Free Demonstration and Tasting, Monday, June 7th at 6:30 p.m. Wine Tasting Dinner, Tuesday, June 15th at 7:00 p.m.
Continuing its series of educational food demonstrations and events, A Mano Neapolitan trattoria in Ridgewood, NJ will be hosting two events in June and will be incorporating New Jersey’s Alba Vineyards wines into both events.
The first event will be a free demo and tasting, “Neapolitan Pizza, Pasta and Techniques with a Twist” and will be held on Monday, June 7th at 6:30 p.m. Reservations for the demo are required and can be made by calling A Mano at (201)493-2000. A Mano’s co-owner Fred Mortati will lead this free demonstration and tasting with help from the trattoria’s specially trained pizzaioli (pizza chefs) and an Alba Vineyards wine specialist, who will conduct a tasting. A step-by-step event, Mr. Mortati and staff will cover all aspects of the Neapolitan pizza and pasta making processes, including the creation of dough, sauce and mozzarella. In addition to these basics they will debut the techniques used to make one of their newest offerings, a pizza with sautéed spinach-infused dough.
The second event, “A Mano’s Alba Vineyards Wine Tasting Dinner” will be held on Tuesday, June 15th at 7:00 p.m. Attendees will be served a five-course meal including a fresh mozzarella pinwheel appetizer, seafood salad, homemade lasagna with bolognese, tartufo pizza with truffles and porcini, and espresso or strawberry tiramisu, each course paired with a different Alba wine. The wine selections were specially chosen by the A Mano chefs and the Alba Vineyards sommelier to compliment and reflect the character of the menu. Reservations are required and the cost per attendee is $35 (not including tax and gratuity). A Mano co-owner Fred Mortati and restaurant manager Greg Stott will be on hand to walk attendees through the menu and the pairings choices. Reservations can be made by calling (201)493-2000.
Patrons who do not wish to attend the demonstration on June 7th or the wine tasting dinner can visit the restaurant between 11:30am and 11:00pm for regular service.
On May 1, a new law goes into effect in New Jersey that requires provisional drivers under 21 to put a red sticker on their license plate. The law, nicknamed Kyleigh’s Law, after Kyleigh D’Alessio who died in a car accident in 2006, is purported to make it easier for the police to enforce graduated driver’s license provisions on new drivers. The law is designed to give the police probable cause to pull over vehicles displaying the red sticker. The law also includes changes to New Jersey’s already fairly strict requirements for young people with provisional driver’s licenses, stopping individuals under 21 from driving past 11 pm instead of midnight and stopping drivers from using all cell phones (whether hands free or not). This law also increases restrictions on the passengers a young driver can have in the car. This is the first state in the country to attempt to require new, young drivers to display a special tag or notice on their car identifying them as such.
This law raises a number of important questions, some of which are rather unsettling. First of all, why are only new drivers under 21 required to display this sticker? No evidence exists that shows new drivers over 21 are safer than other new drivers. If this law were about safety then surely all new drivers should have the same restrictions and have the same red sticker on the back of their car. Proponents of this law cite Canada which has a similar identification for new drivers, but their law applies to all new drivers, not just new drivers under 21. The law is similar in Europe where new drivers, of any age, have to display some special marking. There is zero justification for singling out new, young drivers. None.
The plan was for the sticker to put a bullseye on the back of young people’s cars making them easier to pull over. The unsettling question we need to ask, is who else out there would like to easily identify young people driving alone? Our mind can conjure up many stalkers, criminals and sexual predators who could use this marking system to their advantage. Do we really want to put such a target on the cars of our youth?
New Jersey attorney, Gregg Trautmann, filed suit against the law hoping to stop it going into effect due to its safety concerns. His case lost the first round but he is working on an appeal.
Such concerns aren’t unjustified fears, in the 90’s a law in Florida requiring rental cars to display stickers identifying them as rentals led to the murders of nine people in the state. Criminals used those stickers to identify tourists who were often unsure of their surroundings and ran them off the road with the intent to rob them, or worse.
Because of concerns over the dangerous and discriminatory implications of this law it has attracted a storm of criticism before it has even gone on the books. Nearly 30,000 have joined a group called “NJ Teens Against “Kyleigh’s Law” Teen Driving Restrictions” and over 9,000 members have joined a Facebook group named “Kyleigh’s Law lets creepers know I’m young and alone.” Thousands more have joined one of the other 14 Facebook pages created to oppose this law. The members of many threaten non-compliance with this law. The comment sections of news websites are overwhelmed with passionate comments of young people and parents upset over this law.
Lawmakers are starting to take notice. Assemblymen Robert Schroeder and Michael Patrick Carroll are already planning to introduce legislation to repeal the law. Carroll, who initially voted for the law, hadn’t considered the law’s negative implications for the safety of youth. He now is working to oppose it and has been impressed with the public outcry against it.
My organization, the National Youth Rights Association, is calling upon all drivers over 21 in New Jersey to voluntarily put a red sticker on their license plate as a sign of solidarity with all the individuals under 21. Some have described our efforts as “sabotage” but we see it as showing support and solidarity with young people who have been singled out in such an egregious manner. Letting them know they aren’t alone and that people of all ages oppose this law. That’s the point of it. If, however, it causes some sexual predator to think twice before following a car with a red sticker on it, then all the better.
This scarlet letter sticker is the most striking and unique part of this law, but there are questions about its other provisions as well. The law bans provisional license holders under 21 from using a cell phone entirely, no matter if they are talking, texting, or using a hands-free device. Obviously the last thing New Jersey wants a young girl to do after a creepy van spots the sticker and starts following her is to call for help.
>Goodwin combats Republican footsoldier designation by going after decal law
Every issue goes into the arena here in a special election in the 14th District, and the one that state Sen. Tom Goodwin (R-Hamilton) grabbed hold of enabled him today to surround himself with worried parents and children. Intent on repealing a law requiring red decals on the cars of underage drivers, Goodwin stood in the rain of his hometown with supporters and focused populist outrage at the same Statehouse that gave birth to the law. (Pizarro, PolitickerNJ)
>Ingle: How do you spell hypocrisy with four letters?
Did someone declare it Hypocrisy Week in Trenton? Observers got a double dose of watching what the insiders do as opposed to what they say, a real-time display of the two-faced deceit inherent in Jersey politics. The NJEA, the teachers union, falls back on “it’s for the children” whenever it can’t otherwise justify its push to bankrupt the taxpayers (Ingle, Gannett)
Ron Emrich, Preservation NJ director, said in Trenton, “The endangered historic sites program spotlights irreplaceable historic, architectural, cultural and archeological resources in New Jersey that are in imminent danger of being lost. The act of listing these resources acknowledges their importance to the heritage of New Jersey and draws attention to the predicaments that endanger their survival and the survival of all historic resources throughout our state.
“The list aims to attract new perspectives and ideas to sites in desperate need of creative solutions,” Emrich said. “Several challenges face properties included on this year’s endangered sites list, including neglect and deferred maintenance, weak or non-existent local preservation ordinances, and simple misinformation.
“But on this year’s list, the effects of an extraordinarily challenging economy are particularly evident: a dearth of funds, a lack of historically-sensitive and financially-capable buyers, and taxed municipal budgets are just a few of the difficult issues with which not only those sites on this year’s list, but historic properties throughout New Jersey, are currently grappling.”
Graydon Pool at Graydon Park at Linwood and Maple Avenues, Ridgewood, Bergen County — A natural municipal swimming pool threatened with demolition and replacement.
>At BF Middle School tonight starting at 7:30pm will be the LAST chance for the public to comment on the proposed H-Zone Master Plan amendment. While the revised amendment contains greater setbacks and puts 60% of the parking underground, the proposal still would grant the hospital the right to double its current size to 1,170,000 sq. ft. (up from 530,000) with buildings that will appear to be 7 storeys tall, located only 60 ft from Steilen Ave homes and 40 feet from the boundary of BF. The proposal would also result in 6.5 years of continuous construction just for phase one.
There is an alternative to the current proposal that would allow Valley modernize and save the neighborhood – but this is NOT the current proposal. Please come to the meeting tonight and tell the Planning Board that they need to listen to the “will of the people” and change the proposal. Even if you feel you cannot speak, please attend and support your neighbors.
The Star-LedgerVoting at the St. Cloud Elementary School in West Orange. Half of the 1,800 New Jersey public school teachers who earned more than $100,000 per year for the 2008-09 school year worked in schools in Bergen and Passaic counties, according to a report on NorthJersey.com The report said Passaic had 115 teachers with salaries above $100,000, the largest number within one district in the state. Other towns with teachers making more than $100,000 annually included Hackensack, 98, Teaneck, 93, Wayne 81, and Ridgewood, 71.
The median pay for all teachers in the state was $57,467, while in Bergen County it was $61,096 in Passaic County is was $56,350.
>Gov. Christie takes his tax cap plan to the people New Jersey
Gov. Chris Christie is taking his plan to stem the nation’s highest property tax to the people. And he started on Monday in an unusual place: Corzine country. The Republican governor held his first town hall meeting in Hoboken … home of former Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine … to talk about his push for a 2.5 percent limit on property tax increases that would require voter approval to exceed. A majority of the 40,000 people living in the 1-square-mile city, where Corzine has a waterfront condo, supported the former governor during the election. (AP)
>New Jersey Laborers Union Endorses Republican Kathleen Donovan for Bergen County Executive
One of the state’s most powerful unions, the New Jersey Laborers Union, endorsed Bergen County Clerk Kathleen Donovan for Bergen County Executive today, citing her management experience, her ability to reach across party lines and build consensus, and her vision for responsible economic development in Bergen County as well as her commitment to improving infrastructure and creating jobs for local residents.
With more than 20,000 members statewide, including 900 members of Building Laborers Local 592 of Fort Lee, and 8,000 members of General and Heavy Construction Laborers Local 472, which represents Northern New Jersey–the New Jersey Laborers Union is committing its full resources to the Donovan campaign.
It is anticipated that hundreds of laborers will volunteer time to the campaign through phone banking, voter registration drives, get out the vote drives, and member-to-member education.
Laborers Vice-President and Eastern Regional Manager Raymond M. Pocino called the early endorsement a sign of the union’s confidence in Ms. Donovan. “Through the years, no matter which political party was on the rise or what party was down, Bergen residents time and again re-elected Kathe Donovan for public office. There is a reason for that. It is because of her consistency of effort, her commitment to put people first and her ability to solve problems and create opportunities,” said Pocino. “We support her candidacy for county executive, and more importantly, we support her vision for Bergen County.”
Pocino praised Kathe Donovan’s leadership and experience with economic development as a key factor for endorsement. “Kathleen Donovan was the first woman to chair the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and she understands that prosperity won’t happen without smart public investment and job growth,” said Pocino. “Kathe Donovan not only has a vision for Bergen County’s future but she also has a track record that residents can trust.”
The New Jersey Laborers Union is affiliated with the Laborers’ International Union of North America (LIUNA), and represents more than 20,000 members statewide in various industries, including construction, clean energy, environmental remediation, sanitation and recycling, security, and education. The New Jersey Laborers are widely viewed as having been instrumental in helping to lift living standards and workplace safety for employees in construction, clean energy, and hazardous materials removal, and for developing innovative cooperative relationships with employers.
Over the past few weeks, Governor Christie and the media have made a big deal about some recently-released data. It showed that statewide, over the past 10 years, enrollment in New Jersey schools has grown 3%, while staffing in NJ schools has grown 14%. The Governor and others used these statistics to back-up the claim that there has been a “hiring spree” in our schools and that today there is “plenty of room to cut.” I would totally agree on a statewide level.
However, the statistics in Ridgewood are very different:
2000-2010 Ridgewood: (from DOE reporting) Enrollment Growth = 11% Total Staff Growth = 6.9%
And if we project ahead to next year (2010-11) based on the cuts we are making, it will look like this:
2000-2011 Ridgewood: (from DOE reporting) Enrollment Growth = 11% Total Staff Growth = 0%
In other words, Ridgewood’s staffing-to-enrollment growth ratio is the complete opposite of the rest of the state. (See year-by-year comparison chart at the end of this post.)
Unlike many other districts, Ridgewood is educating many more students in a much more rigorous program with much more state-mandated curriculum – and with the same number of staff — as 10 years ago. This doesn’t look like “bloat” to me.
FYI, the number of administrators in the district has gone down 34% in the same 10-year period. Our highest number of administrators was 37 in 2004-2005 down to 27 currently in 2009-2010 and cut to 21 next year. We have not had so few administrators in decades.
Our district serves 5,700+ students every day. And we will accomplish this next year with 21 administrators. I have to be honest and say while I’m all for streamlining and working “lean,” I’m a bit concerned about the workloads and effectiveness of those 21 administrators. It is for this reason that I can’t support cutting any more administration at this time.
Of course, if the Governor’s proposed 2.5% budget cap becomes law, we’ll be cutting our budget more next year, and we may have to find ways to consolidate a few more administrators. But for now, for this year, I think we’ve cut enough.
The Board of Education will hold a regular public meeting at 5 p.m. on Monday, April 26, on floor 3 of the Education Center, 49 Cottage Place. The Board will recess at 5:30 p.m. and reconvene in Council Chambers at Village Hall, 131 North Maple Avenue, at approximately 6:00 p.m. to discuss the 2010-2011 school budget.
>The tools at the BOE should not have rammed the $48m bond thru in December. What a scam that was…
There was so many things wrong with the way they went about it:
1. should have put in on the general ballot in november instead of its own ballot in december OR put it at the same time as the budget vote. they only did this because they knew less people would come out in december to vote against it AND that the NJ budget cuts were coming. additionaly, it costs money to hold a special election so yet again they wasted money.
2. they put a package deal together so they people with leaky roofs would vote yes even if they were not in favor of a dozen new classrooms, new bleachers, and new turf fields (which were, by the way, voted down by the general public when specifically asked whether they wanted to pay for them on the ballot two years ago).
3. there is no logic to the fact that they are claiming to need a dozen new classrooms while school populations are hundreds less than in the 1970s. why would we possibly need these things? if certain schools are too crowded, rebalance the boundaries like they did with somerville a few years ago. it’s not like you’d be sending your kid to inner city schools if they had to go to a different elementary school in Ridgewood.
4. as mentioned in point 2 above, the put deferred maintenance items in the bond. ok, fine, fix the roofs, wiring, etc. that was neglected in prior years that should have been handled in the operating budget BUT AGAIN, do not add new infrastructure (classrooms etc.) that we will not be able to maintain because obviously we can afford to maintain what we have already (hence the deferred maintenace in bond).
We need somebody on the board who will say NO to the teachers’ union, who has kids who will feel the impact of any cuts/reductions to keep them honest, and will not empire-build. We have to get back to basics and for once stabilize the taxes and let incomes catch up. 4% increases to the budget are not stable when there is essentially zero inflation.
>One of the roles assumed by New Jersey’s municipal governing bodies is as referee when a school budget is defeated. Having been defeated by 102 votes, the proposed $78.8 million Ridgewood Budget now heads for review by elected members of Ridgewood’s Village Council.
The last time The Fly can recall this happening in Ridgewood was 2004, when the Village Council, led by former Mayor Jane Reilly, passed the voter defeated budget with cuts totalling only two-tenths of one percent. Ms. Reilly was offered a paid position with the Ridgewood Board of Education following her departure from public office in the summer of 2004. By New Jersey state law, if a school budget is defeated, the budget is sent to the municipal government for their recommendations. A municipality is under no obligation to cut the school budget, but the reality is that if the voters defeated the budget, then the taxpayers are demanding some relief. That message is not lost on municipal officials, and they are often forced to find a middle ground between the wants of a school board and the decision of the voters.
Generally, the budget will be sent to the finance committee of each municipality and out of respect to the school board, a meeting is held between the two bodies to discuss what budget cuts are possible. After the municipality makes its recommendations, taxpayers can expect to hear how draconian the cuts are from both school officials and representatives of the teachers union. The public will then hear that the school may not be able to function with such tight restrictions and how the children will be deprived of the finest education.
Some of this is true, but most of it is rhetoric. With few exceptions, most of the recommendations made by municipal officials are modest in size and rarely cut deeply into a schools budget. Whenever you read about significant cuts to a school budget, you can bet that the school district will automatically appeal to the county education commissioner. At this point, the commissioner has the power to reinstate many, if not all, of the proposed budget cuts and the school district winds up winning in the end.
By restoring many of the recommended cuts, the voting result is circumvented and the taxpayer winds up footing the bill. The entire process is out of whack and there has got to be a better way of making the vote count. However, until the electorate of our state has the stomach and political will to reform our school funding formulas, we are stuck with the charade of voting on school budgets.
,”comparing schools to private enterprise is not an intelligent comparison. the two are in different realm – its like comparing baseball stats with golf handicaps – the two have nothing to do with each other.
you see, part living in the greatest nation on earth means that YOU have to pay up to live here. you live in one of the wealthiest towns in the nation – nobody is crying for you when you’re paying taxes. YOU CAN AFFORD IT – YOU LIVE IN RIDGEWOOD.
if you can’t afford the taxes, move elsewhere. there is plenty of affordable housing in alabama.”
