croton blog for croton-on-hudson new york

Color Me RED or Color Me BLUE?

March 11, 2006

RED and BLUE are two colors that can be a source of confusion to residents of Croton-on-Hudson. As yard signs pop up like daffodils for the upcoming village election, set for March 21, 2006 (see: candidate debate video), passers-by will notice that RED and BLUE are the chosen colors for both parties.

The election yard sign color designation comes with a twist in “these parts” though—with BLUE for Republican candidates (Joe Gonzalez, Jim Steinberg and Guy Adami) and RED for Democratic candidates (Ann Gallelli, Charlie Kane and Sam Watkins).



So, the whole “Red State, Blue State” notion made popular within the last decade or so by the likes of Tim Russert, do not apply in Croton-on-Hudson. According to lore, the Democratic committee chose RED long ago as they thought it the best color for high visibility in contrast to a snow-covered winter backdrop. In fact, one year the Democrats went so far as to display GREEN signs because the village election fell on St. Patrick’s Day.

On March 16, 2006 9:50 PM, TeaDrinker said:

On Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Crotonblog contacted Croton GOP Chairman Rob DiFrancesco to offer his candidates the same unsolicited advertising opportunity we have provided for the Democratic candidates.

The advertising package, devised by Crotonblog, consists of a banner ad, a streaming video, video transcription, candidate bios and downloads of their respective campaign flyers. Both committees paid $20.00 each to run an ad campaign on Crotonblog through March 22, 2006.

Additionally, the banner ads that appear at the top of some Crotonblog pages are equally displayed so each advertiser gets 50% of all impressions.

On March 16, 2006 8:21 PM, Mrs. Smith said:

After reading the article in the Journal News and the letters in the Gazette today, I was most surprised to see the Republican banner displayed on the Blog - I guess no matter how despicable the Blog is for posting criticism of the Republicans, it has it’s uses. Also noted that the ad placed by the Republicans and the banner are exactly what the Democrats did the day before - how’s that for original thinking???

On March 16, 2006 4:07 PM, Binford said:

I don’t know if you’re right or not, Mrs Smith—and no one will ever know about the “advice of counsel” meetings, since what goes on those meetings is SECRET. As for Village Board meetings: How can they recuse themselves? That would leave only two Board members eligible to vote—not enough to conduct business.

Conflicts of interest don’t end with the candidates for Village Board. The Village Justice position is also on the ballot. How many times has Croton Auto Park and Croton Dodge been brought into Village court for code violations? And what happened? I’d sure like to know.

On March 16, 2006 10:49 AM, Mrs. Smith said:

So I am right in assuming that if this lawsuit comes up for discussion at a board meeting or at one of the villages closed advice of counsel meetings they seem so fond of, that all Republican seated trustees will recuse themselves on the grounds of conflict of interest? I would appreciate a reply from someone on this issue.

On March 14, 2006 4:49 PM, Binford said:

Mrs. Smith asks how signs on the Katz property for Republican candidates Steinberg, Gonzales and Adami don’t present a conflict of interest—especially since Mr. Katz is suing the Village over a rezoning of the property. He wants the prohibition against auto dealerships removed from restrictions in current zoning.

Yes, Mrs. Smith, there is a conflict of interest. But the conflict isn’t just campaign signs. On Monday, several days late, the Croton Republicans filed their financial disclosure statement with the Village Clerk. Guess who are the two biggest contributors to the Steinberg-Gonzales-Adami campaign: Irwin Katz of Wellington, Florida (owner of the Katz property)—$500.00, and Lou Giordano (owner of Croton Auto Park—Mr. Katz’s tenant)—$500.00.

One has to wonder why the largest Republican contributor in our Village election lives in Florida? Are we really so naive to think that there will not be a quid-pro-quo?

The Croton Democratic Committeee has had a long-standing policy of not accepting contributions from any business in the Village because conflicts of interest are unavoidable. The Croton Republicans have consistently refused to do the same.

Yes, Mrs. Smith, it stinks.

On March 12, 2006 3:56 PM, Mrs. Smith said:

I just saw something which absolutely stunned me. As a village we are being sued by Mr. Katz, owner of the property on which a car dealership, the one which puts cars all over the rocks, sits. This property is on Riverside, Municipal Place and has an undeveloped portion on Maple Street.

Click to enlarge picture…

Now, there are signs for Steinberg, Gonzales and Adami all over this disputed piece of property.

Click to enlarge picture…

Tell me how that is not a conflict of interest there? How could a sitting trustee who may be going to have to negotiate with this entity and who is a lawyer, not see this? How could a judge, who is supposed to be neutral not see the conflict. This stinks!!!!

Click to enlarge picture…

On March 12, 2006 2:10 PM, waffels said:

I am sorry but I have lived in this village for almost 50 years and the signs were never a problem. They were part of the poitical process. No uncomfortable feelings associated with supporting your candidate. The campaign was spirited and informative and the winners got together and worked for the better of the village. Along comes Deb McCarthy, John Sarcone, her heighness Cudaquest with all their loyal subjects and the course of village politics changed to this date. Mean, distorted, finger pointing partisanship that continues after the election. People need to wake up and see the damage this group has done to this village. Metro Enviro has and still is a political tool based on fear and misinformation. Unfortunately just as The current administration in Washington has utilized terror, this group uses pollution, truck traffic and the organized crime to scare the public, and very possibly putting this village into a very precarious financial situation.

On March 12, 2006 11:13 AM, weewill said:

I’ve been on the record for several decades as disliking the political signs throughout the village. I think they are messy, cause hard feelings between some neighbors, generally generate charges and counter charges of who does or does not take the opposite signs down and about which side puts them on public rights of way instead of private property. Silly season at its pettiest.

But ……. having been consistently outvoted over the years the sign pollution continues by both Democrats and Republicans. That being the case, why not let both sides put their signs on the rights of way as well as on public properties along roads and highways. That way we’d have only 2 or 3 solid weeks of them and the important thing is to insist they’re taken down within 2 days after the election.

Perhaps that will stop all the bickering and bring a semblance of peace to our small community.

Georgianna Grant


Recent Articles