WHITE PLAINS CITIZENETREPORTER SETS RECORD VISITS FOR YEAR 7,017,658 VISITS! 2,098,003 VISITORS MADE 6 VISITS A DAY EVERY DAY. 63,330 UNIQUE VISITORS MADE 133,730 VISITS IN DECEMBER. WPCNR AVERAGED 17,284 VISITORS A WEEK, VISITING 31,270 TIMES.

Hits: 0

.

 

WPCNR THE SUNDAY BAILEY. News Commentary by John F. Bailey. September 9, 2007: I feel like Captain Renault, played by Claude Rains in Casablanca. When Rick Blaine, played by Humphery Bogart, frustrates Renault’s attempt to blackmail Jan Brandel, a young woman with her fiancé, seeking a Letter of Transit to escape 1942 Casablanca, Renault closes up Rick’s gambling operation in a fit of pique, saying

 

“I’m shocked, simply shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!” (Then he’s handed his winnings in the movie.)

 

This reporter is shocked, simply shocked there’s an election going on here.

 Twelve days before two incumbent  Councilpersons (Benjamin Boykin and Dennis Power) are running in a Democratic Primary they publish a letter in the press this week vowing to fight the Request for Qualifications procedure to start possible station development, already in process.

 

Note to voters: Your ever-vigilant council could have killed the RFQ two weeks ago when they could have said, “I’m shocked, simply shocked you’d bring this proposal back.”

 

 

Two of the councilpersons followed the letter up with a selected mailing to registered Democrats  delivered this weekend asking the rhetorical question

 

“Is this your vision for White Plains? Exclusivity Agreement. No Citizen Input. Developer’s Vision”

 

 

The flip side  of the followup flyer to their White Plains Times announcement  plays the headline:

 

Lecuona, Boykin and Power don’t think so,” and claims they will promote “Balanced Development,” “Open Space,” “Workforce Housing,” “Protecting Neighborhoods,” “Keeping property taxes down,” “Citizen Input: Open Government,” and “Integrity,” signing off with the earnest promise, “Real Democrats With a Real Vision for White Plains”

 

The strong two-pronged attack is obviously aimed at charming the Democratic voter who does not remember the vote for the LCOR Bank Street project (spring 2007); the vote for the 221 Main project; the vote for the city  budget (a 7% increase with no cuts); the vote on the North Street Community 6-1, with one sanctimonious vote by Mr. Power that meant nothing, against; the acceptance of  certiorari payments the last five years that were all unanimous; the PILOTS they’ve approved despite one councilman’s assurances (Mr. Boykin) that they are the same payments as if the developer was paying taxes, without grilling the assessor for assessment projections–  that have made White Plains a developer’s sandbox. And there’s more: the vote to sell Railsidei was 4-3, with Mr. Boykin being the swing man with the deciding vote. 

 

The letter saying how the council would fight the RFQ proposal seems disingenuous of the “Real Democrats” coming two weeks after the council learned about the RFQ proposal, and when the Democrats on August 23, did not say a word of protest about the RFQ then.

 

What is so funny about the Is This Your Vision for White Plains? Piece is the Democratic candidates have no vision. They go with the flow.

 

And, as the past has proven, when the voters have a vision, all the council ignore it – unless they figure if they vote for something – it could cost them the voters who have been reelecting this kind of councilperson for years.

 

(They voted down the 60 acres of park from New York Presbyterian Hospital, because they listened to a selfish vision of persons they were very familiar with. You cannot blame that irretrievable loss on Mr. Power or Ms. Lecuona, but you can certainly blame it on Rita Malmud and Benjamin Boykin, who is running.)

 

This sort of selective concern just before election is nothing new.

 

The tone of the White Plains Times letter and the tone of the followup piece sound a lot like Claude Rains’ as Captain Renault, saying: “I’m shocked, simply shocked to find out that gambling is going on here,” only the council four are saying – “I’m shocked, simply shocked to find out there is development going on here. Did we approve that? We had no idea.”

 

Because they did approve it all.

 

 The development of the future  they now claim in the future will be “Balanced Development.” So they are admitting the development to date has been unbalanced and reckless? Shouldn’t the intelligent voter throw them out if they knowingly did not examine the balance issue in the past?

 

 Now affordable housing has become workforce housing, which sounds so touchy feely. I particularly like the Protecting Neighborhoods line. Mr. Boykin and Ms. Malmud(who is not running September 12), really listened to the North Broadway Civic Association, didn’t they when that organization asked for a park on the AT& T parking lot instead of 14 stories of Avalon Bay? They really listened to the Railside neighbors, didn’t they? And they have not paid attention to the toxic dump at all

 

Mr. Power, who is running, and Mr. Boykin, who is running, paid no attention to the TCE-polluted city dump situation, never grilling the Commissioner of Public Works on the situation – never demanding the Commissioner move immediately to clean it up, regardless of what the DEC says.

 

Power and Boykin (the incumbents)  have also not lobbied the county hard for sewer fixes to prevent future problems in the Beverly Road area, which is particularly interesting because Power recently transferred to the Department of Environmental Facilities fo r the county, and he is in a unique position to lobby for the city for the county to fix their small pipes which Commissioner Nicoletti blames the problem on.  In fact, Mr. Power according to recent reports says he is overseeing county efforts on global warming. He should add to his interests, local flooding.

 

Politicians never fight for you until just before elections.

 

Reporters present understood exactly what the RFQ was. Does it take our slow learners on the Common Council two weeks to read a document.? (At least they read it.)

 

However, Mr. Roach and Mr. Boykin, Mr. Hockley, Mr. Bernstein, Ms. Malmud and Mr. Power have all been impressed with the Cappelli proposal for Station Square. The RFQ specifications describe various versions of the Station Square project.

 

Councilman Glen Hockley speaking to WPCNR said that after the Council 4 (Messrs. Roach, Boykin, Power, and Ms. Malmud) published their letter in the White Plains Times, that he felt this was simply politics.

 

 Hockley also advanced the information Friday that Paul Wood, the City Executive Officer, had told him there could be one, two, or three Designated Redevelopers chosen after the $3 Million study is done. This appears to be a way for the Council 4 to change their present opposition on November 7, and justify their reviving the proposal, one day after the general election.

 

This presumes this show of anti-development zeal is enough to beat back the challenges of the present “swingman” on the Common Council, Arnold Bernstein, and the challenger, Candyce Corcoran.

 

Ms. Lecuona, who  replaced the incumbent Bernstein on the Democratic nomination, is obviously being groomed to swing the balance of power away from Mayor Delfino by filling the role of voting with Roach, Power, Malmud and Boykin. Bernstein is being vilified for voting with the Mayor.

 

This is interesting because Benjamin Boykin has voted with the Mayor a lot. Mr. Bernstein and Mr. Hockley, have trumped the professed anti-development forces of Mr. Roach, Mr. Power and Ms. Malmud, with Benjamin Boykin joining right with them.

 

Perhaps the voters should be told to vote against Mr. Boykin, too – if the Democrat literature was consistent.

 

This is all about getting rid of the swingman, Mr. Bernstein. However it would appear that Mr. Bernstein has not been the only swingman to side with development. Mr. Boykin has done that too.

 

When you look at the record it is wonderful to note that 12 days before Mr. Boykin and Mr. Power are facing a challenge, they are suddenly born again as “real democrats.”

 

Where was the Democratic council “foresight, courage, and intelligence and vision”  the last four years when they let our property taxes soar, our budget balloon, our infrastructure fall into question, and parking enforcement drive residents out of the downtown?

 

Frankly, I’m shocked, simply shocked to see they finally are coming to their senses, at least until after they are officially on the ballot, then officially reelected.

 

When they are, I look forward to a budget increase in 2008-2009 limited to inflation; labor settlements in line with inflation this time; more candor on what developments are being thought about; studies of city potential, paid for by the city; an end to subsidies for developers building workforce housing; extended parking hours; an end to the parking ticket blitz; a certiorari penalty to make it a little less attractive to file a certiorari; and let’s see a Budget and Finance Committee that meets once a month instead of after the budget is presented.

 

I’m shocked, simply shocked to realize when you look at the “Real Democrats” campaign promises this week.  They seem quite different from the way they voted the last four years.

Hits: 0

WPCNR’S VIEW FROM THE UPPER DECK. Special Report to WPCNR from WPPA Channel 76 BEYOND THE GAME’s Johnny V, a bold Boston Booster. September 8, 2007:   “We’ll be in the playoffs and we dread the idea that the Yankees will be too.” Cambridge denizen David Laurila, author Interviews from Red Sox Nation recently shared those thoughts.  In taking the pulse of Red Sox rooters this writer found moods are up certainly since Buchholz’s No-No and Jon Lester’s  pitching performances.  Laurila went on to say, “Come Friday the 14th when NYY hits town, it will assuredly be, ‘We HAVE to win this series’—whether we’re up by two games or 10. (Boston’s lead in the All-Important Loss Column in the American League East is 5 games going into Sunday afternoon’s action in Baltimore and Kansas City.)

Johhny V. of Channel 76’s Beyond The Game (Tuesdays at 10, Friday at 9) with two of the books he has contributed to. Mr. Vorperian took the pulse of nervous Red Sox Fans this week for WPCNR as the Yankees close in.

The Fracas in Fenway Comin’ Up This Friday.

Southern New England Society of American Baseball Research President Len Levin a past sports scribe with the Providence Journal noted, “I’d like to be 50 games ahead of the Yankees, but if the Red Sox go 13-12 the rest of the way, the Yankees would have to go 19-6.  And the Red Sox have a softer schedule. I think most Red Sox fans these days are trying to will the Yankees to go into a horrible slump and miss the post-season entirely.”


       Calling the Bambino?  Andy Tossetti said, “The pitching needs to be more consistent from Dice K and  Schilling…As far as the bats are concerned the instant outs..-Crisp, Lugo and Drew really need to start hitting the BALL…I think if they play a little smarter they could WIN the whole thing again.”  A Nutmeg State Boston Backer Mr. Tossetti made these declarations before his wife, Linda, -a prime Pinstripe Promoter, and oh yes, Babe Ruth‘s grand-daughter.

       There is a revisionist air in Red Sox Nation, in the main, things look good. Of course there are some true traditional Sox supporters that look to the 14th and feel like Boston 212 owner Charlie Garland.  Charles says “Alas..this is September, and this is, after all..THE RIVALRY…It all comes down to emotions. Throw standings, ERAS, RBIs, and payrolls out the window…This year, The Rocket returns, promising his “red glare” for the final season series, and quite possibly another October classic.  New rookie hurler phenoms are emerging for both teams.  This year’s feast still has all the flavor, spice, aroma, sizzle, and calories that we ravenous Sox (and Yanks) fans salivate over..despite the earlier season’s headlining surprises.

         Mr. Garland signed off with, “So, my mood? I’m a Boston fan.  I’m biting my fingernails.  I’m pulling my hair out.  I’m grinding my teeth.  I’m dripping with sweat trying to keep my blood pressure at bay.  My September 4-course diet consists of Valium, Sominex, Coffee, and Maalox.  My mood, you ask? I’m trying to think about football (it’s not working).  This, the perennial pandemic of passionate paranoia…is driving me crazy.  And I wouldn’t have it any other way….”

           You know what?  Me too!  GO SOX!

Hits: 0

WPCNR CITY HALL TICKER. September 7, 2007:  No developer has, of yet, responded to the Request for Proposals as of Friday, according to Paul Wood, the Executive Officer of the City of White Plains in an official statement  released at 6:30 PM this evening to the media, “and they are not likely too,” in light of the public announcement of four White Plains Councilpersons today, Wood said.

Paul Wood, White Plains Executive Officer for Mayor Joseph Delfino, asked if city hall would extend the deadline (past September 30), Wood  responded in an e-mail: “There is no point in telling them not to respond or to extending the deadline.” Wood told WPCNR he would fax the list of developers who were sent the RFQ Monday.

The city hall statement is a reaction to the published policy statement of Councilpersons Benjamin Boykin, Rita Malmud, Thomas Roach and Dennis Power made public in the press today which stated publicly the four councilman would oppose the RFQ and end the procedure as soon as possible. The statement makes the case that the RFQ is needed to fund any study the city would do to determine the possibility of development potential in the Metro-North Station vicinity in White Plains. Wood also laments “we may have missed the boat.” He also adds Mayor Joseph Delfino is very dissappointed the councilmembers chose to make this public without informing the Mayor of their feelings.

Mr. Wood is reacting to the surprise letter to the White Plains Times from the four councilmembers which appeared today vowing to kill the Request for Qualifications procedure initiated by the City August 27.

Here is Mr. Wood’s statement on behalf of the Mayor of White Plains:

 

 

The City issued an RFQ after extensive questioning from Councilmembers Boykin, Roche, Malmud and Power regarding the development potential of the transportation center area.  If there is no interest in developing the area, why are they so concerned about what could be built?

When the Council was prepared to turn down the previous proposal offered by Louis Cappelli, the resounding sentiment was that there should be “competition” for the right to develop there.  The RFQ seeks to address both of those issues WITHOUT having to have the taxpayers fund the necessary studies estimated at about $3 million (or a 10% tax increase) to determine the development capacity of the area in question. 

Unless a developer is willing to pay for the studies, the taxpayer will have to.  It is insidious to try to develop a plan for the area without knowing what the capacity capabilities are.  In response to the insinuation that this is somehow a wolf in sheep’s clothing, that’s shear (get it?) nonsense. No one has responded to the RFQ, and considering the 4 council members recent comments, I doubt anyone is likely to now. 

So, that’s where we are today.  Interesting to note that New Rochelle, Mount Vernon, Yonkers and Stamford Connecticut all recently unveiled plans to develop their transit station areas with office and housing projects. 

Considering the change in financing and market conditions, we may have missed the boat this time around.  I can only say the Mayor was extremely disappointed that these council members expressed their negativity regarding RFQ’s so publicly without the courtesy of informing him. 

Again, if there is no interest in developing the area, why did Councilmen Boykin and Power and President Rita Malmud request information regarding the development potential of the area.  You’d also think that sending out an RFQ to 22 developers and announcing it would certainly invite “competition?” 

The RFQ would simply answer the question of which developers would be interested in putting up $3 million to do the necessary studies.  It does not ask for proposals, it does not seek ideas, it simply asks are you capable of putting up the $3 million to do the studies and are you an accomplished developer/builder.

Some one or a group would then be selected to work with the City to develop a proposal for the area that conforms to what the capacity for the area is – period.  There is an timeline included to invite citizen participation in the process so that it would be a very public process.  Since I doubt anyone is now going to be willing to invest the $3 million based on their comments, the taxpayer will have to pay or nothing will happen there.  Those are the only alternatives.

Hits: 0

WPCNR CAMPAIGN 2007. By John F. Bailey. September 6, 2007 UPDATED 1 A.M. EDT, September 7, 2007 UPDATED 8:31 AM. EDT, UPDATED 3:08 PM EDT: Incumbent  Councilman Arnold Bernstein called this week’s “WPDCC” newsletter mailing to select Democratic voters from the Democratic City Committee as being  “slanderous” and an “attack on my good name” Thursday afternoon.  He issued a challenge to Democratic rivals Benjamin Boykin, Milagros Lecuona and Dennis Power to debate him at the Women’s Club Friday, September 14 at 8 P.M.  As of 11:30 Thursday evening, Mr. Power refused to debate, Ms. Lecuona has said it depends on what her colleagues decide, and Mr. Boykin has not returned two phone calls from WPCNR asking the question. Candyce Corcoran the other candidate in the primary said she was willing to debate anyone, anytime, anywhere.

As  of late Thursday evening, Liz Shollenberger, the Chair of the Democratic City Committee when asked if her three nominees had accepted the challenge to debate Mr. Bernstein, told WPCNR “Not to my knowledge. It would be news to me if they did.”

Tony Russo right, introduces Councilman Arnold Bernstein  at a News Conference Thursday afternoon, holding in his right hand the WPDCC Newsletter mailed this week by the Democratic City Committee that Mr. Bernstein says slanders him and attacks his good name.

Dennis Power flatly refused to debate Mr. Bernstein and Ms. Lecuona said she would have to see what the rest of the team was doing, but did not rule out debating Mr. Bernstein. Mr. Boykin as of 3 P.M. Friday afternoon had not returned WPCNR’s call to see if he would debate.

 

Candyce Corcoran the other candidate in the September 18 Primary scrum said she had been told by Journal News reporter Keith Eddings that all three: Boykin, Lecuona and Power has agreed to debate last night at 6:40 PM. At that time, Corcoran said  she would debate. This afternoon Corcoran told WPCNR, “I’m ready to debate anyone, anytime, anywhere. I know the issues and I’m ready to let residents know what I am thinking. I have nothing to hide.I do not need a team to confer with for what comes out of my mouth.”

 Mr. Power told WPCNR he was not interested in debating Mr. Bernstein because “he (Bernstein) has had more than enough time to explain his votes, and frankly I am not interested.” Power also said he approved of the WPDCC mailing piece that was sent out attacking Mr. Bernsteins’ record. Power said “I’m not interested. I never heard anything from Arnie Bernstein (about the debate invitation.)

 

Power Approves Mailing

 

Asked if he approved of the way the WPDC C piece attacked Mr. Bernstein’s record,  when many of Bernstein’s votes were in line with Mr. Boykin’s votes and the rest of the council, Power said, “I do approve of the WPDCC letter the committee sent out. He had four years to explain his votes,” and that Bernstein was far out of touch with the rest of the Democratic Party. Power also said more than 80 people voted for the nominees and that selection of Mr. Boykin, Ms. Lecuona and himself was “overwhelming” by the District Leaders.

 

Lecuona defers to colleagues.

 

Ms. Lecuona speaking to WPCNR this evening said she had first heard of the debate challenge while at a meeting, and did not rule out participating. She said she would have to cancel a prior engagement to participate and see what her other nominees were doing. “It’s more like a team thing. I have to see what the others have to say.”

 

When informed Mr. Power had flat-out refused the debate challenge, Lecuona said. “I just heard about it briefly. I assume this was caused by the mailing that went out.”

 

Asked if she approved of the mailing, Lecuona said, “ To tell you the truth I don’t think that’s the right question. This was sent by Liz Shollenberger, and when I look at it it looks like cuts  of the Journal News. So it seems like what they are writing here it’s based on some articles in the paper. But, you know, John, I don’t like to talk about other people. I want to keep my campaign focused on what I can bring to the table. If that’s what you to ask me then we can continue talking. But what other people say, I am not interested in that.”

 

WPCNR asked if the committee showed the mailer  to Ms. Lecuona before they sent it out, that Lecuona, by her reaction, seemed a little offended by it. Lecuona said, “As I just told, if you want to talk about my campaign, then we’ll talk about my campaign.  If you want to talk about what Liz Shollenberger does or what Arnie Bernstein does, that’s what they do.  That’s not the type of person I am. If you want to talk about the things I can bring to the table, then we can talk. If Liz did this, that’s not my style (to comment on what other people do).”

 

Asked about Bernstein’s charge she had a conflict of interest being on the County Planning Board, Lecuona said, “I am aware of that. As a matter of fact on the time I’ve been on the planning board, there’s another person who became councilwoman in New Rochelle, and she was in the same position,  and she resigned. The President and the Chair (Shollenberger) are aware of that.”

 

Bernstein charges selection of nominees was not fair. 

 

Bernstein in his news conference charged that the selection of the Democratic slate was by public show of hands vote for the first time, so that District Leaders had to reveal who they were. 

 

Bernstein alleged this procedure was not fair because, he charged district leaders who serve on the whim of the party leadership,  faced the possibility of being replaced since party leaders would see who was going against the slate and who was for it. WPCNR observed this in progress and notes that each District Leader was called on individually to voice their preference, and recorded by district. The vote previously had been by secret ballot.

 

 

Bernstein chided the mailing piece for calling him “a rubber stamp for development”  with the Mayor, when the committee endorsed Mr. Boykin whose voting record, Bernstein said was almost identical to his.

 

Mr. Bernstein said the mailing piece’s charge that he opposed the county senior housing proposed on the post office site was an “out and out lie” that he was actually in favor of it if the 85 Court Street shelter could be moved. 

 

On the same subject, Bernstein also took issue with the mailing piece characterization that he was “demonizing the homeless,” by joining in a call for the shelter to be relocated. Bernstein said he did so because the 85 Court Street shelter (since closed, August 5) was near six schools and a library and “because I didn’t think the basement of an office building was sufficient to meet the needs of these struggling and needy people.”

 

Chides Rivals for Conflicts of Interest.

 

Bernstein also attacked the Democratic City Committee leader for accusing him of “being beholden to special interest groups,” charging that two of the nominees have “clear conflicts of interests serving on the Council; one candidate who was given a high salaried position by the County Executive as a political pay back for running a losing campaign for Mayor and another who has no legislative experience, but is a member of the County Planning Board.”

 

 Dennis Power ran for Mayor in 2005 and after losing that election to Mayor Delfino, was hired as an Assistant to the County Executive reporting to Sal Carrera, in the Department of Economic Development. Power still is employed by the county, having been shifted to the Department of Environmental Facilities. Ms. Lecuona is a member of the County Planning Board.  Mr. Power was cleared of any conflict of interest in this matter.

 

Bernstein Poll Encouraging: Appel

 

Jonathan Appel, the Treasurer for the Bernstein primary campaign, said that, “I think what’s turning in Arnie’s favor are far in agreement with Arnie’s position. It’s just certain fringe special interests, tiny groups that have taken over the party.”

 

 

Noting a contingent of firefighters joining the news conference, WPCNR asked if the Bernstein campaign had commitments from groups to help. Appel said, “We’ve got the endorsement of the PBA, the central labor body, the endorsement of the communications workers, and we hope all unions will put their power behind the get out the vote along with us.”

 

WPCNR asked what Bernstein’s polling conducted two weeks ago had shown, and if Bernstein would have withdrawn had his numbers been down. (Bernstein had the opportunity to attempt to place himself on the November general citywide election ballot as an independent, but chose not to.)

 

Appel reported, “I would never expected the numbers to have been different than they were. As you find in most things, the people who are satisfied usually stay quiet.”

 

Asked if he had polled the 4,000 or so core voters with a record of voting in the Democratic primary, Appel said, “The core voters who show up in the primaries are a lot less than 4,000. Most Democratic primaries, you usually get 2,200 at the most, and we’ve hit pretty much every one of them  plus a lot of other registered Democrats in the city.”

 

WPCNR asked what the numbers show. “I hate to give a number, because I honestly don’t remember.”

 

WPCNR parried, “because you’re on the winning side?”

 

Appel said,  “Of course. In a primary  we have five people running for three positions. You don’t need 50% to win, because  the votes are split. I’m confident that in the end, Arnie is going to have a lot more votes than anyone else.”

 

Asked who was in the most trouble, Appel said he really didn’t know, Asked to handicap it, Appel said,  “Arnie comes in number 1, Ben (Boykin) number 2, Dennis (Power) 3, Milagros  (Lequona) 4,  Candyce (Corcoran) 5. That’s off the top of my head right now. The poll didn’t show support for any other candidates. We don’t care about that.” Appel said the poll did not give a choice poll, asking just if they supported Mr. Bernstein.

 

Asked if he thought the other Democrats would show up at the date, Appel said, “It would be hard for them not to show up. How else do they defend all the lies they put in that piece.”

 

Asked what was next in the final 12 days before the primary on September 18,Appel said, “We’e going to continue the campaign the same way we have. We’ll get our mailings out, we’ll  have our ads out, and we will do a full effort to get out the vote and have Arnie win this primary by a very large margin.”

 

Asked if he was going to have phone banks, Appel said “We have phone banks being set up, and phone banks that are ongoing, and having more phone banks right before the primary.”

 

Bernstein conference about to begin: To the right, holding pad, is Keith Eddings, reporter for The Journal News, covering the news conference. Appel, is slightly behind  Mr. Eddings.

 

Appel said different members of his team would be handling the phone banks, “different members of our team, a very large campaign team, a lot people putting in a lot of effort to help Arnie.”

 

Appel said he estimated that Mr. Power  and Mr. Boykin together had given $5,000 to $6,000 to the Democratic City Committee, but pointed out that Mr. Power and Mr. Boykin to his knowledge had not filed statements on contributions and expenses which are due Friday September 7. (In the first edition of this article, WPCNR had reported that Appel and Boykin had given $5,000 to $6,000 each, and WPCNR hereby corrects this misunderstanding.)

 

Democrats check on effects of their mailing by phone Thursday night.

 

Tonight the Democratic City Committee was polling democratic voters asking them to vote for the Democratic slate and referring the voters to the WPDCC newsletter Bernstein was criticizing today “because it had a lot of good information in it.”

 

As of 11:00 P.M. Councilman Benjamin Boykin had not returned WPCNR calls asking if he would accept the debate challenge.

 

For the record here is the text of Mr. Bernstein’s address today:

 

I have always believed that government should be dedicated to helping people pursue their goals and aspirations in a safe and just society. I believe that the political process should be open and fair to all who want to offer their services to the greater community. I also believe that the political process should be about the issues and not about mudslinging and personal attacks. That is why I am a Democrat and why I have dedicated my public career to the Democratic Party.

 

Unfortunately, sometimes the leadership of our party losses sight of their ideals when they become more concerned with taking and keeping power than they are for the people they represent. When this happens, they will do anything to win, including manipulating the nominating process and attacking those who do not follow their orders like good soldiers.

 

I have run a positive primary campaign based on my experience and record, but I will not stand by while party bosses slander my good name, control our party and the democratic process.

 

In this publication, the Democratic City Committee Chair states that the election process was open and fair. If that is true, why were the balloting rules for the election process changed this year from anonymous ballots to public voice votes? Was it to ensure that the members of the city committee were intimidated into voting the way the party bosses wanted or risk their positions in the party?

 

She asserts that I did not receive the nomination because I am a rubber stamp for development and the Mayor. Strange,  the Committee endorsed Ben Boykin whose voting record on development in our city is practically identical to mine. In fact, considering his tenure on the Council, he has voted in favor of far more development than I have.

 

She accuses me of demonizing the homeless because I called on the County to find a more appropriate place to shelter the hardcore homeless  not in our downtown near 6 schools and our library. And because I didn’t think the basement of an office building was sufficient to meet the needs of these struggling and needy people.

 

She accuses me of opposing the creation of senior and assisted living units on the old Post Office site. This is an out and out lie. I did support the creation of the units, but would not vote in favor of a project that put senior and assisted living units near hardcore homeless shelter. Would you want to place your parent one half block from such a facility? I would not and do not think the overwhelming majority of our citizens would as well. I specifically told our party at a city committee meeting when asked about this what my reasons were and that I would support such a project once the Homeless shelter issue had been resolved.

 

Worst of all, she accuses me of being beholden to special interest groups. I find this offensive, especially since she and members of the nominating committee endorsed two candidates who have clear conflicts of interests serving on the Council; one candidate who was given a high salaried position by the County Executive as a political pay back for running a losing campaign for Mayor and another who has no legislative experience, but is a member of the County Planning Board.

 

In closing,I must repeat that I will not stand by while the White Plains Democratic Party is controlled by a few politically connected individuals. I will not stand by while the Democratic City Committee slanders my good name. That is why I am running in this Primary and that is why today I am challenging the Committee’s endorsed candidates to a debate on the assertions made in this reprehensible piece and any other issues they care to discuss.

 

Thank you all for coming. Let’s fight to take our party back and PUT THE PEOPLE FIRST

 

Debate to be held Friday September 14^th 8pm at the Womans Club

 

Hits: 0

 

WPCNR THE DAILY BAILEY. Commentary By John F. Bailey. September 5, 2007 UPDATED 9:56 A.M. EDT 9:56 P.M. EDT: The Democratic City Committee sent out a mailing this week to city Democrats eligible to vote in the September 18 Democratic Primary. The campaign literature seeks to convince the Democratic voters they should vote for “the real Democrats.”

This raises the question of what is a Real Democrat? The flyer also makes a series of allegations that need to be clarified and put into perspective.

For the record, readers of WPCNR have known for weeks that Arnold Bernstein, Benjamin Boykin, Candyce Corcoran, Milagros Lecuona, and Dennis Power are running against each other for the three Democratic slots on the November city election ballot. Readers of WPCNR also know the Democratic City Committee attempted to throw Ms. Corcoran off the ballot on a technicality in her petitions, and decided not to challenge Mr. Bernstein, and did not follow up on a preliminary challenge to Robert Stackpole and Robert Levine’s petitions to get on the November ballot as independent candidates.

In the literature being received around the city, the Democratic City Committee  proclaims it “is supporting the real Democrats in this race, the three people who stand for open and participatory government, compassion for those in need and concern for managing the growth of White Plains so as to keep it a livable suburb.”

Roasting Bernstein.

The publication called WPDCC, penned by its Democratic City Committee “leader,” is a 4-page flyer eviscerating its former fair-haired candidate Arnold Bernstein who four years previously was chosen over Eridania Camacho-Quinn  for Common Council nomination. This year, the tables were turned by the nominating committee on Bernstein, who replaced him with Milagros Lecuona.  Bernstein was also the campaign manager for Glen Hockley in days when he was considered “a real Democrat.”

They take Mr. Bernstein to task for opposing the location of the homeless shelter in downtown White Plains – this as being un- Democratic – and in the process question the truth of White Plains Police Reports . However, the flyer neglects to tell readers that Mr. Boykin and Mr. Power, their two candidates failed to support the Mayor’s resolution asking that the White Plains shelter be relocated. However, the conditions of that shelter, since closed, well-documented by WPCNR showed that whatever “compassion”  the Common Council had for the homeless – other than Rita Malmud attempting to convince Andy Spano to move it,   was not evident in the 18 months it existed at 85 Court Street.

 Mr. Bernstein,  in voting for the resolution was listening to persons in the downtown who complained about the security threat of the homeless which the police reports which today’s flyer attempts to discredit. The Democratic flyer ignores the fact that the Democrats, including Mr. Boykin and Mr. Power refused to call for the shelter to be relocated, as the Mayor, Mr. Hockley and Mr. Bernstein wished.  The Mayor asked Rita Malmud to intercede with County Executive Andy Spano to see if she, as a Democrat could convince Mr. Spano to relocate the shelter. Nothing happened until  9 months later when the shelter was closed August 5.

Democrats Want it Both Ways on Station Square

 The Democrats excoriate Mr. Bernstein for pressing for the Exclusivity Agreement on Station Square – forgetting to tell the reader that all Democratic City Councilpersons,including the candidate Mr. Boykin,  (Mr. Power skipped his briefing with Mr. Cappelli),  knew of the Station Square Project  weeks in advance of when it was introduced May 10. Mr. Boykin told WPCNR he knew about the proposal as did his colleagues, Ms. Malmud,  and Mr. Roach well before the May 10 meeting.  The main reason Mr. Boykin and Mr. Power voted against it was because Mr. Boykin’s, Ms. Malmud’s and Mr. Roach’s prior knowledge of the project was exposed by WPCNR and it was politically incorrect for the council to pass the Exclusivity Agreement  in front of the community opposition.

The flyer makes no mention that  the council has made no outright rejection of the Request for Qualifications introduced two weeks ago, calling for firms to submit qualifications  in 30 days for a project very similar to the Station Square proposal. The Request for Qualifications  trots out the Exclusivity Agreement in a different form. Neither Mr. Boykin nor Mr. Power have said, “Hold on, Mr. Mayor, this is the same Exclusivity Deal we threw out last Spring.”  They have not opposed Bernstein’s original support of the Station Square Exclusivity Agreement.

They Criticize Bernstein But Voted With Him

The WPDCC  accuses Bernstein of rubber-stamping plans for high rise luxury development – neglecting to mention that Mr. Boykin and Mr. Power voted for a series of developments. Mr. Boykin voted for  221 Main with Mr. Bernstein.  Mr. Boykin voted for approval of an extra floor on the Ritz Carlton Podium with Mr. Bernstein.  Mr. Boykin voted for Avalon Bay with Mr. Bernstein. Mr. Power and Mr. Boykin voted for the LCOR Bank Street Commons  affordable housing project, and Mr. Boykin voted for the North Street Community project with Mr. Bernstein. Mr. Power voted against the North Street Community, but he was the lone dissenting vote, with his three democrat colleagues voting for the North Street project, essentially it was a free pass for Power to show support for opposition to the project at no cost to him. Originally, WPCNR reported Power had voted for this project and we correct that impression.

Against  Affordable Housing?

The flyer accuses Mr. Bernstein of being against a county affordable housing project, neglecting to mention that the city wanted to build its own affordable housing project there for seniors, which Bernstein supproted, so Bernstein was not exactly against affordable housing in that location as the flyer charges.

 Mr. Power and Mr. Boykin voted for The Pinnacle affordable housing exchange last spring, allowing the shift of  affordable housing owed by the 221 Main development to be built in the City Center garage – also a proposition supported by Mr. Bernstein.

Waffling on the Homeless? 

The flyer seeks to portray Mr. Boykin and Mr. Power and Ms. Lecuona as being more guardians of the community and more pro-affordable housing than Mr. Bernstein when  they (Boykin and Power) have voted with Mr. Bernstein – except on the homeless shelter issue.

The only issue Boykin and Power voted against Bernstein on were the homeless resolution that the Mayor, Glen Hockley and Mr. Bernstein supported calling for relocation of the shelter.

In short, the Democratic City Committee would have its voters believe that two of its three nominees are “concerned with managing the growth of White Plains so as to keep it livable,” while Bernstein is pro-development.

But that is not the way Mr. Boykin has voted.  Boykin voted for the City Center, the Jefferson, two condominium projects on Maple Avenue, Avalon Bay, Bank Street, and “son of Bank Street,” and voted to sell off Railside Avenue for development in face of pleading neighborhood opposition where he voted with Mr. Bernstein. Mr. Power has not taken a strong stand yet where he was the deciding factor, and has not even questioned matters that raise serious questions, but for that matter neither has Mr. Bernstein.

If the incumbent councilpersons Boykin and Power are not pro-development they certainly are not anti-development, either, or anti-administration, for that matter, and not critical of it or administration procedural policy.  

So to say Mr. Bernstein is not a real democrat because he voted for projects supported by the Mayor, is simply sophistry aimed at a public the leaders of the Democratic Party feel is too uninformed and uninterested  to remember the way things really were.  

Silence from Bernstein. Outrage from Corcoran.

Mr. Bernstein contacted for comment on this flyer Wednesday evening said he would not have a comment until tomorrow (Thursday).

Candyce Corcoran, the other contender in the primary was criticized in the flyer as being linked to traditional Conservative Party issues such as Right to Life.

She pointed to her past history as a District Leader for the White Plains Democrats,  and as a person who broke her foot at a pro-choice rally in Washington, D.C.,  was incensed that the Democratic Party would try to paint her as not being pro-choice.

She also said she ran as a Democrat on the Republican Ticket when she ran against William Ryan in 2001, not as a Republican. She chided the Democrats  pointing out, “When I win (the Democratic Primary), the Democratic Party will tell Democrats to vote for their slate on the Working Families Line.”

She said she was only running on the Conservative Party line, after being denied the Democratic Party nomination. “It’s obvious that where I put people before politics, the Democratic Party puts politics before people and will support the Democrat no matter who they are. A good councilperson will work and listen to all the people no matter who they are.”

The Democratic Party chides Ms. Corcoran  for running on the Conservative Party line that they say supports cutting services for the needy, taking away rights of workers and “endanger women’s reproductive freedom.”

Ms. Corcoran points out this is disingenuous. She reports this morning she was Treasurer of the Pro-Choice Political Action Committee and was at a Pro-Choice rally at the White House when she broke her foot.

Corcoran for the record, was once the Organizational Chairperson and a District Leader with the Democratic party of White Plains. As further evidence of her Democrat pedigree, she points out she was Co-Campaign Manager for Benjamin Boykin in his first campaign for Council.

She was a member of the WESTHELP Advisory Board; White Plains Recreation and Parks Advisory Council;  an advocate for handicapped parking in White Plains.

A Convenient Election Issue

 Finally on the front page of the WPDCC, the publication pumps the Democratic Majority recent effort to increase the affordable housing percentage of units to 10% in the city for “workforce housing.”

 Well, overlooked is the fact that this proposal has not been studied extensively with developers’ input, taking the analysis of the LCOR Bank Street Commons job as a basis for this legislation is preposterous, because Bank Street Commons is getting millions in tax breaks on this development, which means the city loses.  LCOR would never do this job if it were not for the tax breaks – which they said originally they did not need! Remember? 

Advancing this type of percentage proposal without talking with developers is not too smart. Once this is passed, if it is passed, White Plains may stop development interest cold. However, it is an easy proposal to make in an election year.

And, when pray tell is all this affordable housing going to come on board for the workforce? We are still waiting for Bill Brown’s project to open and the county Horton Mills townhouses to open that have been in the works for five years.  (But that’s another column.)

We have been thinking what makes a real Democrat in the eyes of the Democratic City Committee.

They write in the issues of WPDCC that “Our nominating process was open and fair.”

The nominating committee chose Mr. Boykin, Mr. Power  and Milagros Lecouona, a political unknown. They rejected Robert Stackpole, the longtime planning board member, Wall Street financial expert, and a man who has been highly critical of city financial policy; they rejected Ms. Corcoran; they rejected Don Hughes, a person who has followed issues very closely and made information available to the public on his website, a man who knows issues in the city; they rejected Claire Eisenstadt, an architect and long time observer of the direction the city was going.

The case could be made that by rejecting Mr. Stackpole they rejected the best candidate for Common Council in years, based on his experience and intelligence and familiarity with the issues.

Stackpole is continuing the fight with Mr. Levine by appearing on the November ballot.

So what is a Real Democrat? You Decide.

On September 18,  and again in November 6, the Democrats of White Plains,  have the opportunity to either keep the same or make a change. They have Mr. Stackpole, Ms. Corcoran and Mr. Levine and Ms. Lecuona against very known quanitities: Mr. Boykin, Mr. Power and Mr. Bernstein.

 Tuesday September 18, though,  is Mr. Bernstein’s last hurrah.  If he does not nose out Ms. Lecouna, Mr. Power or Mr. Boykin in the Tuesday vote, he is out of there. Ms. Corcoran, Mr. Stackpole and Mr. Levine will be the remaining choices in November.

Of course there are the Republicans, too, available on Election Day November 6: Anthony Pilla, Augie Zicca and Cass Cibelli.  Perhaps one of them will turn out to be Appalachian State.