.

Segerdahl: I Will Provide Proven, Positive Leadership

Village trustee candidate for the East Jon Segerdahl submitted the following letter to the editor.

The ads and letters to the media from Mr. Episcopia and his supporters state that he “remains committed to earning your trust and support” - but he indiscriminately pedals LIES:

LIE #1: “I’m not silent on crime in the East. I strongly urged the police commissioner to provide for increased police presence in the East.”

FACT: The residents of the East had no communication from Trustees Episcopia or Donnelly during the burglaries spree in 2011 and 2012, and only found out about the increased police presence at the EPOA meeting on January 17th.”

LIE #2: I voted to hire 5 new police officers.”

FACT:  5 police officers were hired to fill vacant positions.

LIE #3:  “Taxes are up less than 1% in the last 5 years.” “Taxes are well below the CPI of 2.7%”  

FACT: Check your tax bill. The Garden City News states that our taxes have gone up over 17% since 2005.

LIE #4: Episcopia takes credit for the Aaa bond rating the village enjoys.

FACT:  The Moody's rating agency did not upgrade Garden City to Aaa on April 30, 2010, but recalibrated ratings to a new rating system and specifically stated: Quote: "should not view the recalibrating of municipal ratings as rating upgrades...This recalibration does not reflect an improvement in credit quality or a change in our credit opinion"
Source: Moody's website, April 30, 2010 Global Credit Research Report on the Village of Garden City's (NY) $6.8 Million GO Bonds

LIE #5: “Jon Segerdahl refused to follow the rules and failed to appear before the EPOA Nominating Committee.”

FACT: The process Jon Segerdahl followed for filing an independent nomination is in the EPOA bylaws, because the founding fathers of Garden City that wrote the Community Agreement provided this option so the people would always have a choice.

LIE #6: “Jon Segerdahl voted to make the St. Paul’s playing fields into parkland, depriving the trustees of options.”

FACT: The move to parkland designation for St. Paul’s fields has benefited every resident and prevented trustees with ties to developers or commercial real estate from selling the fields off!

LIE #7: “Supports saving the St. Paul’s clock tower.”

FACT: Voted against accepting funds for the full repair from Bob & Pat Kaliban, and against accepting funds from the CSSP, even though the village attorney said the village could take the money.

LIE #8: “St. Paul’s could cost $30-40 million to restore and our village budget is $53M.”

FACTS: St. Paul’s budget to create a Community Center has been verified at $10M by village-dictated experts. Episcopia supports hiring a consultant to create a recreation center that could easily cost $60-$100 million.
 
Do you want a trustee who blatantly tells mistruths and obviously can’t be trusted? Or do you want a trustee who will provide proven, positive leadership and a voice for our future?

Vote for Jon Segerdahl on Tuesday from 4:30 to 9 p.m. at Stewart School.

GCRes1 January 31, 2012 at 05:03 PM
Continuing: #7: “Supports saving the St. Paul’s clock tower.” Again, as with most of these, Nick hasn't said this, so it shouldn't be in quotes. What Nick has said is that the "solution" proposed by Mayor Brudie and his CSSP allies would ALSO be an eyesore, so he is opposed to it. He and others have also pointed out that the $11,000 is essentially made up, and was a quote provided by someone who now fails to answer his phone. The estimate, the check, it's all theatre by the CSSP crowd. Nick has advocated getting a real quote for a real aesthetic solution (a "faux" clockface or similar). He thinks the Village should pay for repairs to public buildings, not private citizens. He has said each of these things publicly and repeatedly, and Jon knows it.
GCRes1 January 31, 2012 at 05:10 PM
Continuing: #8: “St. Paul’s could cost $30-40 million to restore and our village budget is $53M.” Jon's "FACTS": St. Paul’s budget to create a Community Center has been verified at $10M by village-dictated experts. Episcopia supports hiring a consultant to create a recreation center that could easily cost $60-$100 million. This one is my favorite. Jon, have you read the FEIS? Because if you did, you would write a fake Nick quote based on the right statistic: The FEIS estimates that the cost to restore St. Paul's is $30-$50 million. $50 million. That is to restore the building, bring it up to code, but NOT ADAPT IT FOR A USE. That costs more. The CSSP plan renovates 8% of the building. It leaves the rest of the structure rotting around it. It doesn't work, and every serious person who has looked at your plan says so. And of course, if they get their $10 million (if you win this election and GIVE THEM their $10 million), they will ask for the rest. The CSSP plan is the first step to spending $50 million or more. Nick is in favor of (and has voted for) a $20,000 engineering study to see whether it is feasible to reduce the size of the building and stabilize it. Others are studying a rec center, and I ams ure Nick is eager to see those studies as well. No one has any proposal for a rec center, of any size or cost, on which you could base your above estimate. You made it up.
GCRes1 January 31, 2012 at 05:16 PM
Mr. Segerdahl: I call for a full retraction of this letter to the editor. It is filled with incorrect statements and inaccurate quotes and is beneath the standard of a candidate for Village trustee. I think you should be embarrassed to have signed your name to it.
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 05:16 PM
?
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 05:30 PM
This is SAD. All I keep reading from Nick's camp is BS propaganda. Nick blatantly lies over and over again, better yet he actually prints different figures on his flyers than his articles. Secondly, the supporters for this guy, (GCRes1, John Ertle, PK in GC, Jack ONiel, Vertas, Bob) same people over and over flooding these sites blatenly lie! They have been caught lying or making up figures on previous articles. I have submitted numerous posts and have been truthful with all my figures as to not be deceptive or misleading when stating facts. I support the challangers because they are honest people who have the general concerns for the people. Nick and his crew of online cronies can only attack one thing, Jon stated he thinks the CSSP is a good start. If you want to extrapolate that statement into Jon will be irresponsible with his spending go ahead, but it is not FACT, it is a leap of opinion to discredit him. I have caught so many of you in Nick's camp making up numbers and figures, and conceding the fact that your candidate now supports an recreation center. That 100% confirms your campaign is built on total hyprocrisy.
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 05:31 PM
GCRes1 you also conceded a misappropriations of funds is OK. Nick ONLY acts on things when he is slapped in the face by the people or put against the wall. He takes no initiative on his own. What proposal has Nick himself brought to the table on his own? NONE! He votes down just about everything, even at times 7-1 (perfect example, the nursey school lease). Nick ghosts his true tax savings ability by pillaging funds like reserves specifically left for St. Paul's. He then has the nerve to charge the people $800,000 for studies for a referendum to demolish a building, which was put to a vote and was embarrassingly crushed 75% to 25%. How about a preliminary poll Nick!, Wow! Way to know your residents! VOTE HARRINGTON AND SEGERDAHL and GET RID OF THESE CROOKS!
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 05:46 PM
Thank you James, the rhetoric from this group of clowns is unreal. Facts are facts and Nick is blatantly lying to mislead voters into voting for him! GCres please try and defend that... You also hurled the comment that Jon would spend any amount on St Paul’s and at any cost. Complete lie! You only retracted your statement when Raymond actually posted the full transcript recordings of the meeting. Should I repost your apology? Flooding the people with misleading propaganda in an attempt to hold down the will of the residents of GC is quite shameful. Nick won’t spend 100-200 dollars a year on restoration effort, but he will spend 3k-5k in one week on false ads to support his self-interest campaign. I am sure if he found a way to use St Paul’s reserve funds to fund his campaign he would have done that as well. Yup, That is me making the same leap of judgment you all carelessly take part in.. How does it feel?
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 06:02 PM
Bob what do you think the costs of Nick and Brian's Recreation Center is going to be? Save those bumper stickers if they are elected my friend. Bob I think you just joined your friends, living in the land of hypocrisy. The person who stated you shouldn’t live in this town if you can't afford $100 to $200 dollars extra a year might have been harsh , but don’t you realize he is also supporting your rec center idea. I am sorry this is really funny...
GCBob January 31, 2012 at 06:03 PM
I'm still waiting for Mr. Segerdahl to answer how he is going to stop the crime in the East. Is he going to move the police force to just cover the East leaving the rest of village without police protection or is he going to double or triple our police so that he can put an officer on every corner? I know, he is going to put on his mask, black cape and patrol the East under the cover of darkness. Now that I would like to see.
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 06:09 PM
John- They addressed the issue several months later when the topic of what to do with the crime spree was brought up. Whether they were aware of it or not I can't state facutally. However If they were aware when you claim than that is even worse because they waited several months to address the issue!! Meaning they only waited till other members of the Board addressed the issue before they chimed in. Whose heads are in the sand ?
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 06:10 PM
PK keep telling yourself that. Your friend Nick would pick pocket you and claim he saved you that money.
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 06:15 PM
Actually Raymond the reason why Jon is bringing up crime in the east is because there has been crime in the EAST!
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 06:31 PM
Oh Jack ,no I don’t think Jon is going do to that. I think he has lost a step since his Softball days. But JR statements do have some truth to it. We could have had 5 extra police officers the entire time, but because of people like Nick and his nickel and diming those positions were left empty in order to save money. Only when crime started to get out of control was his hand forced to react. But Nick claims he helped fill those positions. Though true, completely misleading.
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 06:35 PM
DId you even read why we have a AAA rating? Nothing to do with Nick or the trustee's.
GCBob January 31, 2012 at 06:42 PM
Trojan4life, if you are going contradict me then please get it correct. The statement that was made was by a CSSP supporter who is backing their plan and he did state an amount of $100 to $200 extra per month, not per year. This elites attitude just turns most people off. The jury is still out on the Rec. Center.
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 06:43 PM
LTR - Those vacant spots were only vacant because your candidate attempts to keep costs down by leaving those spots open. He is reactionary. If he was a baseball manager he would field a team with less players to save cost, only when his team is beaten repeatedly would he add the extra players. He is giving the illusion he is saving us money, however he puts us at risk. Only when crime rose and it was brought to his attention did he fill them.
Jack O'Niel January 31, 2012 at 06:56 PM
Yeah that would be sweet. The home burglaries are trouble but the rifling through open cars can be stopped pretty quickly. Take your expensive toys in the house with you at night... and lock your doors.
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 07:01 PM
I did get it correct. You are insinuating that the supporter is attacking you personally. Since he is a supporter of Jon then he is an extension of what Jon believes and depicts an example of the arrogance of Jon’s supporters, right? But what he said could be said about Brian and Nick's recreation plan. I am sure if he made those comments in reverse and ended with Vote Nick Episcopia you would have remained silent. I guess one person’s harsh comments should speak for the whole ? What he said was harsh and little out there, but the statement can also be made in support of your candidates. Bob you started your comment with an attack on Segerdahl . Jon Segerdahl did not make the comment and showed no evidence he would support that comment? How is Jon Segerdahl delusional for something someone else said? He didn’t even make the comment, a unknown person did . Once again since the actual comments could apply to your candidates campaign that would make Brian and Nick delusional as well according to your reasoning. If you started with this one person who supported Segerdahl is delusional I would have let it be.
PK in GC January 31, 2012 at 07:17 PM
Jon Segerdahl's campaign has captured people's emails from somewhere (a list they probably were not authorized to use) and they are sending unsolicited emails to people. He should be ashamed that he has to resort to such low tactics. I received an email myself and I never gave them my email.
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 07:33 PM
PK i think it is called Facebook. Have you ever heard of that?
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 07:37 PM
Bob I think Mr. Segerdahl would have assigned the appropriate amount of police officers at the beginning, instead of having a small number of officers working overtime. Nick was hoping they would be able to handle the situation and save money at the same time. He was wrong unfortunately and a situation like that is a gamble with the safety of residents. Only when Nick discovered he could save money by cutting overtime pay and because crime was up did he fill those vacant spots.
Robert Bolebruch January 31, 2012 at 07:39 PM
I wish that you guys would just get together and express your frustrations and conspiracy theories at a meeting rather then monopolizing every letter, article or e-mail about this election. After awhile it just becomes noise. If I was voting I would want to see the issues and various opinions on the numerous challenges that this village faces rather then the constant personal attacks. Two of you have accounted for almost 50% of the comments. Back and forth and back and forth. My gosh....take a break. I am sure that many people would want to read more information about the choices but you guys are drowning everyone else out. It is a shame because you make valid points but the ping pong match is brutal to have to watch. Good luck to you all.
Raymond Rudolph January 31, 2012 at 07:45 PM
Trojan, I am not supporting either of these candidates, but I had to comment on your statement about the Police and filling the 5 vacancies. If I am not mistaken, and if I am someone correct me, the Police run a 5-5-4 rotation on posts. So, there are 5 cars during the day, 5 in the evening and 4 on the overnights. The filling of the 5 vacant spots had nothing to do with maintaining that staffing and it's what we had before filling the slots and now have after. Unless the GCPD added cars to the rotation, and I am not sure they did, the safety level of the Village has not been compromised by any vacant officer slots. This is purely a smoke screen and isn't an issue at all. Yes, crime is up mostly due to the economy and the GCPD has most likely increased patrol presence in certain areas, but I do not think they increased the amount of patrol cars on duty at any given time.
Raymond Rudolph January 31, 2012 at 07:50 PM
Bob B, It's kind of funny. Neither the Segerdahl supproters nor Episcopia supporters will sway the other in any way. All comments have been skewed to either side without many being totally accurate. What is clear is that neither Jon or Nick has a clear plan going forward because they all want to talk about what they have done, in the past. I would love to hear their ideas on what they WILL DO to fix GC's finances and aging infrastructure and how that plan will affect our taxes?
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 07:50 PM
Wouldn't you have been even happier if you had those 5 police officers from the start? Not empty vacant slots?
Trojan4life January 31, 2012 at 07:59 PM
Bob with having 5 extra spots filled doesn’t that give one the ability to add extra patrol cars if needed immediately?
GCRes1 January 31, 2012 at 08:05 PM
Raymond: What the GCPD told the public meeting of the EPOA on January 17 is that the have instituted overlapping tours (using overtime). So I believe your 5-5-4 is, for some periods of time, 5-5-5 (or similar). So patrols have in fact increased. It is my additional understanding that this increase has been concentrated in the East.
Raymond Rudolph January 31, 2012 at 08:07 PM
Trojan, While it may give them the "ability" to add patrol cars, if they did not, and I am almost sure they did not, then your arguement of increased or decreased safety is just not valid. Many of the comments on here are just totally false or taken out of context to support one way or the other. Nick is supported by the POA and thus has been "ordained" so remains silent. Jon hasn't really said how he will move forward with a specific plan even though it was requested repeatedly by myself. I want to support him, but a platform of St. Paul's and better dialogue on the board doesn't do it for me.
Raymond Rudolph January 31, 2012 at 08:12 PM
Thanks for the clarification GCRes1. So it would have the appearance that filling the 5 vacant officer slots was more of a reducing OT play than an increase in police presence issue as I have indicated. So GC was not "less" safe before they hired the new officers as has been indicated by some.
GCBob January 31, 2012 at 10:24 PM
Ray, I could not agree with you more but unfortunately we just ran out of time.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »