Scarsdale 10583

I notice that many contributors to Scarsdale10583 use pseudonyms rather than identifying themselves. A posting by "Be Ready for SCC Infiltration" attached to your reporting of the recent CNC selections left me wondering about the purpose of such anonymity and speculating about how much an important message can be discounted by the writer's fear of goodness knows what. I share fully "Be Ready's" concerns about the lack of fiscal discipline of our Village Board and his/her frustration over the modus operandi of the CNC, and I, too, have been an outspoken critic of their refusal to open their process to the cleansing powers of sunshine. "Be Ready" (and others), why not sign your name on your letters in order to fully back your arguments and really have your voice count, and perhaps even get involved directly? There is nothing to fear and everything to gain in taking an open and public stance in favor of good government.

On Friday, I learned from the Scarsdale Inquirer that for the second year in a row I was not among the "top three" selected for nomination as a CNC candidate for office. On a Sunday afternoon a few weeks ago, I outlined in the requisite 10-minute speech to the group my credentials: PhD economist, risk manager, over ten years experience in public finance on a municipal credit risk acceptance committee, and over two decades of management experience in S&P500 firms. Further, I discussed some of my own strongly held beliefs about minimal requirements for an individual to earn my own vote for Trustee, including: 1) no conflicts of interest (e.g. no spouses, children, siblings serving on CNC, in senior positions of policy-oriented groups such as the Scarsdale Forum or of organizations that might approach the Board with funding requests); 2) an understanding that the first obligation in assuring "fair and affordable housing" is to folks who already live in Scarsdale; 3) being willing and qualified to give a fair and timely hearing to groups of individuals lined up on both sides of proposed public infrastructure projects by assessing financial plans and projections and weighing costs and benefits; and 4) a willingness to work to maintain our Village's autonomy and rights to self-determination in housing policies, educational standards and expenditure, fiscal policies and environmental and zoning regulations (where fiscal autonomy does not mean simply the right to "spend more", but rather the responsibility to assure and demonstrate that the last dollar spent by our Village is not one that would have been better spent by our citizens in the private sector or saved).

I had not intended to throw my hat in the ring again, but I was asked to. Although I am very busy with a successful financial risk consulting practice, teaching Taekwondo, and becoming a more competitive rower I would have gladly served if selected. And while there is a certain sense of relief in coming in fourth or fifth or sixth in a contest where there are three winners and not having to accept the burden of office, I would gladly try again if asked to. Had I been selected, I would have worked hard to lift the shroud of secrecy over the nominating process, resolve once and for all the issue of the SCC (and the good people working for the SCC all these many years deserve a decision that is based on a thorough, realistic, and professional consideration of the financial viability of the project), and to instill financial discipline to a body that increased the Village property tax rate by 64% between the 2002-2003 and 2011-2012 fiscal years, a period during which the general price level as measured by the NY area CPI grew by only 29%. (While tax rates grew by some 30% in real terms over that period, it would certainly be a stretch to argue that the quantity or quality of Village services grew much if at all, let alone by 30%). Simply put, I would have voted to respect and maintain Governor Cuomo's 2% cap and put an end to the tax policies that are driving our friends and neighbors out of Scarsdale once their youngest children graduate from High School. Of course, I urge our citizens to vote for candidates who will also support our Governor's effort to help beleaguered Scarsdale property taxpayers who are not part of the 0.1% club.

So -- I ran and I lost the contest. Perhaps some didn't like my message, perhaps some didn't like my 11th hour independent run last year, maybe others resented my strongly worded and successful op-ed campaign over the past year urging real estate tax reassessment, and more-than-likely most just thought there were three candidates who offered better skill sets. I am none the worst for having run and lost, and at a minimum my fellow "losers" and I served as benchmarks for the three who prevailed. I encourage other concerned citizens to move out from under your noms de plume -- sign your names, join with other civic-minded individuals, and even run for Village Trustee along with the three CNC candidates and Harry Reynolds, all four of whom deserve praise for their willingness to serve. Be counted and make a difference for the good of your hometown.

Respectfully,
Bob Selvaggio

Comments (4)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by Long Live the CNC!, February 03, 2012

If residents of Scarsdale spent more time running for office - all it takes is 100 signatures - and less time complaining about the CNC, we'd have issues-based contested elections.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by William Hyman, January 30, 2012

I agree with Bob as well. While i would like to believe that Scarsdale is truly a non-partisan government it is always a sad event when people who hold a somewhat more conservative point of view or just one that challenges the status quo is continually passed over. Group think leads to stagnation and a lack of innovative thought. These are hard times for many in Scarsdale and it requires new ideas to fiscal problems. I would like to add that it would be nice if ALL town elections were held on voting day in November and not some other day during the year. If we want people to participate, make it easier not an inconvenience!! That alone perpetuates the idea that those in power don't want the rest of us to participate!

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by Good Government Guru, January 30, 2012

The fact that some people, including me, choose to express our views anonymously is what the Internet is all about. Our opinions are no less worthy if we don't post our names. Having said that, I applaud Bob Selvaggio for choosing to post his letter under his real name. And, I agree with his sentiments that the whole CNC "non-partsan" system is an anachronistic un-Democratic farce. The idea that no one knows where our candidates stand on the pressing issues confronting our town and we should just "trust" them to come up with the best solution is offensive to anyone with a brain.

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by Michael Weinstein, January 30, 2012

In my view we live in an unfortunate period for Scarsdale government. I share all the sentiments expressed in Bob's letter above. All to frequently I have found myself forced to become a reluctant civic activist. Be it to work to illuminate the Trustees as to the fundamentally unsound financial plan put forth by the SCC, or most recently to fight a simply ludicrous parking policy that was all of a sudden enforced in the Freightway garage.

But what is most disconcerting about Scarsdale's process for selecting Trustees is the complete secrecy under which the process is managed. As a voter I have no idea as to the principles that any mayor or trustee will employ in their decision making. What do they stand for? What are their ambitions for the Village? For Trustees up for re-election what did they accomplish in their first term? etc.

No representative electoral system I am aware of can be in any way described as democratic if we cannot answer these basic questions. Instead, the current system fuels distrust, low voter participation and no accountability on the part of our elected officials.

It is long overdue that we reform our system and bring the openness we deserve.

• 
• +1
• 
• 

Name

Comment

smaller | bigger

Add Comment