WPCNR MR. & MRS. & MS. WHITE PLAINS VOICE. July 24, 2006: Tim Sheehan, frequent contributor to Common Council meeting debate reflects on the Council appointment of Dennis Power to serve through December 31, made official last Thursday evening:
Today as power has been restored to more sections of the City, more light can now be focused on the Council’s recent appointment of Dennis Power to the vacant Council seat, a controversy that many Democrat leaders surely hoped would fade as stormy weather set in late last week and commandeered the headlines.
First, in order to dispel the notion floated on this site that opposition to this appointment has only been lodged by “vituperative newcomers,” I note that I have lived in this town for 22 years, and while I am a member Republican City Committee (RCC), I have served on various boards and commissions at both the City and County level for many years in a strictly non-partisan fashion. Thus, although I always endeavor to afford the Council wide latitude in reviewing their decisions, if a particular Council action is flat out wrong, I will not hesitate to say so, even at the risk of appearing to be “politically incorrect.”
(More)
Some time ago in this City, registered Republicans outnumbered Democrats and both the Common Council and Mayor’s office were largely controlled by Republicans. However, despite the enrollment and political power advantage, our then longstanding leader, Basil Filardi, always maintained that the “City comes first, and the Republican Party comes second.”
Since 1992, the Common Council has been controlled by Democrats. Early on in their reign, Council Democrats and a large segment of the Democratic City Committee (DCC) seemed inclined to continue the “City first” code of conduct. However, with the recent appointment of Dennis Power to the Common Council, the DCC and Council Democrats have essentially repealed the “City before Party” credo.
While nominations to run for a Council seat are controlled by the party apparatus for either the Democrats or Republicans, these choices are reviewed by the ultimate protective filter – the voters – who determine which worthy candidates will receive the power to vote on Council matters and receive the taxpayer funded salary and benefits which accompany the position. But filling a Council vacancy involves two separate actions – an interim appointment (for up to a year) made by the Common Council and a nomination (made by the political parties) to run for the last year of the vacant term. Since an individual appointed to the interim Council seat bypasses the electorate, immediately votes and draws a salary, great care has been taken by past political party leaders and Council members in filling the interim position. The position has not been used as a patronage depot for an individual that a political party owes a favor to.
To the contrary, the interim appointment has been utilized as a forward looking means to develop and promote a “blue chip” prospect in the party that was both talented enough to immediately contribute and young enough to serve on the Council for years to come. Both the Council and the political party in power benefited from this arrangement, as the Council received a talented fresh face and the new Council member used the interim appointment to build a legislative record and develop the political ties needed to successfully run for re-election.
Following the 1989 election a Council vacancy was created when Joe Delfino was elevated to the County Board of Legislators. The then Republican Council majority (with RCC input) appointed the fourth place finisher in the 1989 Council election and Rosedale neighborhood leader Bill Waterman to fill the seat. Although Bill did not retain his seat, losing to Bob Greer in the November of 1990 special election, he ably served in his short Council tenure, facilitating the installation of the downtown intersection “chirping” devices for the visually impaired that one can still hear today.
Following the 1993 election, a Council vacancy was again created when Sy Shulman moved into the Mayor’s office. Council Democrats and the DCC demonstrated that they too knew how to handle an interim appointment, tapping their “blue chip” prospect and Fisher Hill neighborhood leader John Martin for the seat. John served on the Council for two years, winning his special election in 1994 but losing his seat to Jo Falcone in 1995. Nonetheless, while on the Council he was appointed to serve as the chair of the City’s comprehensive plan effort, a position that he capably continued in even after he left the Council.
I know that Dennis Power is a decent person who cares about the City and means well. Having served on the Common Council for one term, albeit 15 years ago, he has earned our thanks and perhaps even a spot on a list of candidates to be considered by the Council and the DCC as a replacement for the late Robert Greer. But at the risk of being unduly blunt, Council members should not have chosen him for the interim appointment and serious conflict of interest issues may well impede his future ability to serve in the Council position.
Of the many recent published tributes to Dennis, penned by his campaign manager, a “high level” aide and the chair of the DCC – all of which mention his past service to the City as a Common Council member, circa 1987-91 – it is perhaps not an accident that none mention a single significant legislative accomplishment of his tenure. What I recall of his term was a Council member who, to put it charitably, often seemed confused by Council proceedings and was frequently ruled out of order when he tried to make ill timed (or advised) motions or tried to speak at times when debate was not permitted. I also recall that his dedication to duty was questioned by the Mayor, who at one point requested that Mr. Power submit timesheets to prove that he was putting in the required time on the job and to justify his Council salary. Ultimately, in 1991 when Dennis decided not to run for re-election, the notion that he had not distinguished himself in his first and only term was shared by many City residents from both political parties.
And while, with personal experience as my instructor, I certainly agree that there is no shame in losing an election, Mr. Power’s attempted return from a 14 year City government exile and loss in the 2005 Mayoral election is not as important as the manner in which he conducted his campaign, which largely consisted of a litany of complaints not accompanied by any original or constructive solutions. His class warfare laden message that the benefits of downtown development were unavailable to all citizens failed to resonate with the majority of the electorate, who enjoyed the new downtown and agreed with the direction that the current Mayor and Council members were leading the City in.
Given the Democrats 2 to 1 enrollment advantage over Republicans in town, Dennis’ 42% electoral showing (and vote totals on the Democratic line far below fellow Democrats who simultaneously ran for Council) in the Mayoral election was plainly a crushing defeat. For Council members – undoubtedly pressured by the DCC – to appoint Dennis to the Council just 8 months after his negative political campaign to lead the City was so soundly rejected by the voters is nothing short of an affront to the White Plains electorate. Moreover, it smacks of a backroom patronage deal that one would expect from a Brooklyn political clubhouse, but not from a White Plains party committee. If the DCC wanted to reward Dennis (for running against Mayor Delfino when no one else would) with a Council position, they should have nominated him to run for a four year Council term in 2007, or accepted the compromise that permitted Dennis run this year for the final year of the Greer term, but offered the interim Council appointment to someone else, such as Alexis Greer.
Additionally, Dennis’ present position with the County’s office of economic development may well be found to conflict with his position as City Council member. This problem of dual positions (one appointed, one elected) between City/County government levels has already been ruled by a State Supreme Court Justice to be a conflict, as County Legislator Dave Hall found out a few years back, after being tossed from his elected County Legislator seat because of an appointed position that he held with the Village of Harrison. I’m not sure what is worse about this appointment: the obvious potential conflict (and the specter of litigation aimed at forcing him to choose between his County and City positions) or the fact that Dennis stubbornly refuses to acknowledge any conflict.
For instance, flatly contradicting his “high level” campaign official’s insistence (on this site) that Dennis would never take a position against the City, Dennis has already told the Journal News that he “sees no problem” with the County’s proposal to deed County owned land in the City to a private developer and that the City does not have the right of first refusal on this property. This is clearly a position contrary to the City’s legal interests. Additionally, what is his position on the County’s drop-in shelter dumped on the City in the past year (the City wants it removed) or the fact that the County opposes the City’s desire to develop its own IDA? How can he possibly vote on a large development project in town whose developers pay fees to the County’s IDA, an entity closely affiliated with the very County department that he works in?
Amazingly, instead of consulting with the only individuals charged with looking out for the City’s interests – the City’s Corporation Counsel or the City’s Ethics Committee – about these conflicts, Dennis instead turned to the County Attorney for help, clearly indicating where his loyalties lie. And despite the fact that the County Attorney apparently doesn’t see any problem with this, her admonition that Dennis not share any County secrets with the City vividly demonstrates that (1) there most certainly is a conflict, notwithstanding her conclusion to the contrary and (2) her job is to protect the County’s interests, not the interests of White Plains citizens.
Moreover, in furtherance of his inane plan to avoid obtaining clearance from the City’s Corporation Counsel and/or the City’s Ethics Committee, Dennis intimated in Friday’s Journal News that he need not worry about such ethical conflicts, because he will instead be seeking out “commonalities” between his two positions. I sincerely doubt that this Yoda inspired sound bite will pass muster in any court of law or formal ethics proceeding.
Finally, I am dismayed at the manner in which Alexis Greer was treated by the party which her late father so proudly headed for many years. The DCC rushed to nominate Dennis for the special election without even considering her or, apparently, receiving commitments from a majority of all Council members – who were legally responsible for making the interim Council appointment – regarding Dennis. This led to the public and sordid soap opera which pitted Alexis against Dennis for the appointment while the Council was in a political stalemate. Nonetheless, Dennis hardly distinguished himself by telling the Journal News why he was a better choice, histrionically proclaiming that there were “serious matters” on the Council’s agenda, clearly insinuating that Alexis – an articulate College graduate who steadfastly worked with her father for many months on Council business – was not up to the task.
Given all the above listed factors, it is manifestly clear that Dennis was simply not the conflict free, “blue chip” prospect that the DCC should have sought out – and sitting Council members should have insisted upon – to fill the interim appointment and run for the balance of Bob Greer’s term. In choosing Dennis, it is equally clear that the DCC and Council Democrats have emphatically put their party’s interests before the interests of the City. And Dennis’ future ability to vote on important Council matters remains unclear.
But the Council majority has made their decision and Dennis, for the time being at least, is our newest Council member. So today, I wish Dennis Power good luck in his future service to the City. And if there is a silver lining to this controversy, I am glad that I had an opportunity to reminisce about the late Basil Filardi, a pioneer party leader who always insisted that the City of White Plains was far more important than any political party or any failed candidate that the party owed a favor to.
Tim Sheehan
