Last week I questioned why Feiner was going negative so quickly and asked why he wasn't stating positive reasons why voters should re-elect him for his 12th term. Feiner responded directly in the comments section to this blog. I'm posting his answer "above the fold":
We have maintained our AAA bond rating, complied with the NYS tax cap (unlike some other local governments). Town services are excellent and we always respond to complaints and concerns of residents--frequently the same day. For more info on some of the positive accomplishments check www.paulfeiner.com or www.greenburghny.com (the town website). Thank you for taking the time to write this blog. PAUL FEINER
That's a positive, "running on his record" statement. Thank you to Paul Feiner for reading this blog and commenting.
As far as today's developments (May 31), there is a good article in the White Plains blog on the lohud website summarizing Bernstein's candidacy announcement at http://whiteplains.lohudblogs.com/2013/05/31/edgemont-leader-bernstein-challenges-feiner-for-greenburgh-supervisor/
Give credit to reporter Greg Shillinglaw for a concise and effective descriptions of the WestHELP issue.
I'll also recommend the mysterious William's report on his abettergreenburgh blog of the Westchester Republican Party meeting over in Hastings last night. If you ever wondered why Westchester is a one-party county (Astorino notwithstanding), you'll get a good sense of the reason in this post:
http://www.abettergreenburgh.blogspot.com/2013/05/news-blackout-continues.html
Last, thank you to the Bernstein's FB team for linking to this blog
Friday, May 31, 2013
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Sources of Information - updated 5/31
Information about the on-going events pertaining to the Town Supervisor election can be found at the following websites:
www.paulfeiner.com [obviously Feiner's outlet for his official statements and p.o.v.]
www.greenburghny.com [official town website, similarly promotes Town Board's achievements]
www.edgemontcommunitycouncil.org [Bernstein's base; critical of Feiner, though largely focuses on local Edgemont issues, such as schools, etc.]
www.lohud.com [Journal Newspaper website: infrequent Greenburgh articles which are strangely bereft of insight or familiarity with town; occasionally reader comments on Greenburgh related articles can be informative through contrasting viewpoints, although most commentators remain anonymous (except Hal Samis, a frequently prolix, contentious and fearless anti-Feiner activist)]
http://greenburgh.dailyvoice.com [typical "hyper local" news website; true to its name, it has "daily stories on Greenburgh but its choices of topics are arbitrary and lack any sort of analysis or depth; occasionally contentious exchanges in readers' comments, where, again, almost all commentators remain cloaked behind a veil of anonymity, excepting Hal Samis]
www.abettergreenburgh.blogspot.com [local commentator's website often focuses on Elmsford/Mayfair area issues; good source for explanations of the complexities of the Valhalla School issue, Westhelp and other town controversies from an anti-Feiner/town board p.o.v.; author is stridently anti-Feiner and has recently started promoting Bernstein's candidacy but site's effectiveness is impaired because the author insists on staying anonymous]
Facebook:
Paul Feiner page - frequently updated by Feiner with information about his doings and accomplishments
Friends of Bob Bernstein page - just recently started
Edgemont Community Council - FB companion to ECC website
Let me know if I've missed anything.
UPDATE 5/31:
Turns out I did miss a few. While I was being snide about the lohud.com coverage of Greenburgh, I negligently failed to notice that lohud has Greenburgh coverage in his white plains and hudson politics blogs at
http://whiteplains.lohudblogs.com
http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com
Greg Shillinglaw, the reporter who wrote today's post on the Bernstein candidacy announcement and Feiner's response, seems quite well-informed about the town and election issues. I stand corrected.
Also:
www.richardjgarfunkel.com [in past contested primaries, Mr. Garfunkel was an outspoken and effective voice strongly supporting Feiner's candidacy; he often wrote on various websites as a de facto campaign spokesman without making clear his role on Feiner's staff, or if he was simply an enthusiastic volunteer. I imagine he'll be involved in this campaign.]
www.paulfeiner.com [obviously Feiner's outlet for his official statements and p.o.v.]
www.greenburghny.com [official town website, similarly promotes Town Board's achievements]
www.edgemontcommunitycouncil.org [Bernstein's base; critical of Feiner, though largely focuses on local Edgemont issues, such as schools, etc.]
www.lohud.com [Journal Newspaper website: infrequent Greenburgh articles which are strangely bereft of insight or familiarity with town; occasionally reader comments on Greenburgh related articles can be informative through contrasting viewpoints, although most commentators remain anonymous (except Hal Samis, a frequently prolix, contentious and fearless anti-Feiner activist)]
http://greenburgh.dailyvoice.com [typical "hyper local" news website; true to its name, it has "daily stories on Greenburgh but its choices of topics are arbitrary and lack any sort of analysis or depth; occasionally contentious exchanges in readers' comments, where, again, almost all commentators remain cloaked behind a veil of anonymity, excepting Hal Samis]
www.abettergreenburgh.blogspot.com [local commentator's website often focuses on Elmsford/Mayfair area issues; good source for explanations of the complexities of the Valhalla School issue, Westhelp and other town controversies from an anti-Feiner/town board p.o.v.; author is stridently anti-Feiner and has recently started promoting Bernstein's candidacy but site's effectiveness is impaired because the author insists on staying anonymous]
Facebook:
Paul Feiner page - frequently updated by Feiner with information about his doings and accomplishments
Friends of Bob Bernstein page - just recently started
Edgemont Community Council - FB companion to ECC website
Let me know if I've missed anything.
UPDATE 5/31:
Turns out I did miss a few. While I was being snide about the lohud.com coverage of Greenburgh, I negligently failed to notice that lohud has Greenburgh coverage in his white plains and hudson politics blogs at
http://whiteplains.lohudblogs.com
http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com
Greg Shillinglaw, the reporter who wrote today's post on the Bernstein candidacy announcement and Feiner's response, seems quite well-informed about the town and election issues. I stand corrected.
Also:
www.richardjgarfunkel.com [in past contested primaries, Mr. Garfunkel was an outspoken and effective voice strongly supporting Feiner's candidacy; he often wrote on various websites as a de facto campaign spokesman without making clear his role on Feiner's staff, or if he was simply an enthusiastic volunteer. I imagine he'll be involved in this campaign.]
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Bernstein's announcement of his candidacy for Town Supervisor
This evening, Manor Woods' intrepid cub reporter ventured out to attend Bob Bernstein's announcement of his candidacy for Town Supervisor. About 45 to 50 people gathered among the weeds emerging from the cracking pavement in the parking lot in front of the dilapidated former Frank's Nursery building. The event got started at about 7:35pm. John Coleman and Mark Lafeyette gave brief and adulatory introductory remarks. I had never met Bernstein and had not heard him speak before. I expected something like the ogre described by Feiner's supporters over the years in comments in lohud.com, Feiner's former blog or other webpages. To my surprise, Bernstein spoke in a calm, fluid and amiable style but also sufficiently dynamic to keep this listener's attention. He started off by saying that there are great things about Greenburgh, but then listed four major concerns: Westhelp, Fortress Bible, Valhalla schools deal, and Frank's Nursery. Bernstein launched into an attack on Feiner, stressing that Feiner has cost the town large amounts of revenue through failure to renew the Westhelp contract ($12 million in lost revenue) and the Fortress Bible judgement which, marked by the town board's violation of a church's constitutional rights, will not be covered by insurance and will probably cost taxpayers $7 milllion. In this two situations alone, Bernstein claimed, Feiner had cost the town $19 million. This lost money could have been put to use, Bernstein remarked, emphasizing flood control measures in various parts of the town and help for seniors during crises such as Storm Sandy. He stressed again that the federal judge in the Fortress Bible decsision found that the board had destroyed evidence and that Feiner was not credible. Bernstein reiterated that payment of the judgment will come out of taxpayers' pockets and that Feiner had never apologized for his actions in that case. Bernstein continued on to discuss the Westhelp situation in more detail and how Feiner had allowed that property to deteriorate rather than renew the housing contract with the county. Bernstein returned to the Valhalla school payment deal and how this was a payment to appease a community group in the Valhalla school district - and mostly not in Greenburgh - because a county shelter was housing poor, mostly minority women a mile distant. Bernstein observed that Feiner had "lost his moral compass." Then Bernstein addressed the Frank's Nursery deal and how Feiner's conduct demonstrated that he believed he was above the law.
Bernstein then pivoted from attacking Feiner's record to review his own role in defending - along with Judge Rosenberg (?) - at their own expense, the town from the lawsuit brought by Valhalla to enforce its deal with Feiner. Bernstein observed that Feiner had sided with the "tea party" position in Valhalla and had again cost Greenburgh home owners money. Bernstein claimed that his defense of the suit - together with the judge - had recovered $1.1 million for the town.
Bernstein concluded by stating that he was the candidate of the town's Democratic Party and that he would bring "competence, consistency and common sense" to town government. He then quoted from Feiner's statement on www.paulfeiner.com (reviewed on an earlier post) asking for more money and predicting a contentious and vicious campaign. Bernstein remarked that Feiner already had $150,000 and was asking for more money, while Bernstein had not yet collected any funds. He added that Feiner was desperate to hold on to his job and that if anyone would be "contentious and vicious," it would be Feiner. He warned his audience to be prepared for smears from Feiner. In conclusion, Bernstein stated that it was time to end Feiner's "twenty-two year reign of error." (A pretty good line you have to admit).
At the end of the talk I approached Bernstein to ask him to respond to Feiner's attack that he intended to cause Edgement to secede from Greenburgh. Bernstein responded as I anticipated: he stated (I'm paraphrasing) that Paul Feiner's management of the town had prompted the secession movement and that removing Feiner from office would remove the reason for Edgemont to secede. [Again, this is my paraphrase and not a direct quote!!!]
After listening to Bernstein make his case, it seems to me that Bernstein's risk in taking this approach is that the controversies he cited to challenge Feiner's record are complex. From my experience in my section of Manor Woods, very few of my neighbors appear conversant about Bernstein's four major attack points. (Over the ten years I've lived on Mercer Ave, I've heard very little discussion of town politics or affair - other than schools, but that's an issue another post). I suppose that it's easiest for Bernstein to describe the Fortress Bible judgement which has a straightforward narrative and will potentially cost the taxpayers between six and eight million dollars. The Frank's Nursery deal might be familiar to many because of the recent referendum on the sports bubble (not to be confused with the tennis bubble proposed for Veterans Park), but the details of the competing proposals for the site are known to few. Westhelp and the Valhalla deal require a lot of explanation. It might be hard to convey these points convincingly during a summer campaign when few have the focus for such complex matters. I might guess that there is only a small core of Greenburgh residents who are already familiar with these contentious points and that these individuals comprise the small group who pay close attention to town affairs generally. These people have probably made up their minds already if they are with or against Feiner. Bernstein may have been "preaching to the converted." Reinforcing this last point in my own mind, I was struck that among the 45 to 50 in attendance, I didn't see a single familiar face from the Manor Woods neighborhood.
Feiner has built up a committed group of supporters over 22 years whom he can rely on to turn out for primaries. I doubt that Bernstein's arguments will change the minds of the three thousand or so voters who've grown accustomed to pulling the Feiner lever (or filling in that circle) eleven times over more than two decades. It will be seen whether Bernstein can communicate his message and motivate the mass of residents who pay little attention to town board matters (especially the residents of the river towns) to come out and vote for him. This will be Bernstein's fundamental challenge.
Bernstein then pivoted from attacking Feiner's record to review his own role in defending - along with Judge Rosenberg (?) - at their own expense, the town from the lawsuit brought by Valhalla to enforce its deal with Feiner. Bernstein observed that Feiner had sided with the "tea party" position in Valhalla and had again cost Greenburgh home owners money. Bernstein claimed that his defense of the suit - together with the judge - had recovered $1.1 million for the town.
Bernstein concluded by stating that he was the candidate of the town's Democratic Party and that he would bring "competence, consistency and common sense" to town government. He then quoted from Feiner's statement on www.paulfeiner.com (reviewed on an earlier post) asking for more money and predicting a contentious and vicious campaign. Bernstein remarked that Feiner already had $150,000 and was asking for more money, while Bernstein had not yet collected any funds. He added that Feiner was desperate to hold on to his job and that if anyone would be "contentious and vicious," it would be Feiner. He warned his audience to be prepared for smears from Feiner. In conclusion, Bernstein stated that it was time to end Feiner's "twenty-two year reign of error." (A pretty good line you have to admit).
At the end of the talk I approached Bernstein to ask him to respond to Feiner's attack that he intended to cause Edgement to secede from Greenburgh. Bernstein responded as I anticipated: he stated (I'm paraphrasing) that Paul Feiner's management of the town had prompted the secession movement and that removing Feiner from office would remove the reason for Edgemont to secede. [Again, this is my paraphrase and not a direct quote!!!]
After listening to Bernstein make his case, it seems to me that Bernstein's risk in taking this approach is that the controversies he cited to challenge Feiner's record are complex. From my experience in my section of Manor Woods, very few of my neighbors appear conversant about Bernstein's four major attack points. (Over the ten years I've lived on Mercer Ave, I've heard very little discussion of town politics or affair - other than schools, but that's an issue another post). I suppose that it's easiest for Bernstein to describe the Fortress Bible judgement which has a straightforward narrative and will potentially cost the taxpayers between six and eight million dollars. The Frank's Nursery deal might be familiar to many because of the recent referendum on the sports bubble (not to be confused with the tennis bubble proposed for Veterans Park), but the details of the competing proposals for the site are known to few. Westhelp and the Valhalla deal require a lot of explanation. It might be hard to convey these points convincingly during a summer campaign when few have the focus for such complex matters. I might guess that there is only a small core of Greenburgh residents who are already familiar with these contentious points and that these individuals comprise the small group who pay close attention to town affairs generally. These people have probably made up their minds already if they are with or against Feiner. Bernstein may have been "preaching to the converted." Reinforcing this last point in my own mind, I was struck that among the 45 to 50 in attendance, I didn't see a single familiar face from the Manor Woods neighborhood.
Feiner has built up a committed group of supporters over 22 years whom he can rely on to turn out for primaries. I doubt that Bernstein's arguments will change the minds of the three thousand or so voters who've grown accustomed to pulling the Feiner lever (or filling in that circle) eleven times over more than two decades. It will be seen whether Bernstein can communicate his message and motivate the mass of residents who pay little attention to town board matters (especially the residents of the river towns) to come out and vote for him. This will be Bernstein's fundamental challenge.
Comments Guidelines
I encourage any relevant comments. My rule, however, is that all commenters must use their real name and a working email address. If I don't recognize a name, I will confirm the commenter's identity by email or I'll delete the comment. I reserve the right to delete any comments that don't meet my guidelines.
Monday, May 27, 2013
Who would have expected that following the Town Supervisor race requires daily attention?
Suprisingly, less than one week into the race for Greenburgh Town Supervisor, - and still 3 1/2 months before the primary - there are daily developments to follow. Feiner put out on his website [www.paulfeiner.com] his argument for retuning for a 12th(?) term as Town Supervisor. It appears that this is an appeal to potential donors from various mail/email lists and not a statement intended for the typical voter. Either way, give Feiner credit: it took a few days, but he has articulated positive reasons to vote for him (as opposed to insinuating only that Bernstein is going to go all Jefferson Davis and lead Edgemont to secede from the United States of Greenburgh - which makes Feiner Abraham Lincoln... or James Buchanan?). I'll quote Feiner directly:
As a long time supporter, you know of my “Problem Solver” reputation for helping thousands of residents resolve their concerns both large and small. You also know of my ongoing commitment to rethink and improve how government does business. I am as idealistic and energized as I was in my first term as Supervisor, yet with the knowledge and experience gained from over two decades in office.The last few months have been the most rewarding days of my tenure as Greenburgh Town Supervisor. So much is being accomplished that will provide long term benefits for the Town. We continue to tighten up the way we spend your tax dollars with new initiatives that make government more efficient. We’re making
Greenburgh greener and we’re creating affordable housing opportunities.
OK, so (1) he's the "problem solver" (hopefully he trademarked that term long ago) who ... helps resolve concerns (maybe a bit awkward, but the point is strong: Feiner is the consummate constituent service pol.); (2) rethinks/improves govt (he does come up with a lot of ideas that get into lohud.com); (3) idealistic & energized as ever but now with knowledge & experience (ok... but could cut both ways); (4) continuing to tighten up govt spending of tax dollars (um, Paul, I would make this your first argument - take it from Andy Spano: this is what contested elections in Westchester are all about); (5) Greenburgh is green! (enough said); and (6) creating affordable housing (ok, contentious issue which opens up a lot of corollary issues, but at least he's tackling this head on - and this issue could give Feiner a wedge to force Bernstein into a corner (i.e., what exactly is Edgemont's position on new affordable housing?) and it also allows Feiner to invoke Astorino as a straw man (although, despite lib/dem assumptions, I'm not convinced that anti-tax Astorino is unpopular).
Not bad for a start. But I'm interested in the emphasis on fund raising. Feiner raises the red flag of ... House of Sports financing for Bernstein! (Notice the clever use of the ambiguous "inferior bid" language!) Did HOS indeed publicly pledge to raise fund to defeat Feiner? I missed that. Feiner says this may be the most expensive campaign of his career (which prompts the question of how much he spent against his last serious challenger, whom I'm guessing was Bill Greenawalt, about 8 years ago). He wants contributions: which suggests that the supposed war chest of $136,000 is insufficient. Is Feiner really going to spend $200K in 3+ months on this race? Where and how will the Feiner campaign spend that much money?
Question: does anyone have access to the precinct-by-precinct breakdown from the Feiner-Greenawalt prmary? I'm guessing that the data is proprietary to the Democratic Party because it was a primary. I would love to see the breakdown and from where each candidate got his turnout.
[In case anyone actually is reading this blog, here's an interesting note: this blog has been revived for only about 3 days, but I've already heard from one reader.... any guesses who that might be?]
As a long time supporter, you know of my “Problem Solver” reputation for helping thousands of residents resolve their concerns both large and small. You also know of my ongoing commitment to rethink and improve how government does business. I am as idealistic and energized as I was in my first term as Supervisor, yet with the knowledge and experience gained from over two decades in office.The last few months have been the most rewarding days of my tenure as Greenburgh Town Supervisor. So much is being accomplished that will provide long term benefits for the Town. We continue to tighten up the way we spend your tax dollars with new initiatives that make government more efficient. We’re making
Greenburgh greener and we’re creating affordable housing opportunities.
OK, so (1) he's the "problem solver" (hopefully he trademarked that term long ago) who ... helps resolve concerns (maybe a bit awkward, but the point is strong: Feiner is the consummate constituent service pol.); (2) rethinks/improves govt (he does come up with a lot of ideas that get into lohud.com); (3) idealistic & energized as ever but now with knowledge & experience (ok... but could cut both ways); (4) continuing to tighten up govt spending of tax dollars (um, Paul, I would make this your first argument - take it from Andy Spano: this is what contested elections in Westchester are all about); (5) Greenburgh is green! (enough said); and (6) creating affordable housing (ok, contentious issue which opens up a lot of corollary issues, but at least he's tackling this head on - and this issue could give Feiner a wedge to force Bernstein into a corner (i.e., what exactly is Edgemont's position on new affordable housing?) and it also allows Feiner to invoke Astorino as a straw man (although, despite lib/dem assumptions, I'm not convinced that anti-tax Astorino is unpopular).
Not bad for a start. But I'm interested in the emphasis on fund raising. Feiner raises the red flag of ... House of Sports financing for Bernstein! (Notice the clever use of the ambiguous "inferior bid" language!) Did HOS indeed publicly pledge to raise fund to defeat Feiner? I missed that. Feiner says this may be the most expensive campaign of his career (which prompts the question of how much he spent against his last serious challenger, whom I'm guessing was Bill Greenawalt, about 8 years ago). He wants contributions: which suggests that the supposed war chest of $136,000 is insufficient. Is Feiner really going to spend $200K in 3+ months on this race? Where and how will the Feiner campaign spend that much money?
Question: does anyone have access to the precinct-by-precinct breakdown from the Feiner-Greenawalt prmary? I'm guessing that the data is proprietary to the Democratic Party because it was a primary. I would love to see the breakdown and from where each candidate got his turnout.
[In case anyone actually is reading this blog, here's an interesting note: this blog has been revived for only about 3 days, but I've already heard from one reader.... any guesses who that might be?]
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Supervisor Election - an update already!
The Daily Greenburgh website belatedly posted its announcement of Bernstein's nomination by the Dem. Town committee at
http://greenburgh.dailyvoice.com/news/greenburgh-democrat-committee-endorses-bernstein-supervisor
The interesting part is the comment Feiner posts in response to the article. His comment dated May 25 (at 12:24 AM!) echoes his FB posting from a couple of days ago by tying Bernstein to the Edgemont secession movement. Feiner goes a step further now by insisting that such secession will have a deleterious financial impact on the rest of the town, as well as Edgemont. Is Feiner suggesting that as supervisor Bernstein would facilitate Edgemont's secession and incorporation as a separate village or town? It's not clear to me how, if elected supervisor, Bernstein, who would be one vote out of five on the board, could push this through. Nevertheless, it's clever of Feiner to immediately go on the attack and put Bernstein in the position of dealing with his past as a leader of the Edgemont secessionists. I suppose Bernstein could either (1) renounce the earlier secession movement, (2) state that he continues to support it, or (3) ignore this attack. I would think a powerful, but risky, response would be to argue that the Edgemont secession movement arose directly as a result of Feiner's long-term actions as Town Supervisor and that these reasons would dissipate and secession become irrelevant should Feiner be removed from office. But that argument requires the kind of nuance that is difficult to convey in elections.
It's also interesting that in these first two jabs at Bernstein, Feiner does not bother to mention any of his own accomplishments and positive reasons for vote for him.
Feiner may also be taking a risk in focusing on Edgemont secession. This Hartsdale resident might start asking why people from Edgemont might want to secede in the first place. Heck, if Edgemont was willing to take Hartsdale with it and include us in their school district (thereby immediately increasing our property values by 50%), I would be all in favor of secession.
http://greenburgh.dailyvoice.com/news/greenburgh-democrat-committee-endorses-bernstein-supervisor
The interesting part is the comment Feiner posts in response to the article. His comment dated May 25 (at 12:24 AM!) echoes his FB posting from a couple of days ago by tying Bernstein to the Edgemont secession movement. Feiner goes a step further now by insisting that such secession will have a deleterious financial impact on the rest of the town, as well as Edgemont. Is Feiner suggesting that as supervisor Bernstein would facilitate Edgemont's secession and incorporation as a separate village or town? It's not clear to me how, if elected supervisor, Bernstein, who would be one vote out of five on the board, could push this through. Nevertheless, it's clever of Feiner to immediately go on the attack and put Bernstein in the position of dealing with his past as a leader of the Edgemont secessionists. I suppose Bernstein could either (1) renounce the earlier secession movement, (2) state that he continues to support it, or (3) ignore this attack. I would think a powerful, but risky, response would be to argue that the Edgemont secession movement arose directly as a result of Feiner's long-term actions as Town Supervisor and that these reasons would dissipate and secession become irrelevant should Feiner be removed from office. But that argument requires the kind of nuance that is difficult to convey in elections.
It's also interesting that in these first two jabs at Bernstein, Feiner does not bother to mention any of his own accomplishments and positive reasons for vote for him.
Feiner may also be taking a risk in focusing on Edgemont secession. This Hartsdale resident might start asking why people from Edgemont might want to secede in the first place. Heck, if Edgemont was willing to take Hartsdale with it and include us in their school district (thereby immediately increasing our property values by 50%), I would be all in favor of secession.
Saturday, May 25, 2013
An actual contested election for Greenburgh town supervisor
I'm reviving this blog because for the first time in years there should be a competitive election in Greenburgh. To no one's surprise, Paul Feiner is running for re-election for Greenburgh Town Supervisor. This was just assumed - I'm not sure he even bothered making a formal announcement. Robert Bernstein, an attorney from Edgemont - and long-time Feiner antagonist- received the Greenburgh Democratic Party endorsement for Town Supervisor on 5/21. Both candidates now have to obtain the necessary signatures to claim a place on the ballot. This is not necessarily automatic: in a previous election year, Feiner knocked off his opponent Pat Weems by successfully challenging the validity of her ballot signatures (whether justified or not, Feiner paid no price in public opinion for this sly tactic).
A statement by Bernstein on the www.edgemontcommunitycouncil.org website suggests that the focus of his campaign will be Feiner's alleged mismanagement of town finances. It's unclear at this very early stage what reasons Feiner will claim to convince voters to send him back to the same office for the 12th or 13th time. Feiner consistently trumpets his purported achievements on various websites (www.paulfeiner.com; his active FB page; www.greenburghnycom; and recently with comments on the ECC website). But a hint that Feiner is also willing to go negative comes in a comment on his FB page where Feiner described Bernstein as wanting "Edgemont to separate from the town." [Feiner, FB comment 5/24]
The campaign has barely begun and the money aspect is already fascinating: Feiner went on his FB page claiming that he expects Bernstein "to spend more money on his campaign to unseat me than any of my previous opponents." Feiner then asked his FB friends "to contribute or volunteer" and to circulate petitions. [Feiner FB post 5/24]. This is interesting because according to the ECC website, the NY State Board of Elections reports that Feiner already has "$136,547 in campaign funds" [ECC FB comment, 5/20]. Bernstein suggests that Feiner will spend $200,000 on his re-election. [ECC FB post 5/19]. Is this possible? Notice that Feiner doesn't actually suggest that the opponent will spend anything close to the amount his may spend, just more than previous candidates. What is there to spend on money on other than yard signs? Will they actually high campaign managers and workers for this election?
My bias/perspective: I'm an outside observer: I've never spoken a word to either Feiner or Bernstein, or participated in town politics. I've never attended a town council meeting, but I have been following Feiner's various websites, the ECC FB page and lohud.com articles about the town with interest for several years. I switched my party affiliation from independent to Democrat a few years ago because it finally dawned on me that independents were disenfranchised in Greenburgh because the only important election was the closed Democratic primary. .
A statement by Bernstein on the www.edgemontcommunitycouncil.org website suggests that the focus of his campaign will be Feiner's alleged mismanagement of town finances. It's unclear at this very early stage what reasons Feiner will claim to convince voters to send him back to the same office for the 12th or 13th time. Feiner consistently trumpets his purported achievements on various websites (www.paulfeiner.com; his active FB page; www.greenburghnycom; and recently with comments on the ECC website). But a hint that Feiner is also willing to go negative comes in a comment on his FB page where Feiner described Bernstein as wanting "Edgemont to separate from the town." [Feiner, FB comment 5/24]
The campaign has barely begun and the money aspect is already fascinating: Feiner went on his FB page claiming that he expects Bernstein "to spend more money on his campaign to unseat me than any of my previous opponents." Feiner then asked his FB friends "to contribute or volunteer" and to circulate petitions. [Feiner FB post 5/24]. This is interesting because according to the ECC website, the NY State Board of Elections reports that Feiner already has "$136,547 in campaign funds" [ECC FB comment, 5/20]. Bernstein suggests that Feiner will spend $200,000 on his re-election. [ECC FB post 5/19]. Is this possible? Notice that Feiner doesn't actually suggest that the opponent will spend anything close to the amount his may spend, just more than previous candidates. What is there to spend on money on other than yard signs? Will they actually high campaign managers and workers for this election?
My bias/perspective: I'm an outside observer: I've never spoken a word to either Feiner or Bernstein, or participated in town politics. I've never attended a town council meeting, but I have been following Feiner's various websites, the ECC FB page and lohud.com articles about the town with interest for several years. I switched my party affiliation from independent to Democrat a few years ago because it finally dawned on me that independents were disenfranchised in Greenburgh because the only important election was the closed Democratic primary. .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)