A Beginner’s Guide to Austrian Economics
by Jason Peirce
“Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders; no one is relieved of his share of responsibility by others. And no one can find a safe way out for himself if society is sweeping towards destruction. Therefore everyone, in his own interests, must thrust himself vigorously into the intellectual battle. None can stand aside with unconcern; the interests of everyone hang on the result. Whether he chooses or not, every man is drawn into the great historical struggle, the decisive battle into which our epoch has plunged us.” – Ludwig von Mises
December 16, 2014—Of course, Mises above is addressing the need for “everyone” to understand basic, sound economics. This is why it’s heartening to see such renewed interest in the Austrian School since the 2008 financial crisis.
Here is a beginner’s guide in which we’ll briefly examine the basic principles and answer the basic questions about Austrian economics.
The “Austrian School” of economics grew out of the work of the late 19th and 20th century Vienna economists Carl Menger, Eugen von Bohm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises, and Friedrich Hayek (though of course Austrian School economists need not hail from Austria). Austrians focus strongly on the analysis of individual human action. This is known as praxeology, the study of the logical implications of the fact that individuals act with purpose, from which all economic theory can be deduced. Austrians also note the correlation between greater economic freedom and greater political and moral freedom. This in part explains why Austrian economics is the intellectual foundation for libertarianism. Austrians rightly attribute the repeated implosions of mainstream Keynesian economics to the latter’s focus on empirical observations, mathematical models, and statistical analysis.
It’s important to note that Austrians sound a minority voice in economics and are widely marginalized by mainstream Keynesian economists in academia and media. Consider why this may be. It’s certainly not due to unsound theory. Perhaps because of academic group-think, since tenure is largely denied for Austrians? Or maybe because there is a lack of financial incentive to be Austrian, because Austrians cannot be “Jonathan Gruber-ized” and bought and sold by government, bankers, and the moneyed lobbyists and powers-that-be? What do you think?
The Austrian contributions to economic thought are best-evidenced when comparing Austrian economics to mainstream Keynesian economics. Here are 3 examples of how Austrians differ from Keynesians:
Example 1: The Role of Savings, Capital, and Prices
Keynesians assert that consumer and government spending drive economic growth and that GDP determines the strength of the economy. Seeing savings as the enemy of growth, Keynesians advocate government deficit spending, monetary inflation, and artificially low interest rates to boost “aggregate demand.” Of course, inflation, spending, and debt destroy savings, capital, and prices.
“Keynes did not teach us how to perform the ‘miracle of turning a stone into bread’ but the not-at-all miraculous procedure of eating the seed corn.” – Mises
On the other hand, Austrians rightly see that savings and production drive economic growth and determine the strength of an economy. Also, Austrians recognize that prices act as signals in the economy, and that natural interest rates and prices determine the amount of savings and production in the economy.
“The essence of Keynesianism is its complete failure to conceive the role that saving and capital accumulation play in the improvement of economic conditions.” – Mises
Ex-Ridgewood police chief to lead regional dispatch center
JANUARY 4, 2015 LAST UPDATED: SUNDAY, JANUARY 4, 2015, 1:21 AM
THE RECORD
Print
Ridgewood’s Northwest Bergen Central Dispatch has a new director — the village’s former police chief, Lou Mader.
Mader’s appointment was announced by Ridgewood officials on Thursday.
Mader will replace Jack Tancos, who tendered his resignation in late October.
Tancos remains at Bergen Central Dispatch, working as a public safety dispatcher.
Mader, who holds a degree in public administration from William Paterson University, was most recently director of public safety for Hunter College, a position he held for nearly 14 years.
Prior to that, Mader spent eight years running Ridgewood’s police force. He begins his new job Jan. 20.
Republicans are putting the Keystone XL pipeline at the top of the agenda as they seek to move a stack of legislation to President Obama’s desk in 2015.
Incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has promised that a vote on approving the $8 billion oil sands project would be his first order of business in the majority, and legislation is set to move quickly in the opening days of the new Congress.
A Senate panel will hold a hearing on legislation to approve construction of the pipeline next week, followed by a markup on Thursday, raising the potential for a final vote in mid-January.
If all goes as planned, Keystone proponents will have the filibuster-proof majority needed to get a bill to Obama, setting the stage for what could be his first veto in the new Republican Congress. But securing a veto-proof majority will be challenging in both the House and the Senate.
“The Senate needs to get back to work, and Leader McConnell chose Keystone, a bipartisan infrastructure bill, as the first for consideration because a final decision on this pipeline project is grossly overdue,” said McConnell spokesman Michael Brumas.
The Threat to Political Speech Online: Q&A With Former Elections Chief Lee Goodman
Melissa Quinn / @MelissaQuinn97 / January 03, 2015
The Federal Election Commission has steered clear of regulating political speech on the Internet. But the FEC’s outgoing chairman, Lee Goodman, warns that the commission could well impose rules on Americans who disseminate information on blogs, video channels or podcasts.
Goodman, a Republican, last year headed the six-member FEC, which oversees campaign finance laws. In an exclusive interview with The Daily Signal before his term ended, he discussed a 3-3 decision by the six-member commission in response to a complaint filed against a nonprofit group called Checks and Balances for Economic Growth.
The nonprofit had posted two campaign videos on YouTube without making disclaimers or divulging production costs. The complaint alleged that Checks and Balances violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 because it didn’t disclose the information.
Goodman and the two other Republicans on the panel contended that free postings on the Internet are exempt from the law. However, FEC Vice Chairman Ann Ravel, a Democrat, called for a “re-examination of the commission’s approach to the Internet.” Such a review, Ravel said, is “long overdue.”
Ravel has not made definitive proposals for new Internet regulations, a spokesman told The Daily Signal, but she plans to meet with technology and media leaders this year.
This transcript of the interview with Goodman was edited for style, clarity and length.
The Daily Signal: What was the basis for your ruling that Checks and Balances for Economic Growth did not violate the Federal Election Campaign Act?
Goodman: In 2004 and 2005, the FEC undertook a rulemaking specifically addressing Internet communications and Internet political activity. The commission heard public comments from over 800 citizens and organizations. The commission drew a fairly bright line in its regulations as a result of that process. And under the 2006 rule, the commission will regulate paid advertising on the Internet.
If my organization wants to take out a banner ad or place an Internet video on a commercial website and pay a fee for that advertising space, the FEC regulates that expenditure just like it would a TV ad or radio ad. However, if an organization places content for free on the Internet, there is no expenditure to regulate because the dissemination cost is free.
In the process of drawing that line in the rulemaking process, certain organizations proposed that the FEC count production costs of websites and podcasts and YouTube videos as an expenditure, and the commission declined to adopt that proposal.
Since 2006, if your dissemination on the Internet is free or low-cost, such as posting a free video on YouTube or building a website or organizing a social media platform, or any number of Internet-based political activities, you are unregulated.
The American public has embraced this freedom, as evidenced by the hundreds of thousands of YouTube videos, blogs, websites, podcasts, social media posts, social media platforms and other Internet-based activities that have gone unregulated without so much as an inquiry from the FEC.
I don’t think there is any evidence that this robust exercise of freedom on the Internet has corrupted any politician in America. Moreover, it’s clear that the Internet has facilitated a free marketplace of ideas and political expression, where individuals and small groups compete with large, well-funded voices on a level playing field.
For all these reasons, my two Republican colleagues and I voted the way we did in the Checks and Balances matter, and will oppose efforts to impose far greater regulation of political speech on the Internet.
Republicans on the FEC ‘will oppose efforts to impose far greater regulation of political speech on the Internet,’ Goodman says. (Photo: Newscom)
The Daily Signal: If this discussion is brought before the FEC as Vice Chairman Ann Ravel said, what implications could this have on the blogging community, on any Web-based news organization, on people with YouTube channels or organizations posting YouTube videos?
Goodman: I don’t think we can begin to contemplate all of the severe consequences to online political speech as a result of even opening this discussion within the FEC.
First, I believe that opening this issue will serve only to deter low-cost and free discussion of political issues on the Internet. As people begin to hear that the Federal Election Commission is considering a crackdown on Internet political speech, some people will be discouraged from participating. I think that’s a shame, and that’s one reason I’m speaking out loudly and clearly that three Republican commissioners will oppose any effort to restrict freedom on the Internet.
“Republican commissioners will oppose any effort to restrict freedom on the Internet,” says 2014 FEC Chairman Lee Goodman of online political speech
Second, I cannot imagine how the Federal Election Commission will begin to regulate hundreds of thousands of blogs, YouTube videos, chat rooms, emails and links, and all sorts of Internet-based political discussion because of how vast political discussion on the Internet currently is.
The problem for the FEC as a practical matter — put aside the philosophical and policy implications — what the vice chair is inviting the FEC to do is to establish an Internet review board where a room full of government bureaucrats sit on a daily basis and troll the Internet for political commentary — to identify online commentators who did not register or report their expenses in connection with their website, and to issue subpoenas seeking information about their expenditures.
I know of no other way that the FEC could regulate the hundreds of thousands of posts on the Internet, absent such a review process.
The Daily Signal: It seems like this would hurt the little guys starting blogs, as opposed to big companies and news organizations. Is that the case?
Goodman: The specter of regulation of Internet political speech will discourage small groups and individuals from using the Internet to express their political opinions. If we regulate it, we will necessarily discourage it and get less of it. It’s an axiom that if you regulate it, you will deter it and get less of it.
Under current law, there are two important exemptions from FEC regulation: One is the media exemption. Congress wrote in the Federal Election Campaign Act an explicit exemption for the media, the press.
The second important exemption, created in the commission’s 2006 rulemaking, is the Internet exemption. If the commission were to abolish the Internet exemption, many online bloggers who have been protected by it would resort to protection under the media exemption.
However, the distinction between a bona fide media organization and blogger online is a blurred line. And there are three Democratic commissioners on the FEC today who have consistently voted to constrict the definition of the press entitled to the media exemption.
It is unclear whether online bloggers would be exempt from regulation under the press exemption, and it would embroil the FEC in determining which bloggers are the press and which bloggers are not the press. That would be a significant consequence and complication if the FEC were to follow Vice Chair Ravel’s proposal.
The Daily Signal: Would this, then, be regulated by the government combing blogs to see if the blogs meet the qualifications for what the FEC rules as a media organization?
Goodman: That’s correct. Look at the medium. This is not as easy as identifying who has a broadcast license from the Federal Communications Commission. The Internet has placed a printing press in the hands of every citizen in America. And many small groups and individuals have started political commentary pages or websites on their kitchen tables and have grown those blogs into being significant daily publications.
The Internet has democratized not just political speech generally, but journalism specifically. Imagine the FEC having to comb all blogs in America to determine which ones are exempt, are bona fide press entities, [and] which ones are not bona fide press entities and would be regulated because the Internet exemption has been abolished. I believe this is an area where the government ought to leave well enough alone.
On Nov. 5, national and local newspapers in New York report on the results of the previous day’s mid-term elections. (Photo: Richard B. Levine/Newscom)
The Daily Signal: Isn’t it the First Amendment right of Americans to record podcasts and write on the Internet?
Goodman: Absolutely, and let me take it a step further. This is the fundamental error in the proposal to regulate the Internet. The Supreme Court consistently has ruled that the FEC has no constitutional authority to regulate speech for the sake of regulating speech.
The FEC exists solely to regulate large contributions to candidates and to require public disclosure of large expenditures to influence elections because the money involved in the contributions and the expenditures has the potential to corrupt politicians.
The vast majority of posts on the Internet, from YouTube videos to websites to blogs, are low cost or free. Therefore, if we were to begin regulating online political speech, the FEC would be in the position of regulating speech and not expenditures for speech.
Absolutely it’s a First Amendment right to speak to the world through your personal computer without governmental interference, so long as you’re not corrupting politicians.
The Daily Signal: Is the concern that someone who is running for Congress is going to find a blog and be corrupted?
Goodman: I cannot speak for the vice chairman. I infer from her statement that my Democratic colleagues are concerned that Internet speech has become highly effective and influential in the political process.
Pew issued a report one year ago indicating that one-half of Americans report the Internet as a primary source of obtaining political news, information and advocacy. So the Internet clearly is an influential medium in America today.
I believe that’s what captured the attention and regulatory impulses of Vice Chairman Ravel. Just because it is influential or effective does not give the FEC a writ to regulate it.
“Just because it is influential or effective does not give the FEC a writ to regulate it,” says 2014 FEC Chairman Lee Goodman of online political speech
The Daily Signal: It seems this is a nonpartisan issue. You have Democrats and Republicans who would benefit from an unregulated Internet.
Goodman: The proposal to regulate Internet political speech would have ecumenical consequences. It would deter political speech on the right and the left of the political spectrum. More importantly, it would deter thousands of populist voices that have found a voice on the Internet.
The Daily Signal: Do you think this move has anything to do with the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings in Citizens United and McCutcheon v. FEC, even though those decisions deal with monetary contributions?
Goodman: I haven’t heard anyone articulate that being the problem. But the major concern after Citizens United was that large, corporate-funded voices would drown out all other voices in the political process. On the Internet, the smallest of bloggers has the level playing field to make their ideas heard as easily as the largest of corporations.
The decentralized architecture of the Internet gives each citizen an equal place to have his voice heard. What goes viral on the Internet is interesting political speech that resonates with people. Much of what goes viral — by “going viral” I mean gets millions of viewers — is creative and interesting content, and not necessarily well-funded content.
Look at “Obama Girl” in 2008. I daresay that video has had, on YouTube alone, 30 million hits. And because it goes viral and other people pick it up and send links to it, who knows how many Americans have seen that video. JibJab.com [animation with political themes] went viral. I don’t think the production cost of JibJab cartoons is very expensive.
What large corporations tend to do and what well-funded advocacy groups tend to do is they buy advertising. They buy banner ads, for example, and we regulate those expenditures. If you pay Yahoo or AOL to post a banner ad [for] your advocacy message, we regulate that. But what’s going viral and being seen by millions of Americans on the Internet is predominantly low-cost production.
What’s viral on the Internet is a populist phenomenon. Someone posts something interesting or something that resonates, and then millions of Americans talk to each other through email and links and say, ‘Look at this.’ I believe that the Internet is the antidote to the concerns raised after Citizens United. We don’t need to ruin it for the American people.
The Daily Signal: Those are interesting examples. How would FEC regulation change that process?
Goodman: BarelyPolitical.com produced “Obama Girl” and other videos — all politically themed – about John McCain, about Rudy Giuliani. There were at least a dozen politically themed videos that they produced and posted for free on YouTube. It was the first one that went viral. They had millions of viewers for all of them.
Under a regulatory regime, there would be several implications. First, each video would have to carry a disclaimer at the bottom indicating who paid for it and whether it was authorized by a political candidate. Second, BarelyPolitical.com would have to file expenditure reports with the Federal Election Commission disclosing the first date on which they post each YouTube video and how much they spent on the production.
Screen shot from an “Obama Girl” video. (Photo: BarelyPolitical.com/YouTube)
The FEC would have to issue regulations on what would be included in the production costs – do I consider purchasing costs of your personal computer, the editing equipment that you used? What about the video cameras you use? Did you pay the girl who performed in the video? Did you pay anyone else?
We would have to have a regulation prescribing what is described in production costs. The software that you purchased — and by the way, that goes for individual bloggers, too — up to computer, the software you purchased, your monthly Internet access charge. The FEC would have to get into this granular level of prescriptive regulation to tell people what to include in their expenditure reports to the FEC.
Then the content creator would have to disclose anyone who contributed money for the purpose of supporting the blog or YouTube post. And then, last but not least, if they coordinated their communication at all with a campaign or political party — for example, if they republish any campaign materials from a candidate — then that would count as a contribution to the candidate if the blogger or YouTube poster is incorporated. And that would mean the expenditure being reported is an illegal corporate contribution.
These are the consequences of regulating what has been a wholly constructive forum for Americans to speak and share ideas. Government needs to know when to leave well enough alone. The specter of government regulation of hundreds of thousands of websites and YouTube posts and chat rooms is ominous. It’s the regulatory Pandora’s box.
$589,000 in Ridgewood
MLS # 1435831
242 W Glen Ave, Ridgewood, NJ 07450
4 Bedroom, 1 Full Bath,
1 Half Bath, Col
Janis Fuhrman, Sales Associate
Terrie O’Connor Realtors/Ridgewood
Open House: 1:00 P.M. – 4:00 P.M. Sun. 1/4
20
$689,999 in Ridgewood
MLS # 1500062
251 Steilen Ave, Ridgewood, NJ 07450
6 Bedroom, 2 Full Bath,
1 Half Bath, S/L
Diane LoDrago, Sales Associate
Weichert Realtors, Wayne
Open House: 12:00 P.M. – 4:00 P.M. Sun. 1/4
14
Open Houses for Sun 1/11
$7,500 in Ridgewood
MLS # 1445893
221 Bedford Rd, Ridgewood, NJ 07450
4 Bedroom, 4 Full Bath, House
Pam Christian, Sales Associate
Keller Williams Village Square Realty
Open House: 1:00 P.M. – 4:00 P.M. Sun. 1/11
15
$425,000 in Ridgewood
MLS # 1443545
1103 E Ridgewood Ave, Ridgewood, NJ 07450
3 Bedroom, 3 Full Bath, C/C
Jane L. McGuire, Sales Associate
Coldwell Banker, Wyckoff/Franklin Lakes
Open House: 1:00 P.M. – 4:00 P.M. Sun. 1/11
4
$1,360,000 in Ridgewood
MLS # 1445312
221 Bedford Rd, Ridgewood, NJ 07450
4 Bedroom, 4 Full Bath, Col
Pam Christian, Sales Associate
Keller Williams Village Square Realty
Open House: 1:00 P.M. – 4:00 P.M. Sun. 1/11
– See more at: https://www.njmls.com/NJ/BERGEN/RIDGEWOOD-open-houses#sthash.SyywpI7B.og8etjbN.dpuf
Amy Purdy Sunday, January 4th @1:00PM
Champion Snowboarder and Dancing With the Stars Sensation, Amy Purdy, will sign her new book: On My Own Two Feet
Al & Lisa Robertson Monday, January 5th @ 6:00pm
Stars of Duck Dynasty, Al & Lisa Robertson, will sign their new book,
A New Season
Molly Simms Wednesay, January 7th @ 7:00pm
Supermodel, Molly Sims, will sign her new book
The Everyday Supermodel
Sean Lowe Tuesday, January 27th @ 6:00pm
Star of The Bachelor, Sean Lowe, will sign his new book:
For The Right Reasons
Marky Ramone Wednesday, January 28th @ 7:00pm
Drummer from the group The Ramone’s, Marky Ramone, will sign his new book:Punk Rock Blitzkrieg
Appearing authors will only autograph books purchased at Bookends and must have valid Bookends Receipt.
Availability & pricing for all autographed books subject to change.
First In Line Certificate use is the the discretion of Bookends. Blackout dates may apply.
Bookends cannot guarantee that the books that are Autographed will always be First Printings.
Autographed books purchased at Bookends are non-returnable.
While we try to ensure that all customers coming to Bookends’ signings will meet authors and get their books signed, we cannot guarantee that all attendees will meet the author or that all books will be signed. We cannot control inclement weather, author travel schedules or authors who leave prematurely.
Bookends, 211 E. Ridgewood Avenue, Ridgewood, NJ 07450 201-445-0726
Americans on the move want warmth, affordability: reports
By Mark Guarino
CHICAGO Fri Jan 2, 2015 2:03pm EST
(Reuters) – Americans moving out of state in 2014 were most likely to head to places that were warmer and more affordable, such as the South and Southwest, according to studies by two major moving companies.
The 47th annual report by Allied Van Lines showed that Illinois topped the list of states people are moving away from with 1,372 net moves, followed by Pennsylvania, New York, Michigan and New Jersey. The states have remained in the top five since 2010, the company said.
In its 38th annual report, released Friday, United Van Lines reports that New Jersey, New York, Illinois, North Dakota and West Virginia represented the states their clients exited the most last year. Illinois, where outbound moves represented 63 percent of total moves for the state, has ranked among the top five for the past six years, the company says.
Michael Stoll, an economist with the department of public policy at the University of California in Los Angeles, said in a statement for United that migration patterns reflected long-term movement to the South and Southwest, where housing costs are lower, climates are less severe and job growth has been at or above the national average.
United said Oregon was the most preferred destination for its clients, followed by South Carolina, North Carolina, Vermont and Florida. The company said 38 percent of its clients moving to Oregon were going for a new job while 29 percent cited retirement.
Allied clients were most likely to move to Texas, Florida, Arizona, South Carolina and Colorado, the company said. The company said the most popular destinations were generally the same but the number of moves has increased with California, Oregon and Washington state showing the greatest increases for inbound moves.
“Trends demonstrate a heavy movement toward warm-weather, retirement-friendly states,” Lesli Bertoli, general manager and vice president of Allied, said in a statement.
Readers say motivation in writing this story is questionable.
Lets see who wrote the story. Harris the Mayors press officer. Well Mike this will be used against you at some later date at a council meet when you disagree with Mayor. Just wait for it.
Memo from Mayor to Mike. Next time you say something to the press run it by White Horse Strategist first.
The reporter’s reputation for considering himself a buddy of the mayor makes his motivation in writing this story questionable.
Readers define PILOT for ALL non-profit institutions from the educational, medical, and cultural
The PILOT should be for ALL non-profit institutions from the educational, medical, and cultural sectors that own property valued in excess of $15 million. Each institution should be eligible for a “community benefits” deduction generally limited to 50% of the total PILOT contribution, i..e 50% should be a cash payment to the Village and 50% can be defined as benefits that derive to Village residents. You need the Village Manager to initiate this, whereby tax-exempt, land-owning institutions make a voluntary payment-in-lieu-of taxes (“PILOT”) to the Village to help cover the cost of providing the institutions with essential Village services (i.e. police, fire, snow removal). The Village needs to set a standard level of contributions – in programs and payments – to be met by all major tax-exempt land owners in Ridgewood, based on an open and transparent methodology for valuing community partnerships made by tax-exempt institutions. We also need to propose a structure for a consolidation program and payment negotiation system, which will allow the Village and its tax-exempt institutions to structure longer term, sustainable partnerships focused on improving services for Ridgewood’s residents. You also have to clarify the costs associated with providing Village services to tax-exempt institutions, and if necessary, provide recommendations on legislative changes needed at the Village, County or state level. None of this should be difficult.
SAN FRANCISCO — Government censorship of the Internet is a cat-and-mouse game. And despite more aggressive tactics in recent months, the cats have been largely frustrated while the mice wriggle away.
But this year, the challenges for Silicon Valley will mount, with Russia and Turkey in particular trying to tighten controls on foreign-based Internet companies. Major American companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google are increasingly being put in the tricky position of figuring out which laws and orders to comply with around the world — and which to ignore or contest.
On Wednesday, Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, signed the latest version of a personal data law that will require companies to store data about Russian users on computers inside the country, where it will be easier for the government to get access to it. With few companies expected to comply with the law, which goes into effect Sept. 1, a confrontation may well erupt.
The clumsiness of current censorship efforts was apparent in mid-December, when Russia’s Internet regulator demanded that Facebook remove a page that was promoting an anti-government rally. After Facebook blocked the page for its 10 million or so Russian users, dozens of copycat pages popped up and the word spread on other social networks like Twitter. That created even more publicity for the planned Jan. 15 event, intended to protest the sentencing of Aleksei A. Navalny, a leading opposition figure.
Biological bad luck blamed in two-thirds of cancer cases
By Will Dunham | Reuters – Thu, 1 Jan, 2015
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Plain old bad luck plays a major role in determining who gets cancer and who does not, according to researchers who found that two-thirds of cancer incidence of various types can be blamed on random mutations and not heredity or risky habits like smoking.
The researchers said on Thursday random DNA mutations accumulating in various parts of the body during ordinary cell division are the prime culprits behind many cancer types.
They looked at 31 cancer types and found that 22 of them, including leukemia and pancreatic, bone, testicular, ovarian and brain cancer, could be explained largely by these random mutations – essentially biological bad luck.
The other nine types, including colorectal cancer, skin cancer known as basal cell carcinoma and smoking-related lung cancer, were more heavily influenced by heredity and environmental factors like risky behavior or exposure to carcinogens.
Overall, they attributed 65 percent of cancer incidence to random mutations in genes that can drive cancer growth.
Ridgewood Chamber of Commerce presents Restaurant Week 2015 Sponsored by Valley Hospital
What a great way to start the New Year-
RESTUARANT WEEK in RIDGEWOOD @ $25.15
Sunday-Thursday
January 18-22, 2015
January 25-29, 2015
Fine dining at $25.15
For these ten days, participating restaurants and caterers are offering you the chance to “experience” dining in Ridgewood and or your home, plus a wonderful selection of wines.
Each Chef is preparing a tantalizing 3-course, prix-fixe menu at $25.15
Please add a wine that will enhance the cuisine.
Visit the following participating restaurants and caterers. Call for reservations and details.
A Mano Neopolitan
24 Franklin Ave.
201-493-2000
Bella Notte Italian Bistro
14 Oak St.
201-445-7222
It’s Greek to Me
21 E. Ridgewood Ave.
201-612-2600
Latour Restaurant-LUNCH ONLY
6 E. Ridgewood Ave.
201-445-5056
Le Bon Choix
11 Godwin Ave.
201-689-0400
Mediterraneo
23 N. Broad St.
201-447-0022
Novo
37 Chestnut St.
201-444-4910
Park West Tavern
30 Oak St.
201-445-5400
Pearl Restaurant
17 S. Broad St.
201-857-5100
Raymond’s
101 E. Ridgewood Ave.
201-445-5125
Restaurant Memoire
16 Chestnut St.
201-857-8899
ROOTS Steakhouse
17 Chestnut St.
201-444-1922
Sakura Bana Japanese Restaurant
43 Franklin Ave.
201-447-6525
The Office Beer Bar & Grill
32 Chestnut St.
201-652-1070
Village Green Restaurant –
36 Prospect St.
201-445-2914
Home Dining and Specialty Wines
Chestnut Catering
25 Chestnut St.
201-445-3031
From Scratch Ridgewood
www.fromscratchridgewood.com
201-986-6316-Will deliver
Super Cellars Fine Wines & Marketplace
32 S. Broad St.
201-444-0012
The Wine Seller
6 W. Ridgewood Ave.
201-444-3300
Beverages, tax and tips not included. Regular menu will also be available.
FREE Parking all day Sunday and Monday-Saturday after 6:00pm
For more details, please call us at 201-445-2600 or email [email protected] www.experienceridgewood.com
YWCA Bergen County Job Fair
Tue, January 06, 2015
Time: 6:00 PM – 8:00 PM
Location: YWCA Bergen County, 112 Oak Street, Ridgewood, NJ 07450
Summer Job Openings Hoping to be Filled
Become Part of the YWCA Team as a Summer Camp Counselor or Lifeguard
YWCA Bergen County will be holding a job fair in search of individuals who want to join our team as Summer Camp Counselors and Lifeguards.
Positions available for three of our Summer Camps throughout Bergen County as well as Lifeguarding opportunities at our camps and Englewood swim programs.
Job fair will be held from 6:00 – 8:00 pm on Tuesday, January 6, 2015 at YWCA Bergen County, 112 Oak Street, Ridgewood. There will be information regarding summer camps and Englewood swim programs, applications available, and on-site interviews with YWCA staff. For those interested in lifeguarding, there will be a FREE prerequisite water skills test held on Saturday, January 10, 2015 at 9:30am.
Camp Counselors must be at least 18 years of age and available to work June 22 – August 21, 2015 at our Dumont location or June 29 – August 21, 2015 at Mahwah and Saddle River Locations. Lifeguards must be at least 15 years of age and able to work May 16 – September 7, 2015.
For more information, please contact Kerry Jannicelli at 201-345-1906 or email [email protected].
Volunteers Needed for Parks, Recreation and Conservation Board
The Ridgewood Parks, Recreation and Conservation Board
Is Seeking Candidates for 3 Year Terms
The mission statement of the Parks, Recreation, and Conservation Board is to serve as an advisory board to the Ridgewood Parks and Recreation Department, serving to preserve open space and provide facilities and year-round recreational activities that meet the needs of all residents.
Currently, three seats are available and resident candidates are sought; each to serve a three-year term. Meetings are held the fourth Thursday of each month (tentative).
Interested individuals are asked to submit a letter of interest, as well as their civic resume and a Citizen Volunteer Leadership Form (located on the Village homepage under forms) to the following:
East Orange officials and William Mowell, former assistant executive director of the East Orange Water Commission, pictured right, have been facing a lawsuit by a former commission employee. (File photo/New Jersey Department of Corrections) (File photo/New Jersey Department of Corrections)
Lawsuit involving contaminated drinking water in E. Orange, S. Orange to be settled soon
EAST ORANGE — A tentative settlement has been reached in a lawsuit over an effort to hide elevated levels of an industrial solvent in drinking water pumped to residents in the city and neighboring South Orange.
The agreement would resolve a lawsuit filed by former East Orange Water Commission employee Thomas Valenza involving claims that the commission’s former executive director, Harry Mansmann, and former assistant executive director William Mowell schemed to hide the water contamination.
Mansmann and Mowell were both indicted in February 2013 on criminal charges related to the alleged scheme. Mansmann later died and Mowell was sentenced on Dec. 12 to three years in state prison after pleading guilty.
In the lawsuit, which was initially filed in April 2013 in New Jersey Superior Court, Valenza alleges he was directed to turn off contaminated wells before collecting samples, but he refused to do so. Valenza was later “forced to retire,” after learning about illegal activity at the agency, the lawsuit states.
