Ltr to Editor: Retail at Chappaqua Crossing a big mistake for smaller gains than claimed

With 86 comments since publication
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
by Steve Coyle

Since my letter to the Town Board of May 10, 2013 explaining to board members why I believe it would be a mistake to approve the retail and grocery proposal for Chappaqua Crossing, no one from the Town Board has solicited my opinion or ideas. I find this odd, in that I have spent considerable time studying the documents related to the proposed development and given that I have made my living for the past 25 years by investing in real estate.

I am also surprised that Mr. Chapin’s letter on the benefits of a supermarket and retail at Chappaqua Crossing did not openly discuss the findings of the impact study commissioned by the Town.  This report was delivered on May 17, 2013, and contains a number of startling numbers and facts.  (Note: published this and it can be found here: 

Trees and wetlands

This study found that the number of trees that would be removed from the Chappaqua Crossing project has increased from 219 to 872.  Further, the loss of these trees will result in a significant increase in moisture (i.e., water run-off from the site).  The Town’s study suggests that to replace the tree diameter of the 872 trees that are lost, 2,900 new trees would need to be planted.  The proposed landscaping plan has 1,020 trees.  Likewise, wetlands will be removed and relocated.  While the developer proposes increasing the size of some of the wetlands, the Town’s study suggests that wetlands and wetland buffers will decrease by 50%!  This could further disrupt and increase water patterns. 


Similarly, the Town’s traffic study raises concerns.  Firstly, the Town did not commission a traffic study.  Instead, they commissioned a review of the traffic impact study that was prepared by the developer’s consultant.  I believe that this was a mistake, as it appears to have relied on the traffic counts in that study.  As I stated in my earlier open letter to the Town Board, the actual traffic counts will be much higher if the retail project is successful and if it actually meets the developer’s pro forma (a/k/a their underwriting). 

As I suggested in my earlier open letter, I believe that these counts are too low.  Secondly, the developer’s own study identified seven intersections that would be negatively impacted by the shopping center development, but, interestingly, did NOT identify the proposed 4-way interchange of Roaring Brook Road and Horace Greeley Access Road/Chappaqua Crossing Access Road as being an intersection that would be negatively impacted.  The Town’s study at least identifies this as a concern. Further, under the developer’s plan, the Town study concluded that four of the seven problem intersections will not be able to avoid significant impact. 

Reader’s Digest traffic comparison is not valid

To compare the impact of 7,000 jobs at Readers Digest to a retail center and its impacts is extremely dangerous in my opinion.  Most of the trips that originated to Reader’s Digest were along the Saw Mill Parkway and the Metro North Railroad.  Of the local trips that were generated, most were either buses from the train station or were from locals who lived in (or near) the community and worked at Reader’s Digest. 

Even with those facts being true, most old-timers in town will tell you that Route 117 was a place to avoid at 4:30 in the afternoon, as all the Reader’s Digest employees were leaving at that time.  I personally, know several people who lived in Chappaqua and worked at Reader’s Digest.  Such jobs will not be generated from a retail center. 

The vast majority of people working at the stores of Chappaqua Crossing will have no where near the means to live in our community.  The proceeds of those stores will go away from our community to the shareholders of the chain stores that will dominate the center.  Further, most of the trips that will be generated by Chappaqua Crossing will be borne by local service roads, not by Metro North and the Saw Mill Parkway.  These are facts.

“Leakage” of consumer dollars will continue

Unfortunately, Mr. Chapin is correct in stating that we cannot easily replace Reader’s Digest; however, for him to state that a retail center will mitigate a substantial portion of the loss of Reader’s Digest is, at best, misguided in my opinion.

While it is true that there was retail leakage from the trade area prior to Chappaqua Crossing, such leakage will continue to exist post-Chappaqua Crossing.  Most people who live in Chappaqua will continue to spend the majority of their dollars outside of the trade area.  Competing supermarkets in Pleasantville, Armonk, Thornwood and Mt. Kisco will still attract a number of shoppers.  While the leakage will decrease, many households will continue to buy their groceries outside of New Castle.  Likewise, most families will continue to spend the vast majority of their non-food and service expenditures outside of Chappaqua and Millwood.  With limited options for soft good (clothing, bedding, curtains, etc.) and hard goods (furniture, appliances, etc.), most of those dollars and any ancillary purchases associated with those trips will be spent outside of the trade area.

Tax benefits

Finally, the analysis of the tax numbers that Mr. Chapin mentions in his letter is extremely questionable, in my opinion.  (Note: This analysis was conducted by Hudson Property Advisors and was commissioned by Summit Greenfield).  Firstly, that analysis looks at the project as having a 90% occupancy rate for the office property and a 95% occupancy rate for the retail center.  Mr. Chapin’s own letter discusses the fact that much of the existing office space is likely to remain vacant.

Estimated rents are greatly exaggerated

Secondly, the rents that were used in the tax analysis are greatly inflated, in my opinion. 

This analysis assumed that the supermarket anchor would lease space for a $30.00 per square foot triple-net rate (in a triple-net lease, the tenant pays for taxes, insurance and property maintenance).  In my opinion, the highest likely achievable rate for space such as this would be in the $18.00 +/- per square foot range. 

Similarly, the other rents appear to be highly inflated. The tax analysis assumes a drugstore paying $40.00 per-square-foot triple-net, the in-line spaces (along the parking lot) paying $28.00 per-square-foot triple-net and the 24,000 square foot junior anchor paying $25.00 per-square-foot triple-net.  If the rents achieved are substantially less than these numbers—and I believe that they will be—then the tax revenues associated with the project would also be substantially less.

Retail at Chappaqua Crossing is a very bad idea, in my personal and professional opinion.  For the record, I was somewhat in favor of the earlier proposal to build age-restricted housing on the site.  I do believe that the site will largely need to be developed.  However, I firmly believe that retail is not an appropriate use for the site or for the town, as I previously stated this in my open letter to the Town Board. 

In conclusion, I’d like to state that I have never seen a wealthy Northeastern town so easily approve a retail project in a residential neighborhood.  In my opinion, our Town Board has made a series of grievous mistakes.  They should never have suggested a shopping center at Chappaqua Crossing.  They still have the authority to deny the application and should do so.

Steve Coyle
97 Haights Cross Road

Letter to Town Board: TB members should never have suggested retail use at Chappaqua Crossing,, May 10, 2013 by Steve Coyle

Follow up: Open Letter to the Town of New Castle and on Chappaqua Crossing,, Tuesday, May 14, 2013, by Steve Coyle

Letter to the Editor: Chappaqua Crossing Retail Proposal: Fiction and Fact,, September 9, 2013, by Jason Chapin


We encourage civil, civic discourse. All comments are reviewed before publication to assure that this standard is met.

Thank you for your letter. Don’t be surprised that no Board Members responded to you or your letter. Since you are not part of the party machine that runs the town, they have no interest in your opinion, and they are likely afraid to engage you directly.

By 10514 on 09/24/2013 at 1:30 pm

It is not the policy of this Town Board and their cronies to reply to thoughtful citizens who may question them.

By bob on 09/24/2013 at 3:47 pm

Mr. Coyle’s observations may be accurate.  However, to receive a response from the town board and to influence their decision-making, it is not enough to be knowledgeable in the field of real estate development and to explain the shortcomings of this proposal in writing or through public comments at town board meetings.

The town board does listen to those who are active in the New Castle Democratic Party Committee and in the Westchester Democratic Party Committee.  That’s where issues, goals, policies and strategies are discussed and often decided.  Normally, this occurs before votes are taken at town board meetings.  These votes are frequently pro forma.  Residents could save their time and be more effective in their efforts if they understood how the local legislative process actually works.

By giving his address, I appreciate that Mr. Coyle does not live near the site, but the town board leadership has dismissed, rightly or wrongly, most residents’ concerns on this project and others as NIMBY-ism.

By Join the Party on 09/24/2013 at 4:05 pm

Did you post it to Facebook?  An email?  Or did you type (or write) and send a letter to a particular person?  To whom?  When? 

Did you ask for a response?  Did you ask for any thing?  Or just that they read and consider your thoughts?

By To whom and how did you send your letter? on 09/24/2013 at 4:16 pm

“I’d like to state that I have never seen a wealthy Northeastern town so easily approve a retail project in a residential neighborhood.”

Put this in context for us.  What qualifications or basis on which can you make this statement? 

Perhaps you are an anthropologist who studies Northeastern towns.  That would be cool.

By Basis for comparison on 09/24/2013 at 4:19 pm

My hat is tipped to Steve Coyle for sharing his knowledge of the real estate with the New Castle Town Board, as well as with the readers of  While the readers of may learn something from Steve Coyle, it is more apparent than ever that the Town Board, blinded by backroom politics, simply does not care about the deleterious effects a large new shopping center in a residential neighborhood may have on the residents of New Castle and the business owners in the two existing business districts.  Traffic concerns are irrelevant to the Board.  Environmental concerns such as the destruction of more than 850 trees or a 50% increase in runoff or the incredible increase in phosphorus runoff that will cost somebody $1.5 million to correct - all irrelevant to the Town Board.  Why wouldn’t the Town Board care?  Simple - as pointed out above by Join The Party,  the Democratic political bosses have instructed Carpenter and her minions what to do and how to vote.  Carpenter and company blindly follow their marching orders like so many lemmings,
constituents be damned.

To Basis For Comparison, other than Mr. Coyle’s 25 plus years of experience in the real estate industry as a qualification, if you are truly interested in the reaction of other towns to proposed additional business districts, do a Google search and see how hard every other town fights against the creation of a second or third business district, the polar opposite of the New Castle Town Board that is, somewhat incredibly, championing the retail proposal on behalf of the devrloper of Chappaqua Crossing. 


By B on 09/24/2013 at 9:25 pm

Can we please move forward with the development at Chappaqua Crossing? The arguments against are really getting tired….

By Long time Chappaqua resident on 09/24/2013 at 10:25 pm

Long time Chappaqua resident,

If you are tired of honest discussion, why not stop reading and just follow along, lemming- like?

By bob on 09/25/2013 at 6:53 am

@ Long time Chappaqua Resident,

Really ?  How so ?  Please be specific and factual.

By another longtime resident on 09/25/2013 at 8:18 am

To whom and how did you send your letter,

I am perplexed by your comment.  It is pro forma for any elected official to respond to all communications from constituents.  That the members of our town board do not is yet another black mark against them and speaks to their arrogant insular behavior.

By Jane P. on 09/25/2013 at 9:28 am

Join the Party, I cannot tell if you are being sincere or sarcastic. I appreciate that this may be how town politics is run, but are you suggesting that public discourse is a waste of time? That the public political process is a sham?

What about people who are not members of the democratic party, they aren’t able to have any voice in town governance?

By 10514 on 09/25/2013 at 3:37 pm

Is it accurate that Summit Greenfield has Whole Foods ready to go at Chappaqua Crossing if it is approved?

By P on 09/25/2013 at 3:53 pm

The Town Board wrote this legislation to the specifications of Summit Greenfield.  It was written in secret behind closed doors with no public discussion in order to meet Summit Greenfield’s demands and to settle the law suit.  It was written by lawyers with no vision and no studies as to what would be best for the town.

By Edward Galant on 09/25/2013 at 6:37 pm

The developement is not in the middle of a residential neighborhood. It is over 70% bordered by Metro north, Greeley campus and the Saw Mill Parkway. It is segregated unto itself.

Transforming obsolete office space into rentable retail debunks the notion tht there will not be a beneficial tax effect to the town.

So some workes don’t live here and spend their money elsewhere. Do you know anyone who works in Manhattan and only spends his income there?

What are the water flows that matter here? This statement appears to be a “sky is falling” scare tactic. If that were a genuine argument with any meaning at all, the DEP et. als would have been all over the project like white on rice.

THis letter is decidedly one sided. There are benefits.

partime jobs to Greeley students, less teenage distance driving they will likely go across street to new hang outs (I hope). Convenience for waiting Greeley parents, Convenience to the entire town for shopping,

Traffic glut? What time will it be?

There is more to say on a later post

By Dazed and Confused on 09/25/2013 at 7:32 pm

Mr. Coyle,

I’d like to briefly respond to your comments.You may not agree with me, but I thought it would be helpful to you and others to know that the proposal, if approved, would obligate the applicant to meet certain conditions - and in several instances also obtain approval from state agencies.

As you may know, tree removal is regulated by the Town Code - and in this case the Planning Board would review the Site Plan to determine how many removed trees need to be replaced. The applicant would contribute to the Town’s Tree Bank Fund to make up any deficit. And since the site falls within the NYC watershed, environmental issues will be strickly regulated by the NYC Department of Environmental Protection.

The applicant was required to pay for a traffic study acceptable to the Town. Our Town consultant and town staff reviewed data and projections from the study. Regarding the findings, the approved housing along with any additional office tenants and potential retail tenants will increase traffic around the site above the current level. However, the applicant is required to mitigate the traffic increase and has committed to adding turn lanes and a traffic light and widening roads.


By Jason Chapin, Town Board on 09/25/2013 at 8:17 pm

..... And the total trip counts are projected to be significantly lower than when Reader’s had 7,000. As well, retail traffic is spread out more evenly than school or office traffic that follows a regular schedule. Additionally, NYSDOT approval is required for any changes involving Rt. 117 and the Saw Mill Rive Parkway.

Regarding leakage, two retail market studies show that between $135-161 million in retail spending ($47 million alone for food) within 10 minutes of Chappaqua Crossing is being spent in other towns. I believe most residents want more shopping options in town and shorter trips for groceries and other essentials. The Town also wants to increase the commercial tax base to reduce the portion of property taxes paid by homeowners and Chappaqua Crossing offers the best opportunity.

Furthermore, Chappaqua Crossing only generates about $1.5 million in property taxes. The owner is grieving their taxes and the amount is likely to go down because only about 20% of the office space is currrently rented. Converting 20% of the unrentable office space to retail will increase property taxes by $715k (almost 50%)and help to fill the remaining vacant office space. The overall value of the property and taxes collected will go up again when the approved housing is completed.

Finally, the Town can either do nothing and hope for the best or we can consider adaptive reuse and mixed use of the property to maximize the property’s potential. We’re weighing the pros and cons and I’m sure each board member will vote for what they think is in the best interest of the entire Town.

By Jason Chapin, Town Board on 09/25/2013 at 8:29 pm


Join the Party is correct.  Public discourse in this town has been a complete waste of time.  The town board works behind closed doors.  The public process in this town is a sham.

By Bob on 09/25/2013 at 9:07 pm

b is a nice person but we all must understand her through her postings. she is opposed to Chappaqua crossing, period. She, and others who are like minded, grasp at anything that will detract from or derail the project. It seems to me to be a matter of ‘religion’ with them.

Some increased tax revenue is better than successfully grieved tax reduction.

3 or 4 more chain stores in a segregated area, when added to the 4 we
already have, does not rise to the level of the nuclear devastation of our little commercial tax base town.

what about the convenience it brings to Greeley students and parents?To residents? The town board was required to make a decision based upon law, not emotions.

By the way, at what time will the CC traffic glut occur? The Greeley glut doesn’t factor it because it has been a constant for over 30 years.

a net loss of 10 trees, of varying sizes per acre doesn’t seem to warrant halting the project. The numbers given are largely moot since the amount of trees lost due to the store construction is not broken out.

What water flow change? Its town water, isn’t?

The rent situation is not the town’s concern. Tax payments to us are.

By dear b on 09/25/2013 at 9:47 pm

dear b: 

I have steadfastly maintained that I am not against development at Chappaqua Crossing.  I will continue to do so since I know that the property is under-developed and the owner is entitled to have full use of the property.

The foundation for my problem with retail at CC is in the flawed process by which it came about and the many unanswered questions that this flawed process has generated.  We lost a small 10,000 square foot grocery store - how does that translate into a 120,000 square foot retail shopping strip?  Why is it that the Town Board is the group of five people out of the many thousands in our town that decides if 120,000 square feet of retail is good for New Castle?  Why do the people of New Castle have no voice in this matter through referendum or otherwise?  Why is the Master Plan being ignored?  Why were the Lawsuits against the town settled in private without public input?  What happened to the 6 1/2 acres of vacant land at CC promised by the developer to New Castle?  Why is the town afraid to commission it’s own traffic study? 

I really want to feel good about retail at CC, but I find that I cannot get comfortable with the proposal unless I know that the above questions are satisfactorily addressed.  Since I know that most of these questions will never be properly answered, I am probably going to stay opposed to retail at CC. 




By B on 09/26/2013 at 9:19 am

  While there are arguments both for and against retail at Chappaqua Crossing, there appears to be an overwhelming consensus that our Town Board prefers to work behind closed doors, with little transparency and with a lack of open communication – typical town politics. 

The only way to address this problem is at the voting both.  We as citizens have the power to disassemble the monopoly of the party machine.  On Nov. 5, THINK BEFORE YOU PULL THE LEVER – a vote for John Buckley is a vote to continue the cronyism that has become the status quo in New Castle, and in 2 years Chapin and Mottel are up as well. 

It’s time to get some new horses in the stable, the ones we have now are lame. 

By Think Before You Pull The Lever on 09/26/2013 at 9:31 am

At some point, no matter whatever goes there, the space will fill up.  And it’s a lot of space. And it will bring additional traffic, no matter what.  People have been spoiled by the lack of traffic ever since RD left town, but it benefits nobody to have this space stay vacant forever.  And sorry, the town pool is not coming here.

By get over it on 09/26/2013 at 1:37 pm

Mr. Coyle, if you had a magic wand that you could wave over the CC property, what would you see fit to approve for development? How long would it take for your vision to be approved by New Castle, and why would New Castle move to approve your vision? I like you, and I think you have a lot to offer, but if some one like me does not ask you such pointed questions, then I feel we will really never be able to tap into all your experiences and history of knowing a thing or two about real estate. What could town hall approve that would see construction start before the end of 2014, and that would make financial sense to the owner?

By Magic Wand on 09/26/2013 at 2:03 pm

I am a resident of Chappaqua, with a house near the center of town [that is, not immediately near Chappaqua Crossing]. Mr. Chapin says: “I believe most residents want more shopping options in town and shorter trips for groceries and other essentials.” I would like to go on record as saying that I feel no need for more shopping options in town, other than a bookstore, nor do I need shorter trips for groceries or other “essentials”. I think retail at Chappaqua Crossing is wholly unnecessary.

By maggie christ on 09/26/2013 at 4:12 pm

“The Town also wants to increase the commercial tax base to reduce the portion of property taxes paid by homeowners and Chappaqua Crossing offers the best opportunity.” THIS IS A QUOTE FROM Mr. Jason Chapin, Town Board. Folks, this is why we absolutely need to throw whoever is in town hall out. They have a history of using their power that is routed in their authority to deny and reject, deny and reject, or frustrate away, many many applicants throughout the decades that wanted along the way through the fabric of our Communities lifecycle improve various aspects of downtown Chappaqua and other parts of New Castle. They did not have the brain power to understand, like most along the way did [i.e. Brodsky], that the little approvals granted over many decades would prevent a town hall administration from thinking in a direction that Mr. Jason Chapin has stated.

With one approval they are hoping to hide the sins of their past and poor performance in correctly and wisely representing the agendas of the area taxpayers. The statement that Mr. Jason Chapin has made is 100% correct unless we get Greenstein and team into office, or that Penny can show how her 27 yrs can be put to work. Penny, I believe is tired and ready for retirement, I think her heat shields have been worn out, becuase so far - SHE HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO OFFER OR SAY. We just can’t afford business as usual, we can’t afford not to have some kind of smart development at CC. We really need a cleaning out of town hall and fresh new ideas that can not be corrupted by the powerbrokers.

By For Years! on 09/26/2013 at 5:02 pm

There will be a development   The opponents are like the house republicans repeatedly trying to repeal Obamacare. Saying nothing new repeatedly only to consume and waste valuable time.  The property development is a certainty.  Lets tweak it and start the tax dollars coming in.  Have the pylon signage NOT on 117. Only on saw mill side.  The operative wording is.  Tweaking or adjusting.  Not thearting

By Realist on 09/26/2013 at 7:15 pm

Don’t you people realize that railing against town hall accomplishes nothing? The developer has vested rights they delay in inplementation of which cost tax payers to pay money damages by the hour?  Cc will be the one and only shopping center in new castle.  Opponents realize it may be successful which is the reason for their ardor .    Lets have success

By Town hall on 09/26/2013 at 7:26 pm

I guess you don’t do any food shopping or go out to eat.

By Dear Maggie Christ on 09/26/2013 at 11:14 pm

Fine that you have everything delivered.  Methinks the rest of us don’t and need closer stores

By Dear Maggie christ on 09/26/2013 at 11:20 pm

Dear ms Christ,  Not everyone is within walking distance to town like you appear to be.  We drive distances everywhere.  It would be nice if some of the stores we drive to in other towns are in our town

By Non walker on 09/26/2013 at 11:27 pm


The Whole Foods myth was concocted by the developer’s PR flack.

By bob on 09/27/2013 at 7:36 am

1) We had a bookstore, and it died out like so many others once we hit the 21st century

2) Yes, I would like a shorter drive for groceries and other essentials.

By get real on 09/27/2013 at 7:51 am

Since there has never been a true survey to determine what most people in town do want, it is wrong of Mr. Chapin to say what most people want.  There are supermarkets 5 to 10 minutes in every direction from Chappaqua.  I would like to see development in the downtown hamlet.

Retail development at CC is a mistake.  No one I know thinks that retail at CC is the right thing to do.
Mr. Chapin continues to spin the traffic mitigation baloney.  He never mentions the town’s
Planning Board’s own investigation on traffic in this area.  Maybe he has not bothered to listen to it.  He should.  Maybe he has and it does not support his spin.
Anyone want to guess how he is voting ?

By Jane P. on 09/27/2013 at 8:29 am

I am completely against retail at CC.  I know no one who is not.

By Roberta Galant on 09/27/2013 at 8:33 am

@Town Hall - Wow, the truth has finally been told. “Don’t you people realize that railing against town hall accomplishes nothing”

Please every one please go vote this November. If you want Penny vote for her, if you want Greenstein and team vote for them. Please read the quote above and then go vote.

By So nice! on 09/27/2013 at 3:01 pm

what people say about vocally unpopular hot button issues and what they think and will eventually do (ie take advantage of convenient shopping) are different things

By dear ms galant on 09/28/2013 at 9:32 am

According to you because Mr. Chapin says something and states his factual reasons, its baloney. You don’t believe a word he says because of your apparent bias against the project.

Others give pure, personal opinions you want to hear with little or no factual justifications. You believe or side with them.

Is it your position that everything he says is a lie?

By Dear Jane P on 09/28/2013 at 9:46 am

To So nice!

You’re misleading people with your comment on the “Don’t you people realize that railing againt town hall accomplishes nothing.” The quote was by someone who signed their name “Town hall.” It was not by a Town Board member. Play fair and set a good example for others.

By Jason Chapin, Town Board on 09/28/2013 at 11:04 am

good, bad or indifferent. If you really want to have a mistake made by the town that creates a continuing harm, give Greenstein the lever of power. Anyone but him. Anyone. He is a blow hard opportunist that has not made one concrete suggestion to help us go forward.  His best role will be to be appointed chairman of a new board: “Town critic board ;that makes no suggestions” That way he can do no harm

By so nice on 09/28/2013 at 11:39 am

Residents keep commenting that the SG has the right to develop the property.  My understanding is that the developer has the right to develop the property as it is currently zoned by the town. I am confused as to why this decision is not being included as part of the master plan.  I am confused about the overall benefit of the taxes relative to the total tax base and the impact on each household.  The town board should keep the zoning as approved currently, and take the position that if the developer is not happy, they can sell the property.  Maybe the town would consider buying it, and subsidizing the costs by selling off some of the town property for commercial developemnt.

By Stop The Insantiy on 09/28/2013 at 12:22 pm

Mr. Chapin,

“Play fair and set a good example for others,” you say.

Please practice what you preach.

By bob on 09/28/2013 at 1:10 pm

@ Dear Jane P.,

My position is that anyone who knows the area around CC and the existing traffic problems as Mr. Chapin surely does knows that adding a shopping center will make the traffic worse.  It is baloney to say that it can be ‘mitigated’.  Maybe you should listen to the planning board’s discussion of their own investigation on this matter.

I never said that everything he says is a lie, but I do question his financial analysis.  And I do hope that I am mistaken, but it does seem from his writings that he has decided to override the existing master plan a vote yes for this retail zoning change.  We will see, won’t we.

By Jane P. on 09/28/2013 at 1:18 pm

To dear ms. galant,

Of course you are correct, but how would we know without an honest town wide survey ?

By Roberta Galant on 09/28/2013 at 1:21 pm

Mr. Chapin,

Have you seen Editor Yeres’ interview with Mr. Gutfreund on the advisability of towns having and following their master plan ?  It is still on the front page.  Here is the final paragraph:

“Gutfreund: Yes, an up-to-date master plan will spell out right up front what we do want and what we don’t want.  This would have the added benefit of helping town boards to make decisions based on transparent criteria, rather than fear of the lawsuits that sometimes arise from the mixed or confused signals that are an inevitable product of operating without a good master plan.”

By Bob on 09/28/2013 at 2:01 pm

Actually, the League of Women Voters did a town wide survey back in the mid-90’s about what people want in this town.  I believe the study can still be found at the library, but it was pretty much the same as now - more walkable town, better grocery story, etc. 

As to Jason’s comments (and I appreciate your participation in this discussion) it does not make sense to me to push off concerns, i.e. cutting down of trees, because another town board has that responsibility.  As a board, you should take the entire, big picture into account, including traffic and environmental concerns, as these effect the nature of our community.

Finally, as someone who does not live walking distance to town, I do need to get into my car for shopping.  I knew this when I moved here 21 years ago.  I like that about this town.  I don’t want a 5 Guys or Petco in my town.  Grocery store - for many, driving to Readers Digest is no different from driving to Mt. Kisco, Thornwood or whereever they currently shop. 

Our downtown is finally getting livelier. It will never be a full service town - it is too small for that.  But it can be a quaint, userfriendly town that acts as a community hub and serves some of our needs.  Or we can build a shopping center down the road and kill it off for good.

By Audrey Rabinowitz on 09/28/2013 at 2:05 pm

Master plans like everyone’s life plans evolve or change with time.  New castle is no exception.  The town has changed demographically and population numbers.  Society has changed.  We all have changed.  Master plans nationwide are adjusted with time.  Are we so special that we are different from every other place in the region ?

By Jane p on 09/28/2013 at 3:35 pm

The constant use of the word “everybody” as regards who knows what about what dilutes its meaning to “meaningless”

“Everybody” does not know everything. Mr Chapin, no doubt he is sorry to feel, has an overload of information upon which to base his decisions and opinions. Unless you feel he is dishonest or corrupt ,his honest opinion is entitled to be respected. No one is obligated to agree with him.  But we all, as mature, civilized neighbors, should not deride him for doing what he truly thinks best.

Instead of looking at what you think he has not done, look at what he has done: Namely, explain his reasonings as a matter of respect to everyone knowing he would be pilloried.

Greensteinites say nothing, explain nothing, offer nothing,criticize everything. It would serve you right if you get him as your supervisor. Watch his personal “capital” grow when he gets in office. AND nothing will get done. He shows that he is the merchant candidate, not the residents’ candidate.  This is only opinion, not a statement of any facts whatsoever.

Our remedy is to vote him out of office or commence a lawsuit with
Greenstein Law firm pro bono, all the way.

By jane p on 09/28/2013 at 5:59 pm

There can’t be an “honest town survey” that can form the basis for anything. Either side will controvert the results one way or another.
What is Honest? what is town wide? who makes the wording? Will it be yes or not?  Strongly agree? agree? strongly disagree? disagree? don’t care? strongly don’t care? care somewhat?  The town board was elected to make this decision.

While I favor having more commercial tax bases here and increased tax income, the sky will not fall in on me if it does not come to pass…..and the same holds for opponents if stores are built. Cripes. 111 units is the big hit against the town. Stores that cater to these families and the rest of us is a lesser hit, if it is a hit at all.

At a minimum, don’t vilify Mr. Chapin. I have never met him. I don’t know anything about him except what I read in NCN. By explaining his decision, he shows his mettle. Many opponents are just as capable and are admired. Barkers and blow hards are cowards

By dear ms galant on 09/28/2013 at 7:48 pm

There is only one way we can try and remove all the powerbrokers from town hall. It requires you to go vote and to get others to go vote. Go vote for anyone you want, but ask yourself this question, did we like how the current Supervisor has handled the Municipality of New Castle along with all her supporting staff. If so, you know who to vote for. On the other hand, if you simply did not like how town hall has gone about their business, then maybe you need to vote differently this time around. Whatever your decision, just know that the losing party will become that much more sensitive to the issues of the resident taxpayers, CCSD, landlords, and merchants. Remember, when town hall does not approve that swimming pool, larger deck/patio, home addition, or a McMansion, they are hurting our School District from collecting a higher tax. Town Hall has never ever given any consideration to such matters until this election season. We all want to protect our families, allow merchants to protect their businesses, so WHY does town hall smile at us while telling us that it only takes 4 to 7 months to get your emergency generator approved? Aside from buying the generator, getting an electrician, and hiring a contractor; why town hall, why do you have us pay to answer so many of your questions, when you have a Building Department that is more than capable in providing approvals within days of our request. Why do you think that it is necessary to cause us more fees and expenses that rise above our property taxes that we already pay. Please town hall allow us the ability to stay connected and informed when our area is hit by bad storms. Do you realize that anyone applying for a generator permit today will not be approved until January through March 2014. Come on - Mr. Chapin do you find this acceptable? What are you goint to do, change how town hall operates after the election? I don’t think so!

By All residents on 09/29/2013 at 12:50 am

Five businesses go out of business on the Chappaqua strip, several residents want to legalize their swimming pool, a few builders want to buy existing homes in the area and demolish them to build bigger homes, many residents want to legalize building code infractions for refinancing reasons or to get their home ready for sale, some want more sport fields, others want a town swimming pool, many residents want a larger deck or patio, some want to build a shed or a bigger garage on their property, many residents want to take down dangerous trees that town hall has denied the permit to do lawfully, and some want to open up a Pizza shop, a restaurant, an ice-cream shop, or mount a roof top generator on their roof to service the residents of the area during storms. The question becomes, who do you want running town hall and looking out for what you need to get done? We have a choice, a 27 year veteran of New Castle who served Carpenter, or Mr. Greenstein who is fed up and angry at how town hall conducts the matters of resident taxpayers. Go think about New Castle, before you go vote, because this time around as never before seen every vote will count.

By Thinking out loud! on 09/29/2013 at 1:22 am

The majority of New Castle voters are registered Democrats.  The Democratic Slate will win the election.  Antagonizing them in the comments section of this article, and in other articles, won’t do any good.  Negative comments no matter how merited are dismissed by the town board as personal attacks, NIMBISM, elitism, and selfishness.

By EM on 09/29/2013 at 9:38 am

Should Mr. Chapin be commended for his vote to rezone the Hunts Lane property so that Carpenter could then ram through approval of the despicable Conifer housing project? How we forget.

By follow the money on 09/29/2013 at 9:55 am

Thinking out loud!.

At least you are thinking, unlike many of the others posting here.

By bob on 09/29/2013 at 9:56 am

Any one but greenstein.  He has a loud voice but says nothing.  Listen carefully.  Let your reason guide your vote,  not your emotions.  Just look at Obama.    He ran for change, change, change.  But said nothing specific.  Greenstein is worse.  He screams and yells. He doesn’t say how he will get around following the law and its constraints.

By All residents on 09/29/2013 at 10:19 am

But there IS elitism in this town, sadly. There are “special” people here.  There is nimbyism,  but that is ok and the nimby prerogative.  But their nimby status must be fully disclosed for the rest of us to assess bias and credibility. Also, there is selfishness, and that is also a person’s right to be that way.  But again, get that motivation out there to evaluate the speaker’s agenda.  Sometimes direct statements and confrontations are necessary to expose genteel prejudices

By Dear em on 09/29/2013 at 10:32 am

If it walks like a duck. Quacks like a duck and looks like a duck.  .......,it is a duck. All taxpayers are entitled to vote as “selfishly” they like.  That is democracy. But making it seem that a person is not primarily looking out for herself , when she is, under the guise of community well being should be brought out.  Again, self interest is to be encouraged but not hidden

By Dear EM on 09/29/2013 at 11:05 am

Government is a complex thing.  It involves myriad laws and multifaceted interactions with other levels of government.  Our leader cannot behave like a bull in a china shop. He or she must have a calm, broad panoramic view in addition to the many routine items that must be dealt with. Maybe greenstein but not this time around.  Let him serve on a few boards first and let’s see if he is capable of working well with others and has the right temperment to lead and to be a consensus builder. His defeat this time will give him the humility he lacks.  I am afraid of him

By Dear thinking on 09/29/2013 at 2:05 pm

Dear Jason Chapin: 

You seem like you are driven by numbers and logic, so let’s do the Chappaqua Crossing math and see, together, if retail at CC is really worthwhile to New Castle: 

You say there will be a $715,000.00 maximum tax benefit.  I believe there are about 6,500 households in New Castle.  Divide $715,000.00 by 6,500 households.  Result: maximum tax benefit, per household: $110.00, per year. 

Add in the costs to be borne by New Castle associated with having a large strip mall in our town:  additional police, fire, public works and sanitation, and you have an increase in costs of at least $250,000.00 per year, but probably much more. 

Subtract the increase in costs of $250,000.00 from the $715,000.00 maximum benefit and you are left with $465,000.00 maximum net tax benefit after the costs are factored in.  Divide $465,000.00 by 6,500 households and you get $71.50 net tax benefit per household.

Let’s assume that just 100 tax certiorari proceedings claiming a reduction in value as a result of retail at CC are successful (I believe that there will be many more than 100 - but let’s guess really low for the sake of this exercise) with an average reduction in taxes of $2,500.00, for a total of $250,000.00.  Subtract $250,000.00 from $465,000.00 and you are left with $215,000.00.  Divide $215,000.00 by 6,500 and the number is just $33.00 per household.

So, for the same amount that people in New Castle saved by going from twice per week garbage pickup down to once per week, $33.00 per year, retail at CC promises to forever change New Castle from a quiet bedroom community to a commercial shopping destination, with all of the additional traffic and other issues that accompany a strip mall.


By B on 09/30/2013 at 1:19 am

(comment continued)

So, Mr. Chapin, now that we have done the math, I ask you: is it worthwhile to change New Castle forever for a maximum of $110.00 per household?  How about if it is just $71.50 per household?  Or how about if quite possibly the benefit is only $33.00 per household? 
I submit to you that, at least in my humble opinion, $110.00 per year per household is not a sufficient enough benefit to New Castle to give up the peace and quiet that we currently enjoy as a bedroom community.  At $71.50 per year, the benefit per household is definitely not enough to justify the approval of retail at CC, and at $33.00 per household, the net tax benefit is so small as to be laughable. 

Please let me know your thoughts about my calculations.


By B on 09/30/2013 at 1:20 am

The old adage the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know rings true now. Mr Greenstein cannot accomplish anything by screaming and yelling. He must figure out how to work with others first and not rely on being the loudest voice in the room, but instead be the calmest. I can’t imagine him being any different that Ms Carpenter when faced with a speaker who has a different opinion. Penny knows the drill, and had demonstrated patience and a calm demeanor. Rob is just too vitriolic to run the place. Maybe some day but not now. A bully is the last thing we need now.

By The devil... on 09/30/2013 at 7:03 am

Are the building department and planning board short staffed? Does that factor into the reasons for delays?  I am not sure that town board member involvement in micro management will not be viewed as improper tampering with the processes.  Perhaps more staffing and public meetings could reduce backlogs but that costs tax money to do. I don’t know details.

By Good questions on 09/30/2013 at 7:58 am

Dear thinking,

What are you thinking ?
Susan Carpenter was chairman of the planning board before she was elected supervisor.
Have we ever had a worse or more destructive supervisor than Susan Carpenter ?
Robin Stout has served for years, to the detriment of the town.
Elise Mottel also has served for years, again to the detriment to the town.

We have heard NOTHING from Penny on either the Conifer fiasco or CC zoning change.

I vote for the individual, not the slate and I still have not made my choices for this coming election.

By What are you thinking ???? on 09/30/2013 at 10:07 am

@Dear thinking - I hope you never have a septic problem, I hope you never need to legalize your basement or attic. I hope you never need to seek town approval for an EMERGENCY GENERATOR. I hope you never have the desire to open up a business on King Street or Main Street. I hope you never want to put an addition on your home, or sell it to a local builder who would like to buy it - tear it down and rebuild a bigger one. I hope you never have to grieve your taxes, or build a larger deck or porch. I hope you never have to deal with a tag team of town attorneys and P&Z Boards vs. you the applicant. I hope you never have the desire to want to see a town hall be one that assist your goals of what you need to get done, rather than pile on top of you with request to hire all sorts of consultants to get an easy matter like an EMERGENCY GENERATOR approved. I hope all you have to do is go to your job or place of business outside of New Castle, make money, pay your property taxes or rent, and really not have to deal with town hall. Greenstein may not be perfect, but boy does he understand all parts of the community, like no one else before him, or presently serving in town hall. Can Penny put her 27 yrs to work, who knows - hope so, she is a good person, but one who is at the end of her career. So tell me, what is she really go change? Do you know?
I hope your answer is not NOTHING!

By OMG! on 09/30/2013 at 3:46 pm

Still no word from Penny’s supporters as to why she will not submit her conflict of interest—running for office while keeping her position as town administrator and using town resources to garner votes—to our town’s (very friendly to this administration) ethics board.

By still waiting for ethics ruling on 09/30/2013 at 4:41 pm

Cut it out

By Omg is greenstein and other names on 09/30/2013 at 5:39 pm

@The Devil - Don’t you recognize passion when you see it? Don’t you recognize the thrill of change? Don’t you understand that the future of New Castle is at stake - and you seek a calm person? I say not, I say we need a person filled with the hot and burning passion to keep New Castle what it is, while we do away with what we do not want! I say that Greenstein has the passion to see New Castle grow and change, in a way that all would agree is good growth and change! We need a person that can stop the games, stop the BS, stop the corruption, stop the power trips, and fight for a Community! We need a person during this time in the HISTORY of New Castle to make HISTORY by showing his passion. Greenstein can do this, Brodsky can do this. Penny I think would like to do this but will most likely stay calm until she retires - AND THIS WE CAN’T AFFORD OR ACCEPT OR VOTE FOR!

We need a person at town hall who is going to place people on the carpet, place people on the spot, and challenge them to move along in a respectable manner of giving a person a thumbs up or a thumbs down. Now if Greenstein wins and does not deliver, then I say the next election and every election for the next 100 years should go for the Democrats. If Penny wins and she does not put her 27 years to work then we all must remember this for all other elections to follow for the next 100 years. Town Hall is a tired old place that needs a good dose of PASSION and CHANGE! Try it you’ll like it! Now go out and by your significant other a box of Chocolates, flowers, wine, or tickets to the OPERA!

By Passion my boy, passion my lady! on 09/30/2013 at 5:44 pm

You are genuine and good, to say the least. Bottom line there is a net tax benefit.  I will bet you a cup of coffee that you and you family will patronize those stores.  And then, with time, realize that maybe your opposition was a bit too strident.

Having stores is a good thing by itself.  Tax revenues sales taxes are bonuses

By Dear b on 09/30/2013 at 5:46 pm

Tp Passion my boy…

Don’t confuse histrionics with passion.

By 'Nuff said on 09/30/2013 at 10:06 pm

Stop your ridiculous campaign propaganda. We are a town that perhaps could use adjustments.  You still are screaming and still say nothing.  Your opponent may not be perfect but she is not an embarrassment like you are and will be. We move here to live in peace.  We get excitement from our children’s achievements and living comfortably.  You singlehandedly bring discomfort

By Dear passion greenstein on 10/01/2013 at 5:55 am

You are trying to market yourself as a new and improved laundry detergent that has exciting new packaging. But laundry detergent at least performs whereas you don’t.  If fact , you are “snake oil” in a self described passionate bottle. The oil does nothing despite the huckster’s manufactured passion for it.  What do you offer other than what you say is your “passion”.  What have you done for the town already. 

Everyone look closely for the answers.

By Dear Faux passionate greenstein and aliases on 10/01/2013 at 3:52 pm

Just received a mailing from Greenstein’s slate, Team New Castle. They prominently display a color photograph of themselves smiling and carefully posed to look their best.  Down on the left is a smaller black and white photo of the opponent Paderewski slate, obviously unposed and impromptu, that is unflattering. The Padereswkis slate probably did not even know they were being photographed at the time.

This mailing is the defining factor in making my decision where to cast my vote.  Before this I had been wavering between the two. I do not like these tactics, it reveals a certain unsavory characteristic that is ruthless in pursuit of what it wants.  That does not bode well for the manner in which Mr. Greenstein’s slate will conduct themselves in office.

By Sir, have you no decency? on 10/01/2013 at 6:17 pm

All those who are for Penny, fine.  Rather than trashing Rob as you do, ad nauseum, please tell us where Penny stands on the important issues before the town.  I.E. Conifer and CC.

Does she want to wait for the master plan to be updated BEFORE CC and Conifer ?  Rob does.

How does she feel about the vacant planning board seat, vacant almost a year.  Would she accept Bob Kirkwood in that seat.  Rob has said that he would.  These are just but a few examples.

We know where Greenstein stands.  We cannot say the same for secretive Penny.  Actually, she is just like the sitting board, secretive.  Not anything to recommend her.

By why is Penny so secretive ? on 10/01/2013 at 10:08 pm

“May not be perfect”? I’ll say.

Still no word from Penny’s supporters as to why she will not submit her conflict of interest—running for office while keeping her position as town administrator and using town resources to garner votes—to our town’s (very friendly to this administration) ethics board.

By still waiting for ethics ruling on 10/02/2013 at 7:05 am

Dear passion
The only history I see being made is that for the first time new castle would have elected an unstable person to lead us through controversial times

By Dazed and confused on 10/02/2013 at 7:45 am

To Dear passion greenstein,

What is ridiculous is how the democrats in office have so damaged this town.  Nothing peaceful about that.  Rob says where he stands.  It is Penny who says nothing. She is banking on being elected while keeping secretive because she is a democrat.  I am very discomforted by that.

I have heard from many democrats, like myself, in town that they have had enough of the secret, behind closed doors governing and are happy for a different course.


By are you serious ? on 10/02/2013 at 10:14 am

Dear mr greenstein.  Your pseudonym postings seem to me that you are trying to be a white version of rev. Al sharpton

By Voter on 10/02/2013 at 7:29 pm

Could you give specifics of greenstein’s. (your) agenda for change and how it differs from the current administration.  I have no opinion as to the current people. What exactly do yo say is wrong with them?  Specific examples only.  Please don’t repeat your post

By Dear passion on 10/02/2013 at 8:23 pm

This Election is not about the “individual person seeking to be Supervisor.” This Election is about the direction that we as the majority of the Community would like to see New Castle head towards. Now, how is this posting affecting you? Is it pro Greenstein or pro Penny? If you view it as being pro Greenstein, then this means that you would like New Castle to head towards a different direction in getting the business of the residents done. So you can either stay the course, or change course - it’s up to you!

By Understand? on 10/03/2013 at 1:47 pm

Penny’s supporters,

Why has Penny disabled comments on the videos she’s made? I though she wanted to be in touch with the people?

By bob on 10/04/2013 at 7:08 am

TO: Dear Sir, have you no decency?,

I don’t think you made up your mind because of a campaign mailing.

By bob on 10/04/2013 at 7:10 am


Do you think calling someone “a white version of rev. Al sharpton [sic]” is racist?

By curious on 10/04/2013 at 7:12 am

Again, you say nothing.  What changes are you talking about besides opposing retail at CC and helping the local merchants who don’t live here make a better living?  Among your many problems is that We DO understand what you are about….. Personal political gain and increase in law practice income and ego.  Not about new castle as a whole

By Dear greenstein aliases on 10/04/2013 at 7:47 am

Dear passion,

You ask, “What exactly do yo say is wrong with them?”

Why won’t Penny submit her conflict of interest—running for office while keeping her position as town administrator and using town resources to garner votes—to our town’s (very friendly to this administration) ethics board?

11:30 a.m. Fri. Oct. 4: Editor’s Note:  The Ethics Board rang in on October 3.  I’ll publish it shortly.

By still waiting on 10/04/2013 at 7:54 am

Dear “Understand,”

Rob Greenstein will take us in a new direction?

The question is WHAT direction.  That’s what we’re afraid of.

By A loose cannon? on 10/04/2013 at 10:00 am

What’s wrong with Al Sharpton?

By Wondering on 10/04/2013 at 10:08 am

@Dear passion,

Greenstein has said that he believes the master plan update should precede ANY development.
Penny has said NOTHING.

Greenstein is against the horrible Conifer boondoggle. 
Penny has said NOTHING.

Greenstein has said that he is against overriding the master plan to bring retail to CC
Penny has said NOTHING.

Greenstein has said that he wants to see sensible development in the existing downtown hamlets,
AFTER, thoughtful planning.
Penny has said NOTHING.

Hard to understand how you have missed all this.

By Penny says NOTHING on 10/04/2013 at 11:30 am

It appears that you are trying to define the election in a way that merely promotes your (greenstein) candidacy.  Not as to what it really is… Electing measured mature people who know the town well

By Understand on 10/04/2013 at 11:35 am

We all know that rev al is an opportunist. Whether he be green , yellow, purple, blue.  He is a big mouth who shows up for tv cameras simply to stir up dissension….....that is greenstein without cameras

By Voter on 10/04/2013 at 12:04 pm

It’s not about penny , mr greenstein, it’s about you

By Penny nothing on 10/04/2013 at 12:39 pm

Nothing wrong with good ol’ Rev. Al. It’s the person who is posting who has the problem.

By look in the mirror on 10/04/2013 at 12:51 pm

Rev Al in today’s climate can be just like an extreme tea party member in terms of harmfully promoting a hurtful agenda.  Skin color is irrelevant to behavior and manner of thinking.  It’s hard to point to rev Al’s personal financial agenda. He landed a talk show for himself based upon his controversial nature.  Mr “green” apparently wants to host his version of the same for his paycheck (not necessarily in salary).  “Real bosses of New Castle “.  His behavior reminds me of Tom O’Reilly on Fox News. I don’t think anyone in this town wants a person who acts like greenstein or says what he says in his dozens of posts written with aliases,

By Not a racist on 10/04/2013 at 12:58 pm

We have a town hall that we all understand how it currently works, how it conducts its meetings, how it keeps intact its own inner circle of influences, and how it handles the business of all who need the help and guidance of town hall. The question is, do we like the quality and level of help and assistance that we all get out of town hall? Do we like the guidance and speed at which all matters are addressed?

Then we have Greenstein and Brodsky, who want to develop a new approach as to how town hall should operate, who both understand the community, and who like no one else before them actually made personal phone calls, and knocked on doors to say hello…can we talk…how can New Castle help you…what changes do you think need to be made? WOW! If a person has 27 years worth of experience, why would they just expect anyone to arrive at a place where they are speaking to basically either come to complain or support their candidacy? Or, announce that “all are free to call me up.” How come Penny does not pick the person of the day and say “hi.”

This election is about bringing back an intuitive common sense based town hall back into town hall. The next Supervisor will be judged on the little things like getting a roof top generator approved, a deck, a pool, an addition, a dormer, a septic system, permits to cut your trees, and keeping Chappaqua what we know it to be and want left intact. The next Supervisor will have to demand that the CYA principle that is practiced by many in town hall is replaced by common sense that is presently practiced really by no one. It’s time to take white out to the red tape staining all the actions that town hall addresses.

Penny what does having 27 years experience mean to you, and how would you put it to work? A lot of people like what Greenstein and Brodsky have to offer, so what do you stand for? Right now I am voting for Greenstein, unless you can articulate the marvel of having 27 years under your belt and how you would use it!

By Happy face! on 10/04/2013 at 1:11 pm

Not a racist,

Methinks thou protests too much.

By look in the mirror on 10/04/2013 at 3:27 pm

Happy face!,

Head on down to Healthy Choice Pharmacy. We’re sure Penny will meet you there.

By meet Penny on 10/04/2013 at 3:30 pm

Dear bob,

Have you seen the mailing? That’s the point.  Please look at it if you haven’t already done so.

I usually agree with your blogs and find you an intelligent observer.

All the best.

By Sir, have you no decency? on 10/04/2013 at 5:49 pm

This just another greenstein alias

By Dear happy face on 10/04/2013 at 5:57 pm

That is the problem, way too many outsiders know town hall well. We need town hall to know and understand itself, and to see its own reflection in the residents of the area. We have a town hall that does not represent New Castle. Who can change this and how? I know, do you?

By 2nd Understand on 10/04/2013 at 8:30 pm

Just so long as the person is calm, steady, and not looking for too much personal gain.  This is not a description of mr.  Greenstein

By Dear 2nd understand on 10/05/2013 at 8:45 am

Me. Greenstein,  so we must rely on what you may or may not think in the future? That is your secret plan? This is educated new castle, not a suggestible poor area.

For the umpteenth time tell us what you will do that is different other than what your intuition or tarot card reader tells you

By Intuitive common sense? on 10/05/2013 at 8:53 am

Not a racist,

I think you mean Bill O’Reilly. Duh.

By look in the mirror on 10/05/2013 at 10:04 am

Dear Sir, have you no decency?,

Now that the story of the Town Administrator’s intimidation of a merchant has come to light, are you still so influenced by a campaign mailing.


By bob on 10/05/2013 at 10:10 am

Post a comment:

Display Name*:

Your Display Name will be associated with this comment on We encourage commentators to use their real name or initials.

We encourage civil, civic discourse. In other words, be pithy and polite. All comments will be reviewed before publication to assure that this standard is met.