google.com, pub-2480664471547226, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

The Best Gifts from Schoharie County

Showing posts with label Bill Cherry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Cherry. Show all posts

Letter to the Editor: Cherry Has No Interest in Administrator

Written By Editor on 7/3/14 | 7/3/14

Dear Editor,

My name has been mentioned several times in conjunction with the creation of a possible appointed County Administrator position in Schoharie County.  These references have been made in various print news articles, in two separate newspaper editorials over the past few weeks, and in several on-line postings.   Up until now I have remained silent regarding the subject.  It seemed premature for me to take a public stance on the issue, since the position does not presently exist in Schoharie County.  Given the reluctance of the majority of the Board of Supervisors, both past and present, to accept the fact that running a complex organization with an annual operating budget of $72 million requires full-time, day-to-day professional management in order to function properly, many of us have serious doubts about whether the position will ever be created.

However, since my name keeps getting published almost every time the issue gets raised, I guess it’s appropriate for me to clear the air once and for all.  I don’t want the job.  Let me say that again… I will not apply for, nor accept, an administrator position that serves at the pleasure of the Board of Supervisors.  Why would I ever surrender the independence and fiscal authority that the voters of this county have entrusted to me for the past 19 years in order to become an appointee of the Board of Supervisors?  Serving as a county-wide elected official has allowed me to independently manage and safeguard county finances, and to publically criticize the Board when I felt they were making a decision that would adversely impact taxpayer dollars.  If I had been serving at their pleasure, rather than at the pleasure of the 32,000 people of this county, the Board of Supervisors would have fired me long before now.  

I can understand why my name has been associated with the County Administrator position.  It is probably because there have been many times over the years where the Board has tapped me to take on a difficult project, or clean up a challenging situation, outside my role as County Treasurer.  I always felt that it was my duty to say yes, because if left unattended or uncorrected, the problem would likely cost the taxpayers even more money.  My college degree in Public Administration, along with my professional training and job experience qualifies me to hold the position of County Administrator.  But in this case, regarding that particular position, my answer has to be thanks, but no thanks.

In my mind there can be no doubt that Schoharie County government needs professional, day-to-day management.  But whether that goal can be achieved under someone who has to try to stay in the good graces of the Board of Supervisors in order to keep their job is a whole other story.  Perhaps the only way to truly achieve effective leadership at the county level will be to someday move toward the creation of an elected County Executive working side-by-side, and in conjunction with, with a County Legislature.  

Whether the Board eventually creates the position of appointed Administrator, and if so, who they hire to do that job, is as yet unknown.  One thing is certain however…  it won’t be me.  I have absolutely no intention of walking away from the commitment that I have made to serve the people of Schoharie County as their independent, straight-talking, County Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, until such time as they decide that I should do so.

Respectfully,

William Cherry,
Schoharie County Treasurer

County Eyes Seebold Farm for New Public Safety Facility

Written By Editor on 6/23/14 | 6/23/14


Local officials agreed at Friday's monthly county board meeting that if FEMA approves the relocation of Schoharie County's Public Safety Facility that Seebold Farm, located just outside the Village of Schoharie, would be their primary site for a new facility to be constructed.

Flood Recovery Coordinator Bill Cherry presented the recommendation to Supervisors after a careful review and in-depth analysis of topography, site-suitability for construction of the proper size structure, and other considerations. A secondary site in Central Bridge was also proposed. 

Supervisors approved both recommendations unanimously. 

Both sites were required to be identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as they continue to review Schoharie County's second appeal for its Public Safety Facility to be relocated to higher ground rather than remain in the floodplain.

The county has thus far received no direct response since submitting its second appeal at the end of January, although a host of federal and state representatives have joined Schoharie County's efforts to see the facility moved from its current vulnerable confines. 

Seebold Farm is located on Route 30 in the Town of Schoharie and consists of two parcels with a combined total area of 26.3 total acres. Both water and sewer services would be accessed by tying into the village's existing utility lines. The site is currently available for sale. 


Letter to the Editor: Cherry Makes Case for Jail Relocation

Written By Editor on 2/2/14 | 2/2/14

Editor's note: Mr. Cherry sent the following letter to the New York State Emergency Management Office on January 29th.

Dear Mr. Casey,

Please find attached Schoharie County’s second appeal relating to the relocation versus repair of our Public Safety Facility which was determined to be substantially damaged by the floodwaters of Hurricane Irene on August 28, 2011.  This critical structure housed our county’s one and only correctional facility along with our E-911 Communications Center and Emergency Management Office, and served as the county’s central emergency operations command post.  In this submission we will present new information, not available at the time of our first appeal, which we believe will establish beyond any doubt that in order to be compliant with the code requirements of the State of New York, FEMA must relocate this facility out of the floodplain.

FEMA continues to insist that our county repair the existing structure rather than fund a new, relocated facility on higher ground outside the floodplain.  We strenuously disagree with their determination based upon several factors.  When this facility was first designed back in 1990 it was constructed in an area considered to be safe at that time, outside of the FEMA designated floodplain zone.  But over the past 25 years, unanticipated climate changes and increased rainfall have resulted in the Schoharie Creek rising violently and dramatically for brief periods of time, subsequently flooding the entire basin of the Schoharie Valley.  Schoharie County’s Public Safety Facility is located within that great basin, and the structure has been damaged by swiftly rising floodwaters three times in less than 20 years.  The rampaging waters of Hurricane Irene caused the most severe damage to date, resulting in a “substantially damaged” designation to this critical facility which was inundated by 7 feet of raging muddy water filled with gasoline, home heating oil, agricultural chemicals, decomposing farm animals and other toxic debris.  The floodwaters were so intense and powerful that solid steel doors were twisted like children’s toys.  Over the past 25 years, FEMA has amended their floodplain maps and expanded the zones which are likely to experience damaging flooding during a high-water event, and current maps show that the entire Public Safety Facility is now included in the flood-zone, and rightfully so.

For FEMA to continue to take the position that this facility must be repaired and rebuilt in its present location seems arbitrary, short-sighted, and defies common sense.  The Schoharie Creek will absolutely rise to flood levels again and expand beyond its banks.  The topographic and hydrostatic realities of the 314 square-mile Catskill Watershed (a bowl-like ring of mountains which creates a funnel effect by collecting rainfall and snowmelt and forcing the heavy runoff into the headwaters of the Schoharie Creek) will not change.  There can be no doubt that this building will suffer damage from flooding at some point in the future, and millions more of federal, state and local dollars will be needed to repair the devastation.  This cycle could go on for decades resulting in an endless cycle of repairing the facility, evacuating inmates and abruptly interrupting emergency operations at a critical point in time because a complete and total evacuation of the facility is absolutely mandatory and required.  This forced evacuation is not a minor inconvenience, but rather a total and complete breakdown of our emergency command center and emergency communications and dispatch capabilities whenever a flood is imminent – exactly when those emergency services are needed the most.  

Repairing the present facility is expected to cost at least $7 million for hard construction costs.  That figure is likely to rise because of the complexities involved with repairing a structure of this size, and design and engineering costs will increase the overall project total even more.  Added to that will be an additional $7 million or more for mandatory, code-required, flood mitigation measures, bringing the total cost of mandated repairs to at least $14 million.  A new, relocated facility positioned safely on higher ground is expected to cost $18.7 million.  Attempting to protect the building from future flooding by installing mitigation measures such as automatic floodgates will be expensive and without any guarantee that they will succeed.  Flood protection measures have a very high failure rate based upon FEMA’s own experiences, and if a future catastrophic event were to result in water levels that even moderately exceeded the levels of Irene, the protection measures would almost certainly fail.   But even if the flood protection measures did succeed, this facility, which serves as the emergency command and control center for all police, fire, ambulance and emergency services for a population of 32,000 people, would be rendered completely useless, just as it was during the critical hours before, during, and after the events of 6:00 p.m. on August 28th, 2011.

Our second appeal to FEMA is based not only upon economic common sense and fairly predictable future events, it is based upon FEMA’s own legal and regulatory requirements.  First and foremost is the fact that when dealing with a critical facility located within a designated flood-zone, FEMA is legally obligated to comply with local and state code requirements when evaluating whether to repair the existing damaged structure as compared to relocating that structure to higher ground outside of the floodplain.  You will find included in our appeal, a letter from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation dated January 21, 2014 which points out that rebuilding the Schoharie County Public Safety Facility in its present location would be in violation of Part 502, Title 6 of the Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York.  Section 502.4(17) of that code says, in part:

“In order to prevent potential flood damage to certain facilities that would result in serious danger to life and health, or widespread social or economic dislocation, none of the following new projects shall be undertaken within any flood hazard area:  (ii) correctional facilities; (iv) major communications centers or civil defense centers; or (v) major emergency service facilities, such as central fire and police stations”.  
The letter from DEC Floodplain Management Chief, William Nechamen, goes on to state:

“Because a substantially damaged structure is treated like a new structure, Part 502 would not allow a correctional facility, major communication center, civil defense center, or major emergency service facility (to be rebuilt) within a flood hazard area if state funding or state land is involved.”

Clearly – state money is involved here because, while FEMA will be paying for 75% of the costs, New York State will be paying the remaining 25%.  New York State’s share of the projected $14 million cost to repair the existing facility amounts to $3.5 million dollars, and Part 502 prohibits that expenditure of state funds.  We believe that this code-compliance requirement taken on its own merits obligates FEMA to relocate the facility outside the floodplain.   

Please understand that we in Schoharie County are deeply and forever grateful to both FEMA and New York State for your financial assistance as we struggle to recover from the devastating flooding that swept through our valley destroying homes, businesses and government infrastructure.   Our core reason for filing this second appeal regarding the Public Safety Facility is based upon our firm conviction that relocating this critical facility outside of the floodplain once and for all, is the only logical choice at this time.  We would never try to take advantage of this unfortunate circumstance just to get a new county building.  The fact is that spending millions of dollars to repair that repeatedly-flooded structure one more time simply does not make sense.  When you consider that fact in conjunction with the New York State code-compliance requirement that demands that FEMA relocate it out of the flood-zone, and the potential loss of life should our emergency communications center be rendered inoperable in the event of another flood, relocation out of the floodplain is the only logical, and legal option.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully,
                 
William Cherry,
Recovery Coordinator

Blenheim Bridge Dispute Re-Ignites at County Board Meeting

Written By Editor on 1/27/14 | 1/27/14


Following recent sparring between Blenheim residents and Treasurer Bill Cherry over the county's efforts to rebuild or replace the Blenheim Covered Bridge that was reported by local media in December, both sides escalated their feud into a public argument Friday morning at the County Board of Supervisors January meeting. 

Gail Shaffer, who previously served as New York Secretary of State under former Governor Mario Cuomo and is currently a member of the Blenheim Long Term Recovery Committee, questioned Mr. Cherry's role in the process as Flood Recovery Coordinator by accusing him of bias against the small town. She would later also claim that FEMA has rebuilt every other covered bridge in the region, except for Blenheim's.

Mr. Cherry, clearly exasperated by Ms. Shaffer's comments, defended his actions with respect to the Blenheim Covered Bridge but in the heat of argument offered that if, "someone else wants to handle the bridge project, go ahead." He would go on to explain that the federal agency's decision was weighed solely on the fact that Blenheim's bridge did not cross the length of the creek nor was it used for travel, while the others were. 

After taking time to let the argument settle, Mr. Cherry would later present word to the assembled supervisors that FEMA has agreed to pay for the Blenheim project's architectural and engineering design costs. That approval allows Schoharie County to draw up reconstruction blueprints of the bridge and for Mr. Cherry to submit them to the necessary regulatory agencies, which would have been impossible beforehand.

Although good news was reported at Friday's board meeting concerning the Blenheim Bridge project, strife and mistrust still exist between Schoharie County's smallest town and the county's flood recovery coordinator, a situation that continues to complicate progress made toward restoring or restructuring the valley community's most cherished possession. 

Blenheim Residents Respond to Cherry's Letter

Written By Editor on 1/8/14 | 1/8/14


Three weeks after Schoharie County Treasurer and Flood Recovery Coordinator Bill Cherry wrote a scathing letter to members of the Blenheim Long Term Recovery Committee and the Blenheim Town Board over what he described as, "damning and accusatory statements about me personally [by former Supervisor Robert Mann Jr and BLTRC Chairman Don Airey], and more specifically, about my delay in submitting the latest proposal to FEMA relating to the Blenheim Covered Bridge," citizens of the small municipality had the chance to speak out Monday evening, and did they ever.
 
After Supervisor Shawn Smith read aloud Mr. Cherry's letter to the assembled townsfolk, the overall response was unfriendly to say the least. Town Councilman Joe Ward kicked off a thirty minute discussion on the letter and the Blenheim Covered Bridge by calling the Treasurer's comments, " very vitriolic verbiage." One resident, who referred to the Flood Recovery Coordinator as, "Czar Cherry," accused Mr. Cherry of being, "an arrogant liar," that is the crux at the table.
 
Mr. Airey, who was referred to several times in Mr. Cherry's infamous letter, addressed the audience by listing several grievances and corrections, one being that he had, "no issue with Bill Cherry holding the submission," but that he wanted members of his committee and the town board to be afforded the opportunity to review its contents. He would later go on to condemn Mr. Cherry's selective list of Supervisors he sent the email to and its publication in the Schoharie News, while stating that his concerns stem only from being a resident of the Town of Blenheim.

At this point Mr. Smith, who allowed town residents to openly discuss their concerns and offer comments, spoke of Mr. Cherry's abilities in other flood impacted communities across the county and urged that, "If we can all get on the same page, we can work together." He would go on to describe his early relations with the Treasurer as good, although some residents still felt otherwise about Mr. Cherry's intentions, even suggesting that he recuse himself from further handling the Blenheim project and accusing him of, "thumbing his nose at the county Board of Supervisors."

County Board Hears Dam Update, Flood Recovery Report, Recognizes Bob Mann in Year-End Meeting

Written By Editor on 12/23/13 | 12/23/13


"Two years ahead of contract schedule," is what John Vickers of the New York City Department of Environmental Protection told the Schoharie County Board of Supervisors about New York City's efforts to build up the Gilboa Dam at Friday morning's December and year-end board meeting in Schoharie.
 
Vickers, who was assisted by regional engineer Mark Suttmeier in Friday's power-point presentation, stated that two of five phases were completed in dam reconstruction work thus far and that 165,000 tons of weight will be added to the dam at the project's conclusion, coming from the replacement of loose stone structure with concrete steps and 38 torsional anchors.
 
Town of Schoharie Supervisor Gene Milone questioned why "there was not a dredging project attached to this as well," pointing out that there was a build up of sedimentation behind the dam and that they were losing storage of water supply. Mr. Vickers conceded there has not been a study on sediment build up since the nineties, and that they were planning to do one in the near future, but that "as long as sediment builds up in the dead storage area it has no impact on water storage."
 
In other county business, the Board of Supervisors heard from an AECOM representative that while there are "four highly qualified contractors to work on the four creeks," included in local efforts to address stream restoration, that seventeen landowners have still not signed on. Board Chairman Phil Skowfoe commented that the landowners were potentially "jeopardizing the project."
 
Possible ways for the project to move forward if the landowners continue to hold out is for either AECOM to redraw their plans or for the county to consider using eminent domain. In a startling admission, the AECOM representative revealed that they have "overshot their numbers," and are $400,000 over design costs as of now, although the money is available through Natural Resources Conservation Service grants the project has been awarded.
 
Schoharie County Treasurer and Recovery Coordinator William Cherry followed up AECOM's report with news that FEMA has officially denied the county's request to relocate the jail and Public Safety Facility to higher ground. FEMA maintains that the construction costs of rebuilding and code-mandated mitigation efforts should not be added with a total rebuilding price tag of $13.2 million and that they would only use the construction cost when calculating their "50% rule."
 
However, as Mr. Cherry pointed out, FEMA has added construction and mitigation costs together to exceed the 50% threshold in other projects across the country, but have insisted that those cases do not set a precedent, which the county disagrees with. The Treasurer also stated that State DEC officials may write a letter to FEMA saying that they do not encourage rebuilding in the flood plain.
 
The Board of Supervisors voted 12-0 on Mr. Cherry's recommendation to further appeal FEMA's position that they repair the existing building by presenting their arguments directly to officials in Washington D.C., with full support of New York Senator Charles Schumer and Congressman Chris Gibson, as permitted in the appeal process.
 
On the lighter side of things, Town of Esperance Supervisor Earl Van Wormer praised five departing members of the county board: Anne Batz of Broome, Donald Brandow of Conesville, Robert Mann of Blenheim, Thomas Murray of Cobleskill and Dan Singletary of Jefferson for their service, saying that "It's a good thing to have people you disagree with."
 
He followed up his praise by offering a motion of special recognition to Blenheim Town Supervisor Robert Mann, who he was elected to the Board of Supervisors with twenty years ago, that was agreed upon unanimously and with applause from all members of the county board. Mr. Mann wasn't present at Friday's meeting.
 
Members of the county board then approved a series of resolutions, committee motions and entered into a brief period of executive discussion, concluding the 2013 legislative session.

Cherry Blasts Mann, Airey over Blenheim Covered Bridge Dispute

Written By Editor on 12/18/13 | 12/18/13


Editors note: Schoharie County Treasurer William Cherry forwarded the following email, which is addressed to the Blenheim Long Term Recovery Committee and members of the Blenheim Town Board, to the Schoharie News among other media outlets yesterday afternoon for immediate publication.

Dear members of the BLTRC, and Town Board members,

I am writing to you in response to a newspaper article that was published in the Mountain Eagle in their December 5th edition (see attached photocopy). The article centers on the regular monthly meeting of the Blenheim Town Board which took place on Monday, December 2nd. According to the article, Supervisor Robert Mann and BLTRC Chairman Don Airey made some damning and accusatory statements about me personally, and more specifically, about my delay in submitting the latest proposal to FEMA relating to the Blenheim Covered Bridge. I believe that those accusations are blatantly false, and once you know the truth, I think you will agree. 
 
In September, Don Airey, representing the BLTRC, made a presentation to the Schoharie County Board of Supervisors requesting that they submit a new proposal to FEMA describing the former Blenheim Covered Bridge as a "pier". Mr. Airey’s reasoning was that FEMA had paid to replace the Santa Monica Pier in California which jutted out into the Pacific Ocean when it was damaged in a storm, therefore FEMA should also pay to replace the Blenheim Bridge because, like a pier, it was connected to land on the eastern side but not connected to the bank on the western side of the Schoharie Creek. In an effort to support the wishes of the people of Blenheim, the Board of Supervisors agreed to Mr. Airey’s request without necessarily taking a position on the logic of the argument. The Board then instructed me as Recovery Coordinator to direct Simmons Recovery Consulting to put a proposal together based upon Mr. Airey’s "pier" concept and submit it to FEMA as soon as possible.
 
As requested, Ron Simmons used his extensive knowledge of FEMA regulations to put together the documentation to be submitted. At the Board of Supervisors meeting which was held on November 15th, I reported that the Simmons pier proposal would be ready to be submitted to FEMA by the 25th of November, some ten days later. Ron completed his work ahead of the deadline, and on November 18th, the proposal was ready to be sent in to FEMA as soon as I signed the cover letter. A series of emails were exchanged between Don Airey, Robert Mann, and me over the next few days. In those emails, both Mr. Airey and Mr. Mann repeatedly requested that I hold off on sending the pier proposal in to FEMA until the BLTRC had the opportunity to review the document.
 
A sampling of those emails is as follows:
 
"I would appreciate it if Blenheim would be given ample opportunity to review and comment before any submission to FEMA is made." Supervisor Robert Mann, 11/18/13
 
"Bill, I ask that you please consider said request and not rush to submission but instead, delay such admission to early December in view of Thanksgiving and people’s schedules." "There is no need to rush." BLTRC Chairman Don Airey, 11/19/13
 
"Is there some urgency for the November 25th date? We have been waiting patiently for two years, it seems a shame not to give Blenheim at least a few days to consider it." "Please extend this small courtesy." Supervisor Robert Mann, 11/19/13
 
"Of course we wanted the proposal submitted as soon as possible, but in view of how long it has taken Simmons to do so, at this point a week or two more will not change the result either way…" BLTRC Chairman Don Airey, 11/19/13
 
I responded to these requests in the following manner:
 
"It is my understanding that (at the Town of Blenheim’s request), Ron Simmons was directed by the Board of Supervisors to prepare a submission to FEMA describing the former bridge as a ‘pier’ and to attempt to get FEMA to replace the former covered bridge with a replica to be located on the same site." "Just last Friday I delivered my Recovery Report to the full Board and informed them that Ron’s proposal would be submitted to FEMA by November 25th." Recovery Coordinator Bill Cherry, 11/19/13
 
"I am prepared to sign this proposal and submit it immediately unless the Board of Supervisors informs me they feel differently." Recovery Coordinator Bill Cherry, 11/19/13
 
After receiving the repeated email requests from Mann and Airey, and with due respect for the BLTRC and the Town of Blenheim, I wrote this to Don Airey:
 
"You and Robert Mann can have all the time you need as far as I am concerned. I was under the impression that you and Blenheim wanted this proposal submitted as quickly as possible, and that time was of the essence." "I will hold off on submitting it until I hear a consensus from the Board of Supervisors." Recovery Coordinator Bill Cherry, 11/19/13
 
In direct conflict with the true series of events, at the December 2nd Blenheim Town Board meeting, Mr. Mann and Mr. Airey tried to turn the situation completely around and lay the blame on me for not submitting the proposal in a timely manner. I cannot even begin to explain their motivation for twisting the facts of the matter to the members of the BLTRC, to town officials, and to the public. They both know perfectly well, and the emails prove it, that I was anxious to submit the Simmons proposal to FEMA as quickly as possible, in fact on the same day I received it from Simmons, and that I only held back based upon the repeated and strident requests by Mann and Airey. I guess this proves the old saying that no good deed goes unpunished. As quoted in the Mountain Eagle, here are some of things they said about me and the pier proposal:
 
Don Airey was quoted as saying that: "he was sick and tired with the anchor-dragging at the county level and frustrated with the lack of real support and initiative he has received from the county, and in particular, Cherry." At the Blenheim Town Board meeting, 12/2/13
 
"Quite frankly, I am growing fatigued with Mr. Cherry’s inappropriate, inconsistent, and intransigent attitude in dealing with this issue." Don Airey, 12/2/13
 
"As far as the bridge goes, he’s holding it (the Simmons proposal) on his desk right now, knowing that all he needs to do is commit and submit." Don Airey, 12/2/13
 
"We all want to move forward." "In my opinion he (Cherry) is basically thumbing his nose at the Board of Supervisors and I am angry." Don Airey, 12/2/13
 
"The problem now is it’s sitting on Bill Cherry’s desk and he said it will not be submitted to FEMA until he receives a go ahead from the Board of Supervisors." "At this point I feel like we are getting the run-around." Robert Mann, 12/2/13
 
It wasn’t until last Friday, December 13th, that I was presented with a copy of the newspaper article, so I really had no idea of what had transpired at the Town Board meeting until eleven days after it happened. Given the fact that in September, the Board of Supervisors had originally ordered the proposal to be submitted to FEMA as soon as it was drafted, and since the only reason it was still sitting on my desk awaiting my signature was because of the direct personal requests of Mr. Mann and Mr. Airey, on that same day, Friday, December 13th, I signed the cover letter and submitted the Simmons pier proposal to FEMA.
 
I will leave it to the members of the BLTRC to decide how to handle the matter from here, but in the meantime, rest assured that the Schoharie County Board of Supervisors, and I, are actively pursuing your request to replace the Blenheim Covered Bridge in its original location via the pier argument. Mr. Airey has been pushing for me to come to Blenheim to discuss this matter further with the BLTRC, but in light of the events described in this letter and the toxic relationship that has clearly developed between BLTRC Chairman Don Airey and myself, I prefer to await FEMA’s reaction to the proposal before entering into any further discussions. I hope you can appreciate my position.
 
 
Respectfully,
 
William Cherry,
Recovery Coordinator
 

Conservative Party Mailer Blasts Cherry, Supervisors for Report

Written By Editor on 11/3/13 | 11/3/13

Just hours after the Board of Supervisors voted to release the damning details of Fitzmaurice's second portion of their controversial report, opponents of Treasurer Bill Cherry and leading supervisors that were behind the report's initiation and subsequent release sent a massive mailer to thousands of residents blasting the aforementioned as being apart of the "good old boys club," urging no votes against Fulton Supervisor Phil Skowfoe, Seward Supervisor Carl Barbic and Schoharie Supervisor Eugene Milone.



The mailer accuses Mr. Cherry and the aforementioned supervisors of attempting to "control patronage in the county by funding a "Report" that targets their political rivals - employees of the county." It goes on to claim that "they released the report 2 weeks before Election Day, hoping it would sink their rivals," concluding in large red print that "their plan backfired."


Although difficult to read in the picture above, it states tellingly that the mailer was "Paid for by the Schoharie County Committee of the Conservative Party of New York State."

Cherry Denounces "Conscious Act of Deception," Calls for Final Report's Release

Written By Editor on 10/28/13 | 10/28/13


Schoharie County Treasurer Bill Cherry, who previously blasted the board of supervisors decision to release only the first portion of Fitzmaurice's findings as a "betrayal," issued a press release this morning that further denounced the board's decision to release only the speculative original copy as a "conscious act of deception," that he "considered to be a betrayal of the public trust."
 
Adding in his conclusion that "I find it disturbing that the Schoharie County Board of Supervisors has intentionally misled the press and the public by releasing an eight-month-old summary of undocumented hearsay and deceptively labeled it as a “Final Report”. Stating in the last sentence that he hoped that the "public and the press will join me in demanding that the actual Final Report, which was delivered to the Board on October 24th, be released immediately."
 
Mr. Cherry's release in its entirety:
We have been told for months now that the investigative report into claims of discrimination and harassment in the Schoharie County workplace was still being investigated and compiled and was not ready for release.  This matter has been brought up month after month at Board meetings throughout the summer and fall of this year, most recently on Friday, October 18th when it was announced by the Chairman of the Board that Attorney Mark Fitzmaurice could not attend the meeting that day as expected because he was still working on the final report.  It is important to note that on the date October 18, 2013 the final Fitzmaurice report was not yet completed, as stated for the record by the Board Chairman.  
On Thursday, October 24th, after a entering into a four-hour executive session with labor attorney Mark Fitzmaurice of White Plains, NY, the Schoharie County Board of Supervisors released to the press and the public a document labeled the "Confidential Final Report Concerning Discrimination, Harassment and Intimidation in the County Workplace".   Note the very important word “Final” in the title of that document.  The Board of Supervisors also promptly posted this 104 page document on the official county website under the title “County Investigation Report”.     
It is no wonder that news sources as well as the public immediately concluded that this was, in fact, the final report that we have all been anxiously awaiting for the past 12 months.  We were lead to believe that this was the very same “final report” that was not ready for release just six days earlier on October 18th.  We believed that because that is exactly the way the Fitzmaurice and the Board have labeled it.  “Final”, by definition, means end result or ultimate conclusion.  But does anyone find it curious that on page 104 of the recently-released report, you will find that the date that it was actually delivered to the Board was on February 5, 2013?  More than eight and a half months ago…  This is NOT the document that was delivered to the Board on October 24, 2013.   

The document that was released and labeled as “Final Report” is actually nothing more than a “preliminary summary” and is more than eight months old.  Why was this stale document mislabeled as the “Final Report” and released on the very same day that Attorney Fitzmaurice delivered the actual final report to the Board?  Can it really only be a coincidence that on the same day that Fitzmaurice delivered the true results of their year-long, $317,000 investigation, the Board decided to release to the public Fitzmaurice’s preliminary report that the Supervisors had already had in their possession for most of this year?   They could have chosen to release this 104 page document at any time during the past eight months.  It seems to me that there is a distinct possibility that the “real” final report that was delivered on October 24th was going to be embarrassing to some members of the Board of Supervisors, most of whom are running for reelection, and election day is now only a week away.  That may be the reason for this conscious act of deception that I consider to be a betrayal of the public trust.  
I submit that this act of deception was not a coincidence.  I believe that the Board of Supervisors intentionally released the “old” preliminary report in an effort to satisfy the press and the public’s outcry for the final report.  They did this despite the fact that they knew very well that the preliminary report would unjustly damage the reputations of some public officials, including myself, because it included unfounded hearsay, rumors, and baseless accusations without any proof or evidence.  On page 5 of the report, Attorney Fitzmaurice says in reference to his questions during the interviews with county employees:  “Regardless of the source of the information, we wanted to determine if they had heard or knew about acts of discrimination, intimidation or harassment in the Schoharie County Workplace.  This part of the question was designed to elicit a broad range of information, including hearsay…  We told the interviewees we did not care where the source of their information came from.  Even rumor, innuendo and hearsay were to be confirmed or dismissed if possible.”  Not documented facts mind you – they were asked to give the interviewers rumors and hearsay.  
I find it disturbing that the Schoharie County Board of Supervisors has intentionally misled the press and the public by releasing an eight-month-old summary of undocumented hearsay and deceptively labeled it as a “Final Report”.  And worse yet, they released this compilation of hearsay on the exact same day that they did in fact receive the actual final report from Attorney Fitzmaurice in a closed-door executive session.  One can only conclude that the Board took this action in an effort to satisfy the public outcry for the report, while at the same time protecting themselves or their friends from the embarrassing results of what Fitzmaurice delivered to them on October 24th.  I hope the public and the press will join me in demanding that the actual Final Report, which was delivered to the Board on October 24th, be released immediately.

Cherry: Board Has Betrayed the Trust of the People

Written By Editor on 10/25/13 | 10/25/13


Following last night's overwhelming vote in favor of releasing the original compilation by Fitzmaurice and Walsh concerning allegations of wrongdoing in the county workplace, Schoharie County Treasurer Bill Cherry blasted the board's decision to "suppress the second (and most legally important) part." Adding that "the Board has betrayed the trust of the people."
 
The motion to release was opposed only by Schoharie Supervisor Gene Milone, who insisted that the report be released in its entirety and that publication of only the original version would be "misleading" to the public, a position that confused many in the aftermath of last evening's vote but was praised by Mr. Cherry.
 
"Gene Milone should be credited for being the lone Supervisor who voted to release the entire report," the County Treasurer declared forcefully. He followed up by stating that "Many of the rumors, innuendos, and gossip in the first part are unsubstantiated, but it's the actual allegations of law-breaking I care about," concluding that "The people have a right to know if civil service or election laws have been broken."
 
While the Board of Supervisors did vote to release Fitzmaurice's original findings, which are mostly hearsay and accusations, there is still a second and larger part of this waiting to see day light and until that occurs we can only speculate as to the validity of the first portion's contents.
 
 


The Best of the Summer

Donate to Support Local Journalism

CONTACT US:


By phone: 518-763-6854 or 607-652-5252
Email: mountaineaglenews@gmail.com
Fax: 607-652-5253
Mail: The Mountain Eagle / PO Box 162 / Schoharie NY 12157

https://www.paypal.com/biz/fund?id=M6592A5TZYUCQ

Subscribe!

Subscription Options

Site Archive

Submit your information below:

Name

Email *

Message *