Will the last person to leave the Porterfield campaign please turn out the lights?

Last night's Democratic Mayoral debate between incumbent Gary McCarthy and City Council President Marion Porterfield was not for the faint of heart.

It wasn't that Porterfield's performance could be described as erratic and exasperated.  It wasn't that the substance of her answers was often puzzling, leaving one to wonder what reason her ostensibly left-wing base would have to vote.  And it wasn't that the audience indicated her campaign might be significantly lacking in organizational fortitude.

It was all of the above.

A jumbled opening statement, in contrast to McCarthy's planned and clearly rehearsed intro, was followed by an equally confusing punt on the issue of migrant bussing from New York City.  Within 5 minutes, the supposed candidate of the left found herself doing nothing to differentiate herself from McCarthy's position on the issue dominating news for the past week, her response merely being a less coherent version of the same substance.

Just one question in, and it was clear that Porterfield was on her back foot, to put it lightly.  What followed can only be characterized by a parade of blunders, with her high point being a platitude-filled response on the relatively intangible and non-urgent issue of increasing citizen participation in government.  In less than an hour, she, in chronological order:

• Nearly lost her breath while offering a rambling defense of her inflighting-plagued tenure as Council President, which in substance amounted to "I tried"
• Built and fed herself into a buzzsaw, in a way unseen since Dan Quayle compared herself to JFK - please clear the room of children and anyone with a heart condition before watching either - by pointing to her pre-Council tenure as the City's Weed & Seed program coordinator as an example of how she would improve public safety.  Whispers could be heard in the audience as soon as the word "seed" cleared her lips, as those with long memories eagerly awaited McCarthy pointing out the essential facts of the matter: as coordinator, Porterfield willfully violated federal Department of Justice rules, ignoring three years of warnings, and the City was kicked out of the program because she was either unable or unwilling to fill out basic DOJ paperwork for a third of a decade.  And the cherry on top?  Data showed that crime increased in the City during her time in charge of Weed & Seed.
• As the supposed left-wing challenger, responded to a subsequent question about last week's homicides by seemingly coming out in support of Rudy Giuliani's aggressive, "broken windows" approach to policing petty offenses
• Came out, in a Democratic primary where she needs to win big amongst both young voters and the left, far to the right of McCarthy on marijuana, not only highlighting her opposition to allowing marijuana businesses in the City, but dramatically saying that the existing MWBE-operated marijuana small business on Union Street is bad for families.  This small business was opened within a football field of the busy, outdoor drinking-friendly City Squire, Holiday Wine & Liquor, two tobacco-based smoke shops, Ink Oasis Tattoo, and a very healthy McDonalds.  Let's not act like it's 24-hour dispensary in the Sistine Chapel.  
• In what seemed to be a fit of pique, lashed out at McCarthy's suggestion - in response to a question from the Times Union's Paul Nelson regarding what the City's most undervalued resource was - that the City would benefit greatly and attract new residents in the coming decades due to its vast supply of water and position atop the Great Flats Aquifer, which contrasts to well known and widely reported issues, exacerbated by climate change, facing the Southwest and other regions.  Porterfield, who apparently moonlighted as a climate scientist when she was too busy to complete Weed & Seed forms, responded to the Mayor's thoughtful and forward-thinking answer by saying that she was "not sure [water] is what people think of when they move someplace." Is she ignorant, a climate change denier, or both?

To summarize, the ostensibly progressive, WFP-backed challenger in a Democratic primary in a blue city in the bluest state, came out strongly against marijuana, for a crackdown on petty crime, mocked climate change, offered zero support for asylum seekers, and highlighted instances of her own incompetence, which ranged from breaking Department of Justice rules to breaking the City Council.

Is Porterfield giving anyone, her base included, an actual reason to support her?  Watch that debate in a vacuum, with no clue - if only we could all be so lucky - about the toxic, race-based claims of pure progressivism and specious-at-best claims of racism made by the Porterfield - Williams - Farley council bloc against fellow Democrats over the last two years, and Porterfield comes across as the right wing candidate, both on policy and in tone.

This all begs the question: who's advising Porterfield, and who ran her debate prep?

Even before the candidates took the stage, there were signs within the auditorium that it would be a long night for Porterfield.  During the lead up yesterday afternoon, some establishment Democrats were texting each other concerned that a motivated left flank would crowd the auditorium.  In the end, only a smattering of the approximately 100 attendees appeared supportive of Porterfield.  

More staggeringly, none of the city or county's Porterfield-backing elected officials were spotted, not even her City Council bloc or Niskayuna's Jaime Puccioni and Michelle Ostrelich, who as one former Democratic committeewoman observed in a post-debate email, called Porterfield a "mentor" who is "what the city needs right now."  Contrast that with McCarthy, who was being roundly applauded by three councilmen and at least two of the city's county legislators.

Has her council colleague Carl Williams given up on Porterfield's campaign, instead hoping voters blame her for Council dysfunction and give him a pass?  Have Professor Puccioni and Ostrelich retreated to their ivory towers in Niskayuna, instead concerned with the woke Professor's uphill battle in a Conservative Party primary against a career military officer, and two-time-loser Ostrelich's general election against affable and qualified opposition?

In any event, last night Marion Porterfield was on her own, without support, and Gary McCarthy was running laps around her.  To any Democratic primary voter watching, the choice was obvious: it's time for four more years.

Early winter in Glenville: Snowflake GOP Supervisor & Town Board members attack political cartoon

Glenville saw an early flurry of snowflakes and faux outrage last night, with the Town Board passing a resolution (starts at minute 46) condemning the Daily Gazette for publishing a cartoon critical of police brutality.

The cartoon

The resolution, sponsored by town supervisor Chris Koetzle and his majority Republican caucus - deputy supervisor Gina Wierzbowski and councilman Jim Martin - was a late addition to the meeting’s agenda, and was not included on the advance agenda provided online for the media and town residents.  Koetzle, who is also the chairman of Schenectady County's Republican Party, explained in his remarks that he felt “adamant and strongly” that the resolution go forward.

The text of the resolution, read into the record by Wierzbowski, accused the Gazette of “unjustly characterizing law enforcement in a disturbing and detrimental way,” which was “inaccurate, demeaning, and hateful,” before going on to demand an apology by the Gazette.  

The resolution further said that the purpose of the cartoon was to “incite anger in the community and further perpetuate negative feelings” toward law enforcement, and even called upon federal hate crime laws to be amended to include police as a protected class.

After reading the resolution, Wierzbowski said that the cartoon had made her “sick to her stomach.”  Not to be one-upped, fellow Republican councilman Jim Martin, sporting a blue lives matter mask, called the cartoon an “awful, awful thing to publish” and “completely inaccurate.”

The 2018 cartoon, which did not prompt
a resolution of denunciation 

Koetzle said that the “unfair, not true” cartoon “perpetuated hate,” but more interestingly asked a rhetorical question of the Gazette’s publisher and editor, “if it wasn’t law enforcement,  and if it was anything else that you did that to would it fly?  Why’s it only okay when its law enforcement?”  It appears that Koetzle’s memory is shorter than most, having forgotten that the Gazette just two years ago attracted national outrage after publishing, in the midst of the family separation scandal, a right-wing cartoon depicting an MS-13 gangster at the border with a baby saying “How could you separate a loving father from his newborn son?”.  No resolution condemning the Gazette was passed by the Glenville Town Board at the time of that cartoon.  Nor was one passed by any of the county's Democratic-controlled municipalities, who might have heard of freedom of the press at some point…

The hysterical outrage over a cartoon drawing attention to police violence is in contrast to the lack of any outrage expressed by Koetzle, Wierzbowski and Martin over police violence itself.  No one should be surprised to see this from the county’s Republican chair and his top two lieutenants, why would they be any different from their party’s leadership statewide and nationally?

Solomon Syed OUT at Spectrum News: What’s next for SoloSy?

Tuesday brought news, broken by the Times Union, that Spectrum News’s Solomon Syed will be leaving the network.

Solomon, a Niskayuna native and the brother of town supervisor Yasmine Syed, with whom he shared a dorm in college, is known in the Schenectady County town for his hotheaded temperament, having last year lashed out at the teenage daughter of Yasmine's Democratic opponent at an event hosted by the town’s Co-Op grocery store.  Solomon was also, in 2017, involved with his mother in an unhinged Facebook fight, operating under the thinly veiled pseudonym Solo Sy, against numerous town residents in defense of Yasmine.  Both incidents prompted complaints to Spectrum management by town residents, although they are not believed to have played a role in his departure.

In the Times Union’s article, the sneaker-obsessed 38 year old recommended that those interested in his next move follow him on Twitter or Instagram.

While Solomon does have a law degree from Quinnipiac, he is not licensed to practice in New York, making any such career shift unlikely. 

Some town residents speculate that a shift into Republican politics or right-wing media is probable, although others believe it is more likely that he will land in a communications gig at Ellis Hospital, where his father is Chief of Surgery.  Ellis previously hired Yasmine to be their father's "operations and practice manager."

One potential political landing spot for Solomon is the administration of controversial, Twitter-hooked Rensselaer County Executive Steve McLaughlin, who is in need of communications help as he heads into a surely contentious 2021 re-election fight, and has had friendly interviews with Solomon in the past.  The two could pair nicely if they split social media trolling duties between platforms..

CHAIRMAN CLUELESS: Ostrelich, county health chair, admits she has no idea what is going on at Health Department during pandemic

 

Schenectady County Democrats were on edge Tuesday evening after the sudden departure of Public Health Director Lisa Ayers was compounded by a train-wreck interview on the topic given by County Legislature Health Committee Chair Michelle Ostrelich.

No public announcement of Ayers's departure was made, and rumors began to circulate widely after employees received correspondence signed by a new "interim public health director."  This led to the Daily Gazette's Pete DeMola contacting Ostrelich, the county health department's chief oversight officer, for comment, to which she "seemed unaware" of the situation

Ostrelich's grasp of her job's duties was thrown further into doubt when she told DeMola that she was "unclear on the process for hiring a new director".  So not only was she unaware that the director of the largest department she oversees had left their vital position during the deadliest pandemic in a century, she also has no idea how to replace them...

In her capacity as health committee chair, Ostrelich oversees the county's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which had already been derided by The Daily Gazette as "unacceptable", due to its minimalist approach, saying that "local leaders haven’t shown them how to wear a mask, or discussed the need for social distancing or even offered public condolences to the families of those who have died. "

We really shouldn’t be shocked at incompetence from Ostrelich, an ex-Bush Republican who did not vote in the 2016 presidential election, according to Board of Elections records, but the lack of surprise doesn't make the situation any less concerning.  As Bob Herbert of the New York Times said about Michelle's favorite 21st Century president, George W., "There are few things more dangerous than a mixture of power, arrogance and incompetence"....

(Open Meeting) Lawlessness: White male member of Niskayuna's Racial Equity Task Force convenes ANOTHER secret meeting

The Observer has learned that Jon Lemelin, the white male who has self-appointed himself as leader of the Town of Niskayuna's Racial Equity Task Force, has called a second secret meeting of the group.  This time, violating the spirit of the state’s Open Meeting Law by telling the Task Force's members that only seven of them may participate - thus avoiding a quorum in an attempt to skirt legal requirements that the meeting be open to the public, and that minutes of the meeting be kept for taxpayers to review.

As you may recall, last week, Lemelin called a meeting of the Task Force's entire 15-person membership under the guise of socializing, a clearcut violation of the Open Meeting Law.

Lemelin summoned only six of the task force's members to last night's meeting in a cynical attempt to avoid falling under the Open Meetings Law's jurisdiction by lacking a quorum.  This is despite having called the meeting for the purpose of preparing the task force's business, which the Court of Appeals has held should be subject to public scrutiny in Orange Pub. v. Newburgh, affirming the Appellate Division in finding that "every affirmative act of a public official as it relates to and is within the scope of one's official duties is a matter of public concern" and that "it is the entire decision-making process that the Legislature intended to affect by the enactment of [the Open Meetings Law]" (60 AD 2d 409, 415).

Lemelin's decision to hold another meeting is particularly shocking given that he has bragged to town residents of having convinced the Daily Gazette that “there’s nothing to see here” regarding his first illegally convened meeting.  It is also took place amidst the continued outcry demanding the removal of all white members of the task force, as detailed in last week's article, and rumors of a new, thus far unidentified effort to sue the town over the racial quotas outlined in Councilwoman Rosemarie Jaquith’s resolution establishing the Task Force (Resolution 2020-189). 

The week's events have left many puzzled, as they so directly contradict Lemelin's past statements on government transparency and the Task Force's leadership.  Just two weeks ago, in a letter read at a public session of July 28th's Town Board meeting, Lemelin said that he "believe[s] that this task force should be led by People of Color, specifically African-American members of our community," but within days he was scheduling secret meetings and maneuvering to take over the Task Force.  Why the sudden sea change on such a basic and fundamental issue?

The secret meetings, and calculated attempts to undermine the state's Open Meetings Law, also come in sharp contrast to the image Lemelin cultivated for himself as a government transparency activist throughout 2019, when he spoke at Town Board meetings in June, July, and November to demand various changes to the town's ethics code, criminal statutes, and meeting practices which he claimed would promote transparency, despite the suggestions falling largely outside of town jurisdiction.

Lemelin's November remarks on the topic of record keeping at Town Board meetings are particularly of note, having said "its in the interest of transparency" for the privilege of the floor remarks of non-governmental personnel "to be documented in the meeting minutes", and that he "would hate to see the town go in the opposite direction and actually withdraw transparency".  So to be clear, Lemelin believes that the musings of non-governmental officials must be documented in the official record for public scrutiny, but he himself convenes unannounced meetings of governmental bodies, of which no record whatsoever is maintained for the taxpayers to scrutinize?

The issues raised by this situation are numerous.  Why does Lemelin continue to flaunt the law?  Who appointed Lemelin - a white man - to lead this task force?  Who is empowering Lemelin to take these actions, that clearly violate the spirit, and sometimes the letter, of the Open Meetings Law?  And most importantly: Where are town officials and why aren’t they speaking out?  

There are some good people on this task force and they want to do good work. However, the Observer questions Lemelin’s motivations.  We call on the Racial Equity Task Force's membership to reject Lemelin’s (and others behind the scenes) manipulative power grab and meet out in the open.  We also urge town decision makers to wake up, pay attention, do their jobs and give the Task Force a scope of work, rather than leaving them to work from Councilwoman Jaquith's brief resolution, which does not provide any guidance for Task Force members. 

Protecting the interest of the taxpayers by scrutinizing a government-sanctioned group with no clear jurisdiction, which is seemingly being co-opted by a politically motivated leader who only respects the law when it’s convenient doesn’t make anyone a racist.  Not doing so makes you incompetent - or worse.  

Broken System: Nisky Racial Equity Task Force convened for secret meeting by white man

The Observer has learned that Niskayuna's Racial Equity Task Force met last night in an unannounced, secret meeting convened by white, male panel member Jon Lemelin.

The meeting, which as of 10 PM on Wednesday evening was not listed on the town's meeting schedule as legally required,

The Town's meeting schedule as of 10 PM
on Wednesday night, with no public notification of the
Racial Equity Task Force meeting (click to enlarge)

violated New York's Open Meetings Law, which mandates 72 hours notice of any meetings be given to the public and news media.  The law unambiguously applies to all public bodies, and committees or subcommittees thereof, no matter whether elected or appointed, at all levels of government in New York.  

The template circulated by Niskayuna
schools alumni (click to enlarge)

Lemelin's appointment, along with the committee's other white members, set off a social media firestorm in Niskayuna, particularly amongst college-aged alumni of Niskayuna High School, who expressed outrage that qualified applicants of color were passed over.  Two alumni organized a campaign urging Town Board members to vote against confirmation of the Task Force's membership, circulating a template to be used while writing e-mails to Town Board members.

The Task Force's first meeting was legally scheduled for August 26th, as noted on the town's schedule, but the group was convened last night, in violation of state law, at the insistence of Lemelin.  This left residents, reporters, and interested people of color unaware that the meeting was taking place, and rendered viewing the meeting impossible for non-members, as no public video stream was made available.

At a time when residents are calling for the white members of the Task Force to resign, it's baffling that one white male seems to have been put in charge of the group.  Who empowered him?  Why wasn't the public told about this meeting?

Federal suit: Niskayuna Police delayed medical care to teen with cracked skull

Michael Stevens, Niskayuna’s Deputy Chief of Police, who was conspicuously passed over for the department’s top job after Chief Dan McManus’s mysterious suspension last week, is named in a previously settled federal lawsuit as having ignored the urgent medical needs of a 16 year old petty larceny detainee with a cracked skull. 

Frenyea

The 16 year old, referred to as S.A.M. in case files due to their age at the time of the incident, suffered “severe and permanent” damage as a result of being slammed head-first into the pavement outside the Consaul Road Hannaford by an off-duty Schenectady patrolman who spotted S.A.M. leaving the store with beer, which the fleeing teen had already dropped prior to being caught by the pursuing plain-clothed, off-duty officer.

S.A.M. was subsequently placed into custody by Stevens and fellow Niskayuna patrolman Todd Frenyea, who later became president of Niskayuna's police union and is now a sergeant.  The two Niskayuna officers then transported the teen to the department’s station at Niskayuna Town Hall rather than Ellis Hospital, despite the 16 year old suffering from injuries severe enough that they ended up in intensive care for multiple days afterwards.

Stevens in 2018, photographed
by the Daily Gazette

The suit alleges that Stevens and Frenyea’s delaying of medical attention for the teen contributed to the severity of their injuries, a claim supported by the City of Schenectady in its own crossclaim against the Town of Niskayuna, Stevens, and Frenyea.

The claim, settled for $112,500 by the City of Schenectady prior to trial, would have been much costlier to Niskayuna taxpayers had the incident taken place after Governor Cuomo signed the Andrew Kearse Act this June.  The new law, passed overwhelmingly by the state legislature in response to the in-custody death of a Schenectady man, affirms that police have a duty to provide or obtain medical assistance for those in need of care who are under arrest, and provides a specific civil cause of action against officers and departments who fail to exercise due care.

Stevens is deeply connected in Republican politics through his brother, Scott, a senior Republican operative implicated by New York state investigators in a campaign finance scheme to improperly finance attack ads in “several senate races” during the 2012 general election.  As the Republican nominee for Town Board in 2007, Scott responded to then-Sergeant Fran Wall's sexual discrimination lawsuit by speaking in support of the police department as "all good people, all good cops."

Ignoring a teenage detainee's medical emergency seems like a decent hypothesis for why Stevens got passed up for Acting Chief while the Board tries to bring forward much needed reform in a post-George Floyd era...