on the Town (and Bruen too) still have to be addressed in a meaningful way. So the guidance to success was there. But driving the bus into patronage and cronyism again was more important to them. So be it. They just became prime targets for the casino interests who were looking for a bunch they could fool.

      Delete
  15. Just heard a great comment from Chris Matthews. The success of FDR, JFK and Ronny Reagan was tied to the fact that in their administrations they made sure that "everybody in the room was smarter than they were." That's the key guys. Riding around in a "mutual admiration society" truck is not the answer to governing even a small town.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Gadfly, Langley shut the meeting down so fast, you'd think the building was on fire. I thought the public could speak at special meetings, am I wrong? Was this meeting an exception? A good response from Supervisor Langley could have been, I'll get right on it Mary Ann. Oh yes, I just remembered, if you become an independent thinker, your voice is no longer needed. Gadflies, collectively our voices represent the best interest of our town. Elizabeth and Don, I am so on board to do my best to raise the finances needed to win this thing in the courts if needed. I urge my teacher friends (lurkers) to give a generous donation to save our town from the casino bosses. Please see SAVEEASTGREENBUSH.COM for details. Bonnie L.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Somebody has to say it: since they proposed a budget with no tax increase how can it be that we so desperately need the revenue from a casino?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jack, I think the town board remains completely clueless when it comes to the town's finances. So the no tax increase proposal is no more or less valid than any of the prior budgets.

      A budget has to start will a crystal clear understanding of the state of the town's finances. And that, amazingly, remains impossible after so much time, an OSC audit, tens of thousands of our money given to public accountants who knows what other shenanigans.

      The town, very sadly, is a joke. Langley is deeply incompetent. The town board is witless, clueless and almost as equally incompetent.

      People are starting to catch on. That's the silver lining. Decent candidates next year and things could improve rapidly.

      Delete
    2. But don't we ALWAYS say that "Decent candidates next year and things could improve rapidly." But it never happens, does it? No wonder so many people don't vote. They figure ALL politicians are corrupt, so they stay home. The SWF ran a flawless campaign last year. Many people were eager to get to the polls to vote for them, eager for positive change, but even THEY didn't know what they were up against with this Supervisor and his crew of opportunistic political misfits. It's truly a shame.

      Delete
  18. Another one of the businesses Larry Davis supports.... http://www.bizjournals.com/albany/morning_call/2014/10/new-owners-will-keep-dicarlos-gentlemens-club-in.html?utm_campaign=Feed%3A+bizj_albany+%28Business+Review+of+Albany%29&utm_medium=feed&utm_source=feedburner

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Since the casino has an option on Larry Davis' property on Thompson Hill, do you think that Feathers will enter into an agreement with DiCarlo's for show stuff?

      Delete
    2. Did you hear him speak at the public comment session? If not check him out in the early morning session and was the first to speak in favor of the casino. Interestingly he's not a resident, he even stated in April that he didnt know who would want to live near a casino. I digress, check him out. Not as powerful as Gilbert's adolescent temper tantrum, but hedidn't have one intellectual comment about why the casino is good for our town. He called us less impressive names, called us my personal favorite "NIMBYS".

      Delete
    3. Wonder if the Cap View 500sq ft retail shop will sell tassels and pasties?

      Delete
  19. My apologies regarding my previous post. My plea goes out to all staff members in the EG Educational System. Donating is a small price to pay, to keep our quality of life out of the hands of the casino bosses. Urge your co workers, friends and family members to give generously. It's still our town and let's keep it that way. Bonnie L.

    ReplyDelete
  20. All the same stuff they spoke against which caused people to vote out their predecessors, has now become their common place with them and ultimately will lead to their demise. I have stated here before and will do the same now there is no way I would ever waste my vote on Langley again! I don't care if Mickey Mouse runs against him, Mickey will get my vote. Yes I am just one vote of many, but I am one of many that thought making a change would be good in this town. It now appears another change is needed.

    ReplyDelete
  21. In the absence of payroll certification a mere 2xs per year, the RC Civil Service Commission, which is an arm of the NYS Civil Service Department, does NOT recognize the existence of the employees on the town payroll. This means that every paycheck the supervisor signs is effectively illegal. As such, every town employee should be VERY concerned that they are at risk of losing their jobs when the Commission drops the hammer on Langley and demands that every employee and position be classified and certified POST hiring. This supervisor is irresponsible because he refuses to accept that he is working now for GOVERNMENT, not the private sector. Town hall is NOT Lord Langley's kingdom and he is NOT the KING of East Greenbush! Ms. Matters opened up a can of whoop ass today in front of a TU reporter that will demonstrate that if Langley can't competently run a small town, how can he run a casino town? If he can't handle the basic functions of his office, how will he be able to deal with it when casino bosses get in his face and demand a smartly and efficiently run town so that THEY won't have to pay for the damages caused by his laziness and lack of attention to detail. Clearly, EG should be passed over for a casino project that will prove to be administratively overwhelming to this supervisor in record time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But didn't Chris (who is the repository of everything (look it up Chris)) tell him that everything was OK?? Langley's got a big legal problem on his hands now, as a result of the guidance of DeFruscio. Might be a lesson Keith - can you hear me now?

      Delete
    2. Why don't you just give it up now and save our community from this joke. You'd look a lot better for it.

      Delete
  22. Langley wants to run town hall like DeF ran is used car dealorship...INTO THE GROUND! Langley is so much into the politics, and riding around in the truck looking for loyal followers, that he can't find the time to run the town! Imagine ignoring payroll certification! If I was an employee of the town, I'd be pissed.

    ReplyDelete
  23. In order to improve things in this town, a good place to start is going to have to be a tone down the rhetoric and back biting on the blogs. They yield nothing productive.

    It is apparent that Mr. Langley has his style of management and for the time being, we need to accept that it is a my way or the highway style. Keep in mind that the same mentality was omnipresent in the prior administration and anyone thinking that a "change" will yield different results is sadly mistaken.

    In order to start to repair this town, it is going to take candidates with the guts to build a coalition with existing board members and pledge to adhere to certain goals and expectations that are required to improve our financial conditions. Adhering to state municipal law should not be a problem for any board member or candidate.

    The casino issue will be decided either very soon or shortly after the election. The notion that this state would summarily dismiss zoning regulations or presume to predict what the courts are destined to settle is absurd. The ability to site the casino won't be decided until long after the decision is made, which in essence takes EG out of the race. If the Governor himself wants to bless this project, it will haunt him for the rest of his political career, especially if the courts tell him he can't put it here after he grants it.

    Mrs. Matters is doing just fine on her own and seems to be executing her duties responsibly. Perhaps there was a day early on when the casino looked attractive. In the face of opposition, competing proposals and industry statistics that have been made public, the responsible thing to do is react accordingly. The number one problem of politicians at all levels is that they refuse to admit when they are wrong, change course or do away with a failed proposal or program. Mr. Langley and Mr. Malone will likely pay a price for their steadfast support of this project and that day will come. In the meanwhile, it is in everyone's interest to offer productive ideas rather than personal attacks. if it is ignored, ask the next group of candidates to openly pledge to embrace those ideas and vote for them regardless of party. litigation won't heal this town, nor will a return of the old guard. Only an agreement we can hold them to will benefit this town.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately friend, litigation just may be necessary to stop what the ill-advised leadership is trying to do even as we write. Take the effort with the ZBA for example. They want to make the zoning law say what it doesn't say. If they get away with it, we have a problem. We can't wait for the next election to settle what Feathers wants to do with Thompson Hill.

      Delete
  24. Anonymous 7:48 nailed it! Langley is doing the same thing McCabe did, even if he doesn't say it the same way, or anything at all. It used to be, "that's the way it's always been done" was why things were done the way they were. Problem is, if they were always done wrong, when does it get fixed. We need people who are willing to review every policy and practice with a competent team and check to make sure it follows legal guidelines. Seems like MAM is on the right track and it may be a big problem for Keith, Chris and any republican who didn't participate in fixing things the deems neglected for way too long. They used to call Town hall a country club. Now it's like a prison. Neither one benefit residents or the future of this town!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Here's a question. It seems Ed Gilbert, on behalf of Keith, is doubling down on the rhetoric on the benefits the casino will bring, over on his fantasy blog, (incidentally, it was Ed who tried to throw the dogs off the trail blaming Jim L. for running it on the talks blog. Ed doesn't realize that his own people exposed him and he just looks like a moron. It will bite him publicly in due time.)

    So here's the question. Have any of these guys even given a thought to what they will do if they DON'T get the casino? The presumed arrogance of assuming a victory in the face of overwhelming opposition, to the point where they don't even acknowledge the opposition is just mind numbing. It's one thing to be confident, but to be so confident as to have your conduct totally ignore the process and/or the requirements of it promises greater disappointment than winning promises benefits. Maybe Ed should spend less time writing comments to his own blog and really do Keith a favor and start advising him on what to do if they DON'T get a casino. Wait til Jim L. finds out Ed threw him under the bus. FYI guys, this isn't a game… it's a business, try treating it like one.

    ReplyDelete
  26. speaking of what to do if the casiNO does'nt happen,did anyone see the unpaid tax levies in Wed.Oct.1 TimesUnion?They add up to roughly $768,381. Is anything being done about this?Can anything be done about this?Intresting to note:that some of the names have strong ties to the town.I.E-Assini,Corellis(Tommy),Maney(Patrick)-also intresting to note that some of the names are repeatedly on this list.So heres something the SWF(SlitheringWhileFaultering) can get to work on.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I so agree with 10/2 @ 10:59 a.m. Good stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  28. This is the best blog of the three. Not so much mean stuff and blah, blah, blah. It's much more informative and though provoking. Thankfully, a loyal reader.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Agreeing with 10/2 @ 10:59 am as well. That being said the rhetoric on the blogs should not be a concern for the Board members. Heck--Supervisor Keith Langley said he doesn't read the blogs. No politician is ever going to be 100% popular. Even Ronald Reagan had a few in the crowd that were displeased with him.

    Mary Ann is certainly cutting her own path. She is showing leadership in the face of adversity which is shown by her very own colleagues. When your colleagues are very publicly and obviously trying to degrade you via a blog and when your colleagues, who were supposed to be your supporters, try to defame you via a blog, as distracting as that may be, it is not deterring Mary Ann from doing what is right and from doing the job for which we, the taxpayers, compensate her for. The nasty blog rhetoric is certainly not stopping Mary Ann and the more they write, the more hurdles she clears. Quite honestly, that blog is turning Mary Ann into a modern day, local political martyr. Good for you Mary Ann!

    Sitting and accepting Supervisor Keith Langley's style of management seems very much what a dictator style of leadership is seeking from the public. While Anon 10/2 @10:59 PM is correct that we are stuck with his style of leadership for awhile they should keep in mind that we, the taxpayers, most certainly do NOT have to accept it. Exposing that horrendous style of "leadership" is exactly what taxpayers should be doing, through FOILs and blogs and media reports. Advsing the public to "Accept" a deplorable "leadership" or governing style is simply plain wrong and quite unAmerican. Exposing the wrongs will help oust the Supervisor next November and sometimes it takes every it of a year to expose the wrongdoing and "drip" the information onto the constituents.

    The prior administration was not quite the same as the current administration; on that point we disagree. Rick McCabe DID address residents' concerns at Board meetings. Rick McCabe DID request department heads present and on the dais during Board Meetings. Those 2 factors alone make the prior administration very different from the current administration. Please understand I did not agree or condone many of the acts of the prior administration but, I give credit where credit is due and Rick McCabe, as well as supervisors prior to Rick, were much more open to the public's inquiries. At least they allowed and addressed questions. You may not have liked the answer but you were given an answer.

    As far as what it takes to repair this Town---it takes a whole lot more than candidates with guts to work with Board members and adhere to certain goals and expectations that are required to heal this Town. Believe it or not, we had that, a couple of times. We had candidates that were much more altruistic compared to what we have now and people rejected them. The majority of voters voted for what we currently have...some have be re-elected by a majority which means voters have seen their work and STILL voted for them a second time. I would volley that we need to continually inform the public as to what the current administration is doing. Continually exposing Supervisor Keith Langley for his blatantly disregards such as the payroll certification and additional staffing nepotism style, are the actions we need to take. "Accepting" his style flies in the face of opposing him and we, as EG taxpayers cannot afford to take that fall because we may not be able to get up.

    The casino---again we agree; I, as you, do not believe the casino will be sited in EG. That being said, do we really want to take the chance that the Gov will do the right thing because of perceived political ambitions? Doubt it. Crazy things happen because of political ambitions and a casino sited in EG would not be the strangest thing to happen and it would not be the darkest blemish to see a politician cover up and then move ahead in their political career.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The conversation between Anonymous 10:59 and Anonymous 1:20 is one of the best I've seen on an East Greenbush blog. Taken in tandem, they give great hope that a conversation is emerging that can help steer us out of the darkness by bringing good ideas back to the forefront of political debate in our town. As long as politics is about personalities little attention is paid to the substance of our problems and potential solutions for solving them. The agenda behind the name calling on blogs is to make sure everything stays personal so no one notices that neither side is actually proposing policies to change the course of events for the better.

    When Mr. Langley began in office I had a number of excellent, substantive conversations with him about what he hoped to achieve. It seemed to me he had two primary goals: (1) reduce the massive debt he inherited, and (2) get himself re-elected. He knew these were related goals, figuring that eliminating the debt would likely get him re-elected. Looking at the preliminary budget submitted yesterday it's possible to argue that he has taken positive steps to reduce the debt and that the fiscal condition of the town is better than we have been led to believe. This raises a number of serious question but two are foremost in my mind: why is he being perceived as a failure as supervisor and why did he go all in on the casino without knowing much about it?

    The answer to the first question - why is he perceived as a poor Supervisor? - has a lot to do with secrecy and lack of confidence. The special meetings, sneaking an entire Board of Ethics and a casino past us without public input, a refusal to discuss the audit situation, making minority board members FOIL for information, not answering questions or even offering an explanation for his casino vote, etc have made his the most secretive administration in memory. There is no transparency, responsiveness or accountability in his actions and the public is rightfully unhappy about this. It also raises the possibility that he's not addressing the audit issue because he knows things are much better than he's been saying and he's hoping to unveil that as his election strategy next summer and fall.

    Related to this is the $64,000 question of why he jumped on the casino bandwagon. I know there are deep and dark conspiracy theories that he either got paid or played but I think it was something else. I think he truly believed the revenue projections of the developers and in them saw the realization of his twin goals of eliminating the debt and getting re-elected. He truly believed that a revenue windfall on top of an improving fiscal situation would make him unbeatable in next year's election. And, in fairness to the man, it would help him achieve his sincere desire to turn the town's finances around.

    What he wasn't prepared for were the contradictions in his approach. Secrecy leads to distrust and a belief that he's hiding something. Failures on the subject of ethics lead to a belief that he's not governing properly. Lack of accountability looks like arrogance and/or indifference. Refusal to answer questions or provide reasons for his decisions makes him look unprepared and uninformed. And worst of all, if the town is in better shape than we thought the entire rationale for needing a casino goes out the window. It's his process that has cost him his credibility. As Tom Grant says, if people trust that there was a good process, they will usually get behind the decision it yields. The converse is true as well: if people don't trust the process they will never get behind the decision. For a large and growing number of people, the indefensible process behind the casino decision discredited Keith Langley permanently and no amount of good fiscal news can save him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jack, excellent post. Personally, I believe that Mr. Langley's motivation is more self-aggrandizement and or self-enrichment but, men and women of good will can disagree on how we got here and agree on what to do next.
      The pressure must be kept on the Supervisor and the Town Board and good candidates must be on the slate for all three positions in 2015.

      I would also like to caution citizens that the figures from this administration can only be trusted when they have been verified..

      The last caution I posted on this blog was to vote for Cheryl Vallee. My caution was based on the pledge SWF made to follow Keith Langley and support his positions. Folks chose to go in the direction of SWF and, in the first six months of this year we saw what that got us.

      Please do not follow the assertions in this budget on blind faith. Heck, with no fiscal reports we have no idea if this guy is making any attempt to follow the current budget.

      Delete
    2. Jack: Langley's history is fascinating. He not so much won his last election as McCabe lost. Langley then spent two full years doing nothing but whine about not having a majority.

      Voter gave him a majority last year. He, and the new majority then did EXACTLY what the previous majority did in terms of nepotism and patronage. Langley, to this very day, will not address himself to the question of the impact of the 2014 organizational meeting on town expenses. Did those expense go up? Stay the same? Or go down?

      Transparency, communications, openness, honesty, good decisions made in a businesslike manner and implemented properly have, very arguably, gotten MUCH worse under Langley's so called leadership.

      The two blogs managed by Langley associates are simply the nastiest most purely evil we have ever seen.

      Langley, Gilbert and DeFruscio act like overgrown juvenile delinquents. Truly.

      And Langley wonders why things are going like they are.

      Delete
    3. Keith Langley has done a wonderful job with his SWF majority. Each person has been pulling together for the betterment of all the people of East Greenbush in an open and respectful way. The Town has made great strides forward under Keith's leadership. Keep up the great work Keith, Deb and Mary Ann!

      Delete
  31. A good government should never be built on trust because trust needs to be collateralized and since we are a government of the people, one individual can never back the trust of people with blind faith alone. It is only through an honest and open conversation that we can accept and verify, not trust. If you're willing to show me the facts and all the information, I have no need to trust you. Trust is something people do in private, we don't vote for people in public positions to trust them, we elect them to lead. If trust is to exist in government at all, it must be a two way street and our elected officials need to trust the public to accept and understand the argument they make. They don't need to convince all of us, just the majority. Then they have to trust history with their legacy.

    ReplyDelete
  32. As President Reagan said "doveryai no proveryai" ... trust, but verify.

    We trust people every day but are prepared to react if they betray that trust, i.e. we trust that the drivers entering a roundabout will yield to those already in it ... but are prepared to brake or steer around them if they do not.

    We trust that the candidates we elect will behave and vote responsibly for what's best for the town and the people. Votes and actions should be explained by our elected officials ... this is openness and accountability.

    Leaders make decisions every day that the general public may not be aware of ... we trust they will do the right thing.

    Trust and leadership are not mutually exclusive but inseparable ... a trusted leader will be followed.

    Pete Stenson

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All excellent points!

      I'll leave this for you all on this rainy Saturday: "The Declaration of Independence says when government fails, the people have the right to replace it. Well, New York State government has failed and the people have the right, indeed the people have the the people have the obligation, to act." ---Andrew Cuomo

      Interesting given the source! This group and all of those who have dedicated their time in writing the town board and attending meetings over the last few months have helped bring change to EG. People think all we are fighting is a casino, but it's much more than that. Congrats on bringing change to EG and for pushing. A special thanks has to go to Mary Ann for being the first brave town board member we've seen in a long time, and it comes at one of the most important times in EG history. Sue is showing some courage as well. Keep up the fight!

      Delete
  33. Cara Benson posted the comment below on FaceBook about a recent experience with OUR library. You can see how much "insider politics" calls the shots around here. Do we need a change in government at the library too? Good grief!!

    "Friends. I know you know. But let me just tell you one experience of late with how thoroughly money is imbricated into the fabric of our society. A grassroots organization, let's just say you know the one, was able to reserve rooms and have a space at our local PUBLIC library is now not able to do this any longer. You know why? The Board President got a "complaint" (threat) and "politics" and "budgets passing" were the words mentioned. Our library. Where ideas and education and discussion is purportedly the reason for being.

    My plan today is to hand out flyers in front of the local supermarket. Everybody gotta eat. And to suppression of speech I say oh hell no. If this market asks me to move on, I'll go to the next one. And then the corner. And then the freeway. Hell no. Oh just hell no. (Alright, I'm not going to hand out flyers on the freeway, but I did put a sign up in an underpass late last night as traffic was zooming overhead.)"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here's a little glimpse of what "casino imperialism" will look like if that fiasco happens here. We'll be a "company town." Think coal in West Virginia. You'll owe your mind and soul to the company store. Is the Library Board afraid of "what it will look like" if people opposed to the casino initiative meet in that public building?

      Delete
    2. Here's a comment from Daniel Curtis on this matter from FaceBook:

      "We have policies set forth by the Board of Trustees explicitly preventing this kind of censorship at Albany Public Library.

      Censoring content is a violation of the core philosophy of public libraries...

      You should talk to other Board Members and demand that they stand up for you. And...run better board members to unseat them if they won't."

      Delete
  34. Not good East Greenbush, not good. Even under a microscope our town keeps digging their grave. Let's not forget the fundraiser when the town said all of the parks were booked. Except throughout the day Onderdonk Park was booked only by the geese.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I always say everything happens for a reason. All the trouble, all the controversy in EG has produced a show of resident activism like we haven't seen in, well, ever! Citizens aren't just listening, they are participating, raising up their voices, speaking to one another, gathering and getting involved. I can guarantee you that no one wishes s/he was in Keith Langley's shoes right now because his every move is under the scrutiny of the town. We have been attacked nay assaulted by an autocratic leader who foisted a gambling casino on us without caring one wit if we liked it or not. Like a stern parent, the reason in his mind for the casino is 'because I said so!' There is no place for autocracy in America. Brave men and women fought and died for democracy. We owe it to them to practice it. We must all join forces, lock arms, and dig deep to help pay the lawyer who is fighting this FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US in court. He will save the day for us. We WILL save our town!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your comment!! You're absolutely right about the SEG attorney fighting for ALL of us. In this connection, if the Zoning Board decides to "interpret" the Town's zoning law to say what it doesn't say by granting the casino developer's request for such an interpretation, this too will have to be challenged in court. And we'd have a winnable case. But that costs money. We've been passing the hat so far. But this is getting expensive and we're up against some deep pocket gamblers.

      If every one who signed the petition against an East Greenbush casino would contribute $25, we'd be well on the way to clipping Feathers' feathers. This is NOT going to be a "casino company" town. Help us win the fight. This is really a David v. Goliath battle. Remember in the FOIL'd notes that the developers gloated that fighting them in court would too expensive to sustain? Well I'll repeat what Bonnie L. reminded me of.....in the story, Goliath was slain by his own sword.

      Delete
  36. Keith Langley's circumstances are his own doing because he failed to understand the most basic premise of public office, it belongs to the people he represents. The majority was never HIS, he only treated it that way. To have a majority truly function well, those within the majority must be treated with mutual respect and governing must be done as a team. For any one person, republican or democrat, to be so arrogant as to think that they have all the answers is simply irresponsible. He should have assumed his role as the leader of a team rather than dictate the terms of HIS majority.

    For whatever reason, he seems to be under the impression that people will forgive him or be oblivious to his conduct or management style. FYI, Rick McCabe thought the same exact thing. People in this town are not elected by the dems or repubs, they are elected by the rest of the people who vote, mostly independents. People may like that there is a zero increase this year, but they will also remember that there was an increase last year simply because Langley wouldn't adopt wording proposed by Sue Mangold.

    Either way, let him run. Winning in this town is an oxymoron. What have you won? The privilege of inheriting great debt, a workforce that serves only to protect their pensions, an opposing political faction who works tirelessly to make sure you fail? Winning in this town is a greater loss than a victory. in order to be successful you have to appease everyone and bring people together. Problem is, people in this town would rather fight for table scraps than sacrifice for the greater good.

    When the king is greedy the people suffer. And so it goes!

    ReplyDelete
  37. Tom Grant, the elderOctober 6, 2014 at 6:38 PM

    Dear Anonymous 4:35 PM:
    Thanks for writing your very thoughtful post.
    I'm sure you remember that last year Supervisor Langley also proposed a no tax increase Tentative Budget, before he cast the deciding vote resulting in a Tax increase.
    Let's all keep a close look at how the Budget process unfolds this year.
    All the best,
    Tom

    ReplyDelete