Let your voice be heard!!

A Loose Cannon Town Board

After the story appeared in the TU about the EG Town Board approving a resolution favoring the location of a Casino in East Greenbush, I e-mailed the TU reporter (and the Town Board) with a question as to how the numbers from the November referendum could be used to support a declaration of support from the municipality.  No response has been forthcoming.  I followed up with the same question to the reporter’s boss, Rex Smith.  Still no response. 

I order to make application for locating a Casino, a developer needs a resolution from the subject municipality.  They got one from East Greenbush based on very dubious support from the community.  The whole deal on Thompson Hill smells, and the whole Board should be held responsible. 

I’ve printed below a Comment from Dwight Jenkins submitted for the previous Post.  It appears to me that the whole bunch has their fingerprints on a back-room deal that community stake-holders have every right to have a say in. 

“On April 6th (see the Comments on the previous Post) someone named "Larry" asks what I'm going to do when "they" place a casino up on Thompson Hill. Coincidentally a "Larry" owns the property and the project called "Thompson Way" that was illegally approved by the Planning Board on 1/15/14. This is the same project that Supervisor Langley tried to blame on the Planning Board last Wednesday night. Somehow he seems to think that corruption in the Planning Dept. is not his cup of tea and nothing to concern himself with. Of course, no one else on the Board seems to think corruption in the Planning Dept. is anything to worry about either, since none of them batted an eye, but neither did any of them contradict me. So two weeks ago this "Larry" knows about the casino plans but no one else does- it doesn't come at the pre-board meeting, but somehow finds its way onto last Wednesday's agenda, with the misleading statement that not only the State but also the County and the Town voters essentially approved November's gambling referendum. In reality, no one knows how East Greenbush taxpayers feel about a casino in their Town since that's not how the votes were tallied by the Board of Elections. East Greenbush has not yet spoken. Hell, until today most them never even saw it coming to their own town. And another troubling aspect of that resolution: Mr. Langley talks about the financial windfall a casino would bring to our fiscally strapped town. Or would it? Are we really fiscally strapped? See, even though Councilwoman Matters referred to our fiscal "crisis," and Councilwoman Mangold expressed doubt that even a casino would be enough to get us out from under our fiscal woes, we don't really know where we stand since the Supervisor continues to sit on the outside audits we paid more than $30,000 for! Apparently the new comptroller, the one Glenville let go under abnormal circumstances (Google it), is going to do his own audit of sorts. Unfortunately the State Comptroller's office doesn't think much of this idea, telling me that there is no comparison between an in-house audit and an independent outside audit, especially one that we already paid for. The whole place is corrupt. Mr. Langley, what ARE you going to do? It's time to come clean.”

----- Dwight Jenkins

Governance by Avoidance

Well the Langley administration (the “Smart Way Forward”) now has its fingerprints on some of the mischief which had its beginning with the previous administration.  When it comes to governmental sleaze, they’re all in bed together.  I’m re-printing below a couple of Posts by Dwight Jenkins which outline the mischief going on on Thompson Hill.  It’s a scandal run by the patrons of both Parties. 

It looks like Langley's Planning Board Chairman signed off on a Plat approval for which there is no Planning Board approved Plat Plan.  And he did it after a meeting which never happened pursuant to a resolution which was never passed.  And the PB secretary is saying that Mr. Jenkins has to FOIL for the minutes of the meeting that never happened that are supposed to be a public record. 

Seems to me that a false instrument was offered for filing which led to the issuance of governmental permits and approvals.  The Town Board should be acting to correct this perpetual mischief.  But they have their collective heads down the Rabbit Hole.  It’s not like they haven’t been notified.  Time to follow the money. 

Here’s the first from Dwight:

“I live next to a planned cluster development that has been stymied for many years now because it never really came close to Town planning and zoning laws. Until now. But not really, it’s just that someone seems to have given the project the go-ahead anyway. Twenty-three units on 19.83 acres situated on the most scenic hilltop in Town, declared under the SEQRA reporting requirements to have no scenic views to be considered, with a lawsuit pending on the sewer system, with a preliminary project plat approval from three years ago that looks significantly different than the current plan, which was never finally approved by Planning Board resolution as required by NYS planning law but instead was just signed into being by the Planning Board chairman back in January, shortly after the Republican purges and in-between the regularly scheduled meetings of 1/8/14 and 1/22/14, which means there are no published minutes and hence no way for the public to know that the project was moving forward. Ya know how we knew? When we saw the heavy equipment you see digging a foundation you don’t see. The whole project has moved forward in a dark, subterranean manner, right down to the re-paving of the pot-holed Kunar Province road that we called home for eighteen years, made possible at a discount price through an interesting and unusual set of circumstances surrounding the State/Federal money pouring in for our latest traffic roundabout. And I’m told by the Town that everything is in order. Yes, I love the roundabout, but I hate going round in circles on a highly dubious subdivision being run by shadowy Town figures and hidden promises. It’s all being FOIL’ed, the dots being slowly connected, and the Town Board has been put on notice, but I thought you should be aware of just how we do business here.”

And the Second from Dwight:

“Now that “Thompson Way” has its first foundation in progress, a few questions for the Town Board:
I have e-mailed each Town Board member, the Supervisor and Deputy Supervisor, the Town Clerk and Planning Clerk, the Building Inspector, and the Planning Attorney about the obvious, arbitrary and capricious nature of the Town’s approach to this project. Twice, in some cases. I referred to State Planning Law, sections 276 and 277, which require public hearings at different points along the road to development as well as a Planning Board resolution and vote on a Final Plat before the Chairman signs off on the Plat and copies go out to the Planning Secretary and to the County. Why did I get only one erroneous response from someone the Supervisor delegated to respond to me? Why did I get a cursory response from Phil Malone and Sue Mangold, but no one else? Why has the Planning department told me I have to FOIL the Town Clerk for the Planning Board minutes that gave final approval to this project on a date when no Planning Board meeting was scheduled or recorded publicly? Why did I never get a response from the Town Clerk’s office when I questioned the legitimacy of this answer? Why can’t the Planning Department tell me it’s okay to come down and review the Final Plat and supporting documents when all of those materials are supposed to be on file within 5 days of approval? What would happen if an outside investigatory agency/agencies started looking into this project, as recently happened in Troy with that interesting abandoned building that was hastily torn down behind the new “Bombers” restaurant? What would they uncover?  What would happen if an injunction was filed to stop the “Thompson Way” project until a court could unravel the Town’s actions in this case? How would the project’s bonding agency react to the potential delay? How would the project’s counsel react to a judge’s order to cease building, when the Town gave it’s “approval” to the project? Would he or she file suit against the Town?
These are all questions that the Town Board should have considered in the past, and certainly should be acting on even now. An edifice is in fact being built. More than one…”

Right Man, Wrong Job by Jack Conway

This morning the Town Board held a special meeting to make appointments to the Board of Ethics, authorize the settlement of an employment discrimination suit against the Supervisor, accept two resignations and resolve several other matters.  Since the next board meeting is only three business days away, the timing of the special meeting raised eyebrows.  The two primary differences between an 8:45 a.m. special meeting and a 7:00 p.m. regular meeting are that fewer residents can attend and there is no public comment period.  Normally, special meetings are called to address time sensitive matters but a number of today’s resolutions could have waited until Wednesday.  Under these circumstances it’s hard not to draw the conclusion that the board called this meeting to conduct important business under the radar with as little public attention as possible.  One action taken by the board deserves special mention.  The comments below would have been presented as a public comment at the meeting but since that opportunity was not made available, I offer them here.

The appointment of Ed Gilbert to the Board of Ethics is a serious error in judgment on the part of Supervisor Langley.  This is not a commentary on Ed’s competence as a person; I like and respect him and he has made a substantive contribution to the political debate in this town.  But he has done so as an aggressively partisan participant; his appointment represents the politicization of a board that can only be effective if its members are not perceived as advocates for either political party.  More importantly, this appointment will discourage town employees from filing legitimate complaints because they know the Supervisor’s personal political bodyguard is waiting for them if they decide to contest actions taken by a member of the political majority.

The two most important attributes of a member of the Board of Ethics are the abilities to be impartial and maintain the confidentiality of people who file complaints.  If you took a survey of town employees and asked them if Ed Gilbert would be impartial and maintain confidentiality if a complaint is filed against the Supervisor or member of the majority, how many do you think would answer ‘Yes?’  Ten percent?  Twenty percent?  Nobody?  I’m not saying Ed Gilbert won’t be fair and maintain confidentiality but in the world of ethics, perception is as important as reality and the perception guaranteed by this appointment is that the Board of Ethics is stacked to protect the majority.  The message?  Whistleblowers will not be tolerated.

Since this appointment is now fait accompli, three things should happen immediately.  First, a written job description for the position of Deputy Supervisor should be posted on the town website.  This job includes financial compensation for the first time in years and since it is illegal for a member of the Board of Ethics to be compensated for any work related to that board, it is imperative that the public be informed of the line between Ed’s responsibilities as Deputy Supervisor and his work on this board.  Second, he should immediately cease and desist from posting partisan commentary on blogs, in the Advertiser or any other public organ.  This includes the negative, underhanded ‘Anonymous’ work that is often attributed to him.

Third, and most importantly, he must immediately terminate his role as political and policy advisor to the Supervisor and new majority.  Every piece of advice he gives sets up a potential conflict of interest.  Whether it concerns the employment status of an individual, a decision on a specific project or broader policy advice his input can influence issues that may come before him as a member of the Board of Ethics.  It is unseemly and intimidating to town employees for a member of the Board of Ethics to be seen walking in and out of the Supervisor’s office on a regular basis.  He must immediately adopt a non-partisan approach to local politics.  The letter of the Code of Ethics states that members of that board cannot sit on political committees; the spirit of that clause suggests they should not engage in any politics of a partisan nature. 

The fundamental concern of the Board of Ethics is to monitor and eliminate conflicts of interest.  The appointment of an aggressively partisan political operative, one who has twice run for office and recently played a key role in getting the new majority into a position of power, is an inherent conflict of interest since the hallmark of a Board of Ethics is the fairness that comes from people who adopt an independent stance in relation to town employees and elected officials.  It also risks the perception that every statement, promise and action taken by the majority on the subject of ethics has been a political ploy made safe by the knowledge that a mechanism could be implemented that guarantees their protection by discouraging town employees from filing complaints. 

Ed Gilbert is in position to make numerous positive contributions to the governance of this town and I wish him well in those endeavors.  But he has chosen a partisan path and on this basis his appointment to the Board of Ethics should be reconsidered and withdrawn.

Stakeholders and owning the governing process

There was a time a few years ago when a Town Board Meeting had an audience of maybe three to five people.  Jack Conway, Ann Taylor, me and sometimes Rick Matters and Bonnie Lester.  No sign of Mr. Langley, Mr. Gilbert or Mr. DeFruscio - ever.  Citizen involvement grew with CARES and The STORY of EG, and massive amounts of work was done by lots of people in exposing the mischief of the last administration which contributed in large part to its demise.  Ethics reform would not have happened without the effort of citizen stakeholders.  There's a long list.  To try to control the relationships and contacts of this active group is to invite defeat.  Jack put it well in referring to the taking of a scalp.

It’s becoming clear that the new administration knows that it has a marketing and public relations problem.  But their way of addressing it is making the problem worse.  Mr. Langley and his assistants have been “aiming” at the very people who created the context which made it possible for Langley, Matters and DiMartino to be elected.  And the attempts at demanding loyalty rather than earning loyalty began over two years ago.  It didn’t work then, and it won’t work now.  Some of the attempts at “control” have put a face on the administration that even the most insensitive ham-handed politician would run from.  Attempting to control contacts between friends and colleagues in the name of “loyalty” is bizarre.  The administration should be working to demonstrate “loyalty” to those who put it in place, not demanding loyalty from stakeholders. 

And then there’s the “Attack Blog” – EGDemands.  How libelous attacks and cartoons bordering on the pornographic supports a positive image of the administration is beyond comprehension. 

We learned from Dwight Jenkins’ interview with Mr. Langley what the Supervisor’s agenda was.  And that’s supposed to be it?  The fact is that a couple other people created the Majority, at least in part based on promises published in the Advertiser during the campaign.  That majority was created by the voters who are stakeholders. 

When advice comes to a leader only from those who agree with him or behave as sycophants, leaders paint themselves into a corner and cannot lead.  This is particularly dangerous for those who have absolutely no experience in governing a municipality.  They should be welcoming and inviting questions and good counsel.  Not to do so creates suspicion, not confidence. 

I know for a fact that over two years ago the advice was offered that there should have been a transition TEAM made up of stakeholders to fashion a workable agenda and implementation timetable.  This is possible even for a minority.  This advice was rejected and replaced by the “loyalty” and “refrain from associating” demands.  Well, now there is a majority.  And there is still time ……

This Space Available II......

Former Governor Mario Cuomo often said that you campaign in poetry, but govern in prose.  Another take on the task comes from the management profession:  "If you can't measure it, you can't manage it.  This is hard work, and to most who have little experience in doing it, it's scary.  But there are plenty of people around who have intelligence, energy and even experience.

So herewith we offer a governance outline from the infamous Gadfly community.  It needs some filling-in and fine tuning and criticism.  And then it needs some additional quantification and a time-line so it can be measured and managed.  The campaign promise list needs some "how and when" tweaking. 

Mission:

Provide essential services in the most cost-effective manner possible.

Achieve fiscal responsibility by reducing the cost of government, reducing the inter-fund debt, lowering taxes and restoring the town’s municipal credit rating.

Attract and retain businesses by making East Greenbush a good place to do business.

Maintain and upgrade the town’s infrastructure.

  

Operating Principles for Town Officials:

·        Be fiscally responsible and accountable.

·        Always act in the best interests of the community.

·        Commit to a policy of transparency and maximum sharing of public information.

Financial Recovery:

Reduce the size of the town workforce by attrition rather than layoffs.   Implement a hiring freeze for all but essential positions.  Convert positions from full time to part time or seasonal employment whenever feasible.

Place limits on the use of consultants.  Implement a rule that consultants who recommend a project may not receive contracts from those projects.

Reduce the cost of local government by 10% within three years.  Require all managers to submit a plan to reduce their department budgets by 10% in the next fiscal year.  Any manager who refuses to submit a plan with at least 10% in reductions will have their budget automatically reduced by 10% at the discretion of the supervisor and town board.

Reduce town taxes by 15% within three years.

Consolidate town services with either the county or other municipalities whenever possible.

Explore municipal town consolidations in the capital district. Seek and obtain support from the governor’s initiative on this project and goal.

Town Operations:

Commit to the application of generally accepted accounting principles in all aspects of town operations.  Purchase and install accounting software.

Conduct a workload analysis for all town departments, including the Department of Public Works and the Police Department.

Develop and implement measurable goals for each town department and department head. Utilize annual performance reviews to assess, recognize and reward goal attainment by each department head.

Make all appointments based on merit. Create and implement a best practices method for posting open position and interviewing and selecting candidates. Recognize and support diversity in hiring.

Conduct full and meaningful external audits every year.  Specify individual operations for forensic audit on a rotating basis.  Publish the results in a timely manner.

Prepare a ten to fifteen year schedule for the maintenance, repair and replacement of town vehicles.

Community Relations:

Commit to a return of the question and answer session at town board meetings or schedule another meeting on a monthly basis to address residents’ concerns.

Utilize the town website to increase the sharing of public information.   Make the supervisor’s report substantive and not political.

Fully utilize town committees like the Board of Ethics and the Citizens Financial Advisory Committee to advise the Town Board and Supervisor on important decisions.

Investigate the best ideas for revitalizing Columbia Turnpike.

Measure the impact on town services of businesses on the Rt. 4 corridor. 

Goals for Governing from the Smart Way Forward letters to the Advertiser during the last campaign:

1)      Zero-based budgeting rather than incremental budgeting.

2)      Establish procedures for accurate revenue projections.

3)      No borrowing from other funds to cover general fund shortfalls.

4)      Re-consider the Ethics Law in January.

5)      Apply for aid from the State’s new Financial Restructuring Board.

6)      A zero tax increase for 2014.

7)      Coherent master plan for 9 & 20.

I may have left some issues out or not sufficiently explained amplified these items, so the majority is invited to jump in and amplify. 

This Space Available......

I think we need to see a policy commitment from the new administration.  This would mean some statements as to goals to be achieved.  This would also mean some statements as to how the current budget works to move toward those goals.  This would also mean some statements as to how the Organizational Meeting decisions further the stated goals. 

I think a lot of us would give almost anything for leadership which could articulate a vision for the Town and the steps to be taken to get to the goal.  Simply state what you are trying to achieve in quantifiable terms and then state the steps you are taking to achieve those goals.  This is not rocket science.  Governments do it every day.  If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it.  

 Keith, Mary Ann, Deb, Ed…..Write something up related to the goals of the new administration and the steps already taken and to be taken to achieve those goals and post them here.  Let the community know what’s on the agenda.  That's transparency. Right now, folks are taking shots at what they see in the personnel charts.  Are you going to recind the tax increase?  Was the "tap-dance" on the budget an exercise to get cash for new pork for your use?  The election announcement was that there was a "tax cut."  The moves at the last Board meeting made sure that there wasn't one.  Who's ideas was that??  You see that some decisions keep raising questions.  

So write something.  Fly the policy flag of the new administration.  Post it here.