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.

PR Party Hosts "Serious Reform or Just More Shadows? A 'Civil Conversation' on Constitutional Convention," Feb. 2, 7pm, New Paltz Community Center

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Pete Healey - 845-399-3288 - Pete@PRParty.org
Brittany Turner - 916-384-6735 - Brittany@PRParty.org

NYS LEADERS VISIT HUDSON VALLEY TO DISCUSS CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
Proportional Representation Party Convenes "Civil Conversation"

NEW PALTZ - On Tuesday, February 2, the Proportional Representation Party is sponsoring Serious Reform or Just More Shadows?: A "Civil Conversation" About Constitutional Convention. According to PR Party Founder and former Village of New Paltz Trustee Pete Healey, "Our Governor, Lieutenant Governor, State Comptroller and one of our US Senators were not elected to those positions by voters in NYS. There are serious constitutional issues surrounding these appointed, rather than elected, officials. The legislature elected this November will decide on the districts for all state legislators and our congressional delegation for the next 10 years. This legislature ought not be entrusted with that responsibility without a serious reconsideration of our dysfunctional constitution."

NYS Assembly Minority Leader Brian Kolb (R-129th) will be joining Healey to discuss his recently introduced legislation that would, if approved, allow for a statewide referendum on a Constitutional Convention this November, instead of 2017 as currently permitted. The legislation would also prohibit sitting members of the state legislature from serving as delegates to the convention. "There is a growing feeling among New Yorkers that their state government has stopped working for them - that it's grown too costly, unresponsive and disconnected from the lives of those it was supposed to serve. It is time New Yorkers took their state government back - it begins by convening a People's Convention, which is the first step toward restoring accountability," said Kolb. Healey concurred, noting "People rightly fear that the Constitutional Convention could become an insider's game, as is the state legislature. A convention comprised of real people, not legislative groundhogs, is the only way to discuss meaningful reforms."

Also expected to attend are Assemblymember Richard Brodsky (D-92nd) and a representative of Gerald Benjamin, Director of the Center for Research, Regional Education and Outreach (CRREO). Both have been at the forefront of discussions surrounding the potential Constitutional Convention. "Civil conversation" was coined by Brodsky, who has been one of the few Democrats to discuss the possibility of a Constitutional Convention, advocating a slow and tempered approach. Benjamin has voiced pro-Convention sentiments in the Wall Street Journal and Albany Times Union through a series of editorials co-authored with former NYS Governor Mario Cuomo. They will be joined by elected officials, community leaders, activists and residents from across the Mid-Hudson Valley.

The Press Conference will be held from 7:00pm until 7:30pm at the New Paltz Community Center, 1 Veterans Drive, New Paltz. The moderated discussion about the rationale for and impact of a Constitutional Convention will follow, from 7:30pm until 9:00pm.

The PR Party was founded in 2007 to deal with a number of concerns surrounding the structure and functions of NY's local and state government. Initiating the process for a Constitutional Convention is one of its chief priorities in 2010. Additional information is available at the PR Party website, www.PRParty.org.

###

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.

The Wall of Shame

When an election is as close as the one on May 5, you just KNOW there's at least a few people wandering around in a daze, kicking themselves thinking they could've been that ONE vote. I've reviewed the voter rolls and there are surely a few local noteworthies who are doing exactly that. Who do you think feels the worst for skipping out on election day?

Shari Osborn (who was at Village Hall an hour after the polls closed, presumably for a secret and illegal meeting with the Mayor and Trustee Gallucci, who were also sneaking around the building)
Don Kerr
Guy Kempe
Ray Curran
Eric Roth
Dawn Elliott
Valerie Erwin
Linda Welles
Karl Budman
Charlie Karsten
Judy Mage
Dave Holt
Susan Holt
Dorothy Jessup
Judy Swallow
Amos Sunshine
Steve Stanne
Donna Smith
Steve O'Shea
Amanda Sisenstein
Jamie Levato

More to come... I have omitted named of people who forgot to change their registration to their current village addresses, but you know who you are. Seriously?? Change it. Jeez.

When Kimbiz vacates his seat in the near future, these are probably the very individuals who should be responsible for leading the movement to appoint Pete Healey to that vacancy and ensure his reelection in the anticipated special election next year.

Reader Responses

Some reader responses to the VONP election results:

• Wow.
• This is about as depressing a blog posting as I am ever going to read. A schmendrick on the village board. I wondered if it was a waste of time to vote since only 2 candidates are on the ballot for 2 positions. I'm glad I voted for Pete, so at least this is not my fault. Jesus.
• Wow. Good Luck Vo'NP! You will need it. And let us remember NOT to paint all student candidates with the same brush: Dan Torres (for NP school board) is intelligent, responsible, aware, and erudite, and he can even speak in complete sentences!
• Good to know the I's will be crossed and the T's will be dotted!
• Brian is scary.
  
• Now a minimal lesion, perhaps acceptable, but a great lesion?
• What a turn of events... unbelievable...
• Are you serious??
• No!!!! Doucher Brian is in??? Kill me now!!!!!!
• Pete was going to be the only voice of reason left on that board and the only one that would question the Mayor. This is really bad for the village... are people asleep?
  

A sad day for New Paltz and a happy day for democracy

Brian Kimbiz, write-in candidate for the Village Board, has just usurped Pete Healey by 1 vote in a recount.

I've been arguing with people for weeks on the merit of write-in candidacies, while they constantly dismissed the possibility of a write-in victory, instead choosing to sidle up to candidates who are on the ballot, insisting that they WILL be our new trustees. That's how our system works. It's democracy.

For those of us that support the elimination of unnecessarily restrictive and convoluted election laws, student participation and an open electoral process, this is a victory.

For those of us who want improvements for our community, progress and restructuring, and checks and balances for a terminally ill government, this is devastating.

Many of us fall into both categories and that might help explain why it all makes me so nauseous.

I have long been an advocate for student participation in local politics. I have also been a strong advocate for write-in campaigns, as I believe the arbitrary rules governing ballot access and the petitioning process are pointless and unnecessary. Being able to jump through a few hoops doesn't qualify someone to hold office; being unfamiliar with the silly process shouldn't disqualify someone from being a valid candidate. There are, however, many situations where the write-in candidate is not only incapable of jumping through those silly hoops but is also a horrendous candidate. This is the case with Brian Kimbiz.

We all remember the Julia Walsh fiasco and many of us cringe when thinking back to the horribly misguided decision we made in the voting booth on May 6, 2003. Did our community survive? Absolutely. Was it a painful, miserable and frustrating experience? Extremely so. Is it something I believe we can weather again, especially considering the existing board makeup? I am doubtful. Could it be worse? It pains me to say it, but yes. And it gets worse right now.

On the Brian Kimbiz for Village Board Facebook group, Brian proudly proclaimed,

"THE NEW PALTZ VILLAGE BOARD ELECTIONS IS MAY 5TH."

(is May 5th??)

He continues...

"THE BOARD IS COMPOSED OF 6 MEMBERS, THE MAYOR, DEPUTY MAYOR, AND FOUR TRUSTEES."

(6 members?? Really??)

Wait, there's plenty more...

"DESPITE THE FACT THE STUDENT POPULATION IS ABOUT 6,000, EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE NUMBER OF VILLAGE RESIDENTS, WE HAVE NO REPRESENTATION ON A BOARD THAT HANDLES EVERY DECISION IN THE VILLAGE, THE VILLAGE WE ALL LIVE IN."

(VONP Population in 2000 census: 6,034. SUNY New Paltz student population in 2007: ~2,000. Sigh.)

"CURRENTLY THE MAYOR AND THE BOARD ARE WORKING TO MAKE RENTING HOUSES OFF CAMPUS IMPOSSIBLE FOR STUDENTS BY PASSING LEGISLATION THAT WOULD LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT CAN LIVE IN ONE HOME."

(Um... wow, I have NO idea where that came from but... huh???)

So I guess we can all agree that Trustee Kimbiz certainly needs to be schooled in New Paltz 101 (grammar and proper use of caps lock may also be added to his courseload). But, to be fair, perhaps we should also consider where he stands on the issues.

From his New Paltz Green Party Questionnaire, on his priorities:

"I also feel like new development of homes and commerce is very important in and around the Village of New Paltz. The decisions that are made now have long term effects down the road. This means that any new additions to this town should go through the highest scrutiny before any decisions are made. I believe one of the greatest things about New Paltz is the size and membership of its citizens. Also housing situations concerning tenants, landlords, students, and most importantly home-owners need to be carefully considered. Housing conditions, zoning laws, taxes, health issues, among many other things needs mediated in order to create the best community for all of its members."

Wha...? Also, I tend to be a bit of a bitch when it comes to the interchangeable use of Town/Village. When I'm talking with a friend, it's just obnoxious and picky. When it comes to a Village Trustee, I think my annoyance is justified. (Throughout his in-person interview, Brian continued to talk about his vision for the Town Board and his commitment to serving on the body, so as to improve "stuff" in the Town of New Paltz. Members on the interview committee were actually becoming confused as to which office he was seeking.)

When it came to questions about specific issues, Trustee Kimbiz rarely had an answer. At one point, a member of the interview committee questioned his decision to run for an office that he clearly knows little about. Trustee Kimbiz' response was that he would like to get elected first, then learn about the issues and develop positions and opinions later. He saw no reason to understand the intricacies of concerns facing our community until after he was actually elected. He has, however, "watched Town Board meetings on TV a coupla times."

Some highlights on those local issues:

What is your position on Town and Village Unification?

At this moment I do not have a position on the unification of the Village and Town. I will have to better hear both sides of the issue.

What steps will you take to improve current tenant/landlord relationships as well as the current housing situation in general? 
 
 


I think I can be a great lesion between tenants/landlords. Being that I am a tenant I feel safe housing conditions are very important. 
 


What will you do to ameliorate current traffic problems? 
 
 


I am not sure but I believe either making more roads, or increasing flow on certain roads are both bad ideas.

Could you describe your fiscal philosophy? 
 
 
 
 


I believe government should provide services that the community desires at the best price possible, however I also think high taxes are bad, so money must be effectively directed to the things that serve the community best.

What will you do to improve the relationships between SUNY and municipal governments? 
 
 
 


I am again a perfect liaison between the two. I would be coming from the SUNY (working as Senate Vice-Chair) to the other.

What concrete steps do you plan to take to increase transparency in your office and make it easier for the public to participate in the governing process? 
 
 
 


I want to use the Internet as a huge resource in staying connected to me. I think this can be so beneficial as it makes access to me almost instant. My email goes straight to my phone. Aside from that I plan to have a web forum where the public can see my day-to-day work for them and even respond. I think my tech savvy can have a large influence on getting very close to me.

You can't make this stuff up, people. And, honestly, I don't know why anyone would want to. You can read Trustee Kimbiz' full questionnaire at the New Paltz Greens website.

As for the future, we can expect that the Dungan/Gallucci reign will continue with rather catastrophic consequences. We can expect that without Trustees Zierler and Healey, the maniacal schemes of these individuals will magnify unchecked. We can expect that Village employees will continue their work, except this time without allies or security. We can expect that there will be no progress, no open communication and no innovation.

And, if my assessment is correct, we can expect that Julia Walsh can finally pass the "Worst VONP Trustee" legacy onto Trustee Kimbiz. Congratulations, New Paltz. We get the government that we deserve.

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.

Village Candidate Forum

On Friday, May 1, Bill Mulcahy will be filming a Candidate's Forum for all announced Village of New Paltz Trustee Candidates. Invited participants include Pete Healey, Patrick O'Donnell and Brian Kimbiz.

The Forum will be broadcast live at 7:00pm (assuming the modulator is working) on New Paltz Public Access Channel 23. To submit a question in advance, please contact Bill Mulcahy at wmulcahy@hvc.rr.com. Alternately, a call-in number will be available during the live broadcast.

The Village Elections will be held on Tuesday, May 5, from 12:00pm until 9:00pm at the Village Firehouse, located at 25 Plattekill Ave. There are 2 Trustee seats open, each with a 4-year term. Healey and O'Donnell are both on the ballott; Kimbiz has announced a write-in campaign. Any other person can also be written in as a candidate.

To cast a write-in vote on a lever machine, follow the instructions below.
1. Find the column for the office where you wish to cast a write-in vote.
2. Lift the metal door at the top of the column.
3. Behind the door, there should be a blank piece of white paper. If there is ANYTHING written on the paper, alert an election inspector without opening the curtain; just stick your head outside without pulling any levers.
4. Write in the name of the candidate you wish to cast a vote for.
5. Finish casting your votes by pulling levers and/or writing in names. When you are finished, pull the large lever at the bottom to open the curtain. This will record your votes.

***Please note: Lifting the metal write-in slide at the top of any column will count as a vote. You will NOT be able to pull a lever in that column once the slide has been lifted, even if you write nothing on the paper.

***Please note: Write-in votes for candidates whose names appear on the ballot will not be counted.

***Please note: You may cast a write-in vote for anyone you want, for as many offices as you want.

***Please note: You may bring pens, pencils, palm cards, voter guides, etc. into the polling place and voter booth. These do not constitute electioneering materials.

Village of New Paltz -- April 22, 2009

The Village Board had another rousing meeting last evening. While the agenda was lengthy, the majority of the board meeting was spent discussing the proposed budget, which must be adopted by April 30.

It was long. Really, really long. I stuck it out until 10:30pm and then proceeded to watch from home, but it went on until about 2:00am. Luckily, I was accompanied by the lovely Lagusta, which makes everything more enjoyable (as does the alliteration of "luckily," "lovely" and "Lagusta"). There were also antics in the hallway that proved to be far more interesting than the meeting itself, but I digress.

If you really need a play-by-play, you can probably see a repeat of the meeting on New Paltz Public Access Channel 23 this weekend (at least, the 4 hours that the Village actually pays to have taped. You'll get the idea).

Highlights:

The Butterfly showed up. It's true. Only about 20 minutes late (she got there before me), she came, participated (if weird outbursts and ADD qualify as participation) and stayed almost until the end. Good job, Butterfly! You get a gold star.

---

"Candidate expected to assume The Gatekeeper's seat" also showed up. I won't say his name because, really, does it even matter? Take him out and plug in any one of those idiot nobodys… digressing again. Anyways, he stayed and, more impressively, stayed awake for almost the entire meeting. David Lewis could learn from his example.

---

The VB spent a pretty sizeable chunk of time going over paperwork from Ulster County regarding the PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) for Woodland Ponds. Most of the questions during this portion of the meeting could've been easily answered by a representative from the county, which is where I really started to get worked up.

See, in Dutchess County, the majority of County Legislators believe it is part of their job to attend local meetings in addition to their county meetings. So, for example, a legislator would routinely attend village, town and school board meetings in addition to county committees and the legislature. I know, the whole thing is kinda crazy (don't even get me started on the regular communications and newsletters that are sent in-district to keep constituents informed about what their legislators are actually doing!).

Just imagine the improved functionality and transparency of our government if our county legislators showed up at local meetings even once a year, let alone once a month, where their direct interests aren't being served? Given that their attendance at county meetings is inadequate, though, I'll just stick with my dreams of a perfect world where government actually communicates internally, not only from the top down, but from the bottom up, too. And if actual voters get some information occasionally, well, the more, the merrier.

---

The ever-present salary question rose from the ashes, as it tends to do in budget season annually. Ever since Jason West was elected Mayor, the issue of salaried elected officials has become pretty contentious.

I have strong personal feelings on this issue, believing very firmly that people should receive adequate, fair compensation for the work that they do and that we should make it feasible for regular people to govern, which includes attention to financial support. I also feel very strongly, however, that elected officials must lead by example. In situations where layoffs, reduced hours and shortened work weeks are being discussed increasingly, no one has any business hiring new staff or raising their own salaries.

We should protect existing employees first and ONLY then, if there's extra left over, should anyone else be considered. The audacity of even suggesting a pay increase (no matter how insubstantial) is abhorrent, especially during a spending freeze with a proposed budget reflecting monumental tax increases and rumors of layoffs. I am rarely in favor of the VB's tendency to nickel-and-dime, especially when the focus ought to be on reducing the budget $250,000+ (hint: you'll never get there cutting $100 here and $300 there), but this is one area where that tendency is not only appropriate, but necessary.

Last night, the Village Clerk and Treasurer grew increasingly emotional and frustrated as their supply budget had been stripped to the point where they were unsure if they will even be able to afford paper. How, in light of such petty, shortsighted revisions can the VB seriously consider any discussion of a pay increase for themselves? While The Butterfly's argument was right, in principle, her insensitivity and unwillingness to see the significance of her raucous grandstanding was completely inappropriate and unbefitting of an elected official. The Butterfly gave the strong impression that she is somehow doing this work in order to be compensated, rather than doing this work because the voters put their faith in her to act as their representative and voice on the VB. To cheapen the magnitude of that decision is disgraceful and I am disappointed to have chosen this individual to represent my interests.

Many of us attend government meetings regularly (or watch them on TV and online). These meetings often run far longer than they need to as a result of the theatrics and long-winded tirades on irrelevant matters. We don't get paid to attend, either, but we're there because it's important. Our time is not respected by our elected officials. We certainly do not request any compensation for doing our civic duty: being active and attentive to the important issues in our community through watching meetings, sharing feedback and researching different topics (which is much easier and much cheaper for elected officials than ordinary people). I'm certain The Butterfly is there for the same reasons, but she needs to start acting like it.

---

The Mayor defended the New York Conference of Mayors (NYCOM) on two separate occasions, once as it related to their annual kumbaya get-together for elected officials and also as it pertained to the Village's general membership with NYCOM. According to The Mayor, the trainings and resources offered by NYCOM are incredibly informative, educational and valuable and it is simply impossible to create good government without affiliating with NYCOM.

Wow. Where do I start? NYCOM is a bunch of attorneys. We see how great the attorneys over at Greenwald Law have been for the VONP (including, most recently, work that was done at $225/hour instead of the regular rate of $175/hour). We've got at least two people on the VONP Board who are literally OBSESSED with issues of liability. Their obsession has gotten to the point where the quality of life in the VONP is adversely affected by their overzealous and belligerent pursuits to eliminate any activity that may lead to "liability", no matter how insignificant. "Liability" is quickly becoming their favorite word. Now, all anyone has to say is "liability" instead of "no"; the outcome remains the same, but no one has to be the bad guy

Either the VONP is giving NYCOM's attorneys some competition in the litigation market, or NYCOM is somehow responsible for this crazy attitude towards wily residents who go out of their way to sue the VONP without cause (like the Caribbean Latin American Support Project, who was told they cannot use village facilities without a $1,000,000 insurance policy*).

If The Mayor and his actions are an example of NYCOM's wonderful explanation and execution of good, efficient government, SHOULDN'T WE BE RUNNING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION?!?! Things have gotten so bad that not only are The Gatekeeper and Renegade criticizing The Mayor for his secretive and self-destructive actions, but even The Financier and The Butterfly are starting to chime in. He had withheld information that each of them found pertinent to last night's meeting, had budgeted for things that do not exist and, in some cases, must go before the public at a referendum and made haphazard changes on his budget worksheets to the point where no one else on the Board was able to follow his thought process (as if it were so easy to do to begin with!). If this is what we get through our allegiance to NYCOM, we're probably better off affiliating with the Chuck E. Cheese Confederacy of Dunces. It'll probably be cheaper.

---

The overall lack of awareness on the VB continues to be troubling. The VB has been working on this budget for months and there are still frequent questions about what is kept under what line, what different words mean, why things are categorized the way they are, etc. My personal favorite was, "What is public finance, anyways?!". If you want to get paid to be there, you ought to do something worth being paid for. I'd suggest starting with paying attention and learning your job. This is getting incredibly tiresome.

---

I had an outburst during the meeting. It was due to the VB's interpretation of Open Meetings Law and I'm surprised I've been able to contain it for this long. I think my TV generally bears the brunt of it, as demonstrated by scratches and chips around the frame.

Anyone who has watched a meeting of the current VB has probably noticed the interesting phenomenon of pointing, smirking and whispering. The VB is incapable of doing their jobs in open meetings, since the majority of the VB refuses to communicate outside of regular meetings and they do little preparatory work leading up to these meetings. The VB is also completely unprofessional, incapable of keeping snide remarks, underhanded comments and knowing glances to themselves.

The VB has no respect for the public. In any given meeting, at least one VB member will glance coyly at the camera and proceed to whisper, point and gesture without giving any indication what the conversation is actually about. The Financier is famous for this during Bills & Claims, as she will point to figures without saying the numbers aloud and will refuse to indicate what the claim is actually for. Trustees who are not adjacent to the Financier are SOL, as she is far more concerned with being sly than being accountable.

It is no secret that the VB's executive sessions are routinely used for business that is expressly prohibited from discussion in executive session. So, instead of using executive session for private, confidential discussion, they use that time for conversations bound by open meetings law. It only makes sense, therefore, that the VB use the public meeting for private, confidential discussion.

If a VBmember has something to say that cannot be done in an open meeting, they have two options. In situations where it is legal, enter into executive session. In situations where it is not, shut your damn mouth and do it outside of the meeting. I guess the Renegade's quote, "We act formally when we should be informal, and informally when we should be formal," has been proven yet again.

---

*There is more coming on Insurancegate, but I'm doing a little research first. If my suspicions are correct, I'm going to want backup documentation.

Poll: Should he stay or should he go now?

In a Letter to the Editor in this week's New Paltz Times, Village Trustee Pete Healey announces a poll on Mayor Terry Dungan. Without any realistic way of assessing the Mayor's approval level, this is the next best thing.

The full letter is below:
Thanks for top billing in your story on the upcoming village elections, to be held on Tuesday, May 5 at the Fire House on Plattekill Avenue. I have spent my first year on the Village Board learning about the process used at Village Hall and getting to know the other board members, the employees and volunteers who serve the public in their various capacities. I believe I understand the frustrations and sometimes the satisfactions that come with this kind of position, and I'm willing to accept the risks that come with standing for election again.

I want to state for the record here and now, however, that I don't expect to serve out my full four year term. I'm looking forward to the day when, two or three years from now, I can decide if I care to campaign for election to a unified New Paltz municipal government, which will replace the separate village and town governments.

Until then there is of course the current election process, for two open board seats. First, I want to say that Michael Zierler's presence will be sorely missed at Village Hall since he has decided not to run for another term, and his current term expires on May 31. Second, I'm disappointed that, just like two years ago, an inexperienced petitioner and candidate for public office in this village has been removed from the ballot. Those of us who have experience in the political process ought not to use this knowledge to block others' attempts at joining this process. On the contrary, we ought to encourage people to engage and help them to work through the difficult, detailed signature-gathering and filing procedures.

Finally, it's my contention that the overriding issue in this campaign is the direction and leadership of this village government, and I have to state here that I've been sorely disappointed in Mayor Terry Dungan's efforts during my time in office. I have researched Village Election Law and can find no fair and reasonable way to hold a vote of no confidence nor conduct a special election for the remaining two years of his term, to either confirm or deny his continued leadership in this village.

I have, therefore, set up an informal poll on Mayor Dungan with essentially a "Yes or No" vote on his leadership. If you support the mayor then he should "Stay," if you want the mayor to change direction and adjust his leadership style then he should "Go." The poll can be found at http://snappoll.com/poll/322669.php. Any questions regarding this poll or any of the issues I've raised above can be directed to me at phealey3@hvc.rr.com.

Pete Healey

New Paltz

It could be a sitcom, if only it were funny...

The New Paltz Village Board is beyond salvation at this point. It almost reminds me of a sitcom except nothing about the situation is funny. At all.

First, the cast of characters:

The Mayor - living in a bubble, working incredibly hard, accomplishing absolutely nothing and believing he is simply misunderstood as the sole protector of our community. He thinks he is a visionary, except no one else shares his vision or even knows what it is. The Mayor occasionally gives information to others, but would really rather be left to implement his plan without any consultation from the rest of the Board, the community or the staff. He willfully disregards others and consistently takes action without approval or discussion. The Mayor is generally a likeable person and a terrible politician.
Policy example: Singlehandedly instituting a "spending freeze" that is applied inconsistently and erratically, looking in all the wrong places when it comes time to balance the budget.
Priorities: ?????
Quote: "This isn't information that you need to know."

The Financier - concerned with only one thing, which is particularly problematic, since The Financier is secretive, incapable of working with other people, clearly has little interest in this job outside of "liability" and "financial" issues and has no commitment to this community outside of her rigid, narrow view which usually amounts to "When I was Clerk-Treasurer, this is how I did it, so it's right." The unspoken details involving her departure from her previous position suggest the opposite may be true and she continues to prove this in her work with the Village. She would rather be at home than at meetings, and this is apparent on the occasions when she actually shows up. She contributes little outside of her 2 specific interests and is generally unprepared for meetings except when it comes to nickel-and-diming and acting as the extremely overbearing and overprotective parent of the Village, which is usually detrimental to the people who actually live in the Village.
Policy example: Requiring permission slips to use the parks.
Priorities: Bills & Claims
Quote: "This is a liability."

The Butterfly - seems like an accidental Trustee most of the time, The Butterfly flits around and doesn't fully commit to much except those issues that pertain to her immediate environment. Moriello Pool, parks, sidewalks and trees are of utmost importance, but nuts-and-bolts aren't really her thing. She is cute, colorful and bubbly but can becomes incredibly hostile and irrational if she feels threatened. In these cases, she engages in long-winded and disjointed diatribes toward the source of her discomfort without any real suggestions for improvement. She then follows up with a Letter to the Editor reiterating her annoyance, and drops out of sight for a while until she calms down. She goes out of her way to antagonize stakeholders that she personally dislikes, while making remarkable concessions for those she considers important members of our community. If The Butterfly were a student, she'd have been run out of town by now, but because she's a mom her constant absences and latenesses are generally overlooked.
Policy example: Hmm... well, she volunteers for a lot of stuff.
Priorities: Anything that impacts her interests and those of her family.
Quote: "Sorry I'm late!"

The Gatekeeper - seems like the only veteran Trustee (this characterization surprisingly belongs to The Mayor, although The Financier will argue that she's a veteran, too). Even though The Gatekeeper has only served 1 full term on the Board, he knows the Village inside out. The Gatekeeper has been diligent, thoughtful and detail-oriented. The Gatekeeper has a slight tendency to be rigid and overly invested in his view of what is right, but has grown tremendously since his election in 2005. Unfortunately, his tenure on the Board began with a Mayor who was far from ideal. He then supported the current Mayor and... shit. It actually does get worse! So he's finally had enough and is leaving his position effective June 1. This is a huge loss to the Village, as his likely replacement is another dopey, unknown, bland, non-committal transplant from the Huguenot Street Dems (think: David Lewis). Blech. He is attentive to the concerns of Village employees and is often called upon in his capacity as Deputy Mayor to engage with these individuals, as the Mayor is far too busy in his tower at all hours of the night to actually be bothered by people.
Priorities: Process, Building, Zoning, Planning.
Policy example: Woodland Ponds.
Quote: "OK, but can we talk about the agenda now?"

The Renegade - the newest Trustee, but you wouldn't know it. A longstanding member of this community, The Renegade has a focused list of priorities and will do whatever it takes to see that these priorities are achieved. He is clear, unapologetic, driven and fully aware of the staggering political barriers to moving his agenda forward. While The Renegade has taken a tempered, patient approach, it is obvious that his patience is quickly running out. The only Board ally that The Renegade has is The Gatekeeper, probably because they are the only Trustees who are actually doing anything. The Renegade is the only Trustee who interacts with staff at all levels on a regular basis and identifies issues of concern in order to get things done. He speaks his mind and consistently highlights the hypocrisy and self-preservationist tendencies of other Board members. His view of his position as Village Trustee is realistic, characterized by humility, humor and the recognition that VONP Trustees aren't actually the most important elected officials on the planet. The Renegade is about to come into his own and the other Trustees should be wary but will continue to be oblivious.
Policy example: Revisions to the Code on Blasting.
Priorities: Unification, Public Access Television, Village Employees.
Quote: "We act formally when we should be informal, and informally when we should be formal."

Now to set the stage:

It is April 15 at a workshop meeting to discuss the budget, which must be approved by April 30. After spending the first hour of the meeting fixing a botched SEQRA process, the Board finally gets down to business.

(Absent: The Butterfly).

The Mayor: We can either have a really long meeting or a really short one. I suggest everyone send me their ideas and then I will look at them and decide if I agree.

The Financier: I agree, and I want to point out that I can't work like this and should be left to look at the budget at home. Give me original worksheets so I don't have to go through the budget line by line. When you do that, I'll look at it. There's no reason that we should go through all of this together. I have to leave early so I think we should just end the meeting now. The morning comes early.

The Gatekeeper: Well, I think there's something between going line by line and addressing obvious concerns tonight.

The Mayor: OK, great. So everyone send me your suggestions and I'll decide if I want to look at them. Oh, right, Renegade, do you have anything to add?

The Renegade: Uh... yeah.

The Mayor: (sigh) OK, what did you need to discuss?

The Renegade: All of it!

The Mayor: (BIG SIGH)

The Renegade: Well, you didn't distribute copies of my suggestions to anyone, but luckily I have a copy right here. We need to look at the attorneys, engineers, etc. etc. etc.

(A really good conversation occurs where The Gatekeeper and The Renegade make brilliant points, the Mayor pretends to concede but writes down completely different numbers in his notes and The Financier only communicates with the Village Treasurer).

The Mayor: OK, great. I'll look at this with the Treasurer and I will do what I want to anyway. Meeting adjourned!

Village Treasurer: Um, were you going to make a motion to make any of these changes? At this point in the budget process, it's necessary to make all changes by a vote of the Board.

The Mayor: Oh... right. Um... did anyone want to make a motion? Renegade?

The Renegade: Well, no one actually agreed to anything, so no. What is the deadline?

Village Treasurer: April 30.

The Mayor: OK, great. So we'll discuss this at our next meeting. Goodnight!


So... I've gotta wonder... these people are actually ELECTED to do this work?!?!?!?!?!?!