I think Mr. Kakish's desire to be a lawyer is long shot. Besides his less than perfect financial history and telling the press he was an attoney before taking the bar exam, life just threw him a curve ball. Seems like the Superior Court Judges added a few other requirements in order to be admitted to the bar which includes 'fitness to practice law.'
This interview in which 'Joe doesn't know' wasn't very good 'lawyering skills', was it. Can you imagine the members of the Bar Examing Committee watching this disastrous interview and picturing what this guy would be like in a court room? I dunno, but call it a hunch but I'll bet ya 1 cent his name won't be posted as one of those passing the bar exam.
But it's okay, because if he does by miracle ever pass the bar but gets denied because of the errors of Brad Kendell and the PoJo News and Jim Langan he can reapply to be admitted. But he'll have to take the bar exam again. Better start studying!!!!!
On June 20, 2011, the judges of the Superior Court adopted revisions to the Practice Book, including those found below. These revisions were published in the Connecticut Law Journal on July 5, 2011 and become effective on September 1, 2011. Additions are signified by underlining; deletions are signified by brackets.
Sec. 2-5A. GOOD MORAL CHARACTER AND FITNESS TO PRACTICE LAW
(a) Good moral character shall be construed to include, but not be limited to, the following:
(1) The qualities of honesty, fairness, candor and trustworthiness;
(2) Observance of fiduciary responsibility;
(3) Respect for and obedience to the law; and
(4) Respect for the legal rights of others and the judicial process, as evidenced by conduct other than merely initiating or pursuing litigation.
(b)Fitness to practice law shall be construed to include the following:
(1) The cognitive capacity to undertake fundamental lawyering skills such as problem solving, legal analysis and reasoning, legal research, factual investigation, organization and management of legal work, making appropriate reasoned legal judgments, and recognizing and solving ethical dilemmas;
(2) The ability to communicate legal judgments and legal information to clients, other attorneys, judicial and regulatory authorities, with or without the use of aids or devices; and
(3) The capability to perform legal tasks in a timely manner
Art. VI-12. REAPPLICATION AFTER DENIAL.
An applicant who is denied admission to the bar for lack of good moral character and/or fitness shall not be permitted to reapply within two years of denial; the denial may specify a longer period of time. An A bar examination applicant so denied shall be required to retake and pass the bar examination. A motion applicant so denied shall be required to either reapply for admission without examination if qualified or apply, sit for and pass the bar examination.
|File Size: ||453 kb|
|File Type: || pdf|
|File Size: ||482 kb|
|File Type: || pdf|Today the supervisor candidates spoke with the Poughkeepsie Journal regarding the campaign issues. Personally, I can't believe I sat through the entire 45 minutes of this. It was like a trainwreck, you didn't want to look but the sheer morbid curiousity of seeing a disaster taking place in front of your eyes kept me going through the entire forty-five 'stab me with a plastic spork' minutes. As I reiterate at the bottom of the page, regardless of your political party, you have a right to ask your town committee why they endorsed these candidates whom stated in the interview that they didn't know, couldn't provide an explanation or gave incorrect information. Personally, I believe that the residents of Hyde Park deserve better than the two candidates that were chosen for them to vote for (Bad or Worse). Ask the Republican and Democrat Town Committees why these particular candidates were endorsed when the possiblty of other candidates that more qualified were not:
Republican Town Committe, Chairwoman Jean McArthur @ McCarth82@aol.com
Democrat Town Committee, Chair Pat Dreveny, Chair @ firstname.lastname@example.org
Per the attached PDF, you may also contact Joe Kakish and Aileen Rohr to directly to question them on their indiscrepancies.
Cell Phone: 914-582-3721
Frankly, I'm scared from what I heard coming from their mouths. In my opinion the family pet is more qualified to be Supervisor then these two are based upon their explanations to the questions that were asked. Say what you will about the present Supervisor, Tom Martino, but at least Mr. Martino is knowledgable, has statistics and data, is well prepared and would have provided intelligent answers to the issues that were asked in this interview. I'm also sure he can elaborate further on the 2% tax cap and is familiar with the the problems Fairview Fire District is having.
Here's is a video of Tom Martino when he ran for Supervisor in 2009 that was on the Poughkeepsie Journal website (coincidently listed as a related video to the supervisor disaster). Compare Mr. Martino's vision of Hyde Park to the two candidate's and you'll notice the day/night differences.
Mr. Martino kept that promise. Taxes were raised 0.9% as opposed to the 29% he quoted in 2009 and the Hyatt Hotel project and DD project was approved during the time he was in office.
Let's meet the new candidates.
Joe Kakish stated he is a life long resident of the community. While Kakish attended Hyde Park Schools, he actually grew up in Poughkeepsie, at 22 Corine Court, in the Town of Poughkeepsie Voting District. That's the address in which he was served a legal judgement in which resulted in the repossession of his car in 2001. He moved to Hyde Park in 2004. He has not voted or participated in town government since that time.
He stated he wanted open, transparent communication. Perhaps part of this openness should be forthright about what town he actually grew up in and how the $100,000 in legal judgements on records will affect his performance as supervisor. He also failed to mention that he had claimed, when he was nominated as a candidate in June, that he was an attorney which was published in both the PoJo and HV News(he has not been admitted to the bar). He took the bar exam in CT and the results should be posted within the next several weeks and I am wondering, based upon his performace and ill prepared statements and not be knowledgable of the issues, how can he expect to perform in a court room, arguing a case in front of a judge or representing a client in legal matters? Would you want him representing you?
Aileen Rohr wants to bring a positive message to Hyde Park and make it a 'strong commercial hub.' She listed her credentials which she states makes her qualifies as supervisor, however, she failed to mention her time as spokesperson for Stop the Sprawl. Google Stop the Sprawl and her name and you will learn that Ms. Rohr was instrumental in preventing business growth in the town. I also posted in past blogs the letters she wrote to local newspapers that supported her view. Ms. Rohr also states she that she wants to run a 'fiscally tight ship.' Does this include reinstating Ms. Joanne Lown, the previous bookkeeper that was irresponsible with the town's finances as documented by the 2006 audit (since they are apparently good friends)?
How do the candidates feel about the 2% property tax cap?
They stated they support it (the tax cap). It sounds good, but in reality, that means that taxes can be increased no more than 2% per year. Okay, compare that to the amount of inflation. With that being said, cost of living increases, inflation increases, but taxes can only be raised 2%. If taxes do have to be increased then it must go to a public vote and who will want their taxes raised even if it's a necessity. Unfortunately, that means that services will be cut if taxes cannot be increased to reflect inflation and increase in costs. It also means that town personnel may be downsized and how about the snow plowing and highway maintenance? And what the candidates DIDN'T mention is that 70% of the property taxes are comprised of school taxes. Why didn't they know that and/or elborate on that? Why didn't they explain the tax cap and both the pros and cons to having the tax cap? Did they even know what the tax cap was?
A peek at the 2% tax cap in the news in regards to town governent in articles is that most of the town administrations in NYS are WORRIED about the tax cap. So why arent's these candidates sharing those same concerns?
Here are some articles that address it. Do a google search "2% tax cap" for similar results.
How will these candidates increase tax revenue?
Joe Kakish mentioned that Hyde Park has seen an increase in property taxes. In 2010, taxes increased 0.9%. Did he even look at this tax bill? Will he be able to sustain that same percentage if he's supervisor? How will he do so? How will be out together a budget of $11 million dollars when he can't even manage his own personal finances?
His plan is to develop the Rt. 9 highway as he stated that Rt. 9 has 'lots of property. There are some problems with this.
1) Rt 9 has tax exempt lands which include the National Park Service, Winikee Land Trust and Scenic Hudson. YOU can't build on these lands and collect revenue in taxes. Perhaps Mr. Kakish should get his butt down to the Town Clerk's office and file a FOIL request on exactly the land holdings of these organizations that are located along Rt. 9 and perhaps he can rethink the statement of 'lots of property.'
2) Hyde Park lacks a sewer district. How is he going to install one at approx. $300 a foot to support buildiing on Route 9. If he collected the funds (remember that 2% tax cap) where is he going to install the sewer district? There is no point to putting in a sewer district through the tax exempt lands because there are no benefit units that will use and pay for the usage of the system.
3) Where is he going to build on the lots of property on Rt. 9? Knock down some exisiting buildings and displace existing businesses?
4) The only ample size parcel of land is that able to be developed is across from the CIA. It has the resources and size alloted to build on. I don't believe that parcel of land can be defined as 'lots' as it is contained in one particular area.
5) Mr. Kakish stated that the new Stop & Shop and Dunkin' Donuts wouldn't generate any further tax dollars in their new locations. Doesn't he know, as the interviewer pointed out that taxes are based upon the accessed PROPERTY VALUE? If you have a larger amount of property and a larger commerical space, then you have more a higher tax base. In addition, once a business reaches a certain threshold on their gross income the town can charge a certain percentage for taxes. This applies to large businesses, such as big box stores of which there are NONE in town. Okay, I know this and I'm not even running for supervisor (or have any desire to be running for any sort of office). Why doesn't he know this and he's running for supervisor?
6) Mr. Kakish's relatives (THE NESHEIWATS, his mother own many gas stations in the area. When the subject of a Stop & Shop gas station came up, he quickly dismissed the topic. Is it possibile he wants to prevent business coming into compete with his family's business?
7) At one point Mr. Kakish looks into the camera and states that 'no offense' to the businesses already in town, but there needs to be new ones when asked about the tax revenue that the new and larger locations that Stop & Shop and DD would generate. How could you not be offended? I'm not a business owner and I felt offended.
Ms. Rohr is on the planning board and mentioned maximizing the tax base. I would like to point out again, that she was the spokesperson for Stop the Sprawl. She also mentioned the Hyatt Hotel project and the medical arts building that the Planning Board approved. Has anyone driven by the medical arts building. Notice there's not work going on? That's because the developer failed to obtain the final approval and there is a stop work order in places. Hmmm.
When asked how would they approach consolidating services with other towns.
Joe Kakish wasn't aware than Hyde Park shares services with other municipalies. For example, it shares an ambulance district with Pleasant Valley (the same service that Joanne Lown failed to pay for three years).
He also stated, per verbatim at timemark 15:06, that he 'hopes to find a way once I get in there (in office) because I'm not too familiar with things that are with the town.'
But to ease your mind, he DOES plan on finding out 'these things' once he is elected on how he can work with other towns. OMG.
Aileen Rohr suggests renting out the police and facility to other towns to conduct court proceedings. Does she think that other towns that are also in a financial crisis (especially with the 2% tax cap) are going to pay their town employees to travel to Hyde Park, which includes mileage and pay Hyde Park for a rental fee to use the court facility.
Sharing highway maintenance costs is nice, but this topic has been reviewed by the current Town Supervisor and the adjacent municipalies are not interested. Why? Union issues, or reducing their highway superintendents to foremans or eliminiating the position altogether or laying off existing personnel is a reason to why there is not already shared highway departments.
The Hyde Park Police Department
Joe Kakish and Aileen Rohir spoke about the Katie Filiberti case. While they may express their own personal opinions, they have no authority or business to comment on the issue. They can only comment as private citizens because they was not privy to the details of the case. Oh, and Mr. Kakish mentioned how he grew up in Hyde Park under the juristiction of the Hyde Park Police and were confident in the services they provided (living in Hyde Park). Again, he lived in Poughkeepsie.
The Hyatt Hotel Project
Aileen Rohr mentioned the PILOT program. First off, PILOT, or Payment in Lieu of Taxes cannot be approved by the planning board. PILOT can only be approved by the Town Board and to date, it has not. How this program can already be in place as she had stated has me scratching my head.
Ms. Rohr also did not mention 485-B, which can be found at the following link, as it does apply to the Hyatt Project in terms of the tax rates that will be collected on the property. Ms.Rohr stated they she has a background in real estate and both her and her husband manage rental properties. Why did she provide incorrect information in the interview?
Ms. Rohr didn't mention several things about the connecting roads and the DOT regulations.
First off, the connecting roads she talked about that would be located behind the plaza are on private land which presents problems. Who will be responsible for the maintenance? Plowing? Repairs? The town will not. This is why they were not included in the project's plans.
Secondly, the CIA wants the hotel built ASAP. Having a project approved by DOT can take several months. Look how long the curb cut approvals are taking for the new Dunkin' Donuts retail space. In order to avoid the lengthy amount of time, the CIA opted to drop the DOT funding. Read about it here:
The St. Andrews Area
Joe Kakish stated 'was sitting around, with builders and engineers'. What builders and engineers would be consulting and meeting with a long-shot candidate to discuss the future of Hyde Park. Yeah, I'm sure he was 'sitting around with builders' alright. Probably in the same aisle at the local Home Depot in the garden center.
Aileed Rohr stated she is in favor, of developing the St. Andrew's Road however, I posted a blog containing a letter Ms. Rohr wrote the following:
The Hyde Park Town Board is proposing a very significant change with Local Law D. It can be viewed at the official town website, hydeparkny.us.
The law will rezone the area at our southern gateway, the Bellefield District, to "general commercial" from "tourist commercial." This will drastically alter what businesses are permitted and also change how much can be residential, the density, and other aesthetic and functional aspects of this important area.
Bellefield features a 339-acre parcel across from the Culinary Institute of America. This property has a history - it was lost to the county for failure to pay taxes. After many years, the county sold it for a mere $2.75 million, justifying the low sales price with the promise that new development here would provide both a commercial sewer district and commercial uses that would not compete with the existing town center but would enhance it with complementary businesses. With proposed Local Law D, Hyde Park will get neither of these benefits. Instead, our gateway will be open to more strip malls.
These changes should not be instituted rashly. The bottom line is the democratic process is alive and well in Hyde Park and we all should be part of it.
There will be a public hearing on this proposed law Monday at the Hyde Park Town Hall. Please consider joining me in letting our officials know why these changes require careful consideration.
Hyde Park Planning Board Member Hyde Park
The Drive-in Theater
Joseph Kakish was incorrect. It is not held by Scenic Hudson anymore but was transferred to the National Park Service. He should know this if he wants to be supervisor of the town. I posted a blog regarding the transfer and included the article that was publishes in the Poughkeepsie Journal. Mr. Kakish is apparently not up to current events in Hyde Park.
Fairview Fire District
Joe Kakish was a volunteer with the Fairview Fire Dept (when he was 16), but in his desire to be supervisor, he stated (marker 34:34) he's not too familiar with what's going on with the department. Um, well perhaps it has something to do with Marist College being tax-exempt s well as other tax exempt properties in the area that utilize the services regularly? . He stated was not aware of this and stated he has to look into it further. He resided in the Fairview Fire District until 2004 when he moved to Hyde Park. Why was he not familiar with the issues in Fairview if he was a lifelong resident there (and a volunteer at 16!)?
Aileen Rohr also doesn't have the details and cannot comment on it. But a member of her team does (The candidate for that Ward, Mr. Petit) so she'll have to consult with him.
This has been a pressing issue for years. Fairness for Fairview is NOTHING new. During the last election, a sign was posted at the Fairview Fire House that notified the public that Tom Martino would be meeting with the residents to address their concerns. Why haven't these candidates initiated that process and taken an interest as well?
Mr. Kakish gave an incorrect answer and said he supported a metro-north train station to which the interviewer gave the actual meaning of what a 'whiste-stop' was.
Mr. Kakish stated he was for either (metro-north and whistle stop) but couldn't give a definate because he 'would have to look at it.'
I would like to know where Mr. Kakish would propose putting the anemities and parking space needed to support a metro-north train station. The station would need to be updated to be ADA compliant, and I'm sure Mr. Kakish could single handedly negotiate with Metro-North to move their last stop on the Hudson line a few more miles north to the small station at Hyde Park.
Aileen Rohr is in support of the Wetlands Law, however the orignal Wetlands Law was a piggyback to the existing State Law. The piggyback was said to be too restrictive. Rather than placing more restrictions, perhaps a better drainage system designed by engineers in affected areas would be better suited?
For example, the Valkill Creek that caused major flooding problems in Hyde Park has a dam that is located at the Val-kill historic site. From reports, the flood gates are not opened during heavy rains, which causes the lake at Val-kill to back up and flood. The town does not have juristiction on Park land but there are other options in terms of other ways to divert the flooding to occuring.
Joe Kakish doesn't know what his stance is because he would have to talk to people about it.
GIVEN THESE CANDIDATES RESPONSES AND THE DISCREPENCIES THEY'VE MADE IN THIS INTERVIEW, ARE THEY QUALIFIED TO BE THE NEXT CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER? THEY ARE NOT FAMILIAR AND ADMITTED THEY NOT UNKNOWLEDGABLE OF THE ISSUES THAT WERE ASKED OF THEM. REGARDLESS OF YOUR PARTY, REPUBLICAN, CONSERVATIVE, INDEPENDENT OR DEMOCRAT, ASK YOUR PARTY WHY THEY ENDORSED CANDIDATES THAT DID NOT HAVE ANSWERS OR DIDN'T KNOW THE ISSUES!!!! VOTING IS YOUR RIGHT AND YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED FAIRLY AND JUSTLY.
THIS IS YOUR TOWN!!!! YOU DECIDE ITS FUTURE!!!