What are they thinking?!

So, Brian Kimbiz/Kazmin has decided to take an extended vacation (see also: newer and more betterer job than the one he was elected to). He'll be missing at least 7 meetings, but will supposedly be available via email (I'm still waiting for responses on some long overdue emails, and apparently the New Paltz Times is, as well). You can read about it here and here and here.

He's decided he won't accept his salary while he's gone (aww, thanks!), but I'm wondering why he and others have been accepting their salaries while they were actually here?! I've talked about Village Board attendance in the past (if you want to see the previous posts, check out Committed Volunteers and Come Out, Come Out, Wherever You Are! In addition, Brian Kimbiz/Kazmin wasn't even technically elected, which you can read about at Ulster County Board of Elections: Shady or just stupid?).

(Click on the image for larger versions, which will open in a new window)

Think about that for a little bit. I'll be back to discuss in greater detail tonight.

Just In: Patrick O'Donnell to Resign from Village Board

Well, not JUST in, but I was busy baking.

Patrick O(apostrophe broke again god damn when is my student loan money coming in so I can get a new laptop!!!)Donnell is resigning from the Village Board, at some point in the near future.

Why?

He has a work commitment that would prevent him from attending meetings regularly. He can only guarantee that he(apostrophe grr)ll be able to attend 50% of meetings, at best, and feels it is only fair to step down.

Sad to see you go, Patrick, but you(!!!)re doing the right thing.

Think Shari and Jean will follow his lead? Doubtful, but a gal can hope. We will probably end up with one of those dopes as Deputy Mayor now.

In light of the recent developments regarding Kassarole(...)s shady election to the VB, it seems only fair that Pete Healey be appointed to fill out the remainder of the term. God knows it would be HILARIOUSLY AWESOME.

More on this soon...

Ulster County Board of Elections: Shady or Stupid?

Ulster County Board of Elections Commissioners Kathy Mihm and Tom Turco are slated for reappointment at the June 15 Ulster County Legislature Meeting. Unfortunately, I have grave concerns as to whether they're actually up for the job.

There were a series of inconsistencies surrounding the May 5, 2009 Village of New Paltz elections, as outlined below. These inconsistencies were not merely accidents or oversights; they appear to be flagrant violations of the Election Law, enacted by the very individuals who should know right from wrong better than anyone.

For those who are unfamiliar with the situation, the May 5, 2009 election was run by the Village of New Paltz, rather than by the County Board of Elections, which handles many municipal elections across New York State. It was for two Trustee seats on the Village Board. Petitions were submitted on behalf of three candidates: Pete Healey, an incumbent who had won a special election for a one-year term the year previous, Patrick O’Donnell and Brian Kimbiz. If you read the blog, this should be at least somewhat familiar; Legislative Barbie has affectionately referred to Kimbiz in the past (aka Kazmin aka Kaztard aka...).

Healey and O’Donnell were both accepted onto the ballot; Kimbiz was disqualified from a spot on the ballot after his petitions were challenged by Vici Danskin, a decision made by the Ulster County Board of Elections (UCBOE). His petitions were disqualified on a number of violations, including invalid signatures, incorrect or absent dates and details, and his status as a voter registered in Islip, NY. According to Pete Healey, "I never liked the idea of petitions being challenged; anybody and everybody should have the right to campaign, and these petitioning rules aren't made to be fair or democratic. They're made to be unfair and exclusive. So when I heard his petitions had been rejected, I called the Board of Elections to find out why. When I got the answer, I called him. I suggested to him that he could do many things in response to that, including launching a write-in candidacy. When he did that, I went out of my way to make certain that he was included in the only public forum for the candidates. He never returned the call or reached out to me, he didn't show up to the forum, and he didn't seem to have any public campaign at all. I didn't think he was serious. When he petitioned to be a candidate for Village Trustee, he was a registered voter in Islip."

Kimbiz' failure to attend the forum wasn't a fluke. He also nearly skipped a local Green Party candidate interview, arriving 30 minutes late after repeated telephone calls from interview organizers, and has had lousy attendance at Village Board Meetings since his "victory." Some have questioned why Healey did not campaign harder, and whether he felt betrayed by Kimbiz' campaign seemingly targeting Healey after all his help. "Quietly, he joined with some disgruntled landlords, including his own, apparently, to launch this stealth campaign, when he didn't even know how many Village Trustees actually serve on the Board. It's not betrayal; I didn't think he was serious then, and now, after a year in office, it's clear he hasn't taken it seriously," said Healey.

The final canvass conducted by the Election Inspectors on May 5, 2009 reflected a victory for O’Donnell with 95 votes and Healey with 94 votes. Kimbiz received 91 votes and small numbers of votes were recorded for 6 additional write-in candidates. Kimbiz and Village Clerk Kelly Stengel requested a recanvass by the Ulster County Board of Elections.

On May 7, 2009 the UCBOE Commissioners conducted a recanvass of the results. The Commissioners found errors in the counting of write-in votes on the machine paper and of Absentee Ballots, in which three uncounted eligible ballots were discovered. This led to a gain of three additional votes for O’Donnell and Kimbiz. The corrected totals were O’Donnell with 98 votes, Healey remaining at 94 votes and Kimbiz at 94 votes. In addition, the UCBOE Commissioners overruled the decision of Election Inspectors to discount a vote for “Brian Kazmin.” The Commissioners credited this vote to Kimbiz, leading to his victory over Healey by one vote. Healey was not present, as he was working, and O'Donnell requested an additional count to confirm these recanvass results, but was denied by the Commissioners.

Had this been an issue of counting, there wouldn't be much to say right now. But it isn't about the election, or the outcome of the election. It's about the law and the responsibilities of those appointed to uphold, interpret and implement that law. The same can be said for sour grapes. Healey intentionally waited before beginning to investigate the outcome of the election, essentially waiving his 30-day grace period to challenge the final totals in court (but not to initiate an Article 78 proceeding; that option was waived for him by multiple levels of government dragging their feet and playing games). Healey's initial inquiry to the Village Clerk was submitted the first week of July. "The new village clerk (the one who supervised the election in May quit three weeks later, and a new person took over) delayed me seeing the machine paper rolls until the first of September, because she didn't 'understand' my requests for information on the election. As soon as I saw the bogus vote that was counted for Kimbiz, I contacted the Ulster County Board of Elections immediately, but was put off due to the upcoming Primary. I contacted them again after the Primary, and was told to wait until after the General Election. They stonewalled me for several months, tried bouncing me back to the Village, and the NYS Board of Elections delayed my requests for an additional few weeks. I was finally able to collect the information and meet with the UCBOE Commissioners in February of 2010. I've been bounced around between the three for nearly a year, and it continues to this day."

"In the end, it was the reporting of the changes that the Commissioners made in the recanvass that was the problem all along. No one, not the clerk nor the commissioners and not the media, ever said that the Commissioners changed a voted that had been disqualified on election night into the vote that won the election for Kimbiz, or should I say 'Kazmin.' The law states that they are required to file a report on any and all changes they make, and they didn't do it. That's why I'm pursuing this matter. It's because they didn't do their job, and they assumed powers that the law doesn't give them."

That's not all. A detailed 10-page report has been compiled, outlining the various violations occurring at all levels during the course of this election, and the references to relevant portions of the law, court opinions and media coverage. The report has been submitted to the Ulster County Governmental Services, Environmental and Administrative Committee, which has oversight of the Board of Elections. This report will also be provided to anyone requesting it through Legislative Barbie.

Sections of the report include:

1. UCBOE Commissioners empowering themselves with the ability to change votes upon recanvass, which is expressly prohibited in the law.

2. The failure of the Election Inspectors, Village Clerk and UCBOE Commissioners to count valid write-in votes (hint: does Lorin Rotzler = Rebecca Rotzler? We didn't think so, either.)

3. Flaws with "reasonable intent" and "past practice," the stated justification given by UCBOE Commissioners to disregard the law.

4. Roadblocks to access to timely information by the Village Clerk, UCBOE and NYS BOE.

5. Failure of the UCBOE and Election Inspectors to follow prescribed processes.

6. Failure of the UCBOE to compile and provide documentation reporting on the recanvass results, as required by law.

7. UCBOE Commissioners appear to have intentionally hid their duplicitous practice of vote changing from the media, the government and the public.

8. Failure of the Village Clerk to demonstrate specific duties of her position, as outlined in the law and leading to the destruction of permanent government records.

It is my strong belief that while the statute of limitations may have run out to oust Kimbiz, or take these agencies to court for specific FOIL violations, there should be NO restriction on ensuring that the law is correctly interpreted and enacted. It is the primary responsibility of these individuals to serve as caretakers of the election law, safeguarding our elections and ensuring that they meet the most rigorous standards outlined in the law. While the initial circumstances cannot and, in Healey's opinion, perhaps should not be changed, we MUST hold these officials accountable and take steps to prevent such gross abuses from occurring in the future. Healey trusted that the election was conducted properly, and that trust was severely violated. When elections become a game, or worse, an exercise in "because we said so," we are all violated and we all lose. Well, except for Kaz-whats-his-name. He wins.

Come Out, Come Out, Wherever You Are!!!

Last May, I looked at the attendance records for the Village Board. After receiving no response from any Trustees, I wrote a letter to the New Paltz Times asking some of the greatest offenders to please inform us of the explanation for their lax participation. It wasn't a surprise that there was no response.

Since then, I'm afraid that things have gotten even worse. I used the same rough methodology used in that entry to compile attendance records for all meetings in 2008 and 2009 (minutes are not yet available for 2010). The awful attendance records are especially disturbing, as combining the attendance results of two specific Trustees still fails to yield even ONE full time Trustee.

100% Attendance Record - Of course, I have to give credit to Terry Dungan, who has attended 100% of meetings (regular, special and joint) in 2008 and 2009. The Mayor had 75 meetings total between 2008 and 2009, and was present for the entire meeting every time. But showing up is just a minimum requirement; if Dungan plans to seek reelection, he still has a long way to go before he's in the good graces of most of NP.

95% Attendance Record - Trustee Patrick O'Donnell has been present for an ENTIRE* meeting (including joint, special and regular) 95% of the time. Trustee O'Donnell had 22 meetings total, with 1 absence (regular meeting) and 0 lates or instances of leaving early.

87% Attendance Record - Former Trustee Pete Healey was present for an ENTIRE meeting (including joint, special and regular) 87% of the time. Trustee Healey had 38 eligible meetings between 2008 and 2009, with 4 absences, 0 lates and 1 instance of leaving early. In 2008, he missed 3 special meetings. In 2009, he was absent from 1 regular meeting and late to 1 regular meeting.

83% Attendance Record - Former Trustee Michael Zierler was present for an ENTIRE meeting (including joint, special and regular) 83% of the time. Trustee Zierler had 54 eligible meetings in 2008 and 2009, with 4 absences, 4 lates and 1 instance of leaving early. In 2008, he was absent from 1 regular meeting, left early from 4 regular meetings and arrived late to 1 regular meeting.

(This is where things start to get a little bit nasty. Committee, Board and Commission members are held to a 75% attendance policy in Section 31-5 of the Village Code. No such standard has been established for VB members and, frankly, it shouldn't be necessary, but apparently is.)

77% Attendance Record - Trustee Brian Kimbiz aka Brian Kazmin has been present for an ENTIRE meeting (including joint, special and regular) 77% of the time. In 2009, he had 22 eligible meetings, with 1 absence, 1 late and 1 instance of leaving early from a regular meeting and 1 absence and 1 late to special meetings. Not quite at the 75% threshold, but pretty damn close. Luckily, his presence isn't generally missed, except for the comedic relief provided on the rare occasion that he opens his mouth. Ya know, like, in defense of people who wanna paint their front door all crazy-like.

61% Attendance Record - Trustee Jean Gallucci has been present for an ENTIRE meeting (including joint, special and regular) 61% of the time. Between 2008 and 2009, she had 75 eligible meetings. For regular meetings, she has been absent from 8, late to 10 and left 4 regular meetings early. For special meetings, she has been absent 5 times and late 1 time. She has also left early from 1 joint meeting. I don't expect that Trustee Gallucci will run for a second term; her alliance with Dungan was clearly an effort to help bolster her running mate's numbers in his successful attempt to unseat Jason West. However, she is still holding office and regardless of her future ambitions, I believe it is her responsibility to fulfill the obligations that she signed up for. If she cannot, it is only right that she resign and provide an opportunity for VoNP residents to have someone appointed to actually represent them.

31% Attendance Record - Trustee Shari Osborn has been present for an ENTIRE meeting (including joint, special and regular) 31% of the time. 31%. It's not a typo. Between 2008 and 2009, she had 75 eligible meetings. I'm going to do this as a list, because it's so hard to wrap my head around it.
Regular Meetings - 8 Absences, 20 Lates, 14 Left Early
Special Meetings - 7 Absences, 2 Lates, 1 Left Early
That's a total of 15 Absences, 22 Lates and 15 instances of leaving early. I LIKE Trustee Osborn. I really, really do. But WTF is she doing in her position as Trustee?!? This record is absolutely shocking and I am appalled that someone would seek elective office, allow voters to invest their faith in the commitment of their chosen representative and then proceed to be fully present for only 23 of 75 meetings.

It's no wonder that the VoNP is in such sorry shape. I will continue to welcome any explanation from these Trustees as to their horrific participation but until it's provided, can only judge based on the numbers.

*ENTIRE meetings mean showing up before or as the meeting is called to order and staying until the meeting is adjourned. Multiple instances of leaving and returning during a single meeting are only counted as one. In order to be considered a present, a Trustee must be able to vote at the meeting. Thus, "calling in" to a meeting does not count.

Committed Volunteers

Sorry for the hiatus, I've been packing up everything I own to get a better tan 3,000 miles away. Luckily, I'm done with that now.

This week's Village Board Meeting, the last for The Gatekeeper and The Renegade, was a disaster. Because there was no meeting. See, The Mayor and The Gatekeeper showed up, but The Renegade, The Butterfly and The Financier were all absent. Apparently The Financier's absence was excused (this time) due to a personal issue. No one seems to know where The Butterfly was, although her husband was present for the first time in anyone's memory. The Renegade was simply out, due to personal obligations and priorities that may or may not have been communicated or excused. So, without a quorum, the meeting was never called to order and business in the VoNP is stalled, yet again.

In the wake of The Butterfly's unjustified and unprofessional tirade against the NPFD, many of her defenders are pointing to the meager stipend and supreme level of commitment that she has demonstrated in her capacity as Trustee. So, as is my way, I did some data entry and found even my overly cynical self disappointed by the results.

Instead of dealing with the personal qualities of The Butterfly as Trustee, and without even attempting to tackle the subjective issue of voting record, let's stick to something we can all agree is a requirement of office: attendance. We all know that Trustees should show up and participation is apparently a bonus. But I've been stating that The Butterfly and The Financier fall far short of even this basic obligation and we don't need to have a philosophical debate about positions or abilities; the facts back this one up.

Section 31-5 of the Village Code outlines that "Any person appointed to a board, commission or committee of the Village shall be expected to attend at least 75% in number of the regular and special meetings of such board, commission or committee during a period of 12 consecutive months." There does not appear to be an attendance policy for elected board members, but I think it is reasonable to assume that these officers should be held to this standard at a minimum. I'm assuming the absence of this specification is for this exact reason; we shouldn't have to hold elected officials to an attendance policy. After all, they're the ones who chose to seek public office!

Of the 54 available meetings for all of 2008 and 2009 (38 available meetings for The Renegade), who actually shows up?

For the purpose of my averages, "attendance" is considered complete attendance. You show up to the meeting, on time, and stay until the meeting is adjourned. I did not count instances where someone leaves the meeting for a few minutes, as these are expected to occur. Also, as a courtesy to The Butterfly, I did not count instances where she left for significant blocks of time, as it would be nearly impossible to calculate due to the frequency and duration of such "emergency" phone calls, snacking, socializing and web surfing. Each instance of arriving late and leaving early, even from the same meeting, is counted as a separate, distinct violation. I could've weighted lates and earlys as being less offensive than full absences, and also could've formed penalties based on the extent of lateness or leaving-earlyness, but I didn't. They're all equally offensive as far as I'm concerned, plus it's early and I'm not that big into math. I'll gladly email my spreadsheet to anyone who would like to tackle it.

- 100% Attendance Record. The Mayor has attended all joint, special, and regular meetings of the Village Board. He has not been late, nor left early, for any of these meetings. This isn't surprising; The Mayor strikes me as exactly the type of person who would graduate High School with the prestigious K-12 Perfect Attendance Award. Plus, they're his meetings and his agenda and clearly nobody else is going to run them, so it makes sense that he would have to be present in order for business to be conducted.

- 87% Attendance Record. The Renegade, with fewer meetings being counted since he did not take office until June 1, 2008, has missed 1 regular meeting and was late to 1 regular meeting (although, at the request of the VB, was present at a School Board meeting as the Village representative on the evening in question). He was present at both joint meetings and missed 3 special meetings, one of which he would've been late to had it lasted longer than 10 minutes.

- 83% Attendance Record. The Gatekeeper is in third place, being absent from 2 regular meetings, late to 1 regular meeting and leaving early for 4 regular meetings. The Gatekeeper has faced a tremendous loss in his family in 2009, thus excusing one of these absences. He was absent from 1 special meeting and 1 joint meeting.

- 65% Attendance Record. The Financier, in a dead heat with The Butterfly, has an abysmal attendance record. She has been absent from 7 regular meetings, late to 5 regular meetings, and left early for 3 regular meetings. She has also been absent from 3 special meetings.

- 54% Attendance Record. The Butterfly comes in last, being absent from 6 regular meetings, late to 12 regular meetings and leaving early for 5 regular meetings. She has also been absent from 2 special meetings.

Now I know there will still be some who are uppity and defensive about the attendance record.

"But the meetings run so LATE!" Well, shorten the agenda or your soliloquies. Either way.

"But they can't be expected to be at everything, all the time!" I agree. But Village Board meetings are a basic requirement of their office. Showing up occasionally is disrespectful to the voters, the community and the other officials.

"Well, The Financier CALLED into a meeting, shouldn't that count?!" No, it shouldn't. If you're not present to vote, you're not there. For all we know, Scott Schulte could've taken the called-in Trustee hostage, forcing them to make comments at gunpoint.

I am sure there are plenty more pathetic excuses for why Trustees shouldn't be expected to participate in their own meetings. Please, let me know. Especially The Butterfly and Financier. I think an explanation is long overdue.

Also, I think it's worth pointing out that the two Trustee-Elects, Patrick O'Donnell and Brian Kimbiz, have been showing up to meetings for a few weeks. Kudos. Sadly, no one has ever seen their faces at a meeting until recently. We can only hope that they follow the example of The Mayor, The Renegade and The Gatekeeper when it comes to attendance. Actually, we can hope O'Donnell does. We might be better off if Kimbiz just stays home.

Educated Voters are Happy Voters

The New Paltz Green Party has initiated yet another a wonderful public service. It has established a "Candidate Questionnaire" process where candidates have an opportunity to fill out questionnaires related to the party platform and a number of other relevant local issues.

The candidates are then interviewed by the GP and given an opportunity to revise their questionnaire. The completed questionnaires are posted online for the sake of voter education. This interview is also where decisions regarding endorsements are made, when applicable.

I want to commend the candidates who participated in this process: Dan Torres, KT Tobin-Flusser, Brian Kimbiz and Pete Healey. These candidates recognize that writing down and sharing their positions helps contribute to the overall education of voters in our community and demonstrates a strong commitment to their platforms and priorities.

I also want to commend the New Paltz Green Party for creating this wonderful opportunity. It certainly highlights the competence, organization and political savvy of this group, as they are the only New Paltz-based political party that has instituted a questionnaire process in conjunction with their endorsements and interviews.

Completed questionnaires for the Village Board candidates Healey and Kimbiz (O'Donnell has, thus far, declined) are available under the "Elections" section of the New Paltz Greens website. Completed School Board questionnaires for Tobin-Flusser and Torres will be available on the website by the end of the week (Kerr has, thus far, declined).

Blank questionnaires may be filled out by any person seeking elective office, including those launching write-in campaigns, and will also be available on the website. There are 2 versions of the questionnaire: a general questionnaire based on the GP's platform and an office-specific questionnaire tailored to address local issues as they pertain to the position being sought. Candidates should fill out both.

The Village election is Tuesday, May 5, from 12:00pm-9:00pm at the Village Firehouse, located at 25 Plattekill Ave.

The School Board election is Tuesday, May 19, from 12:00pm-9:00pm at the New Paltz High School, located at 130 South Putt Corners Rd.