The Bully Pulpit
Oregon Corners – April Fools
It was Patty’s line. She told Bob that just because he has a bully pulpit doesn’t mean he has to bully everyone.
Patty V. did an effective job in her ”Shootout” post of presenting the meeting. In an attempt to keep some of us from speaking, or at least delay the inevitable, Mr. Tendy started on the other side of the room. But then, he saw that Patty was not sitting with the rest of the people he wanted to avoid, so he had to make up a new rule that he was calling on business owners first. I hope that he will not succeed in making this a community vs. business issue. It is not.
The business owners did a wonderful job of sticking up for themselves, and I believe that means standing up for the community too. It’s a shame that business owners have to waste an evening of their precious time, in a very uncertain economic climate, telling the town board what they should already be able to figure out. You do not design a business district without talking to the people who have businesses there. You do not make decisions about private property without bothering to talk to the property owners. We need a democratic process that fosters public engagement. Instead, there was anger, tension, fear. That is the Town Board’s fault. They allow Mr. Robert Tendy to bully them, and then to bully the public. While Mr. Keating was rightfully angered that he did not have any input into this plan, and first heard of it when it was televised, it is my understanding that the Town Board members did not have any input into this plan, and first saw it when the presentation was being taped.
As I understand it, $5000 has been wasted on this debacle.
The Comprehensive Plan recommended a Master Plan for Oregon Corners with a planner, with the business owners, and with Cortlandt. Instead, we get this silly picture of trees, and parallel parking, and denuded streams.
This misstep cannot be excused. The Comprehensive Plan process taught us all about a successful planning process. Every one of the current Board members has placed politics and their own advancement over the needs of the community. We need the Comprehensive Plan committee. We need a democratic process. We do not need edicts from above.
I would like to see ABACA involved, and any other local architects who are willing. We also have a local arborist, with expertise in native planting. It would be nice to see him involved. I bet we could have a real community project, if Mr. Tendy would just get his politics out of the way.
We would like the problems addressed, without Mr. Tendy’s endless quest to feel that he has left his mark on the town. He told us that he had talked to Mr. Santucci about the clothing drop boxes behind the deli. Oops – it’s not Mr. Santucci’s property.
Mr. Tendy wants us to know that he didn’t just put up that wall to be beautiful!!!! There’s another mess to clean up. That will be a tough one.
Regarding rumble strips – when we have asked for these or speed bumps on roads in Lake Peekskill, we have been repeatedly told that they are strongly discouraged by emergency services.
The property owner objects to Bob’s little pedestrian bridges over the stream.
Our streamside buffers are supposed to be protected. Mr. Tendy does not seem to care about the health of the streams, the ecology of the area, the quality of the drinking, the stormwater runoff. Since the DEC won’t stop him, he will continue to “clean out” the stream.
He also prefers a piecemeal approach to signage, and will change the law to accommodate what he wants. I think we already have a piecemeal approach to signage, with a lot of people doing whatever they want.
Mr. Zarcone recommended putting the stream into a culvert to create more parking.
Mr. Tendy’s treatment of Ms. Villanova was inexcusable.
And regarding that “grant, “ for Oscawana Lake Road, it is not a grant. It is an Act of Congress (SAFETEA-LU) passed during Sue Kelly’s tenure.
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the fourth day of January, two thousand and five
An Act
To authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and transit
programs, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users’’ or ‘‘SAFETEA–LU’’
1361 NY Construct sidewalks and roadway improvements
on Oscawana Lake Road in the Town
of Putnam Valley ……………………………………… $480,000
This is on page 166 of the legislation. Mr. Tendy repeatedly talks about the spread of misinformation. It appears that he is the one doing it. It is $480,000. Where did the $600,000 figure come from?
I would think that this is the money to be used on the Oscawana Lake Road component of the Peekskill Hollow Road project. It doesn’t seem like enough money for the county’s proposal.
The public should not be left out of the loop on any of these projects. We now have this county Oregon Corners plan, a Putnam County Savings Bank project that may or may not be happening, a Peekskill Hollow Road project, and hostilities between the town and the property owner next to the wall. Piecemeal does not work. We already have ample evidence of that.
Reinstate the CP committee now, and let’s get this done. Two women and one man of courage and foresight are all that we need.
Mr. Tendy not only tried to belittle the public, he stood not far from the podium, so that his presence was even more intimidating to the speakers. It was Bob’s show; it just wasn’t a very good one. Mr. Tendy accused John of trying to make this into a circus. Bob did a good job of that all by himself. John Cohen has tried to incorporate the folk tradition into a great many of our planning projects. He has a long tradition with country music, Appalachian music, the New Lost City Ramblers, Pete Seeger, and Bob Dylan. He is one of the treasures of Putnam Valley and part of its flavor.
And while we are still on the subject of Oregon Corners, the restaurant is for sale, the post office, the prior snips n’ tips building and the deli are for sale, the garage is in litigation, and the 2 buildings next to the hardware store have been vacated for possible construction. Nice plan.
This meeting went on, even after the hostile confrontation. Mr. Tendy does not hesitate to put town business onto the agenda, hoping to evade public participation. None of this was on the agenda posted on the town calendar.
The urgent issues –
Another section of non-conforming lot law has been written. I will be writing a post to explain the significance of non-conforming lots and the Byzantine journey on which the Town Board is taking the zoning code. Setting this public hearing was apparently so urgent, it could not wait until a regular meeting.
The urgent appointment of a landscape architect to oversee the Kaspar mitigation plan. This is someone recommended by Bill Zutt, who will be charging the taxpayers $105/hour, including one way travel time from Westport. We do not have time to find someone or to evaluate credentials. Despite years of litigation, the current administration did not plan ahead for this. They also did not consider monetary reparations in the consent order in this case. So the Town gets to continue to pay and pay and pay, and the County continues to put parcels into the ag district. Town Board Member Priscilla Keresey did ask why the taxpayers were paying for this. The problem is, she didn’t ask the question before authorizing the consent order.
And last, but not least, was the urgent appointment of an egg addler for Lake Peekskill. The LP budget committee tried to introduce this concept at budget time, back in the fall, but Mr. Tendy is on ‘no’ mode, when any of us from Lake Peekskill ask for something. Besides he preferred the BB method of goose control. I’m glad it’s not going that way.
And Mr. Zarcone wanted to discuss ethics with Mr. Tendy, but Bob didn’t want anyone else to hear that conversation.
DP
Popularity: 2% [?]
All anyone needs to do is read Dr. Powell’s posts to get the FACTS about what is going on in Putnam Valley. This note is just to encourage people to follow her blog, and to watch the board meetings on television.
First, let me say that I welcome efforts to make Oregon Corners more attractive. Any thinking person has to wonder about the severity of the underlying problems which have PREVENTED this from happening over the years, despite general agreement on the need. By extension, one would have to conclude that these problems still exist. Some of these problems were touched as, in the form of disclaimers, by the Landscape Architect who presented the plan to the Board a few weeks ago. (See it on t.v.)
However beautifully devised an architectural drawing may be, when it contains DISCLAIMERS, it should not be the basis on which to allow our Board–or the Federal Highway Department–to proceed. These disclaimers refer to serious issues which, had I been able to attend the recent PV TownBoard meeting, I would have liked to have addressed. I believe that they are critical to any decision about Oregon Corners plan(s):
1. The cost of the plan, as currently presented, has not been detailed. We are only given a seductive figure of $600,000. as being “available”. No details on what we have to GIVE for this. The Federal government doesn’t just give money…they want something in return. They also have FINAL SAY on the specifications of a road project. That fact is easily checkable by calling the Department of Transporation, as the Friends of Peekskill Hollow Road have done, and have learned about this alarming FACT. Other than the LA’s disclaimer that his assignment–to design the project–did not include engineering (!!!!) I know enough about landscape architecture to know that reliable LA plans DO consider engineering. Landscape DESIGNERS may not have to, but Landscape ARCHITECTS do!
How else can an architect decide on what is feasible to include in a plan? This was slight of hand, and insulting to the public. No one should be asked to vote on a plan which does NOT include engineering!
2. The plan presented was financed by a small grant. However, IMPLEMENTATION of this plan is another matter. The cost to the TAXPAYER of this plan has not been detailed, i.e., initial cost, maintenance, financing structure (e.g., is it a matching grant, with locality putting out the money first, and hoping that Feds will reimburse? as is the case with the Peekskill Hollow Road project?)
3. The relationship of the Hertzel property to the plan has not been detailed. It was mentioned, and glossed over by the Landscape Architect with another DISCLAIMER, similar to the disclaimer which appears on the Department of Transportation’s website where they clearly stated that they would not be responsible for any cleanup of that”‘possible toxic waste site”. What requirement of the town does the Federal highway money have for the disposition of the Hertzel property? How can a Town Board ask residents to accept a plan which does NOT include a disposition of this liability?
4. Without providing details, the Landscape Architect issued a THIRD disclaimer, i.e., that the parking would be on “private property”. The cost(s) to the taxpayer for the use of this PRIVATE property (Santucci Blue Building, and perhaps Mahopac Bank) on which the plan depends to absorb off street parking is not detailed.
Will this private property come under Eminent Domain? Will the town have to rent/maintain/insure the property? Will the town be liable for damages incurred by those parking/walking in that private property who are visiting the private owners’ establishments, as well as being liable for damages incurred by those visiting other businesses? Or, is the current private owner donating this land to the town?
5. The architect’s presentation glossed over the possibility of a drive-in bank in the plan. So, no one can later say that he didn’t cover that eventuality. However, details about the implications of such a bank were NOT provided.
A traffic study was done by the Putnam County Bank which is planning to put in a drive-in/bank at the Corners. In order to be allowed to have a drive-in, the traffic would have to be shown as being low enough to safely allow the slowdown and ingress/egress required by a drive in bank.
If traffic is, indeed, low enough for that, how does thatFACT jibe with claims that traffic is so HIGH at the Corners that we need extra lanes–lanes that disrupt the current business parking there? These numbers are not unknowns, and we have a right to know them before approving the current plan.
6. The relationship of this project to the plans for the rest of Peekskill Hollow Road have not been detailed: Is there “no relationship”; “some relationship”? Is it a slippery slope? Log on to our website to see our concerns about this other Federal “handout” http://www.fopgr08.com
7.Other than MR. Tendy and the LA, the identities of persons who actually took part in devising this plan have not been revealed. We only know about those who did NOT participate. Among this group are precisely the people we would want to have involved–and who have expressed their willingness to be involved: business owners, community representatives, Comprehensive Plan Committee members who studied the problem for years.
As with any project in which the Federal government takes an interest, there are ALWAYS quid pro quo’s. We have a right to know what these are. To give the Feds their due, they also require local governments to share information with taxpayers and to consult taxpayers on plans. As important as I think it is for the changes to Oregon Corners to be practical and affordable, I believe that this latter requirement is the most important: People in a democracy have a right to know; they have an OBLIGATION to find out! Check it out!!
I’m so glad that Dawn was able to report on the Oregon Corners meeting in a more objective and dispassionate manner than I did. I don’t know what transcendental meditation techniques she’s been studying, but she sure manages to keep her serenity despite the blatant attacks that have been inflicted on her by the misogynistic Mr. Tendy. I really hope that more people check out the videos of the Put Valley meetings– they’re online at the town website– so that they can see for themselves the utter disrespect that Bully Bob and the other board members have for the people of this town. Dawn has been covering these meetings for over a year without once losing her cool. On the other hand, my Sicilian temper is readily inflamed when Tendy goes into attack mode which happens at just about every single meeting I attend. As I said in my post, whoever tries to unseat BB this November really needs to post a video album of Tendy’s greatest performances, sort of like the WWF of Put Valley. Keep up the good work Dawn and thanks as always to Jeff for providing us with a place to post our opinions.
I am looking forward to seeing you on the Kent Town Board.
I have no moves planned at this time, but thank you.
When I’m on the town board in Kent (think November this year!) I hope there’s someone out there with the clarity you bring to Putnam Valley that will take my place here in Kent… or, you could move here.