Yeah, I'll BET Otto's "Makes Donations To The Village".

Law Office of John J. Tormey III, Esq.

John J. Tormey III, PLLC
1578 Third Avenue, PMB 188
New York, New York 10128 USA
(212) 410-4142 (phone)
(212) 410-2380 (fax)
jtormey@optonline.net
https://www.tormey.org
 
Monday, July 6, 2026
 
VIA FAX: 1-845-364-2628, U.S. MAIL, and E-MAIL:
RCDOHAdmin@co.rockland.ny.us
Commissioner Mary P. Leahy
Rockland County Department of Health a/k/a

Rockland County Health Department (RCDOH)
Robert Yeager Health Complex
50 Sanatorium Road, Building D
Pomona, New York 10970 USA
 
VIA FAX: 1-845-364-3777, U.S. MAIL, and E-MAIL:
obcmain@co.rockland.ny.us
BuildingsAndCodes@co.rockland.ny.us
Director Ed Markunas
Rockland County Office of Buildings and Codes (OBC)
Robert Yeager Health Complex
50 Sanatorium Road, Building A
Pomona, New York 10970 USA
 
VIA FAX: 1-845-364-8961, U.S. MAIL, and E-MAIL:
rcftc@co.rockland.ny.us
Christopher G. Kear, Director
Rockland County Department of Fire and Emergency Services
Fire Training Center
35 Firemen’s Memorial Drive
Pomona, New York 10970 USA
 
Re:      

Otto’s “Full Service” Restaurant

505 Piermont Avenue, Piermont, New York 10968 USA
 
Dear Commissioner Leahy, Director Markunas, and Director Kear:
 
I am writing each of you to ask that your respective offices please carefully examine health and safety concerns regarding the Piermont, New York restaurant known as “Otto’s Full Service” and its apparent proprietor, manager, spokesman, or representative, one David Kaliff.
 
Comments from Mr. Kaliff and local Piermont public officials were put on public record on June 16, 2026 at the Village of Piermont Board of Trustees Meeting (“June 16 Meeting”). I believe these comments will concern each of you. The comments definitely concerned me. Perhaps you are already apprised of these same comments. The full transcript of the June 16 Meeting minutes (“Transcript”) can be found attached and enclosed to this letter, and also here at these electronic links:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/07/incorporated-village-of-piermont-board.html
https://www.piermont-ny.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_06162026-113
 
Specifically:
 
Item #3 (“Department Reports”) and Item #9 (“Review Parking For Otto’s Restaurant”) cite a lengthy history of at least a year-and-a-half, regarding the rear of the Otto’s property and access and parking concerns. In the Transcript, you will read how so-called “valet vehicles” of the restaurant’s “valet operations” were repeatedly left to obstruct a sprinkler connection, a fire hydrant, and a fire lane otherwise reserved for ladder truck emergency access. While Item #3 (“Department Reports”) explicitly mentions notification of these alarming problems to a Piermont Village Fire Inspector, to the Piermont Police Department, and to one Phil Griffin, I see no mention therein of any notification of these problems to Rockland County or New York State authorities.
 
Hence this letter.
 
Additionally, colloquy transcribed in Item #3 (“Department Reports”) appears to suggest that fire zone signage in the Village of Piermont is insufficient or defective. It also appears that, for some reason at least through the date of the above-linked June 16 Meeting, Otto’s “valet parking locations” had yet to be moved to allow for the legally-required fire lane and emergency access. Worse yet, it is astounding that for some inane reason, Village of Piermont officials think of themselves as beholden to a private citizen in the form of Mr. Griffin in order to deter vehicles from blocking fire zones. See Item #9 (“Review Parking For Otto’s Restaurant”). It is difficult to imagine a weaker manifestation of local government, than this.
 
You will also please note that Item #9 (“Review Parking For Otto’s Restaurant”) leaves uncertain the extent of Mr. Kaliff’s own responsibility vel non for the parking and fire zone problems at Otto’s. Mr. Kaliff does acknowledge that he purchased the subject property, yet it is unclear whether he may have sold the property since as some social media posts previously indicated. See Item #9 (“Review Parking For Otto’s Restaurant”).
 
In any event, the fact that Mr. Kaliff apologized on the public governmental record, for “the incidents that occurred” over the weekend of what was presumably June 12 through June 14, 2026, does suggest that Mr. Kaliff maintains at least some control and accountability therefor. See Item #9 (“Review Parking For Otto’s Restaurant”). Yet in the self-same June 16 Meeting session before the Piermont Village Board of Trustees, as you will see in the Transcript, Mr. Kaliff proffered the excuse that “the valet company frequently sends different employees” – his lame attempt at justification for why fire lane and emergency access has been repeatedly blocked behind the Otto’s property in clear violation of code and law. See Item #3 (“Department Reports”).
 
In the Transcript, Mr. Kaliff proceeds to indicate that 500 people dined at Otto’s on Mother’s Day, presumably meaning Sunday, May 10, 2026. This statement led Piermont Mayor Nathan Mitchell to rightfully query Mr. Kaliff: (A) regarding the RCDOH-mandated maximum occupancy of 180 at Otto’s including its outdoor seating, and (B) regarding how Otto’s could possibly have approximately 300 seats nevertheless. See Item #9 (“Review Parking For Otto’s Restaurant”).
 
While in response Mr. Kaliff acknowledged on record that “the restaurant cannot legally exceed the Department of Health’s occupancy limit” and that “operating beyond the permitted occupancy would be illegal and could result in enforcement action by the [Rockland County] Department of Health” - the question to each of you is whether these were merely self-serving ipse dixit statements on the part of Mr. Kaliff and therefore Otto’s, intended as summarily exculpatory. 

After all, there is already sufficient evidence in the Transcript alone that the valet parking and fire access problems at Otto’s have occurred on a repeat basis, particularly given Mr. Kaliff’s express apology therein for those multiple incidents, and his admission on record therein that “Sundays present[]… the greatest challenge”. The Transcript also makes it clear that concerns regarding fire access behind the Otto’s property have subsisted for at least one and one-half years – and for whatever it is worth, Google’s AI mode indicates that “Otto's Full Service has provided valet parking since it first opened its doors in July 2022”. See also Item #9 (“Review Parking For Otto’s Restaurant”).
 
Moreover, and the most troubling aspect of the Transcript in my view - there is now at least one Kaliff-uttered insinuation on record, that Mr. Kaliff and Otto’s somehow believe that they can effectively buy themselves out of these serious safety concerns - with money:
 

“Mr. Kaliff also discussed the property tax, stating that he pays approximately $36,000 annually in Village taxes and has made donations to the Village.” 

[Emphasis supplied]. See Item #9 (“Review Parking For Otto’s Restaurant”).

 
The first and most obvious questions here are, how much money in “donations”, “donations” when, “donations” to whom, and “donations” for what stated purpose at the time? Was this cash in an envelope, or was it a documented money-trail? Is Mr. Kaliff suggesting that the silence of the Village on fire code violations has already been well-bought by sufficient price? 

And for that matter, since when did “donations to the Village” constitute any form of substitute for providing for and assuring the health and safety of those human beings who dine at Otto’s – particularly those innocent patrons who might have had no prior knowledge of the manner in which Otto’s “valet parking” has apparently obstructed fire lane and emergency access repeatedly, and therefore repeatedly put previously-unsuspecting Otto’s patrons at risk?
 
The health and safety of restaurant patrons at Otto’s in Piermont, as well as anywhere else, is a grave and solemn responsibility. It’s Mr. Kaliff’s responsibility, by his own acknowledgment in the Transcript. It’s the property owner’s responsibility. It’s Otto’s responsibility. It’s the Village of Piermont’s responsibility. And as far as I am aware, and with all due respect, it’s your responsibility as well, as the senior officials in Rockland County with jurisdiction over the matter in part or in whole.
 
Yet the comments put on public record on June 16, 2026 by Otto’s Mr. Kaliff, and by the public officials in the Village of Piermont, afford no confidence whatsoever that the health, safety, and fire access problems with Otto’s “Full Service” will be properly rectified anytime soon.
 
Accordingly, I am asking each of you to please intercede, provide oversight, and carefully examine the situation - since this problem thusfar appears to be well beyond the candlepower of the individuals in Piermont responsible for fixing it. A mass casualty incident of 500 people, 300 people, or even 180 people, would be a totally unacceptable catastrophe - not to mention totally preventable relative to Otto’s vainglorious and wholly-unnecessary boast of “valet parking”.
 
I am certain that each of you are already well-aware of past health-related problems at Otto’s “Full Service” noted previously:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2025/05/ottos-full-service-in-piermont-insects.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2025/05/ottos-out-of-service-piermont-new-york.html
In fact, my next step will be to update my prior FOIL requests seeking all health-related and safety-related records of Otto’s through the present day and publish them, as it is clearly in the interests of all intended restaurant patrons to know about these things in a more comprehensive fashion.
 
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
 
Respectfully submitted,

John J. Tormey III, Esq.

INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF PIERMONT - BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING - June 16, 2026.

INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF PIERMONT
BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING
June 16, 2026
 
Present: Mayor Nathan Mitchell, Deputy Mayor Mark Blomquist, Trustee Jeff Gordon, Trustee Kate McCabe, Trustee Michael Wright, Dennis Michaels - Village Attorney, and Jennifer DeYorgi Maher Village Clerk-Treasurer.
 
Mayor Nathan Mitchell called the meeting to order and led everyone in the Pledge of Allegiance.
 
Item #1 Approval Of Meeting Minutes

Trustee McCabe made a motion to approve the minutes for June 2, 2026. The motion was seconded by Trustee Wright and carried with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
 
Item #2 Approval Of Warrant

Trustee Blomquist made a motion to approve Warrant #052526 in the amount of $85,329.62 and Warrant #061626 in the amount of $835,024.99 for a grand total of $920,354.61. The motion was seconded by Trustee Gordon and carried with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
 
Item #3 Department Reports

Police Department - Chief Hurley stated that during the month of June there is a total of 70 summonses being issued, and 414 incident reports were completed. Of these incidents, 64 occurred in Grand View, with the remaining 358 taking place in Piermont.
 
Fire Department – 1st Fire Chief Goswick stated that the Piermont Fire Department responded to 169 calls. He also informed the Board that the Department went to Lake George, where the Piermont Fire Department’s ladder truck earned First Place statewide, and the Department received Second Place for Dress Uniform in the Fire Service competition. 

Chief Goswick advised the Board that he received a text message from Phil Griffin regarding a parking issue behind Otto’s. He explained that approximately a year and a half ago, he, Police Chief Hurley, and Building Inspector Charles Schaub inspected the rear of the property, where the Fire Department’s sprinkler connection is located. At that time, a no-parking area was painted below the sprinkler connection. 

Chief Goswick stated that valet vehicles had recently been parked against the building and directly across from the fire hydrant, creating an obstruction. He reviewed the required parking clearance from a hydrant and provided photographs of the parked vehicles to the Board.
 
Chief Goswick stated that he notified the Village Fire Inspector and the Piermont Police Department and received permission from Phil Griffin to have the vehicles towed. He emphasized that the rear of the building should be designated as a fire lane to ensure emergency access for the ladder truck. 

He further recommended that all fire zones in the Village be properly marked as “Fire Zone – No Parking” rather than simply “No Parking”, noting that proper signage would allow vehicles to be ticketed or towed when necessary. Chief Goswick stated that he met with Otto’s valet staff and manager the day before the meeting and discussed alternative valet parking locations. He reiterated that the entire rear section of the property should be designated as a fire lane.
 
Mayor Mitchell stated that the area is located on private property and explained that the Piermont Police Department is currently unable to issue parking tickets because it is designated only as a no-parking zone. He stated that if the area were designated as a fire zone, enforcement would be permitted. 

Police Chief Hurley stated that while the designation is not currently addressed in Village Code, enforcement action may still be taken if vehicles create a safety hazard, such as blocking access to a fire hydrant. 

Chief Goswick added that he and Chief Hurley reviewed the Orangetown Code and suggested the Village review it. 

Village Attorney Dennis Michaels reiterated that, as discussed at previous meetings, enforcement on private property requires the property owner’s request or authorization.
 
Mayor Mitchell stated that the Village intends to enter into a signed agreement with Phil Griffin authorizing the Piermont Police Department to issue parking tickets for illegally parked vehicles and vehicles parked in designated fire zones on the property. He stated that he would follow up with Mr. Griffin regarding the agreement.
 
Building Department – Building Inspector Charles Schaub stated that he spoke with David Kaliff from Otto’s regarding the ongoing parking issues. David explained that one of the problems is that the valet company frequently sends different employees. 

Building Inspector Schaub stated that he contacted the valet company directly, explained the situation, and advised them that the current practices cannot continue. 

Building Inspector Schaub reported that the Town of Orangetown has identified approximately 1,400 properties for review as part of its parkland assessment. He stated that Town representatives visited the Village to inspect the property below the trail. He noted that Slattery’s had cleaned up the property, allowing sufficient access for emergency vehicles. He explained that, years ago, the Planning Board requested adequate space to ensure that ambulances and other emergency vehicles could access and turn around on the property. Building Inspector Schaub stated that Orangetown questioned why the area had been so extensively cleared and was informed that the work was completed to maintain emergency vehicle access. Mayor Mitchell stated that the property is part of the Clark Rail Trail system and is owned by the Town of Orangetown. Mayor Mitchell and Building Inspector Schaub discussed the Village Green property and Orangetown’s involvement. Building Inspector Schaub explained the ownership of the Village Green property located at the end of the trail.
 
Mayor Mitchell asked whether Building Inspector Schaub had reviewed the General Municipal Law (GML) referral from Orangetown regarding 145 Tweed Boulevard. Building Inspector Schaub responded that he had not yet reviewed it. Mayor Mitchell expressed concerns regarding erosion control and stormwater management at the property and stated that he intended to discuss with the Board whether the Village should submit a letter to the Town of Orangetown discussing its concerns. Building Inspector Schaub stated that he and Village Engineer Bart Rodi would prepare a letter for Orangetown. Village Attorney Dennis Michaels explained the General Municipal Law (GML) referral process, noting that multiple municipal departments may provide comments or opinions on a GML referral. Mayor Mitchell stated that he would first like to start with the opinions of Building Inspector Schaub and Village Engineer Bart Rodi.
 
Department of Public – Superintendent Tom Temple was not present.
 
Item #4 Old Business

Village Clerk-Treasurer - Stated that she forwarded an email to the Mayor and Board from Hank Hovorka from TWK Market for them to review. She stated that Usha Wright notified her that Dr. Phil Tierno is resigning from the ZBA.
 
Mayor Mitchell had old business to discuss.
 
Deputy Mayor Blomquist had no old business to discuss. Trustee Gordon had no old business to discuss.

Trustee McCabe had no old business to discuss. Trustee Wright had no old business to discuss.

Item #5 New Business

Village Clerk-Treasurer stated that Village taxes are due by June 30 without penalty. She also reminded the Board that, during the summer months, only one Board of Trustees meeting will be held in both July and August. She informed the Board the MS4 interns are working in the Village, they have been working with the Village Engineer Bart Rodi and Building Inspector Charles Schaub. She informed the Board that she received an email from Peter Metzler regarding the Village’s noise regulations. She also advised the Board that she received a letter from Thomas Hughes addressed to the Mayor and Board of Trustees.
 
Mayor Mitchell reported that a member of the Transportation and Parking Commission had resigned. He stated that he would like to appoint Charlie Redmen to fill the unexpired term of Paul Kadin. Mayor Mitchell requested the Board’s authorization to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a vendor to provide vending machines at four Village locations: Goswick Pavilion, the Boathouse at the end of the Pier, the Skating Pond, and the Train Station.
 
Trustee Gordon made a motion to authorize the issuance of an RFP for vending machines at Goswick Pavilion, the Boat House at the end of the Pier, the Skating Pond and the Train Station. The motion was seconded by Trustee McCabe and carried with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
 
Mayor Mitchell stated that the construction fence surrounding the triangle lot is in the process of being removed. He stated that the owner of the open space outside the wooden-fenced portion of the property has granted permission for volunteers to clean up the area. He noted that a sign-up sheet is available for those interested in participating. Mayor Mitchell also reported that the owner of the Paper Place and Spruce Street properties has scheduled June 29, 2026, as the date for repaving those streets.
 
Deputy Mayor Blomquist had no new business to discuss. Trustee Gordon had no new business to discuss.

Trustee McCabe had no new business to discuss.
 
Trustee Wright asked, “why is the wooden fence on the triangle lot across the street only on a section of the property?” Mayor Mitchell stated because that is the section that the developers own.
 
Item #6 Public Comment

None
 
Item #7 Request From William Hickey To Have The DPW Garage Dedicated To His Father John W. Hickey

William Hickey spoke about his family’s long history in the Village of Piermont and noted that he is a life member of the Piermont Fire Department. William Hickey discussed the history of the original Department of Public Works (DPW) garage and noted that his father served as the Village’s Superintendent of Public Works for many years. Mr. Hickey reiterated his desire to preserve the Hickey family’s legacy in the Village and ensure that its history is not forgotten. He requested that the Department of Public Works (DPW) garage be dedicated in honor of his father, John W. Hickey. He stated that he has obtained approximately 20 signatures on a petition supporting the request.
 
Mayor Mitchell stated that the Village’s Capital Budget includes funding to replace the roof of the DPW garage. He noted that once the renovations are complete, the Village could hold a dedication ceremony. Mayor Mitchell further stated that having two dedications for the same family within one year may be excessive. However, he added that dedicating the DPW garage in honor of John W. Hickey “makes a lot of sense” to him.
 
Trustee Gordon made a motion to dedicate the DPW Garage in honor of John W. Hickey. The motion was seconded by Trustee Wright and carried with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
 
Item #8 Request From William Hickey To Have The Piermont Police Department Dedicated To His Great Grandfather James Hickey Who Was The First Constable In The Village Of Piermont In The Early 1900’s

William Hickey spoke about his great-grandfather’s history in the Village of Piermont, noting that he passed away on January 17, 1917, at the age of 59. He discussed his family’s long-standing roots in Rockland County, stating that his great-grandfather served as a Rockland County Sheriff and was a member of the Empire Hose Company. Mayor Mitchell stated that he would be happy to work with Police Chief Hurley on a future dedication. However, he reiterated his position that one dedication per family per year is appropriate.
 
Item #9 Review Parking For Otto’s Restaurant

Mayor Mitchell addressed the issue of vehicles being parked in the fire zones behind Otto’s with Mr. David Kaliff. Mr. Kaliff apologized for the incidents that occurred over the weekend, stating that the Police Department has his contact information and that he is always available if issues arise. 

Mr. Kaliff reviewed the off-street parking available for his customers, explaining that the property has 25 parking spaces associated with it, including 22 grandfathered spaces and three spaces that he previously agreed to provide to the Village at the request of former Mayor Tucker. Those three spaces consist of two standard parking spaces and one handicapped space, which he considers part of the property’s overall parking inventory. 

Mr. Kaliff stated that he is also in discussions with the library and Pamaya Red regarding additional parking arrangements. He reviewed the restaurant’s seating capacity, including indoor dining, outdoor seating, and the bar area, noting that not all seating areas are utilized simultaneously. He stated that the Rockland County Department of Health permits a maximum occupancy of 180 patrons, including outdoor seating, but that the restaurant typically serves approximately 80 guests on Wednesdays and Thursdays and between 125 and 175 guests on Fridays. 

He added that while approximately 500 people dined at the restaurant on Mother’s Day, they arrived in shifts throughout the day rather than all at once. Mr. Kaliff stated that the restaurant’s typical hours are 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on weekdays and 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekends. He believes there is generally sufficient parking available, with Sundays presenting the greatest challenge, and offered to review point-of-sale data to demonstrate customer traffic patterns.
 
Mayor Mitchell confirmed that the Department of Health’s permitted occupancy of 180 which includes outdoor seating. He questioned how the restaurant could have approximately 300 seats when the Department of Health only permits 180 occupants. 

Mr. Kaliff responded that while the physical seating may exceed 180, the restaurant cannot legally exceed the Department of Health’s occupancy limit. He stated that operating beyond the permitted occupancy would be illegal and could result in enforcement action by the Department of Health. 

Mayor Mitchell and Mr. Kaliff discussed the property’s grandfathered parking spaces, including the history of the property, its previous owners, and prior uses that resulted in the grandfathered status. Mr. Kaliff also discussed the property tax, stating that he pays approximately $36,000 annually in Village taxes and has made donations to the Village. He emphasized that the grandfathered parking spaces were part of the property when he purchased it. 

The discussion continued regarding the illegal parking that occurred over the weekend. Mr. Kaliff stated the incident as an isolated occurrence and stated that he had already spoken with the restaurant managers, valets, and the valet company, making it clear that vehicles may not be left in the fire zones behind the building, as the area is not a parking lot. 

Mayor Mitchell stated that Mr. Phil Griffin had provided photographs documenting the illegally parked vehicles and stated that he does not want cars parked in the fire zones. Mayor Mitchell stated he wants to meet with Building Inspector Charles Schaub and Mr. Kaliff to walk the property and establish an accurate count of available parking spaces. He also stated that if Mr. Kaliff has agreements with neighboring property owners to provide additional parking, copies of those agreements should be submitted to the Village to be kept on file.
 
Mayor Mitchell again questioned the number of grandfathered parking spaces. Mr. Kaliff reiterated that the property has 22 grandfathered spaces and that the three spaces previously provided to the Village bring the total parking inventory to 25 spaces. He stated that his goal is to secure a total of 60 parking spaces and that he will continue discussions with the library regarding additional parking opportunities. 

Mayor Mitchell thanked Mr. Kaliff for attending the meeting. He stated that he intends to research the property’s grandfathered parking rights and reiterated his desire to establish a definitive parking count, taking into consideration the restaurant’s valet operations.
 
Item #10 Resolution To Authorize The Mayor To Enter Into An Agreement With The County Of Rockland On Behalf Of The RCDAO LEAD Program In Which The Piermont Police Department Will Receive $5,000.00 For Participation In The Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) Program Project Connect

Trustee Gordon made a motion to authorize the Mayor Mitchell to enter into an agreement with the County of Rockland on behalf of the RCDAO LEAD Program in which the Piermont Police Department will receive $5,000.00 for participation in the Law enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) Program Project Connect. The motion was seconded by Trustee McCabe and carried with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
 
Item #11 Review Draft Of Proposed Local Law To Establish A Landscaper Registry As A New Article IX Of Village Code Chapter 154 (Property Maintenance) And Schedule A Public Hearing

Trustee Gordon stated that he did not see a provision in the proposed Landscaper Registry requiring proof of insurance. Trustee Wright asked whether insurance is required by Rockland County for contractors. Village Attorney Dennis Michaels stated that insurance is required for home improvement contractors but was unsure whether Rockland County requires insurance for landscapers. Building Inspector Charles Schaub explained that under County law, all contractors performing residential work must be licensed. He stated that for commercial properties, only plumbers, electricians, and HVAC contractors are required to hold a Rockland County license. He added that contractors working on commercial properties are required to carry insurance, but they are not required to obtain a Rockland County contractor’s license. He also explained the distinction between residential and commercial properties, including how multiple dwellings are classified.
 
Trustee Wright asked if there should be something in the agreement that defines commercial property vs. residential property. Mayor Mitchell stated that Building Inspector Charles Schuab is making the distinction between residential landscapers and commercial landscapers vs. working on commercial or residential properties. He stated that he did not believe such a distinction was necessary in the proposed local law because its purpose is to establish a landscaper registry. Village Attorney Michaels stated that if the Village attempted to address all those distinctions within the local law, it would expand from a two-and-a-half-page local law into a much more extensive code. He explained that the purpose of the registry is simply to maintain a record of landscapers operating within the Village. He added that the registry could serve as a first step toward the future adoption of additional local laws addressing landscaping issues, such as gas-powered leaf blowers, and emphasized that the registry is not intended to replace the Rockland County Consumer Protection licensing requirements. Trustee Wright asked how the Village would know whether a landscaper was registered. Building Inspector Charles Schaub responded that the Building Department would verify registration through inspections and suggested issuing bumper stickers to registered landscapers for identification. Mayor Mitchell expressed concern that many landscapers operate multiple vehicles, making a single bumper sticker impractical. Building Inspector Schaub suggested charging a fee for additional stickers to accommodate multiple vehicles. Mayor Mitchell directed the Village Attorney to amend the proposed local law to include a provision stating that insurance coverage will be verified.
 
Trustee Blomquist made a motion to schedule proposed Public Hearing Local Law to establish a Landscaper Registry as a new Article IX of Village Code Chapter 154 (Property Maintenance). The motion was seconded by Trustee Wright and carried with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
 
Item #12 Review Cyber Security Proposal From VJ Networks For The Village Of Piermont

Moved to July 14, 2026, Village Board Meeting.
 
Item #13 Adjournment

Trustee Gordon made a motion at 8:05 p.m. to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Trustee Wright and carried with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
 
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer DeYorgi Maher
Clerk-Treasurer

Don't Bother. They're Here.

Pointing Out Piermont Bigotry.

Marthe Schulwolf And The Piermont Democratic Committee: NYSAG Complaint Number #1-1281771102.

"But Wait! There's MORE!": The Criminal Section Of The United States Department Of Justice Civil Rights Division Considers The Case Of Marthe Schulwolf And The PDC.

On June 4, 2026, Piermont’s Marthe Schulwolf of the so-called “Piermont Democratic Committee” or “PDC”, engaged in a bigoted rant about human beings who she objectified and summarily categorized as the “Ultra-Orthodox”. With broad brush in hand, Marthe Schulwolf, a New York State governmental public official running for re-election out of what was at least in part her own self-serving interest, assured us that the “Ultra-Orthodox”[her words] “are… very authoritarian, structured, cultish societies that do what the rabbis tell them to do”, and who “don’t believe in gender or racial equality”. [Emphasis supplied].
 
Marthe Schulwolf, Piermont’s desiccated answer to Archie Bunker, continued her rant by informing all of us, in that June 4, 2026 public forum, that the “Ultra-Orthodox”[her words] “did get one of their people to become the Democratic Commissioner of Elections. Hopefully she’s following the law. She is the daughter of the… Ramapo Chair… who is an ultra-Orthodox… Severe problem.” [Emphasis added]:
 
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/full-pdc-transcript-thursday-june-4.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/request-for-new-york-state-attorney.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Eya_AhJads
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/vote-sexist-vote-bigot-vote-liar-vote.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/gee-our-old-lasalle-ran-great.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/mount-wolfmore.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/piermont-june-19-primary-defeat-marthe.html
 
Yet the “severe problem” is that Marthe Schulwolf’s unabashed bigotry has infected the Village of Piermont, has infected Piermont’s so-called “Democratic Committee”, and has now infected the rank-and-file of at least a few hundred of Piermont’s residents. After all, the other severe problem is that on June 4, 2026, Marthe Schulwolf spouted off these hateful comments to a roomful of Piermont public officials, politicians, and residents – and not one of those individuals in that Piermont room contemporaneously sought to stop Schulwolf or even vocally object to Schulwolf’s intolerant and incendiary statements.
 
That’s right. It was a roomful of Piermont cowards.
 
Seeing that no local solution was availing as it should have been, Marthe Schulwolf’s misconduct as a public official was reported in writing to New York State Attorney General Letitia James and her staff:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/request-for-new-york-state-attorney.html
That state matter remains pending (the “State Complaint”).
 
Marthe Schulwolf’s misconduct as a public official was then reported in writing to Acting Attorney General of the United States Todd Blanche and his colleagues, as a federal matter (“Federal Complaint”):
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/piermont-candidate-schulwolf-makes-new.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/piermonts-marthe-schulwolf-finds.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/piermonts-marthe-schulwolf-meets-justice.html
 
Then and thereafter, a few interesting things happened.
 
On June 23, 2026, no less than 192 Piermont residents voted to re-elect Marthe Schulwolf to the Piermont Democratic Committee or “PDC” – the vast majority already having heard, or at least heard about, Schulwolf’s deplorable June 4, 2026 Marge Schott act:

https://app.enhancedvoting.com/results/public/rockland-county-ny/elections/PE26
The conclusion is inescapable that those 192 Piermont residents must either share Marthe Schulwolf’s bigoted views about the “Ultra-Orthodox”[Schulwolf’s words] - or at least tolerate them like the unmeritable sheep that the 192 Piermont residents are.

 
Around that same time, the following Blog post went inexplicably viral, garnering 10 to 20 times the normal number of digital “hits” that posts to this Blog usually tally:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/piermonts-marthe-schulwolf-meets-justice.html

This phenomenon normally would only occur if a sub-section of the Rockland County community would seize upon the post and then re-post it through other channels. That sub-section could well have been one or more of the religious communities in western Rockland County. Or, it could have been others who care about what the word “Democrat” is really supposed to mean. Or, maybe both.
 
Then, this past Friday, the Administrative Section of the USDOJ Civil Rights Division declined to take further action on the Federal Complaint (Report Number 790245-ZBK), appearing to defer it to state or local authority. This would ostensibly include deference to the pending State Complaint to New York State Attorney General Letitia James and her staff:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/initial-reluctance-from-administrative.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/request-for-new-york-state-attorney.html
 
But wait. There’s more.
 
Yesterday, Monday, the Criminal Section of the USDOJ Civil Rights Division assigned a different Report Number to the Federal Complaint (795562-ZDV), and appears to now be considering further action on the federal complaint. To quote the Criminal Section, “Please know that the information you have provided will receive appropriate consideration”.
 
So here are some possible reasons why this positive, cavalry-over-the-hill development happened:
 
1. The USDOJ Administrative Section and the USDOJ Criminal Section each separately received electronic and/or mailed copies of the same complaint, and each responded separately.
 
2. The USDOJ Administrative Section and the USDOJ Criminal Section may well have separate authority and the ability to make separate determinations. They may act independently.
 
3. Alternatively, perhaps the USDOJ Administrative Section and the USDOJ Criminal Section are normally expected to concur, and this was simply a case where the two sections were not able to communicate with each other prior to responding to what was essentially the same complaint notified to multiple USDOJ destinations.
 
4. Alternatively, perhaps the USDOJ Criminal Section is expressly overruling the USDOJ Administrative Section’s Friday determination, after reviewing it and realizing that it really should not be dismissed. Being that USDOJ carefully logs-in every incoming complaint and uses software to do so, this explanation appears to be the most likely - especially when one considers the federal ramifications of Schulwolf's bigoted comments as a public official.
 
5. There is also the possibility that the extensive readership of the Friday, June 19, 2026 Blog post resulted in members of one or more of the religious communities in western Rockland County, or perhaps others, to separately contact the United States Department of Justice and request or demand agency response to Marthe Schulwolf’s vile, bigoted comments as a public official:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2026/06/piermonts-marthe-schulwolf-meets-justice.html
 
In any event, we’re back on. Eyes are on Marthe Schulwolf.
 
As for the 192 Marthe Schulwolf sycophants in Piermont - and as for the roomful of Piermont-resident cowards and PDC-enablers who in-person heard and witnessed Marthe Schulwolf’s bigoted rant on June 4, 2026 and did absolutely nothing to stop her – they are as much the “severe problem” as Marthe Schulwolf herself. For that matter, they may find themselves in their own brush with Justice.

Initial Reluctance From The Administrative Section.