file photo by Boyd Loving Councilwoman Knudsen
Reader says Sarcastic Retorts by Deputy Mayor Unwarranted and Unacceptable in the Village of Ridgewood
Can we define how civil it was the way they treated Councilwoman Knudsen last night???? PUCCIARELLI was like a thug with his sarcastic retorts in the face of her comments.
I presume Councilwoman K. said something reasonable or supportive of what the average resident would expect the council to do, Councilman P. disagreed with her because of some personal agenda he’s got going, and, because he’s one of the three amigos, he had license to ridicule her in accordance with the “new normal” of civil discourse in Ridgewood. What got him spun up this time?
You have to watch it on the ustream. The meeting was so long that it is in two separate U-streams. Go to this one first: https://www.ustream.tv/recorded/59529870
Susan’s zinger begins at 2:16:20, but back it up a bit and listen to what Mike Sedon says about the fact that the local hiring law has been broken repeatedly in the past 25 years. Now the three amigos want to change the law to reflect the way it has been followed (illegally). In other words, they have been breaking the law all along, so let’s change the law.
Susan claims that the Open Public Meetings Act was broken last week when they made her leave the closed session and go home. At one point Albert actually got sarcastic about it, and Susan came right back at him for his snotty comment.
Susan and Michael were aces, absolutely on point and the other three were a total train wreck.
Ms. Knudsen appears to have been deceptively advised to recuse herself when the statute required no such thing.
This is uncivil in the extreme.
One’s mind further boggles at the inexplicable statement by Atty. Rogers that although for 25 years the town has been acting ‘inconsistent with the ordinance’ in failing to accord Ridgewood residents hiring preferences when the ordinance required such preference, this does not mean that the village has been ‘breaking the law’. What the heck is the difference between acting inconsistent with an ordinance, and breaking the law, other than using about five extra syllables to say the same darn thing? And the cure for this is to change the ordinance, not fix the hiring practice? You’re right, Mr. Sedon and Ms. Knudson, the real news story here is not a defective ordinance, but a systematic flouting of a law leading to a generation’s worth of Ridgewood-based applicants being improperly snubbed in favor of non-residents.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. The village manager and village attorney sound concerned about improperly snubbed residents potentially seeking to undo some recent hiring decisions.
