Jammed Voting Lever May Cost Delgado Reelection.

Sources advise WPCNR that incumbent Larry Delgado trails challenger Glen Hockley by 60 votes after counting of absentee ballots Wednesday. A stuck voting machine lever cost Mr. Delgado perhaps 100 votes. He is now reported to be mulling whether to concede to Mr. Hockley or to mount a court suit calling for another election.

Paul Wood, of the Mayor’s office, and a close confidante of the candidate, both advised your reporter Thursday that after the recounting Tuesday and Wednesday, Larry Delgado is still behind his challenger, Glen Hockley for the third and last Common Council suit. Mr. Wood, and the second source report Delgado behind by 60 votes.

Oh those old, old voting machines

Unfortunately for Mr. Delgado, the voting machine he was counting on for at least 100 votes could not deliver that, because it was found to have a faulty Delgado lever at the recount conducted Tuesday at Fire House Number 2 in White Plains.

On election night, when returns came in at literally the eleventh hour, Republican leaders were confidant a voting machine in District 18, at George Washington High School, showed Mr. Tuck and Mr. Amodio, Mr. Delgado’s running mates for council receiving approximately 150 votes and Mr. Delgado 50, according to our source. Leaders at that time felt the obvious (to them) Delgado gap was a callout error on the part of their district runner, or perhaps a print error.

Lever on Delgado Line, Goes Down But Disconnects

What was discovered on recanvas Tuesday this week, was the Delgado lever was broken and the condition undetectable at the time of the vote. Apparently, voters would depress the Delgado lever, it would go down normally, and they had no idea their vote was not counted. Unbeknownst to the district inspectors on the scene the lever mechanism had defaulted and according to our source the count rolled back to zero when it reached 100.

The Board of Elections reported to WPCNR Thursday that they expected to upgrade their site with the final totals of the recount possibly on Monday. They would not comment further.

2 Options for Mr. Delgado: Concede or Court

The sources close to Mr. Delgado, who did not return calls for comment on this matter, advise WPCNR that Mr. Delgado is contemplating whether to sue for another election, or concede. The Board of Elections, being Democratic Party-controlled, is expected not to concede Mr. Delgado 100 votes “on spec.”

White Plains old voting machines to blame?

The public should know that part of this problem may be due to the sheer age of the White Plains voting machines. Each machine is mechanically operated. They are not electric. Votes are entered by a “Rube Goldberg” contraption of pulleys and links and stamping devices. A man with personal experience with the condition of White Plains voting machines, told us last week that the machines are at least thirty years old, and that the company that manufactured them is out of business.

He said the machines require a lot of maintenance, and are very delicate. He advised us that the act of transporting machines to the locations of the polling places is rough on the machines, saying rolling the machines over thresholds can throw them out of alignment, or cause a number to “roll down.” Perhaps a bump in transit caused a break in the Delgado lever mechanism, and the doom of the Republican Party as we know it in White Plains.

Posted in Uncategorized

FLASH! Testing, Program Evaluation,P.R. Behind Yanofsky Termination

In a letter released to parents of the White Plains City School District today, the White Plains Board of Education spells out the three areas of disagreement between Dr. Yanofsky and the 7-member citizen School Board leading to Dr. Yanofsky’s departure. Here is the text of that letter: (To read the letter in Spanish, French, or choice of language, go to the Translation Block on the left and select your choice of translation.)

The next Board of Education public meeting scheduled for Monday, November 19 has changed location. It will be at the high school All-Purpose Room B-1. At that time the Board expects to announce the selection of a search firm for a Superintendent.

Herewith,WPNCR reprints the text of the letter released today from Donna McLoughlin, President of the School Board to the parents of the school district, elaborating on Dr. Yanofsky’s termination.

November 14, 2001

Dear Parents and Staff:

We fully understand that the community was surprised by the Board of Education’s decision not to extend Superintendent Saul Yanofsky’s contract beyond its current expiration date of June 30, 2002. We also recognize that the brief announcement letter was inadequate, both in expressing our gratitude for Dr. Yanofsky’s outstanding service to the school district as well as in explaining the factors leading to the decision. As much as we understand and appreciate many of your questions and con-cerns regarding our decision, we will not be renewing Dr. Yanofsky’s contract. The purpose of this letter, is to provide additional background and perspective on the Board’s decision. Dr. Yanofsky has reviewed this letter and many of his
suggestions and viewpoints have been incorporated.

Dr. Yanofsky suggested that we hold off any announcement regarding his departure until the beginning of the school year. The Board agreed. We also agreed that we would not discuss the reasons for our decision. We both felt that a prolonged public discussion would only hurt the District. In retrospect, we now see that earlier disclosure of the reasons would have
been helpful.

First, let us be clear that the transition to a new Superintendent does not signal any change in the direction of the White Plains Public Schools. The primary role of the Board of Education is to plan for and provide the resources and leadership the District needs to reach higher levels of academic achievement. We have consistently worked with, encouraged and supported the Superintendent in our efforts to achieve this objective. We remain committed to the mission and vision statements and the district priorities developed by the Board, in conjunction with the community and the Superintendent. These are printed each year in the district’s Calendar/Directory.

We recognize Dr. Yanofsky’s many fine qualities as an educator and administrator and his dedication to the district. We have extended his contract on three occasions since he was chosen as Superintendent in 1990. We are proud of and support the many innovative programs that have been initiated by Dr. Yanofsky, including the Controlled Parents’ Choice Program,
the multi-year technology plan, the Newcomer Center and our many enrichment programs.

We also want to make it perfectly clear that there have been no improprieties — of a financial, ethical or any other type — on Dr. Yanofsky’s part, nor any single event, that precipitated this decision.

Two major factors were involved in the decision not to renew Dr. Yanofsky’s contract. One had to do with timing; the other, with differences in emphasis and focus, not direction, between the Board and the Superintendent.

There also have been differences regarding style and problems of communication that have complicated the relationship between Dr. Yanofsky and the Board.

With regard to timing, Dr. Yanofsky indicated to the Board early last spring that he was not interested in the customary three year contract extension, but wanted a shorter contract since he was looking to move on to the next stage of his career. Thus, the Board and the Superintendent knew that the transition of leadership from Dr. Yanofsky to a successor would take place
in the near future. It was not a question of if, just when.

Secondly, for the past few years the Board and Superintendent have had differences in emphasis and focus in a number of important areas. We summarize three of these.

1. Student Achievement — While the Board recognizes the effort by teachers and administrators and sees overall improvement across the District in achievement, our rate of growth is slow and many students are not yet performing at acceptable levels on state tests. We have asked the Superintendent to develop a comprehensive districtwide
student achievement plan — a plan that would clearly convey to parents and staff the range of and relationships between the many programs we have in place. Although the Board has engaged in many discussions with the Superintendent about improving student achievement, no comprehensive plan, with clearly defined and specific progress goals for grades and schools, has been presented. The Superintendent felt that establishing specific quantitative goals oversimplified the process of academic improvement and did not take into account the extraordinary amount of effort that teachers and administrators were already investing in the improvement of test scores.

The Board feels that specific quantitative targets should underpin the planning process.

2. Program Evaluation — While the Board supports our many enrichment initiatives to raise the achievement of students at all performance levels and appreciates the efforts teachers, staff and administrators are making, we have also sought evaluation of these programs to measure their effectiveness. Although the Superintendent shares the Board’s view of the importance of evaluation, he felt that there were insufficient resources to conduct rigorous, helpful and technically sound evaluations for all the programs that the district supports. As a result, the Superintendent has provided very few formal program evaluations, nor
have we had a discussion to examine resources to address this issue.

3. Communications with the Public — A third area in which the Board and the Superin-tendent differed related to examining new ways to communicate with the public. We have continually asked the Superintendent for an overall examination of our commu-nications and outreach programs. We want to ensure that the District is sensitive to the community’s concerns and that parents are fully aware of the district’s available resources and our commitment to the needs of their children. While the Board is proud of the district’s communications program via our newsletter, TV, the Internet and frequent meetings in the
community, we believe we must continually reassess our efforts in light of a shifting population base and changing communication needs. While agreeing with the importance of public communication, the Superintendent has been
reluctant to consider new communication activities because he has been concerned that they might require additional resources.

In light of Dr. Yanofsky’s stated desire to leave the District in the near future and continuing differ-ences in emphasis and focus on some areas of high priority, the Board determined that it would be in the best interest of the District not to extend Dr. Yanofsky’s contract beyond its current term.

This decision was discussed with Dr. Yanofsky and conveyed to him, as required by contract, last April. At that time, and throughout the summer, the Board vigorously encouraged Dr. Yanofsky to retire or resign so that he could leave the District with the honor and dignity he deserves. Dr. Yanofsky refused to do so because he felt it would be irresponsible of him to leave at this time. He felt that, given the number of new administrators and other possible administrative changes this year, this was not the right time to change superintendents. The Board recognizes that in a large and dynamic district like White Plains, there are always important personnel and administrative matters to deal with. We are confident that, with Dr. Yanofsky continuing as Superintendent until next June, all decisions requiring action will be properly made by the end of the school year.

It is clear that although there may be differences about specific aspects of our decision relating to Dr. Yanofsky’s departure, the Board and community share a common commitment to the success of our outstanding public school system. We have every reason to expect that the District will continue to run smoothly and efficiently, with all programs continuing as planned. Dr. Yanofsky remains our Superintendent until June 30, 2002, with the full scope
and authority of that position.

The Board has initiated interviews with experienced consulting firms who will assist us throughout the broad-based search process. We will discuss the search at our regular monthly meeting on Monday, November 19th at 8:00
p.m. in the B-1 All-Purpose Room at White Plains High School.

Yours truly,

Donna O. McLaughlin, President

White Plains Board of Education

Posted in Uncategorized

Bland Hits 2 Towering Homeruns. City Wins! Towers Have Power, Prestige, Panache

Frederick Bland’s little sketch grew up Wednesday.

Updated! The Super Architect from Beyer Blinder Belle presented meticulous developed designs for the Louis Cappelli City Center to the Mayor and Common Council that took the Common Council’s breath away. In a presentation every bit worthy of the Cappelli style, he delivered the Beyer, Blinder Belle touch.

Louis Cappelli agreed to pay the city $900,000 for the subterranean and air rights, under and over the new parking structure, for one year, and an option on a second year for another $500,000, protecting his investment.

Mr. Bland’s new schematics show two buildings that are more centered, not as low profile as Bland’s original sketch. The new towers recall echoes of art deco, the French Quarter, contemporary Manhattan, and the Hanging Gardens of Babylon.

The new edifices assert identity and icon try with graduated power, build majestically to the sky, articulating in elegant setbacks, and supple curves of glass, “simplifying in features as they get to the top,” according to Bland. The Towers may be the best Bland has ever done. Speaking to WPCNR after the presentation, Bland was proud, saying he thought the buildings rivaled or surpassed any of the new residential construction being built now in Manhattan.


RECALLING A LUXURY OCEAN LINER, RISING OUT OF CITY CENTER, Frederick Bland’s enhanced twin Cappelli Towers, emerged after 50 sketch design treatments by Bland since September 17, (an average of 6 new treatments a week). The towers present as a slender column presence looking North to City Hall from Martine Avenue and a stately powerful elegant stairway to the sky when viewed from the West. The Martine Avenue Tower will house 293 units. The Main Street Tower, 307 units. This view shows the new parking structure to the right of the Martine Tower, the City Center to the left, with the Main Street Tower in background.WPCNR PHOTO

Mr. Bland said specific design treatment for the street level retail and entrances, and the material selections for the varying surfaces of the buildings, and the critical pinnacles are the next phase of design. He expects the final choices of facing materials, treatment of the street levels (“articulating of the exterior in an architectonic way,” as Bland put it), and the capping structure to be completed by the first of January or sooner.

He said the surface of the central double-window section rising to the penthouses at the top, will consist of white limestone, (the most beautiful building treatment being used today, in Bland’s opinion), with light tan brick being used for the narrower portions of the building.).

First view Council saw in September has grown up

He said he centered the double-floor window central portion of the building to a greater degree, so the two buildings “were not leaning so much into each other. Resorting to architect-talk, Bland said, “The lower base is starting to set an alignment. it is important to come down to the ground experience.”


CENTERING OF THE DOUBLE-WINDOW CENTRAL SECTION RELEASES MAJESTY AND POWER. This side view of the two new Bland Towers design shows the entry/street level retail will consist of two, broad full-length retail windows and curving glass around the corner of Martine and Conroy, and Conroy and Martine, “to bring people into the building,” Bland said. The central double-floor window section will consist of white limestone, the outer portions and north south sections will be single floor windows with light tan brick. (The old Macy’s store was built of white limestone brick.)WPCNR PHOTO

“The Mystery of Penthouse Living.” Five in Each Building

Bland said he became taken by the “Mystery of Penthouse Living,” and the possibilities at the pinnacle of the building. He has designed each tower to provide five penthouse apartments above the central limestone double-window anchoring section. Bland reports he is still working on the interior design of such apartments, allowing possibilities of duplexes and unspecified amenities.


MODEL OF CITY CENTER WITH NEW TOWERS IN PLACE viewed from the West, looking across Mamaroneck Avenue. The Greenpoint Bank building is at the lower left, the Westchester Arts Council building on the lower right. WPCNR PHOTO

The new model of the two towers in place in the City Center complex shows an interesting and striking similarity to the model originally presented by Mr. Cappelli with lower 25 story buildings with step backs rising out of the City Center. The new towers presented Wednesday enhance this original concept.

Cornices at the Pinnacles to “Establish a Wonderful Icon.”

Mr. Bland noted that the cornices capping the building were still in the design stage. He said he wants them “simple but elegant, light-colored with cantilevered “perforated metal” fins. The purpose is to establish wonderful icon and hide all the junk on the top of the building.” He reports they will “glow at night.”

Base very important

Bland is still concentrating on precise treatment of the retail base of each apartment tower. He said he does not believe the look of the apartment building base should duplicate the other three sides of the City Center. “Cities don’t work that way,” he said. The center portion of the first floor floors above the entry/retail-street level, is planned to have French balconies reminiscent of the French Quarter. Bland said the balconies are “a personalized way of making the area very friendly alive and well, (the building) participating in the urban scene.”


ENTRY INTO ELEGANT LIVING shows the evolution of an art deco wrap-around window treatment of the retail, which Bland says “invites” the pedestrian into Conroy Place. Balconies are envisioned above the retail overlooking the City Center Plaza, recalling the French Quarter in New Orleans.WPCNR PHOTO

The presentation ended with a flyby computerization, and a single picture view of the skyline of the city with the new towers computer-inserted looking from the West. To this reporter’s eye, the skyline view did not show the new buildings standing out starkly on the city horizon.

The Council reacts positively, again.

Robert Greer, William King, Benjamin Boykin, and Rita Malmud each commented favorably on the new look.

Mr. Greer said, “I really like it. It makes a great statement for the center of our city.” Greer noted that from the Western view the buildings look almost like one building.

William King, a keen observer of New York architecture, was the most observant critic, positive, but noting that the slender North and South sides should be broken up with limestone treatment, and he wished that double-floor window treatment might be integrated onto the slim profile sides, too. King liked the idea of a step back on the Main Street Tower side, too. Bland said that was under consideration.


MR. BLAND TAKES A BOW. With the look of a slugger who has connected big time, Fred Bland was all smiles at the conclusion of his presentation.WPCNR PHOTO

Rita Malmud expressed great appreciation for the French Balcony effect added to the first four residential floors. She said she did not like “the toothpicks” at the tops of the buildings. Bland said they were working on different ways to hide the antennas. Those were Ms. Malmud’s sole observations.

Ben Boykin observed, “The message I’m getting is (the building) is user-friendly, people-friendly, people-inviting. We’re really getting to that point. The Buildings really do that.”

Subterranean Homesick Blues for Cappelli

During the last two weeks, the city raised an issue with Cappelli brought about by Frederick Bland’s design change of the buildings. Because Bland feels that parking for the Martine Avenue southern tower should be housed in the new parking structure being built for the city center, (using about 200 feet of space on an added lower floor), instead of under the apartment building itself, this requires building another level below the 7-story garage being planned.


THE MAN IN BLACK explains the concept of subterranean and air rights. Louis Cappelli protested that the rights were “worthless,” and wryly complimented the city for finding a way to charge him $2.4 million for them.WPCNR PHOTO

The city told Cappelli that they felt building an extra floor on the garage violated their subterranean rights and air rights above the garage, according to Susan Habel. Deputy Commissioner of Planning Habel reported that Mr. Cappelli who bought into the Bland design had agreed to pay the city $400,000 outright for the subterranean rights to build another floor of the parking garage to house cars of tenants in the Martine Avenue Tower.

Habel added that Mr. Cappelli also agreed to pay the city $500,000 for one year of air rights over the garage to protect his City Center development from the city or another developer building another structure over the garage. Cappelli also has an option to pay $500,000 for a second year in 2003.

At the end of year two,(2003) he may purchase air rights in perpetuity for another $1 million.

Cappelli quietly said that this is a moot point since any building over the garage had to be done in January when he is scheduled to begin the garage. Nevertheless, he has quietly agreed to pay the city $900,000 for the subterranean and air rights for 2002.

Ms. Habel said the Common Council would consider passing the actual legislation articulating this agreement on November 20.

Mr. Cappelli Is Eyeballing the Future with New “Rights.”

The payment for the subterranean rights and air rights, gives Cappelli a unique position should another developer acquire the remaining Main Street property adjacent to the City Center. If Mr. Cappelli wished to acquire the property himself, purchasing the air rights over the garage would free Mr. Cappelli should he want to develop the adjacent Main Street East to North Broadway property himself.

A group headed by A. J. Rotundi and a Palm Beach firm had expressed interest in making a presentation to the Council in September. Ms. Habel advised WPCNR that the group had not gotten their financing and the Planning Department had not heard from them for two months. This can be traced back to when Mr. Cappelli received his approval for the City Center.

Leonard Nadel’s Dream Park Once Upon a Garage Is Discarded

In discussions of the air rights, it was quietly revealed, (virtually by accident in response to a council question), that Mr. Cappelli never seriously considered Leonard Nadel’s suggestion of a green park with fields on the top floor of the parking garage. Cappelli said, “It just doesn’t work, and it would add $4 million to the project.”

This announcement was greeted by quiet puzzlement on the part of the Council.

Cappelli: “I gave him a free hand.”

After the meeting broke up, WPCNR asked Mr. Cappelli how closely he had supervised Mr. Bland’s design development. Cappelli said, “I gave him a free hand.”

Bland himself said when asked if he liked the “Cappelli Speed” style of developing, said “I like to build things” and added he was not happy working on projects which dragged on. Usually, he said an organization that does that does not have an efficient process of decision-making.

Mr. Cappelli’s staff architect, Kathleen Hennesy, said Mr. Bland met with the Cappelli staff at least once a week in the design development process.

Posted in Uncategorized

Hockley Ahead in Recount. No word When Board of Elections Will Announce Winner

The first election recount in White Plains history began Tuesday behind schedule at 4 PM. There is timetable as to when the Board of Elections will announce the winner.

Glen Hockley, “Councilman in Waiting,” reported to WPCNR Tuesday evening that the voting machine canvassing had been completed by Board of Elections officials. He said the Board of Elections was going to count absentee ballots and affidavits next. He was reluctant to comment on the situation, but revealed he was ahead.

The recount, scheduled to begin at noon Tuesday did not begin until 4 PM because the Board of Elections officials scheduled to count had a traffic accident. When the recanvas got underway at Fire House No. 2 on Ferris Avenue, it was late afternoon. Observing were the heads of the two city parties, Frank Cantatore and Adam Bradley, Mr. Hockley, Larry Delgado, the “Incumbent in Jeopardy,” and, observers on the scene said there were legal representatives for each candidate.

James Benerofe, observing the action reported the process “hard to take,” saying the officials would call out numbers line by line for each machine in droning fashion. Rita Malmud, City Council President also observing told this Reporter, that it was a process of just listening to numbers read out loud.

Hockley, contacted by WPCNR at 8:30 PM Tuesday evening said counting had been suspended for the evening, and that counting the paper ballots was next. He said the Board of Elections had given no indication when a winner would be officially declared.

Going into the recount, Hockley held a 159-vote lead over Larry Delgado, having obtained the lead through absentee ballots, according to a Board of Elections observer.

Posted in Uncategorized