Comments on: Vanderhoef: County Exec or Senate Candidate?

By: Cliff Weathers

Cliff Weathers — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 19:40:29 +0000

There’s a huge difference between a Senator, a legislator, running for higher office and an administrator running for higher office. With the latter, it always degrades the performance of supervisory responsibilities. There are no supervisory responsibilities for legislators. So, regardless who the administrator is or what their political ideology is, their performance for their constituents will be hampered.

However, Vanderhoef takes this a step further. He is always running for something else other than the County Executive. This is what, the sixth job that he has openly sought while being County Executive. Why not just concentrate on being a good County Executive, especially when the County is practically bankrupt.

This continuous job search is not only a consistent theme of his, it is taking its toll on County residents and makes me wonder if our eight digit shortfalls are not due, in some ways, to Vanderhoef’s constantly taking his eyes off the ball.

By: WeAreBorg

WeAreBorg — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 00:01:15 +0000

I don’t recall Ms. Coker calling for Hillary to resign when she was running for POTUS. So it seems an announcement for “any” candidacy must meet her criteria to necessitate a resignation.

By: Cliff Weathers

Cliff Weathers — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 13:26:38 +0000

So it’s not just me. This just in from County Legislator Connie Coker:

“The voters did not vote for him so that he could campaign and turn over running the County to unelected staff members – no matter how competent they may be. He has violated my trust and most importantly the trust of the voters. Any announcement for a candidacy must be accompanied with a resignation.”

By: Cliff Weathers

Cliff Weathers — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 06:30:34 +0000

You have failed to address Vanderhoef’s shortcomings in administration. Your only concerns, from what I can see is an examination of the county’s clout if he wins the election.

Mr. Demarest, the proof is in the pudding. C. Scott Vanderhoef has been unable to gauge the economy well in a very small area well before the recession, causing us substantial tax raises, eight-digit budget shortfalls, and cuts in services. And then this Baron of Rockland thinks he deserves 12.5 percent raise while so many of us are suffering with unemployment or substantial loss of income? He’s operated Rockland County as his fiefdom for many years and yet only he and his cronies profit; the residents are stuck with the bill.

How are you able to defend this man’s run for the Senate, without responding with vague platitudes like you did in your last message?

By: Bill Demarest

Bill Demarest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 03:28:58 +0000

One of the reasons Rockland always seems to get the short end of the stick is that the county doesn’t have any significant political presence beyond its own borders.
Our county is split up among 3 U.S. Reps, who are all worried about how things are going in Westchester and NYC.

Let’s look at the big picture … having a U.S. Senate candidate from The Rock could give us some juice. If Scott Vanderhoef did get GOP support, just that fact could help us in the bigger political world – - – where things like better train service and bridges go to those who get the most political attention.

At first blush, I would not have thought of Vanderhoef as a candidate for Senate. But he reminds me of another politician who I didn’t think would be a good candidate for governor — remember a guy named George Pataki?

Politicians like Vanderhoef and Pataki have a knack for making connections with the community. In the political world, they are not seen as threatening or overbearing.
Rockland needs someone to help put it on the political map. I’m willing to hear what Vandy has to say – and I don’t think he has to quit his day job just yet.