The Week that Was in the Greenburgh Supervisor's Race

Here are the events of the past week connected to the campaign for Town Supervisor:

1. Feiner hits the campaign trail: Paul Feiner started actively campaigning with an appearance in Irvington that he reported on his FB page.   Does this signal a return to the “villages first” strategy that proved so effective in turning out Rivertown voters in 2007?  The 2007 primary demonstrated that there is a large reserve of voters in villages who can swing an election.  Will this tactic be effective 6 years later?  [I’ll later revisit my theory that Feiner is actually hurt by running uncontested in the last two elections: it’s been 6 years since anyone has pulled the lever for Feiner in a serious race – in that amount of time a lot of the popuation has changed].

2. Frank's Nursery Chaos:  see this piece over at the Journal News lohud site by Greg Shilliglaw: http://www.lohud.com/article/20130606/NEWS02/306060088/Game-deal-off-Greenburgh-courts-rival-offer-nursery?nclick_check=1

describing the latest bizarre developments in this twisted tale.   Despite’s Feiner’s Captain Ahab-like perseveration on pursing a deal with the Game On 365 company to develop the site as an 8 story tall “sport’s bubble” (i.e., the White Whale of Greenburgh), the Town Board is now offering the site to competitor House of Sports.   It seems that Game On is now putting together a project with the neighboring golf driving range.  The Board is scrambling to "accept" House of Sports’ bid.  Why didn’t the Board deal with HOS – who apparently gave a significantly higher bid – from the beginning?    Is the Board seriously contemplating the possibility of two  developments of large sports facilities on adjacent properties along a two lane road next to a residential neighborhood?   Is Game On bluffing the Board and the Board, in turn, bluffing HOS, which may have been bluffing the Board all along?    What kind of riverboat card game is going on here?  Who will blink first? You've got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away and know when to run!   

Read Shillinglaw’s article for a useful summary.  It’s also the top story at Greenburgh Daily Voice:  http://greenburgh.dailyvoice.com/news/greenburgh-offers-franks-nursery-house-sports-35-million

Bernstein jumped on this latest plot development, labeling it a “Feiner fiasco” on his FB page with the alliteration we've learned to enjoy.   

As always at this early stage, election impact of this development impossible to say.  I don't hear anyone discussing this issues on the 7:58 AM train.  I suppose it is convenient for Feiner to eliminate one of Bernstein’s major talking points early in the campaign season.   But as always, I question how many undecided registered Democrats exist who could potentially be swayed by this issue.  Bernstein seems intent on hammering on the theme of  Feiner's financial mismanagement.  At the moment, Frank’s Nursery is probably the issue most well-known to voters, if only because of the referendum this past fall.  Will Feiner rue having made Frank's such a public issue?

Regarding the Feiner mismanagement argument, Bernstein’s anonymous supporter “William” assembled a useful list of issues and accusations over at his ABG site: http://www.abettergreenburgh.blogspot.com/2013/06/issues.html

3. Who’ll Stop the Rain?:  Bernstein raised continual flooding problems as an issue at his candidacy announcement; William at ABG has been harping on this for years. Recent (and current) storms have again made the situation impossible to ignore.  This issue could be a wildcard in the campaign if Bernstein can effectively make it his own and attract the attention of Elmsford area voters who are most directly impacted. 

4.  Fortress Bible:  Feiner stated directly on FB that he “did not destroy any evidence” in the case.    He also stated (on this blog) that there will be insurance coverage for the damages that the court will order the town to pay the plaintiff.   Bernstein and several others challenged Feiner to prove that there will be insurance coverage. Over on his FB page, Bernstein has posted letters from insurers asserting that there will be no insurance coverage.   As far as the destruction of evidence, the plain language of the judge’s decision clearly contradicts Feiner’s assertion.    Like all the other allegations of Feiner’s mismanagement, it remains to be seen if Fortress Bible will stick as an issue.