2010 Census Reveals Westchester’s Sweeping Population Changes

CURRENT AFFAIRS

      If you think census numbers are of scholarly interest only to statisticians and demographers, you’ve got another think coming. Careful analysis of the 2010 Census results being dribbled out by the Census Bureau reveals some startling and unanticipated trends. The most notable statistic is the degree to which Westchester’s population balance has been affected by international migration and high fertility rates among minority groups, especially Hispanics.

What the Numbers Tell Us       

Today, Hispanics are the fastest-growing population group in Westchester. In the 20 years between 1990 and 2010, the county’s Latinos grew by an astonishing 140 percent and Asians by 60 percent.

      Hispanics constituted only nine percent of the county’s population in 1990. That number grew to 16 percent in 2000, displacing blacks as the largest minority group. Another decade later, the county’s Latino population stands at an impressive 22 percent.

      Blacks increased by a mere five percent between 1990 and 2010. (The Census Bureau accepts the designations Hispanic or Latino as equivalent, but prefers the term black to African-American.)

      In 1990, the number of residents identifying themselves as white--Westchester’s largest ethnic or racial group--constituted 79 percent of the county’s population. By 2010, the white population dropped an unexpectedly large 22 percentage points. Whites now comprise 57 percent of Westchester’s population.

Some Westchester Basics

On March 7, 1788, five years after the end of the Revolutionary War, Westchester County was created and divided into 20 towns. Today, it is made up of 19 towns, many still with their original boundaries and each nominally administered by a supervisor. Within the towns, six cities and 20 villages were added, each administered by a mayor. Three Westchester towns--Mount Kisco, Scarsdale and Harrison--are now in a separate category described as a "town/village.” 

      Administrative nomenclature can be downright confusing. For example, there's a separate Ossining town and an Ossining village, a separate Mamaroneck town and a Mamaroneck village, and a separate Pelham town and a Pelham village, as well as a Pelham Manor village. Two villages are shared by towns: Briarcliff Manor is split between Ossining and Mount Pleasant, Mamaroneck between the towns of Rye and Mamaroneck.

      Westchester’s area is 500 square miles, 433 of which are land and 67 are water. At the time of the 2010 Census, its population was 949,113. In order of population size, Westchester's six cities are Yonkers (also the largest in area), New Rochelle, Mount Vernon, White Plains, Peekskill (the smallest in area) and Rye.

      Among Westchester’s towns, Bedford and Yorktown are the largest in area; Pelham is the smallest. Greenburgh is the most populous; Pound Ridge has the smallest population. Among villages, Port Chester is the most populous; Buchanan has the smallest population.

Population Distribution

Realtors don’t like to admit it, but choice of a community by house- or apartment-seekers is often based on two factors: the racial or ethnic complexion of a community and the strength of its school system. The latter figure, of course, is not measured by the federal census.

      The “whitest” Westchester city is Rye, with an 85-percent white population. Among towns, Pound Ridge (94%) and Lewisboro (90%) are the leaders, closely followed by Somers, North Salem and New Castle. Mamaroneck, North Castle, Eastchester and Yorktown also are towns with white populations of more than 80 percent.

      Among villages, Larchmont (88%) and Bronxville (87%) have the largest percentage of whites. Pelham Manor, Briarcliff Manor, Irvington, Rye Brook and Croton-on-Hudson also have white populations larger than 80 percent.

      Hispanics are the leading minority in the city of Peekskill, making up 37 percent of the population, with Yonkers a close second at 35 percent. (Minorities are defined as persons of any race or ethnic group other than non-Hispanic, single-race whites.)

      The village of Port Chester, 30-percent Hispanic in 1990, doubled its Hispanic population in 20 years. Sleepy Hollow (51%), Ossining (41%), Elmsford (38%) and Mount Kisco (35%) also had impressive gains.

      Among cities, the highest percentage of blacks is Mount Vernon’s 61 percent, trailed by Peekskill’s 21 percent and New Rochelle’s 18% percent. Among villages, Elmsford has the largest percentage of blacks (20%), followed by Ossining (16%) and Tuckahoe (10%).

      Asians comprise six percent of the population of the cities of White Plains, Rye and Yonkers. The village of Ardsley claims the highest percentage of Asians (17%), followed by Scarsdale (13%).and Elmsford (11%). (Asians include Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, Pakistanis, Indians, Filipinos and Pacific Islanders.)

      Native Americans make up an almost insignificant percentage of Westchester’s population (0.1%). Recent news stories alleging that many Hispanics are describing themselves on census forms as Native American are not borne out by census results. In 1990, Native Americans numbered 1,405; by 2010, that figure had dropped to 1,141.

Population Density

Density of a community’s population is a function of lot size and the number of multiple dwellings. Overall, Westchester's population density is 2,193 persons per square mile.

      Mount Vernon is the most densely populated city, followed by Yonkers and New Rochelle. Rye is the least densely populated city. Eastchester is the most densely populated town, Pound Ridge the least dense.

      Among villages, Port Chester is the most densely populated, followed closely by Tuckahoe. The latter’s 6,486 residents are crammed into only six-tenths of a square mile, making it almost as densely populated as the city of Yonkers.

      Other densely populated villages are Pelham, Ossining and Bronxville. Briarcliff Manor is the least densely populated village, trailed by Buchanan and Croton-on-Hudson.

Population Growth

In 1900, Westchester was home to 184,257 persons. One hundred years later, its population had grown more than fivefold. Much of this growth occurred in the southern part of the county. During the first two decades of the 20th century, the cities of Mount Vernon, New Rochelle, White Plains and Yonkers all more than doubled their populations.

      The fastest-growing Westchester community in the 20th century, however, was the town/village of Scarsdale with a population increase of almost twentyfold.

      Following World War II, Westchester’s population soared by 29 percent between 1950 and 1960. Towns and villages alike saw rapid growth. The town of Yorktown grew 248 percent. Other big population jumps in this period include the villages of Ardsley (129%), Rye Brook (128%), and Briarcliff Manor (105%).

      Population changes, however, are not always in the plus column. Between 1970 and 1990, Westchester County’s population actually went down. In the 1980 Census, all six Westchester cities lost population, as did all villages with the exception of Briarcliff Manor.

      The population of Bronxville has gone down steadily since 1940. Mt. Vernon’s population similarly declined after reaching a high point in 1960. Yonkers reached a population high point in 1970 and has not attained that number again.

      Growth and decline are perfectly natural. Communities tend to go through cycles described as youth, a period characterized by growth, middle age, a period of retrenchment, and old age, a time when older housing stocks need restoration or replacement; when traffic patterns change and neighborhoods decline.

Population Trends

A multicultural community with a racial and ethnic composition not unlike that of the United States, Westchester’s major population groups were revealed in the 2010 Census to be 57 percent white, 22 percent Hispanic, 13 percent black and five percent Asian. 

      What no census can reveal is the embarrassing statistic that Westchester County’s administrative structure is glaringly redundant. Its property taxes are the highest of the 3,141 counties in the U.S. Moreover, New York has some of the highest property taxes of any state in the nation. The effect high taxes plus heretofore unchecked annual tax rate increases have had on population growth in Westchester is evidenced by the “white flight” that has taken place over the past 20 years.

      Although the federal government is responsible for controlling immigration, the federal census counts residents--not their citizenship. Illegal immigrants pay no taxes and are a considerable drain on social services and the economy. Unfortunately, we have no firm count of their numbers either in the nation or in Westchester.

      The bottom line is this: Barring a change in national immigration policy and fertility rates, if population trends continue as they have in the recent past, by the time of the next census, 2020, one in every three Westchester residents will be a Latino. Westchester’s minorities will become the new majority, and its dwindling white population will be a minority.

Croton’s Mayor Sells America Short

OP ED 

Lately, Leo Wiegman, Mayor of Croton-on-Hudson, seems to suffer from a chronic case of foot-in-mouth disease whenever he speaks in connection with the celebration of a national holiday.

The most recent example of this egregious tendency occurs in his posting on a new addition to the already rather long list of existing Croton blogs. In this, Croton’s mayor celebrated the 235th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence by awkwardly extolling the virtues of interdependence.

Mayor Wiegman’s example of this nation’s global interdependence is his purchase of a pair of wooden Adirondack chairs made in China. Based on the photo of two  chairs that accompanies his message,  his interdependence is a one-way street.

As a sometime woodworker and to judge by the number of knots visible in the photo, it seems that the mayor got a pair of chairs made of low-grade lumber. In return, China got still-solid American dollars that it continues to regard as highly desirable.

To avoid any charge of misinterpretation of his twisted logic, the quote below is taken directly from Mayor Wiegman's Independence Day message:

“Why not celebrate the freedom we have to be interdependent? Interdependence has never been easier. Interdependence has never been more important. Interdependence is also pervasive.

“So let's embrace interdependence. So why the chairs in the photo?

“Someone in China cut the wood pieces for the nice Adirondack chairs that we just bought and assembled in our backyard just so we enjoy this weekend’s barbecue. I might add, someone in China also packed up the kit beautifully! The chairs were affordable and easy to assemble using the enclosed the pictogram instructions and just one screwdriver.

“Long live interdependence! Long live our liberty to be as interdependent on each other as our hearts may desire!”

I would remind Mayor Wiegman that at the same time some low-wage worker in China was cutting the wood for his chairs, someone in the United States was applying for unemployment benefits because the factory in which they worked making chair parts had been shuttered.

I would also remind Mayor Wiegman that at the same time some low wage worker in China was so carefully packing the component pieces of his chairs, someone in the United States was standing on a bread line or a soup kitchen line because the factory in which they had worked packing chair kits had been closed.

Adding insult to injury,  the materials in which Mayor Wiegman’s chairs were so beautifully packed were undoubtedly made from recycled American cardboard waste shipped to China in the empty ships that had brought the chairs as cargo from China to the U.S.

To anyone who would base a national value system on the interdependence of China and Walmart, I would remind them of the quotation frequently attributed to John Ruskin: “There is hardly anything in the world that someone cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this person's lawful prey.”

So how about a few tears of commiseration, Mr. Mayor, for the innocent American victims of your vaunted system of interdependence?

‘An Enemy of the People’

CURRENT AFFAIRS

The above head is a borrowing from the Henrik Ibsen/Arthur Miller play about honesty, morality and truth-telling. It aptly describes Mayor Leo A.W. Wiegman, the writer of an “open letter to Croton residents.” printed in the June 2, 2011, issue of Croton-on Hudson’s newspaper of record, The Gazette.

What is peculiar about his letter is that an unsigned verbatim version of the text also appears on the local Democratic Party’s website. In the past, once an election campaign was behind us, it was traditional for the Mayor to abandon party labels and to govern and report to the people as their mayor, not as the titular head of a political party. This administration has insisted on stubbornly maintaining a combative us-versus-them attitude toward residents ever since its election two years ago.

Misrepresentation has become the order of the day, and is now a common practice. Aside from the letter’s obvious objective of keeping political animosities alive in the village and rubbing salt in still-open wounds, several of its statements play hob with the truth. The following numbered excerpts from the offensive letter are followed by my refutation of each distortion, misrepresentation or outright lie.

(1) Wiegman: “We did adopt zoning legislation to encourage commercial property owners in Harmon to improve their properties.”

Advocates of Harmon rezoning never presented a single scrap of evidence that a market exists for cramped, walk-up, virtually slumlike apartments over ground-floor retail stores in a commercially zoned area. For Mayor Wiegman to describe such apartments with inadequate parking spaces and no green space as an improvement is laughable.

(2) Wiegman: “Unfortunately for all of us, a very few residents have chosen to fight these changes in court rather than at the ballot box.”

The NY State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) was enacted in 1975 and requires municipalities to prepare or cause to be prepared an environmental impact statement when changes impacting the environment are proposed. Each municipality is responsible for the propriety of their actions. When municipalities break the law, as Croton did, no agency other than the municipality itself or an alert citizenry polices its actions.

 If an improper determination has been made by a municipality and citizens can demonstrate that they may be harmed by it, the only redress stipulated by the law is for them to take legal action under Article 78. No significance can be attached to the number of citizens bringing an action. Has Mayor Wiegman forgotten the far-reaching national impact of Brown vs. Board of Education, which involved a small number of litigants?

Mayor Wiegman is both uninformed and disingenuous in his suggestion that the proper avenue for ensuring compliance is the ballot box when an Article 78 action is the sole remedy available to citizens. An election is not the proper medium for making changes in legislation affecting property rights.

(3) Wiegman: “The litigation is preventing many commercial property owners in the village from beginning renovations that would improve the commercial ratables, (4) while costing the village thousands in litigation expenses.”

I challenge Mayor Wiegman to publicly identify the “many commercial property owners in the village” who were prevented by the Arttcle 78 action from beginning renovations.

It is insensitive and disingenuous for Mayor Wiegman to accuse those who support the Article 78 action of engaging in barratry—the persistent instigation of groundless lawsuits. It is also fatuous for Mr. Wiegman to portray those who endorse the Article 78 action as troublemakers bent on harming the village by bleeding it white with legal expenses.

As for the legal expenses the Village has incurred, I would remind Mayor Wiegman and the Village Board they were warned by many citizens that the law they were about to enact was defective, yet they chose to ignore the warning.

 It may be a bitter pill for the Mayor to swallow, but New York‘s court system has consistently ruled in favor of strict compliance with the provisions of SEQRA, as Judge Albert Lorenzo has so emphatically ruled in this case. This administration has no one to blame but itself.

Croton’s commercial property owners immediately saw through the administration’s Harmon zoning changes as a transparent scheme. After commercial property owners made the costly structural alterations described as “improvements,” the administration would then raise assessments and impose higher taxes. This would enable the administration to reduce taxes for a more numerous bloc of taxpayers—residential voters.

It's about Time

OP ED

My recent screed about the reasons why the “Ins” deserve to be the “Outs” was posted before the replay of the Village Board meeting of March 7 was available.

At that meeting, after invoking “market forces” as important in attracting desirable new businesses, Trustee Ian Murtaugh dropped “market forces” like a hot potato and revealed some surprising information--namely that in the administration’s eyes there are “good” businesses and “bad” businesses.

He proceeded to condemn nail salons, pizza parlors, gasoline stations and auto repair shops--honorable businesses all--as undesirable additions in Croton. One is forced to ask Trustee Murtaugh whether “market forces” was merely a catchphrase that momentarily caught his fancy and prompted his gratuitous but self-indicting comments.

Croton’s Village Code does not give the Village Board the power to arrogate unto itself the right to pass judgment on the desirability or undesirability of a business, save for those already judged and convicted without trial in the Gateway Law, such as fast-food establishments (i.e., McDonald’s, the No. 1 employer of local youth), automobile dealerships (magnet businesses that attract customers from a wide area) and parking lots (i.e., potential competitors of the Village).

If memory serves, the last nation to decide what shops will open where was the Soviet Union, and we all know the outcome of that mistaken policy. I know of no one who bemoans the departure of that benighted country and its despicable system from the company of nations.

Isn’t it time for those who live in Harmon and who are members of boards and committees (and thus could theoretically profit from the unsubstantiated benefits they are so shamelessly touting at every opportunity) to stop endorsing Harmon rezoning and recuse themselves?

It's time for proponents of Harmon rezoning to stop playing prosecutor, judge and jury.

Why the “Ins” Should Be “Outs”

OP ED

There are many nagging issues in the upcoming local election largely revolving around the quality of leadership this village has been getting from an overbearing, inconsiderate administration. For years, arrogant local politicians and planners have closed their eyes to the fact that Croton is unlike other Hudson River villages.

In 1924, Westchester County purchased Croton Point. In 1970, a federal court ordered the tottering Penn-Central Railroad into bankruptcy. Both events were severe blows to tax revenues, removing large chunks of property from the tax rolls.

Ever since 1967, when the limited-access Croton Expressway opened, Croton has been a virtual backwater. Not unexpectedly, most Croton residents are happy without thousands of automobiles funneling through its narrow main north-south thoroughfare, Riverside Avenue. Village planners still refuse to acknowledge these realities.

Conjectural “gateways’ will not bring customers to Croton so long as it lacks so-called magnet businesses to attract them. Croton also still does not have a detailed inventory of its commercial properties, unoccupied or occupied. Nor has it formed a committee to encourage new businesses to come to Croton or to assist existing businesses in trouble. It did create a mysterious substance called “Green Tape” to expedite applications—yet the Zoning Board still meets only once a month.

Croton has five commercial areas, thanks in part to the 1933 marriage of Croton and Harmon. Instead of integrated planning for all commercial areas, Croton’s politicians recently violated basic planning theory and attempted to Balkanize the Village by concentrating on one commercial area, Harmon--until stopped in their tracks by legal action. The high-handed self-confidence of Croton’s amateur planners makes it the laughing stock of knowledgeable planning professionals.

The current administration also has had a penchant for hiring consultants to tell the Village what it already knows. Recently, it allotted a cool $97,000 for a compilation of information, much of which the village had at its fingertips. Moreover, such reports are rendered moot by the turmoil in the Middle East and the soaring cost of oil and gasoline, making it impossible to predict parking usage patterns. And it turns out that the projected huge multistory parking garage is far beyond the financial reach of the Village. Embarrassingly, someone neglected to tell the contractor about Croton’s most sacred cow, “the view.”

But the most recent overbearing and ill-considered action has been the administration’s tactless and clumsy attempt to fob off on its citizens a foolishly cruel local solution to a countywide problem--overpopulation by white-tailed deer--and to do it by allowing bowhunting in Croton’s nature preserves. Deer are hardly Croton’s most pressing problem.

Deer have become a nuisance--but a nuisance and a hazard of our own creation. In 1930, the white-tailed deer population of the U.S. was about 300,000. Today, it is estimated at 300 million. Such explosive growth is the result of the disappearance of predators, conservation efforts, demands by hunters, and the growth of suburbia.

Not until an uproar erupted, largely fueled by members of their own party, did the bloodthirsty members of this administration grudgingly (and unconvincingly) backpedal on bowhunting. These are people who will rush their pets to a vet at the first cough or sneeze, but who think nothing of consigning sentient wild animals to cruel, inhumane slow deaths while risking life and limb of users of these same nature preserves..

Having been a registered FDR Democrat for 72 years, I say to the bumbling local management: It’s my party and my Village, too. Heavy-handed treatment of party members and the Village itself represent unforgivable failures of leadership. The time has come for an overbearing and inconsiderate administration to seek other employment. And please take your annoying electronic timer with you when you leave.

Animal Cruelty as Public Policy, 6: A Naked Attempt to Politicize the Bow-Hunting Controversy

OP ED

On Friday, October 1, the local Democratic committee issued a peculiar press release on its website. In common practice, the Mayor and elected trustees submerge their political allegiances and affiliations upon election and are supposed to serve the best interests of all citizens without regard for race, creed, color or political affiliation.

This strange 159-word “release” consists of five sentences so pointedly serving political aims as to be risible. The sentence-by-sentence text of this “release” follows with matching comment about its purpose and underlying attempt to influence community behavior.

RELEASE: On Monday, September 27, 2010, the Mayor proposed and the Village Board agreed unanimously, that further action on bow hunting be postponed until the Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) has completed its report and conducted public information sessions.
COMMENT: Any statement about the Village Board’s intentions should properly emanate from that body on the Village website. Why has the local Democratic committee taken upon itself to make an announcement of a decision by the Village Board under the guise of a public service announcement? The answer to this question is clear: The Democratic committee is anxious to keep attendance at the October 4 meeting low, thus giving the lie to their proclaimed interest in hearing citizens concerns.

RELEASE: The Board discussed the proposal and informally agreed to announce the decision at the regularly scheduled board meeting of October 4. This statement (the release) is being made in advance of that meeting to assure the public that the board would NOT be coming to a final decision on bow hunting on the 4th.
COMMENT: Note the use of the weasel word “informally” to characterize the decision. The sole purpose of this “release” is to discourage participation in the October 4 Village Board meeting by the broad spectrum of angry anti-bow hunting Croton citizens that characterized earlier meetings. The Democratic committee is running scared and anxious to tamp down the broad-spectrum surge of anti-bow hunting sentiment expressed at earlier meetings and in the letters pages of The Gazette. It wants the current bow-hunting fiasco to be forgotten well before the next election.

RELEASE: The purpose of these sessions will be both to allow community discussion as well as to listen to and address any concerns.
COMMENT: If the Village Board is truly interested in citizens’ concerns, the upcoming meeting on October 4 would be an excellent place for them to continue to sample the broad scope of residents’ attitudes and statements.

RELEASE: The Village Board concluded that the CAC has not succeeded in educating the public as they thought they had.
COMMENT: This is a revealing and damning choice of words. The citizens of Croton do not need “educating,” if that is the purpose of any public sessions to be held by the CAC. As used here, ‘educating” sounds suspiciously like brainwashing. What Croton needs is a CAC made up of open-minded citizens with some expertise in conservation—not a group of zealots with their minds already made up and bent on “educating” the rest of us. The fundamental truism is that bow hunting of any kind is inappropriate for a community as small as Croton. That position should be a given in finding a solution.

RELEASE: Through these public education sessions al parties will be able to learn more about the environment impacts from Croton’s deer population and all the options to fix those impacts.
COMMENT: The impact of a migrating deer population in numbers larger than the land can carry stems from various causes and has been felt all over Westchester for many years. A valid solution does not lie within the grasp of individual communities but must be a coordinated countywide effort with a maximum chance of success without animal cruelty. Damage to the environment can easily be repaired once a practicable solution is found. Croton’s presently proposed puny effort would have no genuine effect of the deer population of northwestern Westchester other than to give politicians an opportunity to claim falsely that positive action had been taken.

For Croton Democrats, it’s just one gaffe after another. The latest imbroglio makes me embarrassed to be a Democrat.

Animal Cruelty as Public Policy, 5: Conflicting Interests, Bullying and Official Cowardice

OP ED

No one disagrees that overpopulation of deer is a problem everywhere in Westchester or that something should be done about it. The central issue is whether medieval inhumane hunting methods in which animals are cruelly injured and bleed to death is the way to attack the problem in Anno Domini 2010.

The Village Board’s Sept. 20 postponement of consideration of a local deer bow hunting law for a mere two weeks would be laughable if it were not a clear indication that the administration is suddenly aware that they are moving too fast. The public sees no reason for the unseemly haste with which this unpopular legislation is being railroaded through. What has been glaringly lacking is thoroughgoing public discussion of such pressing issues as alternatives, public safety, privacy and risk management, to name but a few.

In Croton, the process of approving new laws is a surreal extravaganza of Marxian proportions—not Karl Marx but the Marx Brothers. Burlesque would be a better word to describe the rampant conflict of interest in the process. Although Fran Allen had pointed out the lack of supporting evidence to the Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC), three Committee members, including Trustees Olver and Murtaugh, found no inconsistency in the proposed change to Croton’s hunting ban.

After their positive vote and undeterred by the clearly evident conflict of interest, two of the WAC members (Messrs. Olver and Murtaugh) will take off their WAC hats and don new hats as Village Board members. “Imagine that,” they will exclaim. “The WAC sees no conflict between deer hunting and waterfront revitalization. Now let’s pass this law quickly!”

In another classic display of a conflict of interest, at least two members of the Conservation Advisory Committee, which proposed this inhumane and dubious solution to the deer problem, were allowed to speak interminably at Village Board meetings, to spread inconsistencies about deer counts, and lie that neighboring communities embrace a similar law. The Village Board has yet to explain why proponents receive unlimited time at meetings to “educate” the public about the glories of bow hunting deer, while opponents are strictly limited to five minutes.

Fran Allen, who is both a national and a local treasure and who has spent her working life in the service of logic and the scientific method, carefully explained her vote as based on a total lack of scientific evidence to support a decision either way. Not content with having easily won a 3 to 1 vote in the WAC, Trustee Olver, in a Stalinesque ultimatum, then abandoned all decorum and publicly demanded that Fran Allen be removed from the chair she has held these many years. Later he demanded that she resign.

Ignoring an opportunity to apologize to Ms. Allen, Trustee Olver resumed his unrelenting attack on her. Trustee Olver has frequently exhibited an annoying penchant for patronizingly lecturing Crotonites and tediously belaboring the obvious. Apparently, a lifetime spent on the global public purse explaining to villagers in the hinterlands of the Third World how a flush toilet works has distorted his perception of Croton voters’ level of intelligence, making his frequent absences from meetings more welcome than his presences.

Ernest Hemingway once defined courage as “grace under pressure.” During this embarrassing performance by Trustee Olver, the Mayor and other Village Board members, three able-bodied men and a woman, sat stiffly, staring straight ahead, each with the same grim expression on their Great Stone Faces. No one said, “Just a damn minute, Mr. Olver, a public meeting is neither the time nor the place to be attacking Fran Allen for her vote.” In the face of a cowardly, bullying assault on the character and integrity of an unpaid longtime volunteer, it is obvious that courage is a commodity in extremely short supply with Croton’s paid governing body.

It so happens that voters denied Mr. Olver reelection in March of this year, and he was appointed by Mayor Leo Wiegman to finish what's left of Ms. Restuccia’s term. Presumably, he serves at the pleasure of the Mayor. Mr. Olver has given every indication that he wishes to commit political suicide. It’s your move, Mr. Mayor.