croton blog for croton-on-hudson new york


Steinberg, Gonzalez Suggest “Museum in the Streets” for Croton

March 18, 2006

Republican Trustee candidates Jim Steinberg and Joe Gonzalez forsee elected officials, residents and local historians working together to keep the light of memories past burning bright. Hence a recent announcement that if elected they would lend their support to establishing a “Museum in the Streets” (a trade-marked historical walking tour) for the Village.

The “Museum in the Streets” program has been highly successful in neighboring communities such as Hastings-on-Hudson, where Trustee Jim Steinberg maintains his law practice. “The program is simple,” Steinberg stated, “Throughout the village important landmarks and points of interest would be marked with impressively designed signage that explains the history of the site.”

“It would be truly wonderful for all residents, including our children, to learn more about Croton’s history through a walking tour.” said Trustee candidate Joe Gonzalez. “This is a program that can be a joint effort between the village board and The Croton Historical Society.” he continued.

“In speaking with village historian Joyce Finnerty, I was excited to learn from her that she too, along with The Croton Historical Society, has an interest in this project. Working with them, we could make this project a success.” Steinberg stated.

In funding the project, Trustee candidate Joe Gonzalez said, “The village board would work with The Croton Historical Society to solicit private donations to help pay for ‘The Museum in the Streets’ project which is the brain child of Patrick Cardell from Cushing, Maine.”

“In a village such as Croton, we are not at any loss for wonderful sites and points of interest that are worthy of special designations” stated Steinberg. “From the Alexander Hamilton house, to the stop light in the center of the upper village which was originally a well, to the Grand Street Firehouse, Croton has many interesting spots which could make for a wonderful walking tour through the village.”

Jim Steinberg and Joe Gonzalez have both stated that among the many other quality of life initiatives they would implement if elected, this project is towards the top of the list and they vow to make Croton’s “Museum in the Streets” a reality.

On March 20, 2006 4:30 PM, weewill said:

Silverone1997,

You are way off base! If you want to talk about common decency and respect you’d best start with yourself and make sure of your facts before accusing anyone of such a despicable act. I, immediately upon reading of the attack,(incidentally not on the blog but in Jim Steinberg’s letter,) I clearly communicated my outrage that such nasty accusations could surface in these last days of the campaign. I decried that kind of activity then and do so again now at your outrageous accusations.

I have no idea who you are Silverone1997, but rest assured that if I ever find out, I will definitely explore legal action. This kind of unfounded rumor and innuendo must stop in this village. None of us want it or endorse it in any veiled form whatsoever.

Georgianna X Trustee

On March 20, 2006 12:36 PM, TeaDrinker said:

After the “onewhoknows” comment was removed from Crotonblog, three comments were posted after Mr. Steinberg’s response in calling the anonymous comment to be false. Those comments came from “Just The Facts”, “Notorc” and “SilverOne1997”.

Out of respect for and to limit our exposure to Mr. Steinberg as he explores his legal options regarding the anonymous comment, we removed three comments by the aforementioned contributors and closed comments to the article. Thus, nothing can be added to that discussion thread.

I hope that in the spirit of forgiveness, “Notorc” can understand why “Just The Facts” was mistaken in a previous comment listed above in thinking “Notorc” was banned.

In fact, “SilverOne1997” had this to say in the comment that was removed:

“notorc is absolutley right. the original comment (which has since been removed) that made those allegations against trustee steinberg was totally un-called for.

not only that, but it’s even sadder that this could really be what “name withheld” and “name withheld” think is necessary to get by. hey ladies, how about you try a little common deceny and respect. i hear it can get you pretty far, but if you know better, you can go ahead and continue spreading lies and partisanship. just my 2 cents.

i would also like to see a copy of trustee steinberg’s statement if that is possible.

i have the opportunity to meet trustee steinberg while he was campaiging at the train station and i can only say that he is a helluva guy. even my husband, a very big democrat (national not local, thank god) was impressed by steinberg.

i agree that the blog should be kept anonymous, just look what happens when fellow bloggers find out who you a perons is. but i really hope this will bring and end to stupid and hateful comments being posted on this blog so maybe we can all come out one day.

good luck trustee steinberg, we need you to keep us sane.

like notorc, i’m not sure if links are allowed but here is a little levity at a trying time: enjoy!

(hope it works, it took a few google searches to figure out how to link)”

Unfortunately, in haste on that fateful day, the comment was junked without ever reading it’s content. Since “Just The Facts” has brought the content of the comment in question to our attention, and due to its unfounded and libelous tone, “SilverOne1997” has been banned from further commenting privileges on Crotonblog.

On March 20, 2006 12:08 PM, Just The Facts said:

Actually, it appears that I owe “Notorc” an apology as I mistakenly confused him/her with “SilverOne”.

It was “SilverOne” who following the Dr. Pepper incident committed defamation against two prominent Croton residents by accusing them of being the perpertrator of the “One Who Knows” post — without any shred of proof (just partisan hatred).

“Notorc”, I sincerely apologize for confusing you with “SilverOne” — I know that I would personally be upset if someone attributed SilverOne’s activities to me. I hope that you can accept my apology, and I look forward to your return to this forum.

As for “SilverOne”, personally I think you should be banned for the very reason that “one who knows” was presumably banned. Furthermore, should Mr. Steinberg choose to pursue legal action against “one who knows”, I would hope the two Crotonites that you defamed similarly pursue legal action against you.

On March 20, 2006 9:29 AM, TeaDrinker said:

“Just The Facts” and “SilverOne1997”: In response to your comments over banished commenters on Crotonblog… “Notorc” has not or was ever been restricted from commenting here. Perhaps you were confused with Maria Cudequest who WAS banned as she had assumed six different commenting identities and that “Notorc” was one of them?

For background on the saga, see the comment sections of “STB Denies NIR Application Without Predjudice” to review how Ms. Cudequest was caught. For the blog’s reponse please read “A Penal Process Known as Banishment… Explained”.

Additionally, for those wishing to further comment regarding a recent Letter to the Editor about Croton Republican Committee placing their flyers in resident mailboxes and using pictures without permission on their campaign materials, please add your thoughts to “Croton GOP Campaign Runs Afoul of the Law Again” to keep this discussion more topical. Thank you.

There is also an open forum located here for comments unrelated to anything…

On March 20, 2006 9:12 AM, notorc said:

Oh, and by the way SilverOne, “Notorc” was apparently banished for the same reason “one who knows” was banished. Notorc, slandered two croton residents by name by attributing the despicable attack on Mr. Steinberg as comming from those two individuals without the slightest bit of proof.

What the heck are you talking about? I didn’t slander anybody and to the best of my knowledge I haven’t been banned. Instead, I was told to go away by posters who didn’t like my opposition. To his credit, the blog administrator (Ross W) actually asked me stay.

I’m still a lurker but don’t feel like being pounded upon if I share opposing views, it just isn’t worth it.

“Just the Facts” has it all wrong…I’m still here.

On March 20, 2006 8:48 AM, Just The Facts said:

Oh, and by the way SilverOne, “Notorc” was apparently banished for the same reason “one who knows” was banished. Notorc, slandered two croton residents by name by attributing the despicable attack on Mr. Steinberg as comming from those two individuals without the slightest bit of proof.

Apparently SilverOne believes that the actions of “Notorc” are OK, but that Mr. Steinberg was terribly wronged and should file suit against “one who knows”. BOTH are slander and both are wrong.

But, apparently SilverOne doesn’t see it that way through his/her red colored glasses. And silverone supposedly is not biased…..

On March 20, 2006 8:39 AM, Just The Facts said:

SilverOne, I really wish you would just stop avoiding the facts by just painting anything that contradicts you as angry attacks.

The fact of the matter is that the Steinberg, Gonzalez and yes even the Adami campaign broke the law this weekend — federal laws. You may wish to label this law as trivial, but the truth is that there is a very good reason that the USPS has made it illegal for anyone other than the postal carrier or the resident to touch a mailbox — identity theft. The theory goes, allowing unauthorized people to touch your mailbox, increases the risk that someone will gain access to identifying material of yours. We can debate this all day, but our congress in Washington decided this was important and it is the law.

Get this straight Silverone, neither you, nor Steinberg, nor Gonzalez have any right whatsoever to decide what is a trivial federal law and what laws you don’t have to abide by. Furthermore, because of your arrogance Silverone, I am going to report this to the postal inspector (I was going to let it go, but, now I have changed my mind due to you, SilverOn).

On March 20, 2006 8:29 AM, Mrs. Smith said:

Silverone, Talk about being angry! And you deliberately miss the point that as a representative of the residents of this village, you should follow all village laws. It follows the pattern of arrogance of Steinberg that he feels the rules don’t apply to him. He may not be putting signs out, but he is certainly aware of them, same as he must be aware that it is against the law to put mail in a mail box. I noticed that on their last flyer they used pictures from the village archives. Did they get permission to use these photos? Did they ask the photographer? I cannot imagine the village giving permission for public propety to be used for political purposes. You may consider this trivial, but it all follows a pattern of arrogance and the sense that one is above the rules.

And talking of civility, where were you when the former mayor and trustees were accused of receiving money under the table and making secret deals? These were far more sinister and ugly accusations and I didn’t hear anyone other than a few loyal friends speaking out against such incivility. It seems the old adage is true - what goes around comes around.

On March 20, 2006 12:21 AM, SilverOne1997 said:

time for another real reality check…

the angry and arrogant comments posted on this blog by the likes of “weevil”, “just the facts”, “reality check”, “one who knows”, “the shadow knows” and the many others are so similar in style and rhetoric it makes me question if this blog is really just being used as an online coffee klatch for the local democratic party zealots…

accusations of impropriety and illegal behavior over such trivial actions as putting campaign literature on mail boxes and signs on private property to people re-inventing facts to suit political purposes. and dare someone disagree with these people! the attacks will never end… and then when you really speak the truth and hit a nerve the blog’s owners will publish your ip address, ban you or erase your comments citing un-civility… give me a break! just look at what happend to “notorc”

i can’t even imagine the angry attacks that are going to be leveled at me for speaking the truth in this post…

under these conditions is it any surprise that there are so few supporters of the administration on the blog? no one wants to be attacked and not everyone has the luxury of endless hours of computer time that retirement affords anne gallelli and georgiana grant.

it’s really sad to see such angry and frustrated people attack at every chance. it must be tough to be powerlessly against everything and for nothing.

for sanity’s sake i think we all need to agree to disagree (to use a favorite quote of georgiana grant).

this bickering will get us no where and is detracting from the debate.

and that my friends is a real reality check!

On March 19, 2006 10:31 AM, Just The Facts said:

SilverOne, I really don’t know why I am wasting my time debating you when you clearly have no grasp of facts or reality.

Nevertheless, the past 12 administrations are not currently up for relection. The administration that Steinberg refers to as “out administration” is. So lets look at what this administration has done with regard to the parking situation in detail. Well, that was quick, because they haven’t done a thing.

My point is this, its been three months since the major flooding events of January. To my knowledge (and I have been looking) Mr. Steinberg has said not a word in public about parking. Not a single idea, not a single proposal. Mr. Steinberg has come upn with other ideas in the interim, like a tomato stand and a walking tour. Whopee! Perhaps if Mr. Steinberg was competent he wouldn’t be avoiding the true issues and commming up with last minute diversionary proposals that in any event he is unlikely to follow through on (think trustee office hours).

Now clearly based on your post from yesterday you feel that Steinberg’s positions on tomato stands and walking tours are MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more important to voters than his lack of an idea or position on the parking lot situation. You must truely hope that the voters of croton are as clueless as you are.

On March 19, 2006 8:56 AM, Reality Check said:

Now it is time for an authentic Reality Check.

Lets take a look at the views of SilverOne1997. In the first instance I, for one, am completely sick of the notion that any disagreement with a political candidate is a so called “negative attack”. I have expressed some very definite views on the policy issues at stake in this debate. Similarly, I have expressed my reservations about the character of Mr. Steinberg. I find him demonstrably arrogant, peevish, and juvenile. In my view it is not a ‘negative attack’ to point out those qualities in a candidate which make him undesirable, indeed, unfit to serve us. Case in point, Mr. Steinberg’s ridiculous posturing on the problem of the purloined Dr. Pepper. For a fuller treatment on that subject, please see my post in yesterday’s open forum.

Suffice it to say, his out of proportion reaction to the posting of a rumor concerning a minor event, all the while affirmatively embracing as his collaborator Maria Cudequest who routinely - and without a shred of evidence - accused Bob Elliott and Georgianna Grant of accepting payoffs, is disingenuous in the extreme. In my view it makes him unfit to serve.

Be that as it may, the characterization of all disagreement as a ‘negative’ attack, is merely an attempt to muzzle opposition by giving it an unsavory label.

Now on to the so called substance of SilverOne’s comments.

Parking lot flooding was on the radarscope of the last administration and grant money was obtained, some of which was to be used to look at the problem. When the severity of the problem became more obvious the use of portions of that money could have been reconfigured to take additional steps with respect to flooding. But, that entire project was shelved by the Cudequest/Schmidt/Steinberg administration to artificially and temporarily lower Village expenditures, thereby permitting Mr. Steinberg to claim in this election that he worked to lower taxes. That is the reality.

In the eminent domain discussion, SilverOne conveniently ignores approval by the current majority of the expenditure of $52,000.00 to pursue the issue. Significantly, they did so in a way which, by dropping an optional scoping session, further limited public discussion and participation. My take on the Kane/Gallelli objections is that this was done without sufficient information and planning in advance, and in a way which excluded the public at a critical stage. Clearly, we have started on a downhill course without the best advice available.

While it is true that the majority could, in theory, walk away from condemnation at any time, is this single issue administration likely to do so? Will the political realities of obeisance to King Maker Cudequest permit a retreat while they retain the majority? I sincerely doubt it and, as Mr. Kane can probably explain better than I, once a train starts rolling downhill, it is hard to put on the brakes.

Perhaps if Mr. Steinberg and his cohorts could overcome their inclination to act in secret, some of us might understand what is going on and be more supportive. But the endless, and legally questionable, secret back room meetings seem likely to continue until there is a new majority on the Board to act as a counterbalance.

So SilverOne, if you want a Reality Check, you would do well to take the time to actually look at reality. Make a critical examination of what your candidates actually say and do, and save your vitriol. Consider the fact that Mr. Steinberg has been hibernating for a year but now, literally on the eve of the election has great ideas for tomato stands and walking tours. Give some thought to what that tells you about his tenure as appointed trustee and what we can expect from him over the next two years, if he is elected. My guess is not much until the month before the next election when he will propose things like a Children’s Garden Club and a Senior’s Basketball League.

And that, my friends, is an authentic Reality Check.

P.S.: Since imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I thank SilverOne for her implicit compliment to my posts.

On March 19, 2006 12:54 AM, SilverOne1997 said:

just the rhetoric is more like it…

“fixing the flooding at the train station and acting in an informed and well thought out manner with respect to Eminent Domain”

o.k.

this is just the facts:

the facts show that the lot was purchased in 1994, was flooding before the purchase and has been flooding since… the flooding at the lot at the train station parking lot went unanswered for years by both democratic and republican office holders. before leaving at an earlier hour for the station i had to park in the flood zone and once lost a car to flooding. guess what? mayor elliot was in charge at the time along with grant, schmidt, wiegman and mccarthy… did they answer the flooding problem then? based on what happend in late january of this year and georgianna grant’s own admission on this blog of doing nothing as a trustee along with her fellow board members, they did not. how dare you, in a blatantly political fashion, place the blame for the most recent flooding episode a board that has only been in power for 1 of the past 12 years we have owned the lot! i hope the village finally learned its lesson and fixes the lot this time around which they say is happening, of course actions speak louder than words but for pete’s sake give them some time.

now to the eminent domain. this is pure and simple an attempt to scare people with lies and misinformation. how many times does the mayor and trustee steinberg and village attorney have to say that if the cost is too much they will not go forward? the journal news even recognized this in their endorsements and i would have to assume that is why steinberg was picked instead of gallelli. gonzalez has no record on this or anything for that matter so its no surprise they also picked kane, who has his strengths, especially when it comes to the environment… back to the point, the 50 million dollar figure that mr. kauderer admitted he did no research in determining is being spread about by gallelli as if there is good solid evidence behind it but in reality it is just an uneducated guess made by a partisan and arrogrant attorney.

to quote the journal newspaper in closing, “there’s plenty of opportunity going forward for the village to decide what eminent domain – and control of the property – would cost. Why panic over price now?”

now that my friends is a reality check!

On March 18, 2006 11:53 PM, Just The Facts said:

Surprise, surprise, SilverOne gets it wrong again.

Exactly how does SilverOne know all the voters are against the Dem’s? SiverOne, unlike resolutions passed at recent board meetings, the village election is not a foregone conclusion. The election is this coming Tuesday, you should not be so presumptuous.

Oh, and by the way, my two cents says that the issues that the Dems are talking about, like fixing the flooding at the train station and acting in an informed and well thought out manner with respect to Eminent Domain trumps these ridiculous last minute “ideas” hatched by Steinberg.

On March 18, 2006 8:02 PM, SilverOne1997 said:

jut got back from boston coincidently and this sounds kind of like what they have in boston with the paul revere trail. very nice idea. now if we only had a pretty upper village to walk around. that’s just my 2 cents. oh yeah, and the level of negative attack should really be alarming. i think the local democrats have gone off the deep end. its tough when all the issues and voters are against you. i guess they’ve taken the approach to be against everything and for nothing. pretty sad.

On March 18, 2006 11:14 AM, Reality Check said:

Time for another Reality Chck.

After a year of doing absolutely nothing to move our Village forward, Mr. Steinberg is just chocked full of feel good ideas. He, or Mr. DiFrancesco or Ms. Cudequest, must be burning the midnight oil, searching the internet for ideas.

Give me a break.

How about paying attention to the real issues all year long instead of coming up with campaign slogans at election time?

Why is it that not a single grant application has been filed by the Cudequest/Schmidt/Steinberg administration? This means that two or three years from now there will not be outside funding for capital projects that directly affect our quality of life.

Look around the Village. Walk the trails, go down to Elliott Way and enjoy the waterfront. Visit Croton Landing. See the kinds of real projects to improve the Village that vision and planning have created when the Village is in the right hands. Then look at the sorry do nothing record of Mr. Steinberg and his cohorts.

It is time for a new majority on the Village Board to start moving the Village forward again. The petulant Mr. Steinberg is the wrong choice. He should be voted out of his appointive office.

And that, my friends, is a Reality Check.

On March 18, 2006 10:57 AM, Just The Facts said:

What I would actually like to see from Mr. Steinberg is some follow through on last year’s campaign proposals and some action on some much more important quality of life issues facing the village today.

1) What happened to the trustee office hours? After a year in office, there is absolutely NOTHING to show for this initiative. This is not a hard program to pull off and the cost is basically zero. The school board already does this.

2) What is happening on the flooding and parking issue at the commuter lot? the answer is NOTHING. Mr. Steinberg, how about making a concrete proposal for this issue. I am sure your constitutents care about this issue much more than a historical trail. As a trustee, Mr. Steinberg has made absolutely no statement concerning this issue of vital importance.

3) Community Center. What progress has been made in this area over the past year? Absolutely none.

Enough is enough with this empty campaign promises and proposals. Mr. Steinberg has had a full year of being an appointed trustee and he has absolutely no record of success. It is a bit too late at this point to be promising to do these small quality of life programs while completely avoiding large existing problems already facing the village.



Search


Recent Articles