Thursday, July 23, 2015

No More Business As Usual

I don't believe that I know Mr. Shapiro, but I do believe that his letter in today's Advertiser is spot on.  For those who don't get the Advertiser, here's the letter:


185 comments:

  1. Mr. Shapiro,

    Don't know you, but you are so right!!!! A change is long overdue.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great letter and very true. From what we are hearing at the doors, people are more than ready to give the " non politicians" a shot. What has really saddened me is the lack of pride that folks have currently in our town, no one is saying, hey, what do you mean, things are great here! East Greenbush residents are smart and currently very discouraged.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am one who has also also been going to the residents homes in East Greenbush since the start. Most, not all residents don't know about & honestly are completely unaware of how poor of shape East Greenbush is even in. It's quite sad!

    ReplyDelete
  4. 8:05 a.m. You are quite right. "Most" residents are completely unaware of and, in fact, take no interest in local politics. They go into the voting booth, if they vote at all, and vote their party line and then leave feeling like they've done their duty as Americans...they voted! It's extremely difficult taking people away from the focus of their own lives and/or getting them to break with tradition. For that reason, it took a master campaigner like Rick Matters FOUR campaigns to get elected. EG 1st candidates have their work cut out for them but I hear that they are master campaigners themselves so they are indeed a force to be reckoned with. Under the circumstances with politics as we know it, they are off to an excellent start.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think it's fair to say that in the last two election cycles people have been looking for a REAL ALTERNATIVE to business as usual in local government. Langley was elected as a supposed positive alternative in the Supervisor's office. Didn't happen. MAM and Deb ran on a published reform platform that got smothered by Langley and DeF and Gilbert. So both party machines have demonstrated that neither want reform in the way "business" is done in Town government. The only way out of the corrupt quandary is a slate not beholden to or controlled by the machines. Until EG1st appeared on the scene there has NEVER been a real alternative to business as usual. Now there is a real alternative, and it's generating some excitement.

    ReplyDelete
  6. What has taken EG1st so long to get here? Things have been bad for a very long time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here's one perspective......The casino fiasco was sponsored by insiders from both Rep and Dem machines. It was a hair-brained idea, but they thought that they "ran" things so much that they thought they could pull it off. But because is was such a dumb idea, cited in a really dumb place - it had the effect of surfacing and bringing together a whole new bunch of people who successfully "beat City Hall." So the "character and intelligence bankruptcy" of the insiders, coupled with the energy and intelligence of a new constituency, provided one of the foundations of EG1st. EG1st is not SEG. It's bigger. What happened is that people found that they didn't have to take the crap any longer from the usual suspects. The arrogance of the old insiders is going to come back and bite them in the butt. We can't afford them any longer.

      Delete
  7. We never could afford them but, until now, what choice have we had? From the local level to the national level all we do in America is toggle back and forth between two self-enriching, corrupt parties that are one and the same. To my way of thinking, it's EG1st vs Republicrats this year...period! Vote for Langley, Poorman or VanWormer, it makes no difference, they're one and the same and if you vote for any one of them, nothing will change. Nothing! If you're voting traditional party lines, you might as well use the eeny, meeny, miney, moe method of selection OR you can break with tradition and vote for Jack, Tina, and Tom. If you vote for Langley, Poorman or VanWormer, DON'T complain about anything anymore including the mismanagement of the town, high taxes/low return, the depressed look of 9 & 20, the faltering state of the town's finances, and countless other things. A vote for Langley, Poorman or VanWormer is a vote for things to stay the same.
    JACK, TINA & TOM 2015

    ReplyDelete
  8. Serious question. Why would anyone vote to re-elect Supervisor Keith Langley? There has been no improvement in any significant area during his lackluster term of office. I'm all in for Jack, Tina and Tom, but any of the other announced candidates for Supervisor are much better than Keith Langlry.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 9:51 p.m. "lackluster" is a good word for Langley's term. Since 2012 he hasn't followed through with anything of any significance. Even the WWTP has had a months long setback due to an industrial accident that happened on his watch. Since the treatment plant upgrade project started, he's only been over there once to physically check it out. Also, he seems to be hinging his entire reelection campaign on paying off the town's debt but exactly how he's going about doing it in such a short period of time remains a closely guarded secret that still needs revealing. Are we still in junk bond status? Can an audit be produced by the office of the state comptroller that confirms the condition of the town's finances? This is what I'd need to see before I voted to reelect Mr. Langley.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dear 939: Yes, we are still in junk bond status. How do we know that Langley even paid off debt? the testimony of Meaghan Hart and Ed Gilbert is not the same as hearing it from Langley himself. He is unfit for office.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 7:20 AM,
    Keith Langley is a doer, not a fancy talker. Keith has the utmost confidence in his close associates Meaghan Hart and Ed Gilbert to get the word out about his many noteworthy accomplishments for the people of the Town of East Greenbush.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Question to Gadfly;

    Why are you not infuriated by the actions of our Chief of Police and Commissioner of DPW ?

    You , of all people , seem to become obsessed with the inappropriate carrying on of town officials. Why so silent ? Especially since both of them are clearly linked to Mike Poorman .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These people are appointed. The only ones who can do the appropriate supervision are those elected to do so. If they won't, they have to be replaced. That's why I'm in favor of replacing the machine office holders with some truly independent elected officials.

      Delete
    2. Let me give you an example. A year ago last January, a Town appointee (the Chair of the Planning Board) signed the Plat approval for the Thompson Way development without a meeting of the Planning Board or a Resolution by the Planning Board allowing him to do so. The Town Board was complained to on several occasions, but absolutely nothing was done. The only alternative would be for citizens to pursue an Article 78 - costing money. When elected officials refuse to exercise their fiduciary responsibilities to manage their appointees, they should be replaced.

      Delete
    3. Thank you ....appreciate your point of view

      Delete
    4. And you had the Town Attorney and the Planning Board Attorney sitting there watching it all happen without a "peep." And the folks who directly benefited from that Plat approval had their hands all over the casino fiasco too. You just can't make this stuff up.

      Delete
  13. Keith Langley is the TB Liaison to the Planning Board so we can be assured that everything is on the up and up.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Keith is also the TB liaison to the Zoning Board as well. So no worries there either.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thank goodness our hard working Supervisor, Keith Langley, agreed to take on the additional tasks of serving as the Official Town Board Liaison to BOTH the Planning AND Zoning Boards. It's no accident that so many businesses have to decided to locate and/or expand in the Town of East Greenbush under Keith's wonderful leadership.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ILL, are you serious???? He took them on so his political cronies could have some stake over what is said and done. Get real will you.

      Delete
  16. Nothing happens on either the Zoning or Planning boards without Keith Langley's say so. He controls the appointments of the members of both of the boards. Mr. Langley and his political patron, Chris DeFruscio, wield immense influence over the decisions of these boards.Just ask them.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I truly think I Like Langley is Langley.....there can't possibly be another soul in this town that thinks he is doing a good job....when he is so blatantly doing a bad job!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ILL knows that hyperbole is always good for a laugh.

      Delete
    2. 3:31, you're giving Langley way too much credit. He can't put a sentence together let alone multiple posts!

      Delete
  18. 4:55- My read on Langley Liker is that (s)he gets his/her material directly from published reports from 1. Keith Langley 2. Ed Gilbert and 3.Meaghan Hart.

    ReplyDelete
  19. ILL is a breath of fresh air. We enjoy reading the posts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or a combination of D Fiacco, M Hart and E Gilbert...

      Delete
  20. Public Notice: Special Meeting
    Posted: 27 Jul 2015 06:48 AM PDT

    Notice is hereby given that the Town Board of the Town of East Greenbush will be convening on Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 4:30 PM at the East Greenbush Town Hall, 225 Columbia Turnpike, Rensselaer, New York, 12144 for the purpose of voting on the extension of the PDD.

    Pete Stenson

    ReplyDelete
  21. I wonder which of the many nearly expired PDDs is on the agenda? The Meeting Notice is unusually vague and opaque, even for Keith Langley.
    Not good, Mr. Langley. Not good at all.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Thanks for all the comments. I'm just trying my best to help as many people as possible become more aware of the many "Exceptional" accomplishments of Supervisor Keith Langley and his administration. My continued thanks to the Gadfly for providing the opportunity.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I encourage all interested and concerned Town Residents to attend this afternoon's Special Town Board meeting called by Supervisor Keith Langley to discuss the future of the (a?) Planned Development District(s?). Proposed changes in Zoning practices through the implementation of PDDs are often difficult understand.
    I'm sure Keith scheduled the meeting at an unusual time (4:30pm) in order to allow for a lengthy explanation of the PDDs and to encourage a robust give and take among Interested Residents, Town Board Members, Project Developers, Consultants and Town Staff regarding these soon to be expired (August 2nd) projects.
    This promises to be a very informative meeting which will certainly showcase the leadership skills of our good friend and Supervisor Keith Langley.
    My thanks go out to Keith for taking the time out of your hectic schedule to convene such an important meeting TODAY at 4:30pm at TOWN HALL.
    Thank you Keith!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Thanks ILL- unfortunately I'll be out on a job at 430pm. Does anyone know if there will be a video of the meeting to look at?

    ReplyDelete
  25. The constant sucking up would indicate that Gilbert is "I Like Langley".....little too much hero worship there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nah, ILL is actually entertaining. Gilbert is just a downright embarrassing fool.

      Delete
  26. Special Meeting Agenda is on-line at http://eastgreenbush.org/government/town-board/agendas-a-minutes

    Pete Stenson

    ReplyDelete
  27. Apparently published agendas are not important to Supervisor Langley. Tonight's Special Meeting was for the purpose of approving the "Extensions of Certain Planned Development Districts (PDDs). With no opposition Res. 125.2015 was quickly approved by the Town Board.

    Subsequently, Supervisor Langley attempted to move Res. 112.2015 (which was NOT on the agenda) "A Resolution to Authorize the Supervisor to Sign the Memorandum of Agreement with the East Greenbush Police Department Union." The motion failed and the meeting adjourned.

    Supervisor Langley had no comment when questioned why that particular resolution was not on the agenda. Most in attendance left the meeting shaking their heads.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 6/12 p.m. Who voted no for the police union reso? Was CP Matters there? Langley is desperate for the police vote.

    ReplyDelete
  29. CP Matters might have been at work, inconvenient time and all. CP DiMartino voted no. She probably saved Langley from a world of trouble. The NYS law that requires notice be given for matters to be considered at special meetings has more teeth than the open meetings law. Langley's silly, sneaky move voilated both laws and DiMartino recognized that.

    ReplyDelete
  30. You may recall that I raised the same issue at the previous Special Meeting.

    Sadly, according to a Committee on Open Government Advisory Opinion:

    "Both statutes require that notice of the time and place of a meeting be given; neither contains a requirement that notice include an agenda or reference to the subject matter of a meeting." The statutes referred to are Town Law §62(2) and Open Meetings Law §104.

    The Advisory Opinion can be read in its entirety at: http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/otext/o2852.htm

    Pete Stenson

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pete....as I understand it, the Resolution the Supervisor attempted to have passed was not on the published agenda for the Special Meeting. Doesn't East Greenbush have a Local Law which holds that any Resolution advanced at a meeting which was not on the published agenda receive a majority vote to be included on the agenda before it is brought to a vote as an agenda item? Looks to me like an attempt to get a retroactive approval for something the Supe should not have done in the first place.

      Delete
    2. Thanks, Pete. it is, indeed, disappointing when the laws made to protect the public interest (and the interpretation of those laws) have no teeth.
      Nevertheless the Supervisor still plas fast and loose with the needs of the public. Still sneaky and silly.

      Delete
  31. Gadfly 7:31 AM- I believe you are correct. My recollection is that it was former Councilperson, Sue Mangold, who sponsored the Resolution requiring a majority vote to be included on the agenda before any measure not on the published agenda is brought to a vote.
    Kudos to Sue Mangold!

    ReplyDelete
  32. 7:55 If you will, what is the reso no. and year?
    See p. 3 of today's Advt for a worth reading article by CPs Matters and DiMartino. Looks like Langley has been caught signing agreements behind the backs of the board members. The guy is a menace and can't be trusted to play nice. What else is he doing behind our backs? Hopefully the two CPs will keep digging.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear 8:53 AM,
      I (7:55 AM) reference RESOLUTION 13-2015 moved by CP Mangold and seconded by CP Malone which was passed unanimously by the TB on 1/21/15.
      The 2nd RESOLVED of the RESOLUTION states- "RESOLVED, any items on Board meeting agendas that were not presented at pre-board, be required a majority vote to be considered for a vote."
      N.B. Resolution 13-2015 makes no distinction between regularly scheduled TB meetings held at the regular dates and times and irregularly scheduled "Special" TB meetings, scheduled by Supervisor Langley, held on arbitrary dates and at inconvenient times for non-connected people.

      Delete
    2. As always, love Gilbert's two cents. While I agree with him in that Poorman failed at filing his July periodic report with the Board of Elections, I find it comical that Gilbert is speaking on behalf of the EG Republican Committee who supposedly had "No Activity" filed with the BOE for a year and a half! You're telling me they didn't receive one donation for a year and a half? And Mr. Gilbert, since you are so keen on calling out Poorman (not good Poorman, not good) how is that for almost 2 years our Republican Committee is operating with a few thousand dollar deficit?

      Delete
  33. Gadfly, et al,

    Close.

    Unfortunately, 13-2015 Resolution for Timely Submission of Resolutions, which was sponsored by CP Mangold and unanimously adopted on 1/21/15, addressed Resolutions not appearing on the Pre-Board Agenda and made no mention of Special Board Meetings (which don't have Pre-Board Meetings).

    Pete Stenson

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pete....I think it could be argued legally that Special Meetings are called for specific stated purposes, and that ancillary matters would be out of order. Good one to be tested at law. Seems pretty clear though what was going on here.

      Delete
    2. Highly reminiscent of the McCabe era.

      Delete
    3. Gadfly, that's what I've always thought, but I see no basis in law, though I'm no attorney.

      Pete Stenson

      Delete
    4. Pete:
      Are you still the Treasurer of the East Greenbush Democratic Party?

      Delete
  34. Dear Gadfly and Pete:
    I come down on the side of 9:55 AM that the intent of 13-2015 can be and should be, interpreted to include ALL Town Board meetings. What is to be gained from hiding information on agenda items from the general public? IMHO, the automatic default mode in East Greenbush Town Governance should be for openness and transparency for items under consideration by the Town Board at any public meeting. Instead, Supervisor Langley couldn't be bothered to mention that he wanted to vote on the Resolution until after the public comment period had ended. Attempting to sneak ANY Resolution without any prior public notice immediately AFTER the public comment period ended is not an example of open and transparent government.
    There are many questions regarding Supervisor Langley's secretive behavior that need answering including, but not limited to:

    * Why didn't Supervisor Langley simply include the police union resolution on the "Special" meeting written agenda? He was able to provide copies of the PDD Resolution. Will he once again blame his staff for this omission?
    *Similarly, Why didn't Supervisor Langley post the Police Union Resolution on the Town website prior to the Special TB meeting? Will Mr. Langley blame his staff for this as well? Or is something else going on?
    *Why would Supervisor Langley try to conceal this particular Resolution from public examination and comment?
    *Why didn't Supervisor Langley at least read the Title of the Resolution at his Special TB meeting?

    Not good, Mr. Langley. Not good at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, What was with Langley not even mentioning the Reso until AFTER the public comment period ended? What is Langley afraid of???

      Delete
    2. McCabe pulled the same kind of shenanigan as Langley when he signed the MOA adding the sick leave incentive (which had sunset in the previous contract) without Board approval. ("It's the way we've always done it." Right?)

      Delete
    3. July 30, 2015 at 9:55 AM - Problem being is there is no Pre-Board Meeting for Special Meetings which I believe, can be called on two days notice.

      July 30, 2015 at 11:06 AM - No arguments on your points, but to quote Langley "the resolution is the resolution".

      Good, bad or incomplete.

      Pete Stenson

      Delete
    4. @ 1:19 PM and remember McCabe has been the driving force behind the so far unsuccessful scheme to get Keith Langley the Democratic Party endorsement to run for EG Supervisor. McCabe and Langley seem to be birds of the same "feather." Of is that "Feathers?"

      Delete
    5. 154 - McCabe is not the driving force on getting Langley the cross endorsement. Please remember that McCabe and DVW are best buddies.

      Delete
    6. Yes, and DVW and McCabe are former business partners and I hear that McC is managing the DVW campaign. How do you say "an attempt at rehabilitating McCabe?" Here we go again.

      Delete
    7. you are so far off the mark it's hilarious!

      Delete
  35. Supervisor Langley's secretive behavior at yesterday's Special Town Board Meeting provides just the latest example in support of Mr. Shapiro's post calling for the establishment of a truly independent Third Party.
    Fortunately for East Greenbush voters, a truly independent alternative does now exist. It is called East Greenbush First. Please consider voting for EG 1ST candidates Jack Conway for Town Supervisor and Tina Tierney and Tom Grant for Town Board. They strongly and resolutely believe in open and transparent government. Their way is certainly not the Keith Langley way.
    My vote is for Jack, Tina and Tom on Election Day, November the 3rd.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Langley can force items onto any given agenda but he can't force bd mbrs to vote on them. Ha! Kudos to Deb for voting "NO" to his antics. This is just more of his bullying and total disregard for the board. And where does Langley get off signing settlement agreements without TB approval? Who does he think he is? And who does Gilly Gilbert think he is? Wouldn't it be hysterical if Honey Bee Keith got ONE vote on Election Day from you know who? Clearly, Elroy has a fetish for HBK. It's quite sweet really.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What you don't know, is that Deb agreed to vote yes on the contract the night before, then pulled an about face at the meeting. She screwed us over, plain and simple. She wouldn't vote yes without her partner in crime Maryann there to do it with her. If you think these people are looking out for what's best, you are sorely mistaken. It's All political games. Nobody on that board should ever be elected again.

      Delete
    2. So are you saying that there was behind the scenes, non-transparent and private wheeling and dealing out of the public view on this matter? It wasn't on the agenda, but was introduced after the public comment period. It was handed up to the dais after the first resolution was voted on. Kinda like that casino resolution a year ago last April. Right?

      Delete
  37. Poor, dumber than soup, Elroy. His Advt article today opens up the EG Republican Committee to public humiliation for THEIR failures where filing financial reports with the BOE are concerned. Has Gilly never heard the expression "people who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw bricks?"

    ReplyDelete
  38. The blind leading the blind... The republican committee should be embarrassed to be affiliated with such trash. Langley had his chance, he failed them & failed the residents whom reside here. Why in anybody's right of mind, you back & put faith in a man who proves time after time of what a mistake we made 4yrs. ago. Does anyone lean from there mistakes??? NO would be the answer to that!

    ReplyDelete
  39. Gadfly,
    I hope you and your readers had the opportunity to view the ad posted in this week's Advertiser on behalf of our wonderful Supervisor by the many "Friends of Keith Langley."
    Please allow me to quote a small part of it. "Four years ago, East Greenbush received negative audits and a down-grade of the town's bond rating. Keith Langley knew residents deserved better and delivered on a promise to improve town finances."
    That says it all for me. I'm sure that Keith's many friends and supporters will go to the polls to vote once again for Keith "the promise keeper" Langley as our Town Supervisor.

    ReplyDelete
  40. When is Mr. Langley going to back up anything he says with documentation from OSC or even from just our town comptroller proving what he says is true? Show us one scrap of paper that proves anything. Please!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Dear ILL: if Keith Langley actually kept an eye on the books he would have been able to certify the work done on his watch and we would have an audit. Without verifable books what Langley says is just babble. Who do you think is bying Langley's stuff about new business on 9&20? Many will need to travel on 9&20 to get to the polls! Voters see what a dismal failure Langley is every day.

    ReplyDelete
  42. The mere fact that Keith Langley thinks that the electorate will just take his claims of financial restoration at face value, without asking questions, proves that he has no more respect or regard for us than he has for board members. Let's get an open discussion started, Mr. Langley.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Dear 8:18 PM and 8:37 PM, The OSC is in the process of taking a very close look at our Town's finances. I would suggest that each of you stop criticizing and sitting on the sidelines and stop in to Town Hall and directly ask Supervisor Langley about what the OSC has come up with so far. Keith has been working very closely with the OSC in the development of a detailed report that I'm sure will be made available to all in the near future. It is crystal clear that Keith is almost solely responsible for the remarkable current condition of our Town's finances and he is always happy to talk to anyone about the tremendous progress he has made in moving EG in the right fiscal direction.
    As far as getting new business on 9&20, I don't get your point. All one has to do is take a drive up or down 9&20 to witness first hand the remarkable transformation of that road way during the first Langley Administration. Take Town Hall for example, with the installation of the new signs, the improvement of the Building's facade and the installation of the new surveillance cameras, Town hall has become a more vital and welcoming place for residents and visitors alike. And don't get me started on our state of the art WWTP. It is my understanding that an increasing number of engineers and consultants from many different companies have visited the facility to observe the workings of this technological marvel.
    Keith Langley deserves all of our thanks and all of our votes for "Getting Results for East Greenbush."
    I almost forgot. If you get a chance, please make an effort to stop by the EG Library to take a good look at the wonderful portrait of Keith hanging on the left side (going in) of the hallway. It really captures the vigorous leadership style of Keith Langley. I'm not sure how much longer the portrait will remain on exhibit, but it sure enhances the ambiance of the building.

    ReplyDelete
  44. To I like Langley. I gotta admit. You're beginning to convince me. I didn't realize we had it so good here in East Greenbush and that Langley was responsible for all the good things going on.

    ReplyDelete
  45. ILL - Don't forget Keith's been around the OSC block before. When he took office the OSC was concluding that our books were unauditable for 2010 and 2011. Fine, not on his watch. He then agreed in a response to the OSC audit that himself and the TB were “commited to implementing all recommendations outlined in the examination.” Well, how committed was he ILL? 2012 and 2013 books were unauditable as well and our current comptroller called the accounting system "broken beyond repair" when he came in in 2014. If that's what him and his silent majority Gilbert think is "common sense budgeting", I want to drink whatever they're drinking to take a look into their fantasy world

    ReplyDelete
  46. ILL, what kind of a dream are you living in? For the rest of us its a nightmare!!!

    ReplyDelete
  47. ILL: the new signs are the best example of putting lipstick on a pig I ever saw. "Common sense budgeting" includes responsible, verifiable reports to the people. Langley has never made such a report. There are plenty of examples, here is one of them: 6 - 8 months ago he (his agents) were insisting the water and sewer increases were a must do and without them the town would fall into financial ruin. He was asked for information regarding the water and sewer assessment rates and the issue just disappeared. Now, less than a year later we see an advertisement about how much better off we are. Langley and his inner circle are just not to be trusted

    ReplyDelete
  48. ILL, in plain English, you are hilarious. You could become rich and famous similarly exalting the thousands of politicians all over the world who do the same wonderful job Honey Bee Keith does for the town of EG. You keep me in stitches, ILL. Keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete
  49. @ 12:26 PM, Thanks for your kind words. Fortunately for the Town of East Greenbush, our wonderful Supervisor Keith Langley is unique. I have never met another governmental leader who can even remotely compare to Keith Langley. So much the better for the residents and voters of East Greenbush. Keith is our very own home grown product.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Mr. Langley is indeed "unique," so unique that there are THREE residents of EG who are challenging him for his job. Is that unprecedented? These candidates must think they have a shot at election or they would not be wasting their valuable time and money. The last Advt article from the two disgruntled councilwomen was, I admit, most disconcerting. Not only was Mr. Langley unable to maintain a professional, working relationship with them, it now appears that he has been conducting town business behind their backs and then unilaterally signing agreements on behalf of the town without their knowledge. How many secret meetings and phone calls do you think occurred before Mr. Langley steamrolled out the casino deal? I'm sure many as well. This man seems determined to run the town without the board, without the residents, all on his own. I find that not only unacceptable but frightening as well. It's time for another change. With this many choices for supervisor and town board this year, all we can hope for is that people are paying attention. The current board isn't working and that has to change.

    ReplyDelete
  51. We need to remember that it was the set of wheeler-dealer insiders from both major parties who brought us and steamrolled the casino deal. Just ask Langley who brought him the first Casino Resolution which went on the Agenda at the last minute a year ago last April. Both "establishment machines" were in in up to their necks. Neither can be trusted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The wheeler dealer backroom deals are a thing of the past. I wonder if the wheeler dealers know it yet.

      Delete
  52. So, who exactly are the wheeler dealers of the Casino Deal and who are they aligned with?

    ReplyDelete
  53. @12:37pm- we know one of the wheelers is "Casino" Keith Langley, but that his ineptness botched the "deal."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You might want to take a look at some of the material here....

      https://eastgreenbushtruth.wordpress.com/players/

      One direct conflict was revealed in the Capital View Application and led to the series of recusals.

      Delete
  54. Ok, so who are they aligned with?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whoever will put the "fix" in and get them what they want. That Plat approval without a meeting of the Planning Board or a Resolution is a classic example.

      Delete
  55. I just read the Drainage Pipe article in today's Times-Union and I'm confused. Didn't Supervisor Langley appoint Anthony Corellis Commissioner of the Public Works Department? Now they seem to be at odds with each other with CP Mary Ann Matters siding with Mr. Corellis. And didn't Supervisor Langley endorse CP Matters in the last Town election?
    Would someone explain to me what's going on down at Town Hall?

    ReplyDelete
  56. 9:56 a.m. It's total chaos at town hall. Here's the deal. Langley is going after Corellis for two reasons (1) Corellis doesn't support Langley for re-election and (2) Matters put the settlement agreement article in last Thursday's Advt. Because she called for an investigation into how many agreements Langley has signed without town board approval going back to 2012 when he was elected, Langley is retaliating by putting Corellis through a similar "investigation" for "misappropriation" of town property. Langley is vindictive and petty and today's TU article proves it.

    ReplyDelete
  57. @ 11:58 AM- It looks like a bunch of children are (mis)representing us. Time for a new and professional approach to EG government.
    I'm for Jack, Tina and Tom on November 3rd Election Day.

    ReplyDelete
  58. @9:56, there is no logical explanation other than we have a bunch of childish, unprofessional people in positions within this town that they do not belong in. With each blind check for "Republican" or "Democrat" just because they belong to one of those cliques each election we the people keep voting the same types of people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right on target, 1:18!!! This time around we'll have three intelligent grown-ups to vote for. Not tied (on purpose) to either of the tired old machines, with their petty mischief and deals.

      Delete
  59. Where have all Keith Langley's Casino peeps been hiding?

    ReplyDelete
  60. Langley is alone now. He's desperate for a cross-endorsement from the dems (how pathetic is that?) but he's basically a man without a party. It will be interesting to hear what happens at the dems caucus at the Elks club on Wednesday nite at 7 pm. I heard Jack Conway will make an appearance.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Talks won't post this, but three connected Dems got a new driveway on Thompson Hill as a result of Langley's $150,000 repaving job. This, in addition to the illegal Plat approval by the Planning Board Chairman which started it all.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Everyone who reads this blog should go to the Dem caucus at the Elks Wednesday night at 7:00 pm. Both parties need a scare put into them. Every registered Dem should show up to that caucus tomorrow night!

    ReplyDelete
  63. They don't need a scare, they need to be put out of office. It can be done. Caucus Smaucus the dems had their chance and they helped themselves, not the town.

    ReplyDelete
  64. We're for Jack, Tina and Tom!!

    ReplyDelete
  65. Yes, 8:28 a.m., all EG dems within earshot, show up tomorrow nite for Jack (Elks Club, 7 p.m.) Everyone start hooting and hollering for Jack. Stage a good 'ol fashioned coup! Hopefully hundreds will show. Go, go, go!

    ReplyDelete
  66. If I could be a Democrat for a day, that day would be tomorrow. I would show up to that caucus for Jack with a big sign that says, "Put East Greenbush 1st - Vote for Jack."

    ReplyDelete
  67. If a group could successfully get Jack Conway on the ballot as an EG Democrat, the entire group's reason for running an independent campaign is tarnished. The more helpful thing to do would be to get as many people to show up to the polls on November 3rd and vote for EG1st!

    ReplyDelete
  68. ATTENTION!! Due to inclement weather and thunderstorm watches through 8 PM tonight, we have cancelled Music in the Park's first concert tonight.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yet another Keith Langley "inclement weather" false alarm. His next step will be to reschedule the concert for 8:30 on Friday morning.

      Delete
  69. @2:46 PM- "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowin."
    Jack, Tina and Tom on November 3rd!

    ReplyDelete
  70. 1:11 p.m. But how can EG1st candidates make a difference if they can't get into office. It makes no sense that they wouldn't use every possible means to accomplish that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1:11 p.m. here, our town has suffered enough from people using "every possible means" to accomplish what they want. By not joining ANY party, and sticking true to their guns is the most honest thing this town has seen from people trying to get into office. They have been working hard at running this campaign for most of this year, even months before their announcement. Their entire campaign is based on not aligning with ANY party, minor or major. So, by putting Jack or any of them on the Democratic line it tarnishes their entire reputation. They do not need to be on multiple lines. We the people need to be more informed when we vote. If someone feels they will only vote for a democrat, republican or whichever party they are registered as because they "belong" to the same party, is irresponsible. I know it happens all of the time, but it's time for the people to take responsibility as well.

      Delete
  71. @AnonymousAugust 5, 2015 at 8:18 AM--you are very right. If people in registered parties want to support Jack, Tom & Tina they should go the primaries and write their name in. This is America, we have the right to vote for whomever we want and if we want to write their names in, we can! If they want to represent ALL of us then that means they are representing even those that are registered to parties. I am registered to a party and I vote. I suggest they accept our support.

    ReplyDelete
  72. I think the issue is that the Rep and Dem parties are dominated behind the scenes by the "shot calling" people who have gotten this Town into the trouble it's in with their special interest deals. If you think these people will go quietly, you've got another "think" coming. They have to be isolated.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Why not try for the minor party lines? Why not go after the Indy's at least? Ignoring that group is a big mistake. EGG1st can wear blinders but if they don't win they can't do a darn thing to help the town. Winning at least one small line, like the Indys, is something EG1st can aim at and should. 1:11 said it--they want to be independent. ALOT of people think being registered Indy IS INDEPENDENT! If EG1st really wants our support they should do everything they can to get it and win it. That's why I signed their petition! I thought EG1st was going to do everything they can to win so that they can make changes. If they aren't going to try with everything they have, it isn't worth it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Blinders? Really? Come on, they are working hard every day petitioning and getting to know people in the town. They are going to try with everything they have before the election so on that day people will know who they are and what they stand for. Old school ballot line placement is what they reject and they will tell people that. You need to believe in the candidates not the line they are running on.

      Delete
    2. 8:46 AM. As you know, the Independence Party is not independent and many people already realize that and the number of people becoming aware is growing on a daily, if not hourly, basis.
      Jack, Tina and Tom are on the right track and they have our family's (3 votes) support on Election Day.

      Delete
    3. Dear 8:46, I believe that Jack, Tina and Tom are doing everything possible to get elected without compromising their integrity. They chose to create a 3rd Party line in order to demonstrate to residents that they're not playing the usual games, even if it means having to work a little harder.

      Everyone knows that the Working Families Party and the Independent lines are basically garbage lines that are packed with Republicans and Dems, allowing them to easily hijack more lines on the ballot. It’s sleazy politics, not popular endorsement.

      Jack, Tina and Tom refuse to play dirty politics, despite the extra work it will necessitate. I'm impressed that EG1st is choosing the honest way, and not simply the easiest way.

      Their break from the traditional parties will work out in the long run. Even though they're not yet well known, they seem to have a lot of supporters. Over time, their support base will grow in leaps and bounds. They're showing, right from the start, that they're not like the other politicians in this town. Thank goodness.

      Delete
  74. I will be voting for Jack, Tina and Tom on the EG 1st line if they are somehow able to get enough signatures to get on the ballot. Im sick and tired of ALL these other parties standing for nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  75. There is a reason the Dems don't want EG1st at their caucus-they're scared. They know if EG1st gets another line, they have trouble come election day. That should send EG1st a message--another line is worth considering. This comment is from their blog and it is telling. The Dems don't want EG1st there.
    "AnonymousJuly 30, 2015 2:59 PM
    I was glad to see Mr. Shapiro's letter in the Advertiser today confirming that the people running on the East Greenbush 1st ticket will "not appear on any other party lines". If the EG 1st candidates are honest and true to their word we should not hear anymore rumors that they plan to hijack the Democratic caucas."

    ReplyDelete
  76. There's a statement on the East Greenbush First FaceBook page with the rationale for running on the EG1st ballot line. They are asking for comments there. Have at it.

    https://www.facebook.com/eastgreenbushfirst

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Will be interesting to see who comments on Facebook when you can't be anonymous.

      Delete
  77. The reason the Dems won't win this year is because of comments such as the one from "What Charades!August 03, 2015 7:18 PM", on Talks. They HAVE to bring what religion a person practices into a petty town dispute. That is completely uncalled for! EG1st sticks with TOWN issues and TOWN issues only. There is enough religious persecution around this world against every faith, we don't need it on the town blogs. EG1st shows respect for residents and THAT is why they will get elected. Whatever ignoramus authored that comment just cost Pete and Dave VW some positive attention. It is well known they monitor that blog and they should have known better than to allow a comment mocking one's faith practices. This is not the place for that and you know why...because in America there is NO place for that! Disgusting!
    Guess EG1st now has my household's undivided attention! Keep going guys!

    ReplyDelete
  78. Remember this ridiculous speech from Ed Gilbert, while serving our town as Deputy Supervisor and of all things our Ethics Board Chairman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7tRwiSCkHw&app=desktop ?????
    This is the man who stands behind Langley week after week in the Advertiser, and the same man who makes a fool of himself monthly at Town Board meetings. How sad is our Republican Committee to allow this man to speak on behalf of them? How could anyone, evenregistered Republicans, in our town put their trust into this party? It's a joke!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  79. It is very, very possible, for the FIRST TIME in the electoral history of the Town of East Greenbush, this is the year candidates running on an established political party line may be at a disadvantage. Think of it, the more established party lines for the candidate, the less votes on election day.
    This is exciting stuff.
    Stay tuned...

    ReplyDelete
  80. Odd fact of the day...the Republican Committee paid for an ad slamming a Republican (Poorman) petitioning for their line..(see Gilbert in the Advertiser). Odds are Poorman will knock off Langley and then the same committee paying for attack ads will need to pay money to support the same guy they attacked!!!! I've never seen such a thing and hope to never see it again.

    ReplyDelete
  81. 9:28pm. How did the Republican Committee pay for it. Their Board of Elections Financial Disclosure Report says they are thousands of dollars in the red.

    ReplyDelete
  82. What is up with the fence at the poop plant? Don't they realize that the fence doesn't cover up the smell?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree the smell is an issue but at least now we wont have to look @ the mess behind the wall, i believe the fence is a good thing.

      Delete
    2. I believe it is a good thing too, but it doesn't get rid of the multiple problems that are at the plant.

      Delete
  83. The fence was a waste of money. It's hiding absolutely nothing. I want to vomit every time I drive past.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Gadfly, Remember when the mismanagement of our town finances under the McCabe administration was most important? Now McCabe's best friend Dave VanWormer is running for Town Supervisor and Rick McCabe is one of his biggest supporters. Do we want to return to that?

    ReplyDelete
  85. My reasons for voting for EG1st have absolutely nothing to do with the democrats or republicans, that's because party affiliation means nothing to me! Having an R or a D next to a candidates name doesn't show what they stand for - other than what clique they pretended to side with. I will be voting for Jack, Tina, and Tom because they stand for something. They have intelligence, and truly care about the community - not themselves. They are not going into office looking for political favoritism for themselves or their friends. Most importantly, they show respect. They have brought us a campaign filled with substance and what they truly stand for, they have not stooped to the level of campaigning by attacking the other candidates, something we are all sick of across the country!

    That being said, two candidates run the Talks blog. I respect the fact that a blog is ones own personal page and they have the right to post whatever they want. However, they are now not just average residents, they want to run our town but yet run one of the most childish blogs (Gilbert/Defruscio take first place on the worst childish blogs) that has been focused on attacking the other candidates along with Corellis and Matters. That didn't bother me until they decided to run and control OUR town. I respect you Don, you have not stooped to level of middle school antics. I had to laugh, because one of the most recent "attacks" toward you was that you made a comment after the democratic caucus that "the blogs will be blowing up after this." This made me giggle a little, it's like opening a can of worms. I would assume the reason for your comment was the extremely low turnout at the caucus, something I'm sure they don't want to broadcast. Especially when it was half the turnout for the non-marketed EG1st fundraiser. That says a lot when a group of truly independent candidates can get double the turnout of a major political party. People need to know Dave and Pete's involvement in the Talks blog, it shows a piece of their character with some of the stuff that's allowed to be posted on their. With the backing of Langley and the allowance of Gilbert to speak on behalf of the Republican committee and the fact part of our Democratic Committee is part of the Talks blog is more proof the parties in our town have failed miserably. GO EG1st, history is in the making!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A couple of things about the Caucus: I do think it was a sorry example of the democratic process which we are supposed to cherish in this country. Thirtynine/fortyone votes decided who would be on the Dem line. And it was a rubber-stamp of what had been decided behind closed doors earlier. And one of the candidates and one of the behind the scenes actors were subject of findings in the last State Comptroller's report. That's sad.

      Delete
    2. @9:09- With all due respect. Let's not forget the Cristo/Taylor Blog which was also run by candidates for Town Office. They also failed to practice civil discussions on a number of occasions.
      Gadfly, I thank you for continuing to call them as you see them and I appreciate the fact that you allow the posting of different opinions as long as they remain civil and respectful.

      Delete
    3. #1 - I do not believe Dave nor Pete "run" the TALKS blog. I believe they are open to comment there just as Jack Conway is welcome to comment here.
      The caucus is the way they've done this for years. The Republican way is really no different and will have just as many / few there as well.

      Delete
    4. With regard to the Rep/Dem nominating processes, isn't that the heart of the problem we have here in this Town? A small collection of "Boss Tweeds" on both sides of the fence who get to choose from those they perceive to be on "the inside" to be the candidates. Once in a while they get a loose cannon who won't behave or be controlled, and it drives them crazy. It's all about control, not good government. And that's the root of the cronyism and the deals - and the debt and the high taxes.

      Delete
  86. @Anony 4:27, they may not "run it" but it is no secret they are 100% a part of it. They can try to to pretend they don't just like Gilbert pretended he had no part in the Matters blog. At least Don takes ownership in the Gadfly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 4:49 p.m. Exactly right. It is common knowledge that Stenson, VanWormer, and Condo are the administrators of the Talks blog, just ask them, they'll tell you, which is more than we can say about that coward Elroy.

      Delete
  87. I just couldn't stomach the thought of Rick McCabe and his cronies being ushered back into Town Hall if Dave VanWormer and the Democrat slate were to get in. Go EG1st.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, McCabe was in and out all during the Langley term so you've had him and his advice right along. All the party regulars are the same. The established parties haven't done East Greenbush any favors.

      Delete
  88. 5:56, I feel about Langley, the way your feel about McCabe.

    ReplyDelete
  89. My rankings for Supe 1. Conway 2. VanWormer Tied for last. Langley/Poorman

    ReplyDelete
  90. Board of Ethics: Meeting
    Posted: 07 Aug 2015 06:01 AM PDT

    August 12, 2015 7:00 Board of Ethics Meeting - convene to Executive Session to review complaints received.

    Pete Stenson

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. God speed Ethics Board, God speed.

      Delete
  91. Gadfly at August 7, 2015 at 9:33 AM:

    Caucuses are deep rooted in this great country, dating back to Colonial times.

    The Dem caucus was advertised and conducted pursuant to NYS Election Law and the Rensselaer County Democratic Committee By-laws and open to each and every enrolled Democrat in East Greenbush.

    A caucus is not that different from a primary in that candidates are nominated by a party committee and the enrolled members of that party are given the opportunity to vote on that nomination.

    Any one present at the caucus could have nominated any other individual for any of the seats, with a vote conducted if the nomination was seconded. Yet, as Suzanne Aiardo points out on Talks, no one did.

    As Churchill observed "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

    Pete Stenson

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're right Pete, we get the government we deserve. And when Mr. McCabe observed "it's the way it's always been done" related to his passing out his stipends, it's at least partially our responsibility to correct the situation. Which we did. It was Jefferson who observed: "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." When the citizenry is not involved in their government to a sufficient degree, we get mischief. When the cat's away, the mice will play, and all that. But I think that is in the processes of being corrected. Things went way too far in the last few years.

      Delete
    2. Mr. McCabe not only handed out stipends to his political friends, he ran the town to the verge of bankruptcy as reported by a Wall Street journalist.
      What's concerning is the players may have changed with the exception of Ms.Murphy, but the culture remains. Mr. McCabe is still very much involved along with Ms. Halloran. Ms.Bennett, Ms.Malone and the rest of the old Democrat guard that condoned the behavior of the past.
      Mr. McCabe is most troubling, as he was the self perceived "ring leader" of the bad behavior that took place in the past, and now will become Dave VanWormer's mentor for the future. Unfortunately Mr.Stenson, and Ms. Smyth will be expected to stand lockstep with their party and history will repeat itself if that slate of candidates were to be elected. Very disappointing to say the least.

      Delete
    3. I'm so sorry to hear Rick McCabe is no longer supporting Keith Langley for re-election as Town Supervisor.

      Delete
    4. My guess would be that Langley is estatic that he's not. He's carrying enough anchors.

      Delete
    5. But wouldn't Keith Langley be worried about losing the votes of the Rick McCabe supporters? I don't follow what you mean by carrying enough anchors?

      Delete
  92. You have to give the EG Democrat committee credit. By putting forward DVW for supe, they're proudly asserting THIS is who we are...we lost it but we want it back...the way it was before...let's hope memories are short enough to usher us, with all our past faults and failings, back into office.
    Finally, along comes EG1st who have decided enough is enough and they're not going to take it lying down anymore. Jack, Tina, and Tom are experienced, A-rated candidates who want to usher in a new kind of government, one that runs efficiently, legally, properly and correctly given the enormous responsibility of running a town of over 16,000 people. Do we really want have beens in office who are relying on us to forgive and forget the faults and failings of past administrations or do we want A-rated, quality candidates who are committed to doing the right thing for the town, not for themselves. Please look for Jack, Tina and Tom on their EG1st.org website and again on the Nov 3 ballot. The future of the town literally depends on it. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  93. And let's not forget the EG Republican Committee, carrying a Committee operating deficit for over 9 years while hurriedly re-nominating Keith Langley for Supervisor, at a fundraiser , instead of a scheduled nominating meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Pete…while what you write is technically true about the caucus, one might ask why Talks, which does a great job of announcing community and political events, didn't post a notice about the caucus, or why you yourself, who likes to alert Gadfly readers to important community and political events, didn't submit a notice about the caucus. They do no community outreach. Why, for example, doesn't the democratic committee do a mailing to all registered democrats inviting them to this vaunted exercise in democracy? The reason, of course, is that the caucus is a closed shop, a fact proven by the fuss made on Talks about us outsiders showing up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And I'll make one more point on the "closed shop" caucus. The Dem Fundraiser was announced (replete with a color photo of the candidates) before the caucus happened.

      Delete
  95. to Donnie boy, which he probably won't post on this rag of a blog

    Pete's too big a man to engage in your useless banter, but im not

    YOU evidently knew about and attended the Dem caucus why didn't YOU post the caucus info?

    why did YOU post flyer for a fundraiser for a party that didn't even exist when it raised money?

    did YOU write the state controller about the mitigation fees like pete asked?

    why are so nasty to folks who don't agree with YOU?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1) I'm not an officer of the EG Dem organization, who's responsibility it would be to take care of publicity. I just heard about it because somebody told me.

      2) Not sure, but I don't think EG1st is a political party. I think it's an organization created to achieve a place on a ballot line. In any case, it's a slate which has moved out into the community to ASK for support to achieve that ballot line. I believe that on Tuesday we'll find out how they did.

      3) I've been way out in front on the Thompson Hill issues for some time now. And Dwight Jenkins has been there before anybody. Both of us have raised the illegal Plat approval before the Town Board on several occasions, to no avail. And Dwight found the material about who was really supposed to pay for the paving many months ago.

      4) It's really hard to be respectful to people who know they are up to monkey business and then they keep on doing it.

      Delete
    2. Did some checking......

      The campaign finance committee Friends of East Greenbush First was legally and formally registered with the State Board of Elections when the fundraiser was announced. It is not a political party but a new line on the ballot that represents a broad coalition of concerned residents. When they submit their Independent Nominating Petition to the County Board of Elections next week we'll get a better idea of how broad their coalition really is. Maybe no one is interested.

      Maybe the 39 people who nominated the democratic ticket is a lot. But at least the East Greenbush First candidates are putting themselves out in public and asking everyone to participate. You can spray all the negativity you like but the Democrats didn't do that.

      Delete
  96. Gadfly, It appears you have exposed their little non inclusive club by simply walking in and witnessing the truth. McCabe, Malones, Halloran, Bennett and others all still joined at the hip. What kind of fool are they taking you for. All the rumors that Riick McCabe is using VanWormer, Stenson, & Smythe as a front to regain control and power of our town is now very believable. Thank you Gadfly for exposing the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  97. @ 4:14, if you actually read the previous posts Don allowed several comments discussing the caucus prior to the caucus, which was the most advertisement there was for it. I'm no rocket science but I'm pretty certain the answer to your question as to why Don didn't post a flyer because why would he advertise for a grouo of candidates he's not for! Lastly, get your facts straight, EG1st has operated their entire campaign to the book and abiding by the law. They never once received money before they filed with the Board of Elections.tlThey have the most detailed filing out of all of the candidates. Facts, they're a b!/@$ aren't they?

    ReplyDelete
  98. McCabe is chomping at the bit to get his sticky little corrupt fingers back into the town checkbook, and who better to do that but his best friend Dave VanWormer.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Gadfly- Is there any scuttlebutt on the Poorman-Langley Primary Race?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haven't any idea. Maybe we'll soon see their petition numbers.

      Delete
  100. Poorman got 393 signatures. 6 people carried his petitions. Langley got 219 signatures. 13 people carried his signatures. The number required to qualify is 132. The time for general objections has past without objections. So both Langley and Poorman will appear on the September primary ballot.

    Langley won a coin toss for ballot placement so his name will appear first.

    ReplyDelete
  101. I'm in the mood to read something funny, but can't seem to find the "Talks" blog you all mention so often. Can anyone post the web address? Thanx.

    ReplyDelete
  102. To 8/8 @ 4:14 p.m. What are you so upset about? Does a little formidable competition threaten you so much that you need to come out swinging? Well, you should save your energy because EG1st candidates and supporters won't stoop to your level by swinging back; they won't waste their time because they're too busy talking to smart, successful, responsible-minded residents who want smart, successful, responsible-minded people in office. They won't waste a second on the likes of you thugs. It's a new day and a new ballgame in EG and EG1st is up at bat just waiting to hit a home run on Nov 3rd.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Looks to me like Talks commenters are waiting for the other shoe to drop on the EG1st petition numbers. Could be they have nothing to worry about or could be they are (so they say) under the bus. I guess we'll see on Tuesday. From what I've heard, the Dem caucus results demonstrate that the Machine is really tone deaf.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whaddaya mean?

      Delete
    2. According to the State Comptroller, McCabe and Murphy owe $39,000 to the Town for illegal sick-leave and longevity payments. This doesn't include any stipend payments.

      Delete
    3. If Murphy owes the money, then Murphy's running mates should be asked how they plan to handle it. They are on the same ticket so they should be talking about it and making a plan.

      Delete
    4. Sadly, Ms. Murphy is running unopposed.

      Delete
  104. The East Greenbush First campaign, web site and focus on the issues is an exact reflection of the candidates. Smart, caring and committed to the right things for the people o the town.

    McCabe, Langley, Portman, Murphy, VanWormer? Yesterday's sad news and failed examples of a bygone era.

    ReplyDelete
  105. dear 910 I mean Donnie wrong again nice try now its time to pay your dues

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bad guess, Anony. However, one thing I have learned around here is that when the truth is spoken, the threats increase.

      Delete
    2. Dear Anony 10:14, direct from the OSC is that the Town Board was recommended to seek legal counsel for the stipends to determine if they should be recouped. 8 employees received stipends that to which some of these payments the OSC couldn't find an "explanation describing what they were for."

      With regards to Longevity and Sick Leave Incentives the OSC stated: " We did not find a Board resolution or any evidence of Board ratification supporting these increases. Further, Town Law does not authorize the payment of lump sum amounts to elected officials in excess of the salaries fixed for their office. The Board should consult with legal counsel and recoup these payments."

      The OSC recommended several times in just this one report that the Town seek legal counsel regarding the stipends. Did the Town? NOPE!

      Delete
    3. I will add, before I posted the comment to which you refer, I looked it up to check the facts. It's here on page 15:

      http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/towns/2012/eastgreenbush.pdf

      Delete
    4. Thanks Don, I apologize for not including the report link. Another source that cited they were indeed illegal payments was the Newsmax article written by WSJ author Stephen Moore that specifically (short and sweet) stated that the poor condition of our Town's finances is a direct result of fiscal mismanagement and illegal payments made to officials. http://www.newsmax.com/US/cities-bankruptcy-after-detroit/2013/08/06/id/519081 . Any comments now anony 10:14, do you want to argue with the OSC report and with a WSJ author? Are they just Don's group??? It can't get anymore specific than that!

      Delete
    5. Gadfly, please let me reword my last post attempt to be more appropriate. There is also that Newsmax article written by Wall Street Journal author Stephen Moore. The report stated explicitly that the reason for our Town's poor financial condition was our fiscal mismanagement and "illegal payments to town officials." One could argue Don's point of view, but here are two reports by the OSC and a WSJ author that cannot be refuted. The facts are there. The stipends were inappropriate.


      http://www.newsmax.com/US/cities-bankruptcy-after-detroit/2013/08/06/id/519081/

      Delete
  106. Hey, Anonyboy, someone needs to bring the stipend scandal back to the floor. OSC could not have made it clearer but in his over three years in office has Langley moved a muscle to address it? Nope. We can add it to the list of things Mr. Republican't hasn't done since he took office. Bet he's regretting it now that the coveted cross-endorsement is off the table.

    Gadfly, is it possible to run these posts in descending order from most recent to least recent?

    ReplyDelete
  107. Toni Murphy and her whole slate of candidates could care less about your take on the Longevity and Sick pay benefits that Toni Murphy and Rick McCabe received illegally. They are all thumbing their noses at you Don, with big smiles on their faces over on their Website. They realize you can't do a darn thing about it. Not now not ever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What you seem to keep failing at realizing is that it's not just Don and a few residents take - ITS THE OFFICE OF STATE COMPTROLLER, a long with the Wall Street Journal author. Pretty sure none of which live in East Greenbush nor care about East Greenbush. Both are just stating the same facts you seem to not understand.

      Delete
    2. 2:17 PM, You're right, I can't. But over time the voters can, and have done something about it. Slowly, but surely. Given the nature of deals and arrangements in political life, we can't even rely on the authority of the oversight agencies like OSC. Every election cycle we have a chance to make improvements in our government. All in all, I'd say we're moving in the right direction.

      In the last few years, both local political machines have screwed up royally and have shown their inability to govern objectively. Their insiders even joined forces to plot the casino fiasco and tried to put it over on us.

      In this election cycle we have a chance to do a real house cleaning. If we don't, we just might get the political equivalent of "nuclear winter."

      Delete
    3. GF, what would a political "nuclear winter" look like? In other words, what does that mean?

      Delete
    4. The machines of both parties having a graft and corruption field-day. Much worse than it has been.

      Delete
  108. Don... Are you saying that you consider yourself as an outsider, and that is troubling to you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm certainly an "outsider" where the machines are concerned....thankfully so. However, I'm a citizen and taxpayer here and I've made public some facts which have made the "insiders" a bit uncomfortable. As a former Town Attorney once said to my attorney....."we want to keep things under the radar." Not a very smart thing to say, right?

      More coming at the end of the week, by the way.

      Delete
    2. Don....iIf only 39 insiders showed up at the Democrat caucus, why didn't you organize a group and get the Eg1st candidates nominated?
      Wouldn't that have solved this ongoing problem once and for all?

      Delete
    3. NO anony 5:25, read previous posts and check out what the EG1st candidates want. THEY DO NOT WANT TO BE AFFILIATED WITH ANY PARTY!

      Delete
    4. May have solved part of the problem. I think Jack, Tina and Tom are working on ASKING the community for support to clean up government. We'll see with tomorrow's numbers how interested the community is in cleaning up government.

      Trying to storm the caucus is just like the game that the insiders play. It's all about getting themselves in power in order to pass out the favors.

      I'd make a bet now that the numbers we'll see tomorrow would indicate that a "caucus storm" could have been organized. But the "brand" has been tainted in this Town.

      Delete
  109. MA Matters has a Ltr. to the Editor in today's TU. She mentioned the "C" word.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What "C" word would you be referring to? Literally the only two words in the article that are "c" words are "committee", "clearer," "clarification", "challenging" and "contentious". Not sure the big deal with any of these words. Oh, and Clark with reference to the original author of the Drainage Pipe article.

      Delete
  110. @12:29 PM- What about "casino?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, that makes 12:14's post make more sense! I tried blocking that whole disaster out that I didn't even remember that part from the article!

      Delete