“Piermont, Divided”: A Sneetch In Time.

What happened during this last Piermont, New York mayoral election cycle?
 
Well, undoubtedly with the malevolent assistance of failed outgoing Piermont Mayor Bruce Tucker and the now-inaptly-named “Piermont Democratic Committee”, losing mayoral candidate Kevin Timoney created a fabricated political party called “Piermont United” to try to snatch a victory from Nathan (Nate) Mitchell. A Freudian would have a field day with Timoney’s crossed-swords logo-graphic re-printed above, by the way, which looks like it was developed by some disgruntled VHS clam-shell animator with a grudge in Burbank.
 
Timoney’s purported premise for “Piermont United” was simple – “Unite” the embattled and disjointed populace of the small 2,500-person Village of Piermont under the common pacifistic banner and utopian mantra of “Please, people, fight no more”. Sounds pretty idyllic, doesn’t it? We are in the “United States of America”, after all.
 
Yet what Kevin Timoney purposefully failed to acknowledge, is that the majority of people out there actually read things more carefully than that, and actually analyze concepts more carefully than that. Simply throwing out the word “United” as applied to the Piermont electorate is facile pedestrianism at best, and grossly misleading at worst. “Uniting” under John F. Kennedy would be one thing. Then again, Kim Jong Un expects his subjects to be “United” under him, too.
 
So the thoughtful questions that the majority of the Piermont electorate posed back to Kevin Timoney and his hastily-concocted logo were – “United” with or under whom, TIMBO?”… “Unite” for what cause?... “Unite”, how?... “Unite”, why?...
 
You see, when Kevin Timoney wanted Piermont voters to “Unite”, Timoney was simply acting as Bruce Tucker’s dullard proxy, to help Tucker prevent Tucker’s enemy Nate Mitchell from becoming the next Piermont Mayor at all costs. Tucker hates Mitchell more than Tucker hates sincerity. And that’s the real irony. “Piermont United” was actually a losing movement born of the hatred of a few small-minded individuals. What Bruce Tucker and Kevin Timoney were really trying to “unite” within the population of Piermont voters, was fomented antipathy towards Nate Mitchell. It didn’t work. Tucker and Timoney failed. Mitchell won.

It’s not about political party. Nate Mitchell, Kevin Timoney, and Bruce Tucker are all registered Democrats. Additionally, in Piermont, Democrat resident voters far outnumber Republicans, and that doesn’t look likely to change anytime soon. Yet even within the Democrat party, there is real division – both on the national level, and even within the small Lower Hudson River Valley Village of Piermont.
 
In Piermont, there are political hacks like Barbara Scheulen and Margaret Grace who have sought to run a feudal allegiance fiefdom in the form of a “Piermont Democratic Committee” and its lame amateurish attendant “newsletter” - for the sole benefit of those whose respective sources of identity have been simply to serve as meek supplicants to incompetent Garmento Mayor Bruce Tucker. Slight, unmeritable lackeys me’et to be sent on errands. It has been disgusting to watch.
 
Then, there are real Democrats who believe in representative government by the people - without patronage, nepotism, cronyism, shady real estate deals, and corruption.
 
This division should not surprise anyone. After all, in the gestalt sense, there are at least two sides to every issue. Our American political system itself is based upon the opposing forces of two (or, sometimes more) multiple parties. Our American legal system is adversarial. There is plaintiff, and there is defendant. There is prosecution, and there is perp and public defender. Moreover, capitalism prevails in America. Capitalism means competition. With competition, there are winners, like Nate Mitchell. And there are losers – losers like Kevin Timoney and Bruce Tucker. Some gotta win. Some gotta lose.
 
The notion that Piermont is a unified body of completely like-minded people, is preposterous when you think about it, not to mention ironic and discordant given the therein-reigning Democrat party’s oft-stated objective of inclusiveness for people with different backgrounds and mind-sets. Moreover, the artificial notion of Piermont “Unity” was just belied by the quantitative exactitude of the Mitchell-Timoney vote-count itself, not to mention belied by common sense and an understanding of the history of the Village and of Rockland County.
 
Piermont’s story is more a Tale of Two Cities. A once-industrial Hudson River village that became a tourist destination on the back of a Woody Allen movie... The municipal workers who cash-out on chunky pensions and benefit-packages, versus the wealthy taxpayers who just pay them without thinking to balance their own proverbial checkbooks by reviewing the Village’s numbers... The residents who could actually live with a building resembling a Motel Six at one end of Piermont Avenue, and a building resembling a Super 8 at the other end of Piermont Avenue, built over still-submerged gasoline tanks – versus the residents who say “No Way”... Those that merely complain about the flooding, versus those that try to do something about it.
 
Yet the best pop culture or literary reference descriptive of Piermont’s recent mayoral election, would be “The Sneetches And Other Stories” by Theodor Seuss Geisel p/k/a “Dr. Seuss”.

Geisel used the story of his “Sneetches” to teach youngsters not to discriminate, illustrating the psychical and social harm done when some Sneetches marked themselves as superior with tattoo-like stars on their bellies while other Sneetches went without. And Geisel was right. Feigned superiority based upon physical characteristics alone, is completely unacceptable, and for that reason the Seussian Sneetches should have been “United”, no question.
 
Yet what about discriminating against those Piermont residents whose lax inattention, self-dealing, or conflicts-of-interest led them to wantonly genuflect to Bruce Tucker and thereby support the harm almost inflicted upon the Village by Tucker’s straw-man candidate Kevin Timoney – simply to enable Tucker’s well-known vendetta against Nate Mitchell? That’s not discrimination based upon physical characteristics. Rather, that’s differentiation of constituents based upon a glaring divide of intellect and moral character - and in that respect, “United” be damned. As distinguished from the Geisel case, such discrimination is, instead, justifiable and wholly-permissible Sneetching. Moreover, it is the American electoral process. And now, the Nate Mitchell Sneetches wear stars on their bellies. The Kevin Timoney Sneetches wear none. It will stay that way until the next election. Additionally, thanks to social media, election petitions, and FOIL requests, we even know who most of the Kevin Timoney Sneetches in Piermont are.
 
Therefore, to really understand the Mitchell v. Timoney Piermont mayoral election result, what it all comes down to is the basis for the divide between the two current sets of Piermont Sneetches:
 

By their vote, the Kevin Timoney Sneetches were willing to endure over-development by greasy ill-minded Jersey real estate developers fostered by an even-greasier current Garmento Mayor named Bruce Tucker. The Nate Mitchell Sneetches said “No Way” to that over-development and to Tucker’s fetid legacy when marking their ballots.

 

By their vote, the Kevin Timoney Sneetches were willing to pay continued sycophantic warped fealty to sleazy outgoing Mayor Bruce Tucker who had absolutely no business in Piermont Village Hall to begin with. The Nate Mitchell Sneetches said “No Way” to that warped fealty when marking their ballots.

 

By their vote, the Kevin Timoney Sneetches were willing to corrupt the “Piermont Democratic Committee” in support of a candidate other than the actual choice of the Democrat party. The Nate Mitchell Sneetches said “No Way” to that corruption when marking their ballots.

 

By their vote, the Kevin Timoney Sneetches were willing to support a newbie MIMBO candidate who put on a laughable unprepared and malaprop-ridden presentation at a mayoral “debate” while often unable to even string two coherent sentences together. The Nate Mitchell Sneetches said “No Way” to that incompetence and inattention when marking their ballots.

 
The point is, there really ARE at least two different types of people who inhabit Piermont – those that pay attention, and those that don’t. Those that think carefully, and those that don’t. You will not have a truly “United” Piermont until the latter group gets smarter.
 
Could that really happen? Well, right now, a sizable number of Piermont residents are still willing to endure continued over-development, continued flooding, continued decay of the Piermont Pier and other infrastructure, continued Village Hall financial malfeasance, continued lack of foresight in planning, continued token economy and patronage schemes, continued opacity and disingenuousness in Village government, continued local restaurant health code violations, continued bad white wine served at those same restaurants, continued amateurism in what some residents try to call “art”, continued presence of known sex-abusers in the Piermont Fire Department, and continued attempts at re-writing history to make Bruce Tucker appear to be a competent Piermont Mayor rather than the undesirable Jersey detritus that Tucker really is.
 
Thankfully, though, the majority of Piermont residents did read things carefully, did pay attention, and did decide to right the ship of Piermont Village government when marking their ballots. Nate Mitchell beat Kevin Timoney. Just remember that the November 4 margin was way closer than it should have been. There are winners. There are losers. And unless those losers all move out of Piermont or otherwise self-extinguish en masse, even those losers might get lucky sometimes in the future, in the context of a subsequent election. Therefore, continued vigilance is necessary, in 2026 and beyond, to keep those losers, those Timoney Sneetches, as far away from Piermont Village Hall as possible. They know who they are. And we do, too.

 
John J. Tormey III, Esq.
Founder, “Unhand Piermont!”