The Hartsdale School District: myths and facts; Part 1: Population Boom and Racism

The Legend of the Hartsdale School District 
Deep in the inner recesses of the consciousness of Hartsdale residents lingers a vague, vestigial memory of a long defunct Hartsdale school district. Legends surround this school district, distorted by a haze of misinformation.  Yet it is true that long ago, Hartsdale did have its own compact school district serving the neighborhoods of Manor Woods, College Corners, Windsor Park and Ridge Road.

The following discussion is intended to dispel common misunderstanding by presenting accurate information about the Hartsdale School District and its demise fifty years ago.  This first posting will address the demographic transformation of previously small, sleepy school districts in the 1950s, and the racism that plagued the county and shaped changes to come.

Population Boom
When looking back to the post-WWII development of the Town of Greenburgh school districts, the crucial factor is the population explosion of the 1950s.  Between 1950 and 1960, Greenburgh grew 60%, from 47,500 to 76,000 residents (Greenburgh grew another 12% in the 1960s to reach 86,000 residents by 1970, and has increased very little in the subsequent 50+ years).  As an example of this dramatic population boom, registered voters in both Ardsley and Fairview doubled from just 1950 to 1954.  

Inevitably, school districts saw their enrollments explode along with the general population.  For example, Fairview schools (Greenburgb #8) saw the number of students quadruple in 15 years, from under 600 to over 2700.  This dramatic growth precipitated major changes in previously tiny school districts, many with only a few hundred students.  Before the population growth of the 1950s, most Greenburgh school districts were still too small to support their own high schools.  There were no high schools in the unincorporated school districts:  Greenville (or "Edgemont") customarily sent its 11th and 12th graders to Scarsdale High School.  Hartsdale sent 10th, 11th and 12th graders to White Plains High School (as did Fairview).   

The old Greenburgh school districts were identified by their numbers:  Ardsley was #5, Edgemont #6, Hartsdale #7, Fairview #8, Elmsford #9, etc.   Edgemont, Ardsley and Elmsford schools have basically retained the same borders but housing developments have taken over the farms and undeveloped land which had once comprised much of those districts' property. Fairview #8 included the remainder of the modern Greenburgh Central School District neighborhoods: Poet's Corner, Orchard Hill, Fairview, Parkway Gardens, Juniper Hill, etc.    

Racism's Persistent and Ugly Legacy
In addition to enormous population growth, the second important factor to consider in the development of the Greenburgh school systems is blatant racial segregation. Racism runs deep in Westchester County and there is not space to go into detail here.  In the 19th century, Westchester County, like New York City,  expressed no sympathy for emancipation or black civil rights.  Westchester opposed the Civil War and voted against Presidents Lincoln and Grant. The county staunchly supported the Democratic Party until almost the end of the century.

The "Second" Ku Klux Klan," revived in the late 1910s, was active in Westchester County until dying out by the mid-1930s.  KKK organizations existed in Peekskill and Port Chester with small affiliated cells in Mount Vernon, Mount Pleasant, Yonkers, New Rochelle and White Plains.  In Greenburgh, only Hastings is reported as having a KKK cell. (Scarsdale Inquirer, Dec. 31, 1928; https://labs.library.vcu.edu/klan)  Cross burnings appear intermittently in newspaper reports of the time, although it is not clear how many were KKK directed as opposed to KKK mimicry.  The New York Amsterdam News reported in May 1932 that a large cross was burned on a hill overlooking Fairview (I'm guessing this means Juniper Hill) in response to the election of Reverend Louis Hughes as the first African American member of Fairview #8's Board of Education.  [New York Amsterdam News, May 18, 1932].

Racism was not relegated to shadowy, secret, social groups.  One of the most insidious expressions of racism, whose legacy shapes the county today, was the establishment of restrictive covenants.  Restrictive covenants on real estate deeds prohibited a wide range of "undesirables" from owning residential property in contravention of community prejudices.  One study showed that in Westchester County, at least  50% of developments of 20 or more houses had restrictive covenants (Journal of Land & Public Utility Economics, 1947).

Restrictive covenants were most notoriously wielded to exclude blacks and Jews from various suburban communities.  The barriers against Jewish home ownership had begun to crumble in most places in the late 1940s, but even after the US Supreme Court barred restrictive covenants in 1948, the exclusion of blacks continued through the collusion of mortgage lenders, banks, federal government home ownership programs, real estate brokers and local insistence.  As a consequence, black families found very limited opportunity for home ownership and were restricted to narrow, geographic areas.  With no realistic option to pick up and leave, blacks renters could be exploited by landlords who charged disproportionately high rents and who had little incentive to improve inadequate properties.  Black home buyers too were limited in terms of choice and, often denied access to government-backed mortgage programs, frequently entered into disadvantageous home purchase contracts.  Often, too, black homeowners and renters lacked political leverage to demand that municipalities invest in infrastructure in their neighborhoods. As a result, even in suburbs, "ghetto" or "slum" conditions became notorious.  [For background, see Richard Rosenstein's The Color of Law http://a.co/d/2MEMLdU]

In Greenburgh, the legacy of racial housing restrictions became obvious.  Parkway Gardens, in a largely isolated section of the north-east corner of the Town, was developed and marketed starting in the 1940s as a black suburban neighborhood of small homes on limited parcels of land.  Fairview- Manhattan Park, also mostly African American, and pre-dating Parkway Gardens, remained largely unpaved and subject to flooding and abject conditions.  In the 1950s and 1960s, local newspapers reported for their white readership about Fairview's "slum" conditions as landlords allowed properties to deteriorate and overcrowding persisted while the town neglected infrastructure.

In contrast to the largely African American neighborhoods of Fairview and Parkway Gardens, nearby Hartsdale and Greenville/Edgemont, also within unincorporated Greenburgh, were almost entirely white.  The boundaries that divided school districts may have been invisible, but posed an insurmountable racial barrier.  One report observed that in the mid-1960s, Hartsdale's school enrollment of almost 900 students included only one African American child.  In late-1950s Edgemont, the appearance of a black transfer student from Yonkers was remembered as a notable and singular event.   Ardsley schools were only "integrated" in 1965 when a teenager from South Carolina was brought north to live with a white Ardsley family as part of an educational program.   https://patch.com/new-york/tarrytown/first-african-american-integrate-school-1965.  Thus, through the late-1960s, Ardsley (and Edgemont and Hartsdale) educated essentially no children from unincorporated Greenburgh's thriving African American community.  Nearly all of Greenburgh's black children were enrolled in the Fairview #8 school district where, as of the early 1960s, they comprised almost 1/3 of the students.

In the next posting, I'll describe the school merger mania of the 1950s and 60s and the series of events that doomed Hartsdale's school district to extinction.

Greenburgh's Changing Demographics: will political representation keep apace?

Summary: Greenburgh's slow population growth over recent decades masks (i) an aging population but also (ii) significant demographic shifts.
Takeaway: Changes in the Town's composition are not reflected in the political establishment, but the times they are a changin' (someday).

I. Slow: The 2000 and 2010 censuses report that Greenburgh's population grew by 1,636 residents (1.9%) during a decade when, by comparison, Westchester County grew by 3%, New York State and New York City each grew by 2.1% and the US by 9.7%.   It might be surmised that growth is constrained by limited new housing opportunities but, surprisingly, the Town saw an increase of 4% in housing units (from 34,084 units in 2000 to 35,452  unit in  2010) in a decade when the population grew by less than one-half that rate.  Who is filling all that new housing?

II. Old:  Along with the slow growth, Greenburgh is rapidly aging:  the median age increased in one decade from 39.7 to 42.8 (up to 43.2 in the 2014 Census estimate).  This is much older than the New York State median age of 38 in 2010.

III. Diverse:   Note: Tracing racial and ethnic changes using the census is not simple. New York's Department of Education divides students into (1) Black or African American," (2) "Hispanic or Latino,"  (3) "Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander," (4) "White," and (5) "Multiracial."  The US Census, however, does not divide the population so conveniently (and misleadingly?).  Instead, the Census recognizes Latino or Hispanic status as an ethnicity, not a racial category such as black or white. The census, however, does list "races" both with and without Latin/Hispanic individuals.  Below, I'm using the "non-Hispanic" racial categories in order to correlate later with school district population numbers.

Comparing the 2000 and 2010 censuses reveals Greenburgh's demographic trends:

A.     Ethnic Latino/Hispanic Population: The census shows rapid growth in individuals identified ethnically as Latino or Hispanic from 7,825 (9%) in 2000 up to 12,366 (14%) in 2010.  This is an increase of 4,541 individuals or 58% in ten years.  Latin/Hispanic growth was broad-based, taking place in just about every village and school district (e.g., almost all Greenburgh school districts saw their percentage of Latino students double during the decade). Greenburgh's Latin population is diverse with the largest subgroup listing Puerto Rico as place of origin (21%), followed by Mexico (14%) and then Ecuador and the Dominican Republic (each about 11.5%). 

As far as the broad census “racial” categories of white, black and Asian, it almost useless to use exact numbers from the census because of evolving definitions (e.g., multi racial) and the wide diversity within each such artificial category (including, of course, Latino/Hispanic). (Note: the schools handle these categories differently.).  Nevertheless, a few trends can be identified:

B.    Greenburgh’s Asian population (a nonsensical category that includes people with such diverse origins as Indian, China, the Philippines, etc.,)  rose about 20% during the 2000s decade, numbering 9,155 or 10.4% of Greenburgh's population in 2010 (compared to US: 4.7%).  Unlike the Latin population growth which occurred throughout Greenburgh, the Asian population growth increase took place primarily in the Edgemont and Ardsley school districts.   

C.    Greenburgh’s Black (non-Hispanic) population dropped 5.6% from 10,993 in 2000 to 10,377 (11.7% of the Town total) in 2010. 

D.  The non-Hispanic white population fell significantly (6.7%)  from 58,450 (67%) in 2000 to 54,539 (62%) in 2010.   (US: 63.7%/ 2014: 62.8%)

E. The multi-racial ("two or more races")category rose slightly from 2,251 in 2000 to 2,404 in 2010.

Some observations about Greenburgh's changing demographics:
1. Poverty:  Town residents living in poverty grew from 3,324 (3.9%) in 2000 to 4,156 (4.7%) in 2014 Census estimate.  This is a concerning 25% growth in the number of impoverished people. 

2.  Voting:  active registered voters grew rom 2009: 57,069  to 2016: 58,479.  Democracy is alive and well in Greenburgh, but....

3.  Representation:  almost 25% of Greenburgh's population is Latin or Asian.  Are these populations fairly represented in town government and leadership?  Both population groups look to continue increasing.  Are changes in political representation coming? 

No truth to grisly whisperings at Hartsdale Train Station

Speculation abounds regarding the true nature of the construction project at the Hartsdale train station's "De Santi" Plaza.  Rumors began to spread after workers apparently fled the site earlier this week and have not returned.  Some have wondered whether obscure ancient rites gone awry under the garish light of this week's full moon terrified the crew.  Passers-by then began to observe a vague resemblance between the in-process plaza, purportedly designed to display a Veterans Memorial, and altars devoted by the ancients to human and animal sacrifices.

We believe, however, that these ominous portents are merely coincidences.  We've found no evidence - as we've heard suggested - that the Town Council members will reveal themselves at the plaza dedication as shaman-priests of a ghastly mythical spirit whose unquenchable thirst can only be sated with human blood. Admittedly, the throats of random, unsuspecting passengers alighting at train station would provide a convenient and abundant harvest, but such rituals have gone out of favor in Greenburgh in living memory.
Finally, our inquiries have found no evidence that the retaining walls will be inscribed with the timeless, unspeakable summons to the horrific demigod, Cthulhu,   "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"

HARTSDALE STATION PLAZA "MEMORIAL" 9/15/16

SACRIFICIAL HIGH ALTAR - PETRA

MONTE ALBAN - ALTAR, OAXACA, MEXICO

Fairview in the 1950s: An African American Neighborhood Endures Urban Renewal

Reading through newspaper accounts of Greenburgh in the 1940s through 1970s is startling. Unlike the Greenburgh of the 2000s when we complain about taxes, and argue over whether or not to build access roads to shopping plazas or battle against the location of assisted living complexes, the Greenburgh of previous decades confronted profound questions of planning and race.  The issues that most energized residents were (1) proposals to merge school districts amid rapid population growth and the urgent need to build new school facilities; (2)( plans for urban renewal ("slum clearance") of parts of historically African-American neighborhoods in Fairview,  and the concomitant zoning and placement of public housing,; and (3) the impact of construction of the Cross-Westchester Expressway (Rt. 287).  Decisions made in the 1950s profoundly shape the Town of Greenburgh today.

To illustrate the impact of just one of these many issues - which appear to me to dwarf in import, drama, and real impact on individual lives anything the town has confronted in recent years - here are maps showing the consequences of urban renewal on the historically African American central neighborhoods of Fairview.


1.  1930 Map of Central Fairview

In the 1950s, the grey area on bottom left of the map was deemed by the Town as "substandard" housing and leveled as part of urban renewal effort in cooperation with federal and state authorities and approved by the Town Council amid litigation and dispute.  This centrally located neighborhood, between the major thoroughfares of Tarrytown Road and Dobbs Ferry Road, however, was not replaced with new housing at the same location.  Instead, the African American residents of this area could find 131 units of new public housing built on the Heyer Farm property one-half mile to the north-east beyond the barrier of the Cross Westchester Expressway (now 287) that was also completed in 1960. At the same time, the Heyer Farm property (pink area in upper right of map) was zoned for multi family units stretching north-south from Old Tarrytown Road (northernmost road on map down along the west margin of the Heyer property).   The lettering across the north-central portion of the map "White Plains Parkway" is the current day route of Rt. 287.


2.  Central Fairview Today

Central Fairview today (googlemaps.com).  Note: 1. Rt. 287 bifurcates and dominates the neighborhood; 2.  the clearance (i.e., leveling) of neighborhoods between Tarrytown Rd. and Dobbs Ferry Rd. pursuant to "urban renewal" and replacement by a shopping plaza and parking lots; 3.  The placement of Greenburgh's largest public housing development - the 131 unit state site along the west edge of the old Heyer Farm property between Old Tarrytown Road and the highway 287 (where the "Greenburgh Housing Authority" marker appears).  An additional 30 low rise "senior" federal public units at Manhattan and Florence Ave. on the south side of the highway were also built in 1960.  Notably, the designers of Greenburgh's public housing appear to have pioneered low-rise in place of the infamous high-rise "projects" typically built in the mid-20th century. 

3.  Close up African American neighborhood between Tarrytown Rd. and Dobbs Ferry Rd. cleared (i.e., destroyed under the Greenburgh "urban renewal" program) in late 1950s.  1930 map:

Grey neighborhood on left side (Columba, Vanderbilt, Roosevelt and Lincoln Aves). were first leveled as part of urban renewal.  The rest of the Tarrytown/Dobbs Ferry road angle neighborhood (Meadow St., Spring St. and Warren Ave south of Tarrytown Road) was later eliminated to make room for the current shopping plaza.

4. Current appearance of same area:

The 1950s African American neighborhood south of Tarrytown Road has been replaced by a shopping plaza  (K-mart, DSW, Home Goods, Modells) and parking lots.  Housing that may have been "substandard," but centrally located, has been replaced by public housing units well out of the sight and mind of the general public.

It is convenient and maybe a bit too easy to draw conclusions when confronted by these maps. Urban renewal, or "slum clearance" as it was commonly referred to in the 1950s, may have indeed been inspired by sincere, progressive motives. The implementation, however, of this possibly idealistic plan included leveling of a highly visible African American neighborhood located along the central artery of Tarrytown Road concomitant with the establishment of public housing  in an undesirable area flanking the newly constructed highway and out of sight of the main local thoroughfare.  Considering that in the late 1950s and early 1960s, African Americans had very limited housing options in Greenburgh, New York (e.g., fewer than a total of 10 African American children attended the Town's Edgemont, Ardsley and Hartsdale School Districts in the early 1960s), it may also be inferred that the Town had devised a plan to permanently relegate African American to the margins of the highway in a perpetual "urban ghetto,"  that was well removed from the major local roadways. 

Manor Woods History: The Story of Caterson of Caterson Terrace?

Greenburgh's Rapidly Changing Demographics - First in a Series

At a recent Greenburgh Town Board meeting discussion of the Comprehensive Plan, one attendee observed that in unincorporated Greenburgh, population growth was far exceeding projections assumed in the plan.  I was very surprised by this comment and my curiosity led me to look into this issue. The demographic changes in the Town of Greenburgh, its various sub-components and, especially the school districts are fascinating, surprising and raise questions about the representativeness of Greenburgh democracy.

First sources;  census.gov is an amazing fount of information.  I've relied on the 2000 and 2010 censuses.  The census does provide intra-census projections - the latest is for 2014 - but my conclusion after examining school district reports is that these projections are not especially reliable for Greenburgh   I've found usboundary.com, an amazing resource for understanding Greenburgh's byzantine conglomeration of villages and school district, none of which precisely align.   Even more interesting are the numbers provided by the NY State Dept. of Education at data.nysed.gov, which allow investigation into school district enrollment numbers, as late as the 2014-2015 school years.

Before we drill down, some basics:
Greenburgh according to the 2010 census has 88,400 residents, which is an 1.8% increase from 2000's total of 86,764.
These 88,400 residents are broken down as follows:
A. More than half (45,537) live in incorporated villages:
1, Irvington Village:   6,420
2. Ardsley Village:     4,452
3. Dobbs Ferry Vill: 10,874
4. Hastings Vill:         7,849
5. Tarrytown Vill:     11,277
6. Elmsford Vill:        4,664

B. The remaining 42,863 live in Unincorporated parts of Greenburgh (referred to as Town Outside Villages, or "TOV").
The TOV population is best understood by examining it by school district:
1. Greenburgh Central SD:                                             21,801
2. Edgemont SD:                                                              7,454
3. TOV in Ardsley SD, but not living in village:         c. 5,150
4. TOV in Elmsford SD, but not living the village :   c.  3,050
5.  c. 5,400 mostly in Valhalla SD and Pocantico Hills SD,  with remainder in various Greenburgh SDs.

In Greenburgh, residents identify themselves by school district more than by any other political category.  This leads to great confusion.  For example, as shown above, more Ardsley School District residents live in TOV than actually live in Ardsley Village.   None of the village school districts precisely align with the villages that share their names.  To make matters more complicated, in addition to 7 school districts located entirely within Greenburgh (Ardsley, Edgemont, Dobbs Ferry, Irvington, Elmsford, Greenburgh and Hastings), three additional school districts share Greenburgh population with neighboring towns.  Tarrytown SD has about 11,000 of its residents in the Greenburgh village of Tarrytown with another 10,000 living in the neighboring, non-Greenburgh village of Sleepy Hollow. Portions of the Valhalla and Pocantico Hill SD borders lie within Greenburgh, but most residents of those districts reside outside of Greenburgh.   As we will later see, all of this makes analysis complicated.

C.  So in addition to the above political breakdown, let's look at Greenburgh's 2010 population of 88,400 by school district, again using the 2010 census numbers as filtered through usboundary.com:

1. Irvington SD:           9,125
2. Ardsley SD:             9,616
3. Dobbs Ferry SD:      9,499
4. Hastings SD:            8,514
5. Tarrytown SD:        11,277  (with an additional 9,870 residing in Sleepy Hollow)
6. Elmsford SD:           7,734
7. Edgemont SD:         7,454
8. Greenburgh CSD: 21,801
9. Other:                      3,380 (mostly Valhalla and Pocantico Hils)

Next:  demographic changes in the Town of Greenburgh and School Districts

EDGE-XIT: DOES IT HAVE A CHANCE; OR "A CASE OF ITCHY-EDGIES" (PART I)

This past week, community activists in the Edgemont School District launched a petition drive as the first step on the path toward incorporating as Greenburgh's 7th village.    David M. Wilson wrote a good article on the topic at the Journal News.

In this Part I, I'll discuss incorporation's chances and my expectation for the coming campaign.

Every decade or so, going back to the 1920s, there seems to be some move to redefine Edgemont as a political unit - not simply a school district - stuck in the uncorporated part of Greenburgh. Decades ago there even was a still-born attempt at joining Scarsdale, which were rejected by Edgemont's larger neighbor.

Will this most recent attempt at incorporation enjoy a different fate?

As noted above, the first step to getting incorporation on a ballot, it getting a petition signed.  The state requirement is 20% of "qualified voters" which I'm assuming means residents 18 and over.  According to the 2014 US Census projection, Edgemont's population was 7,138 with 5,024 age 18 or over.  (I'm not sure if non-citizens are considered for purposes of the petition: Edgemont has about 530 non-citizens, although the Census website doesn't break them down into over/under 18).   In any event, the petitioners will need at least 1000 signatures.   Since contesting the validity of signatures on political measures is a competitive sport in Greenburgh, the incorporation organizes should certainly plan for many more above the minimum.  Maybe 1,500 to be safe?

How many Edgies can be relied on to support incorporation?  I don't know if anyone has tried polling, but we do have a few hints.  The closed Facebook group "Edgemont Residents for Incorporation" has 724 members.  This of course doesn't mean these are all Edgemont voters, but the FB membership number is about the same as the 687 Edgemont residents who voted for Bob Bernstein when he ran against Town Supervisor in 2013.  While those votes back in 2013 were not votes for incorporation, Bernstein's support in that primary does reflect widespread dissatisfaction with Paul Feiner's administration. I'm going to assume that Bernstein's nearly 700 voters from 2013 as well as the Facebook crowd can reasonably be relied on to support  incorporation now.  

If at least 700 Edgemont voters form an informed and motivated base in support of incorporation, adding another 500 to sign the petition shouldn't require too great of an effort.

If the petition goes to an Edgemont-wide referendum, it appears that a simple majority of votes cast  determines incorporation's fate.  At this phase, advantage swings in favor of the pro-incorporation forces.  One obvious hint comes from the few measures we have of Paul Feiner's popularity in Edgemont: in that 2013 primary where Bernstein received 687 votes in Edgemont, Paul Feiner received only 202 votes.  In fact, in the few contested primaries he has faced, Feiner has never done well in Edgemont:  in 2005 he lost there by 422 to 223 to Bill Greenawalt, and in 2007 Sandra Berger beat Feiner by 362 to 287.

Despite these Edgemont vote numbers in contested primaries, no one should underestimate Paul Feiner's skills as a politician.  You don't govern such a diverse community as Greenburgh for 25 years without political talent.  Edgemont incorporation, however, is starting to look like the most daunting leadership  challenge he has faced since Greenawalt's 2005 primary contest.

How is Paul Feiner responding to the incorporation moves?  My conversation with a Hartsdale community leader who spoke with Feiner confirms the argument that Feiner presents in Wilson's article:  Feiner is arguing that Edgemont will face enormous tax increases by incorporating.  The new village will need to obtain services like police and DPW from other places: Feiner suggests that the Town of Greenburgh won't sell such services cheaply.  Will this hint of vindictiveness throw a glass of cold water over the incorporators or will it backfire, as the pro-incorporation leadership team seeks services from other towns or villages?  Paul suggest that Edgemont will lose access to the Veterans Park pool but there is disagreement over this point and I question how many Edgemont families regularly use that pool and if that is an effective dissuading argument.

The major challenge facing the pro-incorporation movement, on the other hand, is convincingly responding to tax-increase fears.  They have many argument on the They do, however, have a lucky break on their side: the proposed Shelburne Nursing Home debacle came at exactly the right time to support the pro-incorporators point that the Town Board cannot be relied on to make astute and informed decisions on important zoning matters. The recently filed lawsuits will bring back unpleasant memories of the Town Board's disastrous management of the Fortress Bible zoning situation.

The battle over Edgemont incorporation has the potential to turn quite nasty:  the pro-incorporators forces may be best served by making the underlying issue into a referendum over Paul Feiner's past performance and future competency to direct the taxation and zoning of Edgemont.  This Feiner-focus was effective in leading Bernstein to an easy victory within Edgemont in 2013 and may prove effective again in motivating a solid cadre of Edgemont anti-Feiner voters.  Although it does not appear to come directly from Paul Feiner, I've seen hints that the anti-incorporation forces will rely on racial fear-mongering by arguing that (i) incorporation and desire to separate from heavily minority unincorporated Greenburgh is partly motivated by racism and (ii) potential incorporation voters could be deterred by insinuating that a new Edgemont village will be compelled to build low-income housing.

What should Paul do? Ironically, it may be in the master tactician's best interest to appear to sit this one out.  Because Feiner is certainly a lightening rod for a good percentage of Edgemont residents who may oppose any position he takes,  the Town Board might be best served by finding surrogate spokesmen to take the lead in combating the pro-incorporation forces.  One such surrogate has already appeared in Hugh Schwartz, an Edgemont resident and zoning board member, who wrote a recent piece in the Scarsdale Inquirer opposing incorporation and is now establishing a Facebook presence skeptical of the ECC's pro-incorporation efforts.  I believe that the anti-incorporation forces will be best served by finding a few more spokesman from within Edgemont to speak at community gatherings, rather than relying on Paul Feiner whose presence risks making the referendum into a replay of the 2013 primary.

Again, Paul Feiner's history of poor performance in contested primaries in Edgemont, is not a reliable indicator of the fate of incorporation.  It does suggest, however, that if the pro-incorporators frame the incorporation vote as a referendum over Paul Feiner's governance in Greenburgh, it will be quite a challenge for the anti-incorporators  to summon a enough votes to surpass the 700 or so Bernstein loyalists.  This ability to turn out motivated loyalists on each side will be crucial since the referendum is likely to be a stand-alone vote.

I do think that the anti-incorporation forces have one potentially powerful gambit to play.  Rather than fighting on the beaches and in the hedgerows, Feiner will be best served by preventing the  petition from advancing to the referendum stage.  I expect the anti-incorp forces to pull out all stops in challenging the petition's validity.  Feiner's team has shown skill with such tactics in the past (anyone remember Pat Weems?) and I would expect nothing less from them as zero hour approaches.

In Part II, I'll examine the potential impact of Edgemont incorporation on the remainder of unincorporated Greenburgh, particularly Hartsdale.