I’m constantly amazed at the contempt that these 3 have for so many of their own neighbors. People that comment at meetings are generally well-meaning and highly involved residents. Many of them are serial volunteers that make great contributions to our Village. The Council majority is at best dismissive and at worst obnoxious to anyone that dares to voice an opinion that differs from the conclusion that they’ve already reached or the deal that they’ve already made. They hold civility hearings and are completely uncivilized, they point fingers claiming conflict of interest and all have conflicts themselves, they disregard their own rules and flagrantly collaborate outside public meetings in violation of the Sunshine Laws.
History has shown again and again when governments try to silence their own citizens, citizens rise up and overthrow the government. Mr Aronsohn has confirmed that he will not seek re-election but there has been no word from the other 2 – one can only assume that they will run again. Please spread the word to your neighbors and send out links to the various recordings of this horrific behavior. We have to make sure that neither of the remaining Council majority gets another term.
Does anyone expect anything different from the three stooges?
Albert is absolutely delusional if he thinks he will be re-elected. The jig is up.
The Village Council does not have contempt for many residents. It has contempt, and should, for the few meddling gadflies that do not accurately represent the majority of Ridgewood residents. Overly-involved is a better description of these people that go against the true of meaning of good neighbor – one that minds their own business and stops being a huge PITA. Those are the ones that should move to a place better suited for their “involvement.”
12:28, please do not underestimate the thousands upon thousands of residents who do not read the local paper, follow Ridgewood political news, or care, but may vote for a familiar name anyway. It doesn’t take much of a margin to get elected around here–viz. Ms. Hauck.
“Serial Volunteers.” What exactly does that tell you right there…
12:28pm – you just don’t get it… they don’t care about reelection… they just need to push through their agenda, benefit and then leave the mess for the next council.
There will be a lot of money floating in 12:28. Money can change the campaign direction with ads.
1:06 – Elected officials should not have contempt for ANY Village resident. I know several of our Council majority’s targets and they are not, as you suggest, pains in the a**. They simply favor smaller development projects to the larger ones that members of our Council majority support. These tax payers have a right to express that opinion and should have the expectation that any elected official listen to them politely for 5 minutes without insulting them. They are guilty of nothing more than disagreeing with 3 of our Council members.
What makes it so much worse is that these (recorded) verbal attacks on citizens come after a series of hilariously hypocritical “civility forums” sponsored by Mr. Aronsohn, Mrs. Hauck and Mr. Pucciarelli.
You are quite correct 5:56. Money can change the direction of a campaign and often the candidate with the deepest pockets wins. Those who want the 3 stooges out will have to dig deep to accomplish their goal. Let’s see if they will put their money where their mouth is………or are they just all talk and no action.
Look for big Al the Developers Friend to change is party affiliation to Democrat just like double dipper Sheriff
Sardiono.
The same voters who voted in Knudsen and Sedon will vote in the next council.
Mind your own business? Really at 1:06?? This is OUR town, and it is OUR business.I am sure you would be happier if residents stay clueless because the more people pay attention the more they are outraged.
1:06 – wow, hate much? Since when are involved citizens considered to be meddling gadflies? Since when is 100’s of people considered to be a few people? I agree with tuscanina, everyone gets to have a voice and an opinion, even if they do not agree with you.
Actually the responses to Anon 1:06 are par for the course… if you’re not on the “boot the 3 amigos bandwagon”, you open yourself up for the usual broadsides…
Hey 106 – – one of the gadflies here. I’ve got an idea, you pay my taxes and take over my volunteer roles in town, and i won’t keep going to meetings and speaking out.
159, it may actually be that a majority of voters are okay with the status quo, which usually translates into low turnout.
Paul Smith – you’ve made this comment before. While 1:06 is a supporter of the Council majority (or maybe one of them) notice their provocative tone. “Meddling gadflies”? Really? If someone were to support the Council majority in non-judgmental terms on this blog they would open themselves up to fewer “broadsides”. Think about it.
Provocative tone? What about the name calling of the 3 members of the council of which “the 3 amigos” is the kindest? Whenever someone dares to take the other side, even in a civil manner, boom. And when the same tact is taken as those that oppose the 3, all of a sudden it’s hateful, etc.
Paul Smith – I have never referred to them as the three Amigos. 1:06 said we should mind our own business and stop being “huge PITA”. HE threw the first stone and your defense of that is ridiculous.
Agree with 8:37, pay my taxes and I will sit back.
thanks for proving my point… he threw the first stone? you may want to refer to the previous comments….
Paul are you really making excuses for throwing childish temper tantrums at council meeting ,by a lawyer, who should know better ?
Actually, yes, 1:06 threw the first stone. There have been other more “civil” (for lack of a better word) comments in support of the Council majority that have appeared here without subsequent comment. You seem to only look for evidence that supports your theory.
The original post, while strongly opposing what the Council majority stands for, is devoid of any such name calling or insults.
No James, absolutely not. My point was the poster on here gave his or her opinion and as it was not lockstep all of a sudden, wow, he or she is a hater (or as above “wow- hate much?”)…
936 I was referring to the comments not the post…three stooges, big al the developer’s friend etc. The post does not take any personal shots…
I would say those are very polite especially considering the nasty comments from most of their supporters, I particularity find thin skinned politicians merely a vail for censorship
I gather they have been on things that you had to censor and you give everyone a long leash. Outside of that there are a few who are pro valley, housing, parking, etc that do unleash some torrents but it appears that other side is more frequent on that approach…
I tend to think James censors the stuff over the top… he has a very delicate balancing act, as you can see by the posts and commentary…. if you are to a degree reasonable and not profane your post will be on here.
Paul is right we should not use the 3 amigos or Big Al the Developers Friend. We should stick to the words that they used at meeting to describe taxpayers. Below is the short list. Remember public officials are held to a higher standard .
disgraceful
beyond the pale
not a way to conduct business
[should] not be tolerated
surreptitious
secretive
sneaky
awful
deceitful
hidden
You want some civil words to describe our elected officials? Here goes:
Susan Knudsen and Michael Sedon are honest, ethical, civil, polite, thoughtful, thought-filled, deliberate, educated, considerate, flexible, wonderful, up-front, responsive, responsible, kind, strong, courteous in the face of attacks from colleagues, etc.
And to add to the list (7:16) of words to describe Paul, Albert, Gwenn, and Roberta: weirdo, stalker, creepy, bullies…..more words they have used to describe citizens.
Thanks for proving my point yet again. If 2 of the 3 are running, don’t be surprised is 1 is a repeat victor. It’s fine if you want to make remarks and throw some mud, just don’t get sanctimonious when someone shoots back on this site…