Baseball Classic is a Hit in Scarsdale
- Details
- Written by Joanne Wallenstein
- Hits: 8430
The Scarsdale Baseball Club hosted the 12th Annual Westchester Baseball Classic Memorial Day weekend tournament and close to 300 baseball players from 15 teams in Westchester came to town for the annual summer classic. Scarsdale fielded teams in each of the 14u, 15u and 16u brackets with the 16u Raiders taking the runner-up trophy after falling short to Westchester Academy in a thrilling championship game. This year the tournament was fortunate to be sponsored by the new Smashburger on Central Avenue. They did a great job feeding the many hungry players and fans.
(Pictured at top) 16u Raiders Team
Back: Ethan Raff, Josh Cromwell, Michael Wallach, Tyler Mandel, Dylan
Doughty, Koji Sakulrat, Jeff Weigel (Coach)
Front: Pat Lyons, Nate Ware, Scott Kelly, Teddy DeLorenzo, Harry Chalfin.
Not pictured: Masashi Kawabata
14u Team Picture (above)
Back - Eric Alessio (Coach), Brad Waterhouse, Kiran Ramachandrin, Jack
Callahan, Michael Green, Joe Weintraub, James Conlan, Kodai Morikuni,
Sam Bernstein, Joe Kelter (Coach)
Front: Cole Thaler, Jonah Schneider, Hayato Ide, Jack Waxman, Michael
DiSanto, Dan Karp
Not pictured: Ben Lehrburger
Delay the Revaluation?
- Details
- Written by Joanne Wallenstein
- Hits: 4104
This letter was sent to Scarsdale10583 by Donald Dietz III of Brewster Road: Contrary to the Scarsdale Inquirer's commentary on last week's Village Board meeting, I thought the Heathcote homeowners who spoke did understand the revaluation process very well. They presented legitimate arguments, asked reasonable questions and made sensible suggestions as to how the Village might move forward in order to improve the revaluation and make everyone more comfortable with Tyler Technologies' methodology.
In contrast, I found many of the Village's responses to be less than forthcoming and, in some instances, even deflecting and dismissive, as if the revaluation were already a fait accompli. Not a confidence builder in my book.
As I see it, there are two key issues the trustees ought to tackle and resolve before Tyler's preliminary assessments are adopted by the Village Assessor and set in stone. The first is the accuracy and, therefore, the reliability and legitimacy of the Tyler revaluation. The second has to do with transparency and trust, and correcting the perception around town that something is just not right, that the Tyler revaluation is not any more equitable or fair than what we have now.
As to the first, it is clear that what Tyler has wrought is not right and can be legitimately questioned. At a minimum, 927 homeowners scattered throughout the Village (me included), not just in Heathcote, say this is so, and it is no secret that there are others out there who were unable to contact Tyler during the Village's abbreviated review period. Collectively, these good citizens own at least 16% of the revalued properties in the Village, if not more, which is not insubstantial. They certainly should not be marginalized by anyone, including the Inquirer, as merely a few inevitably disgruntled citizens.
In addition, by the Village's own admission (to wit the Mayor, the Village Manager and the Village Assessor), there are many mistakes in Tyler's work. This includes an indeterminate number of properties undervalued by Tyler, whose owners are inexplicably silent at this time. But we have been told not to worry, since it will take the Village only three years or so to find and fix these errors. Wow! Since when is anything in this community other than excellence acceptable? A valuation error rate possibly approaching 35-40% to start does not seem to meet that standard.
Perhaps the more difficult problem to resolve is that of trust, without which any revaluation will come under constant scrutiny and criticism and even potential legal challenge. Is this really what the Mayor and Trustees want as their legacy?
Why not embrace the appeal made by the Heathcote constituency last week and defer the revaluation for a year so that there is adequate time to correct obvious errors, share information and hear everyone out without their having to file formal grievances at potentially significant cost, as they are being told by the Village to do now? Why not make every effort to demonstrate that the revaluation is in fact not only equitable and fair, but accurate and a marked improvement over the system in place today? That would be a proper outcome and a logical way to proceed.
Alternatively, if for some as yet unknown reason there is insufficient time (or lack of political will) to delay implementation, the Village ought to put in place a mechanism to ensure that those who have been wronged or improperly benefitted are, respectively, made whole or incrementally assessed by the Village at some future date. The idea would be to restore taxpayers to the position they would have been in had the revaluation not been instituted prematurely, but instead had been done correctly the first time. In this way, balance, credibility and equity could be reestablished after the fact.
Respectfully submitted,
Donald E. Dietz III
66 Brewster Road, Fox Meadow
Police Issue Warning About Phone Scams
- Details
- Written by Joanne Wallenstein
- Hits: 4755
In response to multiple incidents involving Phone Scams, the Scarsdale Police has issued the following:
Warning to the Public Regarding Incidents of Telephone Fraud
Recently there has been an increase in incidents occurring over the telephone, where the caller attempts to fraudulently obtain money from victims using several different "phone scams". The Scarsdale Police Department wants to alert residents to these fraudulent scams, to prevent people from becoming victimized.
"Grandchild In Jail" ‐ In this scam, the caller will claim to be a friend or relative that got into trouble or was involved in an accident in another country (often Mexico, Canada or one of the Caribbean Islands) and needs money to get out of jail. In some cases the scammer will tell the victim they are a police officer and their grandchild has been arrested and needs to have money sent to them for bail. The scammer will require that a Western Union MoneyGram be sent or Green Dot Card Money Card be purchased and the card number provided to them.
"IRS Tax Warrant" – In this scam, the caller will claim to be an agent or police officer from the 
Internal Revenue Service calling about a past due tax balance that is owed. The caller will tell the victim that unless the debt is paid immediately, they will send a team to the victims home to immediately arrest them. They scammer will also request that the "tax debt" be paid with a Western Union MoneyGram or Green Dot Card Money Card.
"Jury Duty Warrant" In this scam, the caller will claim to be a police officer or a warrant officer from Westchester County or New York State claiming to have a warrant for the victim for failing to report for jury duty. The scammer will also claim that unless a fine is immediately paid, the police will be sent to the victims home to arrest them. The scammer will demand that the fine be paid using a Western Union MoneyGram or Green Dot Card Money Card.
The public should be aware that all of the above telephone scams have been occurring frequently, and that the scammers are very good at frightening their victims into compliance. No government agency will ever ask you to pay a fine using a Western Union Money Gram or Green Dot Money Card. Should you receive any of these types of calls, advise the caller you are notifying your local police department and hang up. Never respond to any telephone or Internet request for money without first speaking to a trusted friend, relative or your local police department.
Community Pitches in to Conserve Bronx River Reservation
- Details
- Written by Pam Fuehrer
- Hits: 3758
The Day of Service - Pitch in For the Parks event held to honor Dr. McGill upon his retirement was a terrific success. Jim Sutton, Executive Director of the Bronx River Reservation Conservancy assigned our group the area from the wooden bridge at the Scarsdale Train Station southbound to Harney Road. Almost forty members of our community - children, parents and local business owners ranging in ages from five to over fifty years - showed up at 9:00 a.m. on Saturday 5-17, ready to make a difference in our community. The results were astounding; please see for yourself. The energetic group removed huge sections of the invasive knotweed plant along the path, clearing multiple areas of its threat. Dr. McGill and his wife both participated, adding a special touch to the effort to act Not for Self - or Non Sibi. The McGill Farewell Committee is grateful to all those who were able to attend the event, those who wished to do so but couldn't, and to those who participated in their own activity that day, helping others in Dr. McGill's honor.
War of Words Rages Over Affordable Housing in Westchester
- Details
- Written by Joanne Wallenstein
- Hits: 7239
Is Westchester County becoming the next Selma, Alabama? The battle over the affordable housing settlement is intensifying here and there have been fighting words from all quarters during the past few weeks. The Reverend Al Sharpton even visited White Plains and threatened that civil rights groups will get involved if the county fails to honor the agreement to build 750 units of affordable housing and dismantle exclusionary zoning laws.
In April, the Anti-Discrimination Center (ADC), which brought the original lawsuit against the county in 2006, issued a lengthy and angry report attacking Westchester County for non-compliance as well as HUD and Federal Monitor James Johnson for failing to enforce the terms of the agreement. The report, which is titled, "Cheating on Every Level: Anatomy of the Demise of a Civil Right Consent Decree," charges Westchester with failing to live up to the terms of the agreement and refusing to litigate to force local municipalities to amend restrictive zoning practices that bar multi-family housing in areas zoned for single-family homes. It claims that the affordable units that have been built are in "isolated and otherwise undesirable sites" and furthermore that the County Executive has "cheated" when counting these affordable units.
The report specifically singles out Scarsdale, which Johnson did not name as an exclusionary municipality, despite the report's claim that, "Scarsdale only has 0.26 percent of residential land zoned for multi-family use. The undeveloped land that is zoned multi- family is only 0 percent of the village's total acreage--there is no such land. Scarsdale's ability to meet future need for affordable housing is a total of zero units."
The ADC urged the court to hold Westchester in contempt and demand "full compliance." In response to the report, Judge Denise Cote, who is overseeing the settlement, called a conference on Friday May 2 and reaffirmed her confidence in Federal Monitor James Johnson, advising him to continue to work with the county to comply with the settlement.
HUD continues to punish the county for non-compliance and is now threatening to further their sanctions against Westchester by reallocating an additional $5.2 million in community development block grants (CDBG) from 2012 to punish Westchester for failing to issue an acceptable report on impediments to fair housing. This $5.2 million loss is in addition to the $7 million the county already lost in funds allocated in 2011.
In his State of the County message on May 1, County Executive Astorino proposed to replace the lost CDBG funds with $5 million in county funds for neighborhood revitalization, sidewalk improvement and affordable housing. Astorino claims that the program would cost each Westchester household only $1 a year. About the settlement, Astorino boasts that the "progress is phenomenal" on building 750 units of affordable housing. He says, "To date all 31 communities in the settlement have identified potential projects, 403 units have financing in place, 385 units have building permits, and 175 units are already occupied. Two facts are irrefutable. Westchester is ahead of schedule in meeting its obligations to have 750 units of affordable housing built in the settlement's 31 communities, and that progress would not be possible if the local zoning in those communities did not allow it."
The settlement has now become a key issue in the campaign for NYS Governor where Astorino is vying to unseat Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo. The Governor has produced television ads charging Astorino with "repeatedly violating federal anti-discrimination laws for years, saying Astorino " is the only county executive in the nation that refuses to comply... (losing) $10 million in penalties for civil rights violations." He too attempts to equate Westchester with the fight for equal rights in the South, saying, "Die hard resistance to civil rights didn't work out in the South half a century ago and it won't work out now." It ends by saying, "Rob Astorino, so far right, he's wrong."
Astorino fired back with his own video, in which he chides Cuomo for calling him "racist," and says, "How dare you throw out the race card when you know it doesn't apply. Have you no shame?" Referring to Cuomo's home in Chappaqua he says, "You live in one of the neighborhoods the federal government is attacking. If you knew this, why did you move there?"
Five years after the settlement was signed, parties appear to be moving farther apart rather than closer together on an agreement to comply with the terms. County Executive Rob Astorino has taken a defensive posture and is protecting local zoning laws, which some argue that neither he nor the County Board of Legislature has the power to change. On the other hand, the Anti-Discrimination Center contends that the affordable housing units that have already been built on the scarce available land in Westchester does not qualify with the terms of the agreement. They cite 46 units built in Larchmont for being too close to I-95 and to New Rochelle where there are already a high percentage of minorities. About 83 units in Cortlandt, they say they are too close to a Veterans Administration psychiatric and substance abuse facility, a major road and the railroad tracks. And in Rye, according to the ADC, the 18 units are too close to I-95 and I-287, separated from the city and abutting Port Chester which again is heavily populated by Latinos. It should be noted, that one of the terms of the settlement is that the housing be built near public transportation, yet the ADC is citing Westchester for building units too close to the railroad tracks.
The ADC is also complaining that the failure to enforce the decree has effects beyond the 750 units of housing. According to the report, "the units built were supposed to do more than provide housing for slightly more than 100 families a year. They were supposed to act as catalysts that would spur future development by private developers. The way that would have worked would have been for the units to be sited on parcels that required a town or village to relax a zoning barrier, including the barrier created by single-family zoning. Once the zoning barrier had been relaxed, two things would have occurred. First, existing residents would have learned that the sky did not fall: affordable housing can be placed in the midst of an existing single-family neighborhood and co-exist harmoniously. Second, the consent decree housing would have done the heavy lifting of removing a zoning barrier, so the private developers would have been able to follow along with the easier task of constructing affordable housing with desegregation potential under a reformed zoning regime."
It is puzzling why the ADC continues to lay the blame for the lack of affordable housing in Westchester on racial discrimination when it's clearly a matter of economics. Perhaps that's the reason that after multiple studies the County was not able to produce an acceptable analysis of impediments to fair housing. Where does the ADC expect units to be built at a cost of $68,000 each, even if local zoning codes were changed? There is little open space and what remains may be too close to roadways or the rails for their liking. It doesn't take a demographer to see that Southern Westchester County is already densely populated, overbuilt and very pricey.
Furthermore, the numbers show that Westchester does not need to be "desegregated." The county is racially and ethnically diverse and the ADC's own report says that Greenburgh, New Rochelle, Port Chester and White Plains are just a few of the many communities where the housing inventory includes options at all price levels resulting in economically diverse communities. In fact, the 2010 census showed that Westchester is the fourth most racially diverse county in the state, behind Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx and tied with Manhattan.
How will this impasse end? It's difficult to predict. But with Astorino in the race for Governor of one of the most prominent states in the nation one thing is for sure... neither the issue nor the rhetoric is not going away anytime soon.
