EXCLUSIVE: Flim Flam Conclusions by Yonkers Ethics Board over Majority Leader McDow By Hezi Aris

eHezi Archives 11 Comments

McDow_Patricia EHezi_Hezitorial It was in May of 2010 when the  Yonkers Tribune  was tipped off to the many years Yonkers  City  Council  Majority Leader Patricia McDow utilized a parking spot to store her unregistered, unlicensed BMW, at no cost to her for which we requested an accounting of her conduct. It took months for the Yonkers Parking Authority (YPA) to respond to our inquiry of the circumstances. Eventually, the YPA responded by revealing they were unaware of the non-payment for services rendered. Deputy Mayor William “Bill" Regan sits on the YPA Board of Directors as its chairman. On Thursday, April 14, 2011, the Yonkers Board of Ethics divulged its conclusions, but only to a degree.

Our resolve to alert Yonkersites of Ms McDow’s travesty would in time cause Yonkers Inspector General Dan Schorr to issue his finding on January 31, 2011,  Mr Schorr’s distillation of “facts" were lackluster; we had more facts than he, but he chose to ignore them. The “preeminent ethicist” deflected the political hot potato from his office and relegated the responsibility upon the volunteer Yonkers Board of Ethics. I.G. Schorr’s deflective action exemplified his political and legal ineptitude as Yonkers  Inspector General,  revealing his lack of will and intestinal fortitude to right the wrongs and transgressions tolerated or encouraged under Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone’s regime. 

It has taken almost a year since the Yonkers Tribune’s report to get a “conclusion" on the issue of whether the Yonkers City Council Majority Leader earned favor over others in government as stipulated canno be sanctioned under the Yonkers City Charter. In other words, If the cost to store a vehicle in a Yonkers Parking Authority garage costs $100.00 every month, Majority Leader McDow must pay the same rate as any other resident.

The Hon. Judge Nocca chairs the Yonkers Board of Ethics. After over a one-hour executive session, this reporter and the court stenographer were permitted entrance again into the Mayor’s Conference Room where the preceding took place. Judge Nocca requested Fred Buhler summarize the conclusions arrived by the Board of Ethics that night. Mr. Buhler advised that with regard to the stage of a vehicle by Ms. McDow in the Buena Vista Parking Lot, “several mistakes and assumptions on both the part of Ms. McDow and the YPA had taken place. He did not reveal what those “mistakes” or “assumptions” were. He further pointed out that there was an “assumption of impropriety.” Here too, he did not elucidate over how the Yonkers Board of Ethics came to that conclusion. In fact, no rationale was ever given over how their “ethical” conclusions were distilled.

It was next noted that Ms. McDow had reached an accommodation between herself and the YPA by which a “fine”  of an unspecified amount would be paid by her over the 2011 calendar year. It was said she has paid three of twelve installments so far. 

When one thinks of ethics, one often references the biblical Solomon whose ethical compass is remembered by its being deduced before the public. That is, Solomon spoke to the people with his wisdom rather than at the people with arrogance. This may be worthy of the Yonkers Board of Ethics study at their next meeting, whose next meeting is still to be divulged.

Solomon was tasked to decide between two women to which belonged a child claimed by each. Both women claimed unrelentingly that the child was her own and not the other. The passion with which each woman claimed the child flummoxed Solomon until he advised that the only solution would be to cut the baby in half so that each woman would have a equal part of the child. One woman concurred this to be reasonable while the other woman said she could not bear the thought of her child killed by splitting her child in two. The second woman beseeched Solomon give her child to the first woman to spare the child. Solomon gave the child to the woman that was willing to give up her child to spare him/her. I retell this only to point out that the process of deduction is the foundation to clearing the air, especially when there is  an “appearance of impropriety.” 

There is a reason why favoritism is outlawed by the Yonkers City Charter, that is, specifically to avoid an “appearance of impropriety." First, The People must be made aware of the restitution agreed between Ms. McDow and the YPA.  

Second, the rationale for the duration of services rendered to Ms McDow’s benefit unencumbered by payment is dishonestly deduced. The car stored did not have a license plate nor did it possess a registration sticker for over 6 years time. How did I.G. Schorr conclude the time to be less than 6 years? Political arm twisting; that’s how. Were a car with an expired registration and without an affixed license plate on a city street, that car would eventually be ticketed and thereafter soon towed. It is “common knowledge” that the Yonkers Violations Bureau were advised not to ticket her vehicle while it was in storage in the Buena Vista Parking Lot.

It may be outside the purview of the Yonkers Board of Ethics, yet issue three must be what protocol has been instituted by the YPA to guarantee “mistakes and assumptions” regarding payment for services rendered do not recur. And how to collect payment in a timely manner and to keep records thereof.
Fourth, how did Ms McDow arrive at the “assumption” that she was entitled to free storage of her vehicle at a YPA garage? Did anyone in the Amicone / Regan administration promise her this perk? Just as in the case of Solomon, there was no document or contract to back her story. That is why she relented to an installment payback of the arrears she accrued by her “assumption.” 

Fifth, and this is the most egregious, despite the lack of proof to validate the contention of Ms McDow being offered free storage, though I believe that IS the case, her vote was sold to the administration for a paltry sum. Can any of the votes cast by Ms McDow be treated as valid today knowing what has transpired all these years. My conclusion is, “No!” Shame on her and shame on the administration for allegedly extorting the weakness of her Achilles’ Heel. 

Sixth, seventh, eighth, etc. will consume too much time to enumerate and today is hastened by deadlines that must be met for the Yonkers Tribune and The Westchester Guardian.

The People demand knowledge of the penalty assessed between Ms. McDow and the YPA, and the protocols now in place to mitigate a similar recurrence from taking place. Lastly, it may be wise to convene the Charter Revision Commission to put some bite into the esoteric laws cited by the Yonkers City Charter to which few in the “family and friends network" need adhere.

Enhanced by Zemanta

eHeziEXCLUSIVE: Flim Flam Conclusions by Yonkers Ethics Board over Majority Leader McDow By Hezi Aris

Comments 11

  1. since this story has been made public and she has been fined where is this car now? could it have been towed (for free) by transit towing to transit towing’s property and stored there free of charge?

  2. with all the crimes our elected officials are commiting, and all the cash being handed under the tables, all the no show jobs, and everything else, we are worried about a car in a parking spot????

  3. I made the Rip van Winkle comment becuase I thought what Hezi wrote was a load of crap, however I did NOT write all that other stuff above. While I do frequently disagree with Hezi’s comments at the end of the day this is his blog and he can write what he wants. If it is libelous, people can sue, although I wish he would exercise more restraint. Some of his comments serve only to whip people up and serve no useful purpose.

  4. Are you the same anon that left this comment after the initial post left?
    anon said…
    FTGF is right on the money. What is going on Hezi? Am I Rip van Winkle? I feel like it when I read this:
    “It was never like this in Yonkers. We have remained loyal for decades. Nary a negative expression would pass our lips. They were sealed except to say that this one or that one were good men all.”
    Huh? What?? Is this Yonkers or the Emerald City?
    Something REALLY is up….
    If you are the same anon I will reiterate your own words “Something REALLY is up”.
    The comment left makes me a stalker.
    Totally laughable.

  5. This sit has gone down hill ever since Hezi went to work for the Guardian. Nothing here about the budget, proposed tax increase, nor the 700 layoffs in the BOE. I personally love the Guardian, I scoff up as many copies as I can, then shred them. They make excellent cat litter.

  6. Reporters are supposed to report the facts.
    Reporters are not suppose to critique.
    You write of Ms.McDow:
    “Fifth, and this is the most egregious, despite the lack of proof to validate the contention of Ms McDow being offered free storage, though I believe that IS the case, her vote was sold to the administration for a paltry sum”.
    Totally irresponsible reporting as this is all conjecture.
    You label Inspector General Dan Schorr a “preeminent ethicist”, mirror mirror.
    Your reason for attacking and trying to discredit Mr. Schorr (or anyone that goes against the men behind the curtain) is so transparent to those who have eyes wide open and can read between the political lines.
    Is Mr. Schorr now going to replace “Lesnick The Liar” as your main whipping post since your shift AGAIN?
    If so, you need to give him his own nickname.
    You use your pen to be·smirch Mr. Schorr (and others) again and again. My conjecture (I am not a reporter) is you try to divert the readers in directions dictated by others but orchestrated by you. So transparent.
    Your bias of the month shows in every which way the winds blow. The winds seems to gain momentum in the fall……………………………..
    A comment left requesting a clarification concerning Amicone VS. Lesnick went unanswered.
    YOUR deflective action shows YOUR ineptitude.
    Could it be the irrefutable evidence presented allowed you no defense? Your best defense is no defense?
    YOUR “impropriety” is not lost to those who know what really is going on.
    To refresh your memory I have pasted it here for your convenience.
    FTGF said…
    Such a different perspective and “tone” taken now concerning these issues. Not consistent with past articles penned, interesting.
    Also interesting that instead of the usual
    “Lesnick the Liar”, the salutation of President is now in constant use.
    One recent example of years of “Lesnick the Liar”:
    Referenced below from
    “Mr Lesnick’s passive / aggressive attempt to hood-wink the Real Estate Committee is potentially deleterious to Yonkersites. It brings to question Mr Lesnick ever being considered trustworthy to be maintained for present office, much less considered for higher office. Mr Lesnick’s conduct yesterday evening has proven his susceptibility to prostitute himself for the client of an associate without concern as to its possible negative ramification to The People of Yonkers”.
    Referenced below from
    “He either lied in his written admonition or lied when giving his inaudible rationale in the opening remarks to the opening of the publicly attended Real Estate Committee meeting. Lesnick the Liar did not disappoint those who expected his timid retreat from what he says and what he does”.
    The referenced articles along with many others has lead readers to believe your opinion of Lesnick was that he was a highbinder.
    Now you currently state he is “NOT a crook”.
    A few of the definitions for crook:
    (as per http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Crook)
    Informal One who makes a living by dishonest methods.
    Not honest; crooked.
    the act or an instance of crooking or bending
    I believe the quotes referenced (along with your many other articles)equate themselves with definitions of crook.
    He is “NOT a crook” conjures up a ghost of politicians past, Richard Nixon.
    Your paragraph about Mr Schorr is a curious one. You state he better not Bungle this one up or his political career is fried forever more, please explain how he would bungle this one up to determine his political demise. Also please clarify what you mean by “It’s the Yonkers way in politics”?

  7. This was basically a cover up. Regan (make me your Mayor) must have known all about this. He’s a control freak and micromanager. He either cut the deal with McDow or at a minimum approved it. The IG did what he was hired to do – punt, and the timid joke of the Ethic Board was afraid to use its own power and do its job. Oh, and of course, Amicone’s Law Department wrapped the present up and tied it with a bow, I’m sure the language of any decision will be piled high in legalese. No harm, no foul, no proof, no nothing…Big joke. Can’t wait till this bunch is gone. Nice budget and great downtown development. Good job Phil, you’ve been a fine Mayor. Drove the City into the ground and blamed everyone else. Where’s the stadium Phil?

  8. She has operated with a sense of entitlement from day one. She feels that she is a member of a protected class. Judging from the AG and the BE’s ruling she is probably right. If she was bought off with free parking, how is that any different than what Sandy Annabi is accused of? Sandy has been demonized by the press and many on this site. I guess she does not have that protected melanin.

Leave a Reply

This comment will be displayed anonymously. Your name and email address will not be published.

Comments that are off topic will be removed. If you want a topic to be covered, email me at: ehezi@hush.com

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.