With Thanks To Rockland News And Google Alerts.

The Iceberg That Piermont NY Mayor Bruce Tucker Did Not Avoid.

Peel.

Freedom Of Information Act Appeal – Fee Waiver Request
Wednesday, August 7, 2024
 
VIA U.S. MAIL and E-MAIL:
foiapa@sec.gov
ogis@nara.gov
Carrie Hyde-Michaels, FOIA Branch Chief
Office of FOIA Services
United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
Station Place, 100 F Street, NE – Mail Stop 2465 (Room 1120)
Washington, DC 20549-2465 USA
 
VIA U.S. MAIL and E-MAIL:
morrowa@sec.gov
Alysia Morrow, Research Specialist
Office of FOIA Services
United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
Station Place, 100 F Street, NE
Washington, DC 20549-2465 USA
 
Dear Ms. Hyde-Michaels and Ms. Morrow:
 
In reply to your July 30, 2024 letter regarding my fee waiver request, I am hereby timely appealing your July 30, 2024 decision in error to deny my July 24, 2024 fee waiver request to the SEC’s General Counsel under 5 U.S.C. §552(a)(6), 17 CFR §200.80(f)(1).
 
1.
I assure you and the SEC that disclosure is not at all in the interest of me, the requester. 5 U.S.C. Section 552(a)(4)(iii). The disclosure will not further any commercial interest of mine. While I am an attorney in New York, I am not pursuing this matter for any client. Rather, I volunteered to assist the community of Piermont, New York out of my own initiative without being asked, pro bono and solely out of my own pocket, as an environmental and community advocate, watchdog, and private citizen - once I realized in April 2024 that Piermont was being threated by a crooked village government, over-development, and environmental harm. To date I have spent thousands of dollars out of my own hard-earned money for expenses to pursue the matter at hand, and I will not see any of it back. See, e.g., Coalition for Safe Power v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, Civ. No. 87-1380PA, slip op. at 7 (D.Or. July 22, 1988) (citing Better Gov't Ass'n v. Department of State, 780 F.2d 86, 94 (D.C. Cir. 1986)).
 
Therefore, the public interest in disclosure is far greater than my non-existent commercial interest as requester under 17 CFR § 200.80(g)(12). I have no commercial interest whatsoever in this matter.
 
2.
I also assure you and the SEC that disclosure of the requested information is absolutely in the public interest, and disclosure will contribute significantly to operations and activities of the government, both federal and state. I am in the process of exposing a corrupted local village government in the State of New York. Whenever I obtain results relating to the Piermont matter, I blog them to my own Google Blogger blog, to between 10 and 300 local Facebook pages, and to Twitter/X, at minimum. Examples of such blog entries are below, and many thousands of readers have viewed these entries:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2024/07/erratum-notice-sec-and-federal.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2024/07/sure-plays-mean-pinball.html
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2024/08/analyze-this.html
See, e.g., Friends of the Coast Fork v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, 110 F 3d. 53, 55 (9th Cir. 1997).
 
Moreover:
 
3.
The subject matter of the records that I requested of SEC (see attached and the link immediately below) most certainly concern the operations and activities of the Federal government – namely, the manner in which your SEC interacted with and oversaw, or did not interact with and oversee, the Village of Piermont, New York government on bond and securities matters:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2024/07/sure-plays-mean-pinball.html
I do have reason to believe that the Village of Piermont government may have misstated its financial position to others, in the context of the subject bond and securities matters:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com/2024/08/analyze-this.html
 
4.
Of course the requested records will be meaningfully informative on those operations or activities so that their disclosure will contribute to increased understanding of specific operations or activities of the government. Right now, there are 2,500 residents of Piermont, New York, many of whom are waiting to see what SEC will reply to the July 24, 2024 FOIA request. They read my blog and my other social media posts on a regular basis, as indicated by my Google Blogger statistics and the numerous comments that they make on my social media posts. Many of them want to know what oversight the Federal government, in the form of your SEC, may or may not have exercised over the now notoriously corrupted Village of Piermont government in Rockland County New York, regarding the subject bond issues. See, e.g., Better Gov't Ass'n v. Department of State, 780 F.2d 86, 88-89 (D.C. Cir. 1986); McClellan Ecological Seepage Situation v. Carlucci, 835 F.2d 1282, 1284-1286 (9th. Cir. 1987).
 
5.
Of course disclosure will contribute to the understanding of the public at large, rather than the understanding of the requester or a narrow segment of interested persons alone. My blog, for example, is worldwide, and not just limited to Piermont, New York residents:
https://unhandpiermont.blogspot.com
How the Piermont bond matter resolves will be precedential with respect to every other local village government in New York State, and indeed every other local village government within the United States of America. My cause to bring out the truth about Piermont village government malfeasance, has already been picked up by media, and these news outlets also transmit world-wide:
https://rocklandnews.com/unhand-piermont-mayor-bruce-tucker/
https://patch.com/new-york/nyack/discussion-continue-controversial-piermont-apartments-proposal
 
6.
Again, of course disclosure will contribute significantly to public understanding of government operations and activities - namely, the manner in which your SEC interacted with an oversaw, or did not interact with and oversee, the Village of Piermont, New York government on bond and securities matters. The residents of Piermont, and members of the public generally, want to know and have a right to know what oversight the Federal government in the form of your SEC may or may not have exercised over the now notoriously corrupted Rockland County Village of Piermont government, regarding the subject bond issues.
 
In closing, I have borne the burden under FOIA of showing that the fee waiver requirements have been met. I have provided you substantive information relating to all of the six (6) factors that you cited.
 
I am not a “Commercial Use” requester.
 
I have again identified the requested records by attaching another copy of my July 24, 2024 FOIA request to this e-mail and letter. This appeal includes the facts and authorities that I consider appropriate.
 
Respectfully submitted,
 
John J. Tormey III, Esq.
- - - - - - - - - -
 
From: morrowa@sec.gov <morrowa@sec.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2024 4:13 PM
To: jtormey@optonline.net
Subject: Regarding Request No. 24-03614-FOIA
 
Dear Mr. Tormey,
Please see the attached response to the fee waiver that you submitted as part of your FOIA request on July 24, 2024. 
If you have any questions, please contact me at (202) 551-8376. 
 
Regards,
 
Alysia Morrow
Research Specialist
Office of FOIA Services
OFFICE   +1(202) 551-8376
morrowa@sec.gov

Tell It To Tom.

As you are likely already aware, Piermont Village Hall made a “decision” late last week to finally release and upload to the Village of Piermont website, the multiple years’ worth of Village financials which Village Hall previously sought to conceal from Piermont residents since Year 2020. Piermont Village government rushed to do this after discovering that the “Unhand Piermont!” Blog released and uploaded these same Piermont financials last Wednesday, July 24, 2024. “Unhand Piermont!” sourced the relevant documents and information from the Moody’s website, and from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (“EMMA”) website at “msrb.org”. It is astounding that Piermont government worked so hard for years to try to conceal from Piermont residents, a set of documents specifically intended for those Piermont residents to see and review real-time – especially given that those documents were hiding in plain sight at other locations on the Internet.

As you can imagine, the spotlight placed on the Village of Piermont financials last week has caused a flurry of activity since, including inquiries made to New York State and United States federal regulators regarding: (A) the sanctity vel non of the Piermont financials themselves, and (B) the true economic state of well-being vel non of the Village itself. Perhaps the most important regulator and protector against Piermont Village Hall financial misconduct is Tom DiNapoli and his Office of the New York State Comptroller (“OSC”). His photo is posted here. The Newburgh/New Windsor OSC field office apparently handles Piermont.

Accordingly, the following OSC contact-information has been forwarded to me for YOUR use. If you have any information whatsoever regarding financial malfeasance perpetrated by the Village of Piermont government or by any individual public official therein, you are urged to forward it to the following OSC e-mail address:
muni-newburgh@osc.ny.gov

Naturally, there are manifold protections for whistleblowers in federal, state, and sometimes even local law. Those protections can be easily reviewed by basic Internet searches as well as communications with one’s own counsel versed in whistleblower protection law. Moreover, I am informed that OSC will also accept information anonymously when mailed to the following address:

Office of the State Comptroller
33 Airport Center Drive, Suite 102
New Windsor, NY 12553 USA

Thank you for your careful consideration of this memo.

John J. Tormey III, Esq.

Sure Plays A Mean Pinball.

 
Law Office of John J. Tormey III, Esq.
John J. Tormey III, PLLC
1636 Third Avenue, PMB 188
New York, NY  10128  USA
(212) 410-4142 (phone)
(212) 410-2380 (fax)
jtormey@optonline.net
https://www.tormey.org
 
NEW REQUEST UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (“FOIA”)
 
Thursday, July 25, 2024
 
VIA FAX: 1-202-772-9295, U.S. MAIL, and E-MAIL:
foiapa@sec.gov
Olivier Girod, Director, Office of Support Operations and Chief FOIA Officer
U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20549-0213 USA
 
VIA FAX: 1-202-772-9295, U.S. MAIL, and E-MAIL:
chair@sec.gov
Gary Gensler, Chair
U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20549-0213 USA
 
Re: Village of Piermont, New York – Municipal Securities/Bonds – CUSIP BASE #720798
 
Dear Chair Gensler, Director Girard, and  Colleagues:
 
I am an attorney in New York, and a citizen and resident of the Town of Orangetown, and the County of Rockland. Under Title 5 of the United States Code, Section 552 (5 U.S.C. §552) (“FOIA”):
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/552
request is hereby made that your offices timely provide to this, my law office, full, complete, unredacted, and otherwise unexpurgated copies of each and every document and other item of material (collectively, “Records”) which may be at all responsive to the below itemized requests:
 
1. Exhibit “A”. Please note that Exhibit “A” attached/enclosed is an August 26, 2020 “Event Notification” citing the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Rule 15c2-12 - referencing the Village of Piermont, New York, CUSIP BASE #720798 - and also referencing a Village of Piermont failure to timely file Fiscal Year 2019 material for a period of almost fifteen (15) months (the “Piermont 2019 Default”).
 
2. Exhibit “B”. Please also note that Exhibit “B” attached/enclosed is a November 13, 2020 “Erratum Notice” citing the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Rule 15c2-12 - referencing the Village of Piermont, New York - referencing a Bond date of December 11, 2020 – and also referencing a Village of Piermont omission of important text in a prior Notice of Bond Sale (the “Piermont 2020 Errata”).
 
3. All Records. Simply put, I am hereby requesting all Records relating to the Piermont 2019 Default, and all Records relating to the Piermont 2020 Errata.
 
4. Time-Frame. I am requesting the production of all Records created, generated, communicated, or otherwise existing from January 1, 2017 forward to the present day (the “Time-Frame”).
 
5. All Other Records. Additionally, I am requesting all other Records created, generated, communicated, or otherwise existing within the Time-Frame, relating to Piermont, New York, of any other kind. My understanding is that the Village of Piermont, New York may issue bonds every year, and I am seeking all records relating to each of those bond issues.
 
6. Persons. Additionally, I am requesting all other Records relating to the following Piermont individuals:
 
Jennifer DeYorgi Maher - Village of Piermont NY Treasurer, Chief Fiscal Officer, and Village Clerk.

Bruce Tucker – Village of Piermont NY Mayor.
Mark W. Blomquist – Village of Piermont NY Trustee.
Michael E. Wright – Village of Piermont NY Trustee.
Lino J. Sciarretta, Esq. - Village of Piermont NY Village Attorney.
Rob Burns – Former Village of Piermont NY Trustee (who recently quit his post).
Hannah Ross – Former Village of Piermont NY Deputy Clerk and Treasurer.

7. Types Of Records. Without limitation to the foregoing, a partial illustrative list of the types of Records which are requested hereby, is as follows:
 
Audit Materials
“Audited Financial Statements”
Payment And Repayment Schedules
Bid Materials
“Bond Calls”
Bond Ratings
Bonds
Complaints
Consent Judgments
Consent Orders
“Continuing Disclosures”
Correspondence
“CUSIP” Numbers
Deliberative Materials
Determinations
Disclosures
Documents Indicating Fines
Documents Indicating Penalties
E-Mails
“Erratum Notices”
“Event Notifications”
Exemption Documents
Filings
Financial Information
Financial Statements
Investigative Materials
Issuing Documents
Judgments
“Material Event Notices”
“Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board” (MSRB) Materials
“No Action” Letters
“Notice Of Bond Sale” Documents
Notices
Obligations
Offering Documents
Opinion Letters
Orders
Rulemakings
Rulings
Serial Bonds
Tax Opinions
Tender Offers
Transmittal Correspondence
Transmittal Letters
Transmittal Memos
Underwriting Documents
“Undertakings”
Violation Notices
 
8. Violations Of Laws, If Any. The foregoing requests include each and every Record reflecting any “violation”, “reporting violation”, fine, penalty, or other past, present, future, or anticipated violation, breach, or other transgression – if any - of any federal, state, county, town, local, or other ordinance, rule, regulation, requirement, or other law or standard, including without limitation any violation of rules, regulations, or other laws enforced by, relating to, or otherwise concerning the following agencies and authorities:
 
Federal Agencies
-United States Department Of Justice (USDOJ).
-U.S. Attorney’s Office (USATTY).
-Federal Bureau Of Investigation (FBI).
 
New York State Agencies
-Office of the New York State Governor (NYS GOV).
-Office of the New York State Comptroller (NYS COMPT).
-New York State Attorney General’s Office (NYSAG).
-New York State Department of Public Service/New York State Public Service Commission (PSC).
 
Rockland County, New York Agencies
-Rockland County, Office Of The County Executive (C.E.).
-The Rockland County Legislature (RCL).
 
Town Of Orangetown, New York Agencies
-The Town Of Orangetown, New York (OTOWN).
 
9. Definition Of “Records”. “Records” should be construed in the broadest sense and manner possible and should include any information kept, held, filed, produced or reproduced by, with or for your agency or office in any physical form whatsoever, including without limitation all audio recordings, blog posts, correspondence, data maintained electronically, data, e-mails, executive summaries, extracts, faxes, instant messages, Internet posts, letters, log-book entries, memos, paper records, personal messages, social media communications, spreadsheets, summaries, synopses, telephone records, test-reports, visual recordings, and any other materials.
 
10. Headings. The headings used herein are for convenience of reference purposes only, and should not be construed to be words of limitation or otherwise of any substantive significance relative to this FOIA request.
 
11. Costs. If there are any copying or other fees for this, please let me know what they are and how they are calculated, before filling the request and forwarding the Records to me. As this FOIA should be considered a matter of public importance, and as its results will be shared with the general public, I am asking that any otherwise-applicable fees be waived for this document-production. I am also asking that all documents be provided to me electronically to the full extent possible, so as to obviate the need for any photocopying expense.
 
12. Timing. As you know, the Freedom of Information Act requires that any agency, including your own, respond to a request such as this one within twenty (20) days of receipt of the request.
 
13. Appeals. In the event that any portion of my request is denied, please inform me of each of the specific reasons for any such denial in writing - and provide me with the name, address, and other contact information of the person or entity to whom an appeal should be directed.
 
14. Further Requests. This FOIA request is not intended to be exhaustive, and I may need to make additional or follow-up requests.
 
I will appreciate a response from you and your office as soon as possible. I look forward to hearing from you shortly. Thank you.
 
Very truly yours,

John J. Tormey III, Esq.

"ERRATUM NOTICE?": SEC And Federal Securities Laws "Disclosures" Brought To You By Jennifer DeYorgi Maher, Piermont Treasurer, "Chief Fiscal Officer", And Village Clerk.