Still waiting for his explanation, which he promised early on, so we can decide whether or not to re-hire him. Me? I'd look for someone not quite so arrogant, who thinks or knows he can get away with this. And I don't care what other pols have done. Steve Katz is the issue in front of us right now. View Comment

There are elements of a certain dark humor here. View Comment

Well, today is the day (March 28) that Mr. Katz is due before the judge in the town in which he was ticketed. Today should be the day that he gives us - his constituency - the "facts" that will put this incident to rest. I'll wait for reportage. View Comment

I think Katz should tell the truth about the marijuana he handed over to the police officer, and AT LEAST he should resign from the Committee on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse - his membership is SO inappropriate. He's been quoted as saying that once the truth about this incident is known, everybody will be okay with it. We're still waiting for his "truth." But since he admitted handing it over to the police officer, he must have known it was in his car. Everybody who has commented on Democrats being unethical can go after these Democrats with my blessing. I'm not a Democrat. View Comment

I think Katz should tell the truth about the marijuana he handed over to the police officer, and AT LEAST he should resign from the Committee on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse - his membership is SO inappropriate. He's been quoted as saying that once the truth about this incident is known, everybody will be okay with it. We're still waiting for his "truth." But since he admitted handing it over to the police officer, he must have known it was in his car. Everybody who has commented on Democrats being unethical can go after these Democrats with my blessing. I'm not a Democrat. View Comment

According to the update on the online Wall St. Journal, Mr. Katz voted against legalizing medical marijuana about a year ago. View Comment

It's a pity that nyscof, drsusan.rubin,fluorideispoisson, and ron.eheman chose to absent themselves from the actual hearing that our Town Board sponsored last Tuesday night. Certainly the charges they make here might have been countered by some people who did attend this meeting and are credentialed to speak on the issues. View Comment

Sounds like the specs were tailor-made for this company. Me? I'd like my $70 bucks back in my own pocket, but somehow I don't think this is going to happen. Any savings will probably go into the general maw of town expenditures. If there are any savings, that is. View Comment

An. It's just Michael Grace, turning an administrative issue into another personality issue. I think this supervisor should just get on with the actual work of being the town supervisor...not the town whiner. View Comment

Yes. I also watched this meeting. Mr. Grace interrupted speakers ... Particularly pro DPW speakers, and it seemed deliberately meant to throw them off their points. No way this man is impartial. Not only did he interrupt, but he repeated himself and blurred the DPW speakers' intents. As I said, no impartiality from mr. Grace. He makes himself very clear. View Comment

I'm finding it hard to follow your objections, eyeson. When you say "our," who do you mean? Who is the EOY Committee? And what is a "coast" in hiring? And what are the extras? And, I might add, it's really not up to you to decide what warrants a debate. I think it's up to the people of Yorktown to decide what to do and how to do it. I am still waiting for Mr. DiBartolo to fully disclose his full figures ... it's the only decent thing to do. View Comment

Despite this sensationalistic headline and lead, it should be clear to everyone that this difference in opinion is based on what is good for the town of Yorktown. An adversarial attitude does this town no good, and is disrespectful to the citizens of Yorktown. Nevertheless, based on this reporting, I think it would be a good thing if Mr. DiBartolo produces the figures upon which he bases his anti-DPW opinion. I believe the pro-DPW people have put together a preliminary look at facts and figures, and made it available to the Town Board and the public; if Mr. DiBartolo has a different way of looking at figures, or, indeed, different figures, the Town can only benefit if he produces his figures to the public. View Comment

Mr. Bock clearly said, "We strongly believe that BEFORE voters are asked whether or not they want a DPW they should understand what they're being asked to vote on. " The referendum can't just be "Hey, Guys, let's put on a public referendum." It needs to be a draft of a law - so as soon as the Town Board decides to put out a referendum with the proposed law, that law will be put out for public referendum. The public can't vote on nothing. You're confusing the process. It's an effort to make our town gov't leaner and smaller. Argue that instead of personalities. Town Boards come and go, employees come and go ... the structure of our government is being addressed, not individuals. View Comment

I would think that Mr. McVetty - and all Yorktowners - would see the necessity to keep an open mind until AFTER seeing the proposed law. Research about other towns' departments of public works is ongoing by the Yorktown committee proposing a Department of Public Works, and this research is being done by volunteers, without cost to the town. This information will be presented to the town board and the public before any referendum takes place. This committee seems to be asking for a referendum, which will present its findings and a proposed law for a DPW to the voters. I think you need to see the proposed law before you start opining about it. If you still don't like it, don't vote for it. I don't think one needs to resort to emotionalism to make a point. And, for the record, I don't know Mr. DiBartolo. Probably wouldn 't recognize him if I bumped into him. My concern - and I think many town residents would agree with me - is that this town needs to save costs, if possible reduce taxes, and supply town services in the most cost-effective way possible. View Comment

Just another idea that shows that the Town Supervisor has NO IDEA about saving taxpayer money. Not a clue. View Comment

It's confusing. Mr. DiBartolo is accused, in a civil suit, of "misappropriating" town funds - and we, the taxpayers, are the ones who have paid those bills for which Mr. DiBartolo stands accused. The town pays, and thus we pay. Now the Town Board wants to pay for Mr. DiBartolo's legal representation on this same case, and we, the taxpayers get to pay for that as well. Mr. DiBartolo, it seems to me, is accused of misappropriating town funds while he was in a supervisory position ... but it seems to me that IF he did misappropriate town funds, it was because he took advantage of that supervisory position. In other words, he was acting beyond his supervisory capacity...and the town, I think, should think carefully about paying for his attorney. If Mr. DiBartolo loses this civil suit, will the Town of Yorktown (and thus, the taxpayers) pay for his monetary settlement? The taxpayers don't make out well here. View Comment