MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ETHICS

TOWN OF GREENBURGH

 

February 22, 2010

 

Greenburgh Town Hall

 

Members Present:        Mike Sigal, Jack McLaughlin, Walter Rivera

 

Others Present:            Frank Apicella, Joseph Malara; Gary Sastow; Mark Constantine; Hal Samis; Heather Murray & Renata DeLuca.

 

Prior to the commencement of the meeting, the Board of Ethics heard from a Town resident, Renata DeLuca, about a problem she was having with respect to the imposition of a penalty involving payment of her real property taxes. Ms. DeLuca was referred to the Town Assessor’s office and Ms. Murray offered to provide assistance as well.

 

The meeting was convened at 7:20 p.m. A quorum of the Board of Ethics was present. 

 

The agenda was accepted without any revisions. The minutes for the January meeting were approved.

 

On February 2, 2010 Mike Sigal sent a letter to the Town Board regarding the appointment of volunteer counsel. The Town Board was asked to advise the Board of Ethics if they had any concerns regarding the appointments. As of the meeting, the Town Board had not expressed any concerns and thus the Board of Ethics selection of the three volunteer counsels, Messrs. Apicella, Malara and Sastow, is effective.

 

Mr. Samis was asked if he had any new complaints to file. Mr. Samis advised that he did not.

 

Mike Sigal was elected Chairperson of the Board of Ethics, Walter Rivera was elected Secretary and Jack McLaughlin was elected Chairperson of the Statutory and Rules Committee.

 

The Board of Ethics discussed the amendment to Rule 4j which would prevent a person from speaking at a meeting if that speaker engages in personal attacks on others. It was noted that, under the Open Meeting Law, the public’s right to speak is a privilege and not a right and that the Board of Ethics should not permit anyone to personally attack another. The rule change was accepted subject to public comment.

 

Mr. Samis was given an opportunity to speak and stated that he views this rule as an attempt to personally “gag” him from speaking. Mr. Samis said there is a systematic attempt by the Board of Ethics to limit public participation. Mr. Samis stated that he is an “expert” on the affairs of the Town and that the Board of Ethics will soon be “like all others in the Town.”

 

Mr. Sigal clarified that there is no attempt to limit public participation but only repetitive or obstructionist behavior or personal attacks. Mr. Sigal identified the proposal regarding imposing a fine by the Board of Ethics as a rule that was the direct result of Mr. Samis’ input.  

 

Mr. Sigal discussed the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Citizen’s Union v. Federal Election Commission regarding contributions to a candidate for public office and donating money to a cause. After reviewing this decision along with the Code of Ethics, it was the Board of Ethics’ view that this decision does not affect the Code of Ethics.

 

Mr. McLaughlin gave an update on the Statutory Refinement Project.

 

Discussion took place regarding the complaint regarding Supervisor Feiner soliciting a contribution from a library board member. In light of Mr. Feiner’s testimony at the prior meeting of the Board of Ethics, public comment was entertained. 

 

Mr. Samis raised questions regarding (i) the lack of a court stenographer; (ii) Mr. Feiner’s testimony that the issue was a constitutional issue; and (iii) that Mr. Feiner had voted for the rules he is now alleged to be violating. Mr. Samis also complained that Mr. Feiner had previously accepted a contribution from a person he should not have accepted it from and resolved the issue by simply returning the contribution. He also complained that this matter arose in May 2009 and was still not finally resolved. He opined that the Board of Ethics is too slow in dealing with the matter.

 

Mr. Samis stated that he has no problem with the solicitation of funds; only the acceptance of the funds and that Mr. Feiner should be fined $1,000.

 

Mr. Samis concluded after speaking for approximately 20 minutes.

 

Mr. McLaughlin explained that scheduling conflicts and the need for additional inquiries is what resulted in the length of time the matter took. After conclusion of the investigation, Mr. McLaughlin read a draft opinion concluding that there was a violation of the Code of Ethics in that a mass mailing is a “solicitation.” The proposed opinion further stated that Mr. Feiner should remove the names of people not to be solicited from his campaign mailing lists within 60 days or the Board of Ethics would consider recommending a fine. 

 

Mr. Sigal stressed that the policy goal is to have compliance and not simply to impose fines as a punitive measure.

 

Draft Opinion 2010-3 was approved, with the addition of two further items to be added in response to Mr. Samis’ comments.

 

The Board of Ethic’s Annual Report to the Town Board for the year 2009 was approved, with several revisions to update the status of ongoing matters.

 

Mr. Sastow read a proposed Board of Ethics opinion regarding a request from Mr. Feiner for the Town Attorney to appear before a citizen’s political committee. The Board of Ethics tentatively voted to approve the opinion pending public comment.

 

The Board of Ethics approved a recommendation to the Town Board to adopt a policy statement regarding the prohibition against the making of threats against members of the Board of Ethics.

 

Item 11 of the agenda (A Verified Complaint regarding the solicitation/acceptance of refreshments at community meetings on comprehensive plan) was deferred to the next meeting.

 

Discussion took place regarding three new verified complaints: contributions by the Teamsters Union; solicitation of the wife of a member of a town agency; disclosure by a town official regarding interests pertaining to a lawsuit against the Town. With regard to the complaint concerning the Union, the Board determined there was good cause to proceed, and Mr. Apicella will prepare a Section 12 request to the party complained against regarding the contributions. With regard to the lawsuit disclosure complaint, Mr. Apicella will prepare questions to the complaining party to specify what interests, as defined in the statute, he asserts were not disclosed. Mr. McLaughlin will prepare a draft opinion regarding solicitation of the wife of an agency member. 

 

Mr. Samis then spoke for 25 minutes during public comments. 

 

The Board of Ethics then voted to adopt the tentative decisions that had been made prior to public comment. The meeting adjourned at 9:55 pm.

 

 

Submitted by:             Walter Rivera, Secretary and

                                    Gary S. Sastow, Esq., Administrative Counsel