Yonkers City Council Rules Committee Requested to Indemnify Mayor Amicone in $393,000 First Amendment Rights Lawsuit By HEZI ARIS

eHezi Archives 20 Comments

Amicone_Phil_grave lookYONKERS, NY — Yonkers City Council’s Rule Committee with hold an Executive Session, that is, a meeting closed to the public, lacking any written, audio, or visual commemoration of said discussion, on Tuesday, November 15, 2011, at 6:30p.m. The Amicone Administration has chosen to request the Yonkers City Council indemnify and settle the $393,000.00 First Amendment Rights transgression lawsuit deemed by the presiding justice in the case to be the personal responsibility of Phil Amicone, whose personal conduct and direction of his surrogates tread on the legitimate rights and demeanor of The Westchester Guardian newspaper.

[Editor’s Note: Hezi Aris is the present editor of The Westchester Guardian. He is not now, nor was he ever, in the past been involved in the lawsuit, in any manner.]
Enhanced by Zemanta
eHeziYonkers City Council Rules Committee Requested to Indemnify Mayor Amicone in $393,000 First Amendment Rights Lawsuit By HEZI ARIS

Comments 20

  1. you know, as much as everyone hates on Phil, I thought he was a good Mayor. But this should not pass. He blatantly violated the First Amendment–the most precious right we have. And for what? he only drew more attention to paper that at the time, quite frankly, was trashy as hell. You’ve made it a bit better Hezi. (Though this blog has been suffering a bit)

  2. Sam Zherka a no nonsense stand up guy showed this cock sucker not to mess with the first amendment. Amiclown needs to cough up the $393,000, not the citizens of yonkers.

  3. You hit the nail on the head. Letting Phil off the hook will kill a political career. Larkin wants a future. Shepard agrees with whomever is buying the drinks at the time. If McDow wants Spano’s favor, she’ll vote NO. She looks forward. Not at past favors, Honey Child.

  4. yeah 6-1…she votes “no” when the vote calls for a “no” vote…do YOU have the balls to weigh in on this vote yourself? Didn’t think so.

  5. Murtagh – Won’t show for meeting
    Shepard – Yes – When someone wakes him up
    Larkin – No – He wants a future in polotics
    McDow – She was already bought with the free parking
    Tererro- Yes-Only if Ken Jenkins tells him
    Lesnick -NO- for same reason as Larkin
    Growski NO- because its the right thing to do

  6. Prediction on Votes:
    Murtagh – Yes – Thanks for everything Phil
    Shepherd – Yes – same as above
    Larkin -Yes – same as above
    McDow – Yes – Hey look at the trouble I could be in
    Tererro – Si – tambien
    Lesnick -Yes – everyone else is saying yes
    Gronowski – NO – I only vote no

  7. Pagano is leaving because he knows he will be fired if he stays and if he doesn’t leave now he probably would not be able to collect his 1000 plus hours of “unused” vacation pay. As far as being hated its probably a tie

  8. Heard they are giving Pagano a retirement party its going to be held in the closet in City Hall, they are worried about a large crowd lmao.

  9. At least Pagano has the balls to say he’s leaving. That bitter bitch Hartnett is gonna stay on till they make him leave. I’d like to take a poll. Who is more hated: Pagano or Hartnett?

  10. Briefings on litigation are always in executive session although the council must vote to go into execitive session and then summarize the content of the discussion when they come out of executive session. The vote will be at a regular council meeting after the public has an opportunity to speak at the committee of the whole.

  11. Discussions of legal matters like this are always held in executive session. I think the Mayor should pay too, but it has to be done in the right way.

  12. It was the mayor’s own petty actions, nothing to do with the “City of Yonkers”, nor it’s citizens that caused that lawsuit. Anyone on the council that would agree to that should resign.

  13. NO WAY – If anyone on this council votes to indemnify Amicone from his “personal” liability resulting from his “unconstitutional” actions, they will find themselves as DEFENDANTS in a lawsuit themselves.
    The damages award was to “punish” Amicone “personally” and NOT against the City of Yonkers. The “City” did not act oustide the law or the US Consitution, Phil Amicone did. He should pay!

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.