Ridgewood NJ, Towns like Summit NJ, have invested money in a downtown improvement plans that are costly and visionary and included ample input from residents. While Ridgewood’s lack of vision seems to be focused on fulfilling the ad hoc wishes of special interests.
The fact is we have no development plan and there is no vision. We are reactionary in everything we do. Our council rejects public input and views the public as obstacles to be overcome. Residents are never treated as if our voices matter by the council majority, they are attacked, threatened and berated .
The group Citizens for a better Ridgewood (CBR ), worked to create a vision.The CBR Facebook page says “We support a lower number of Housing per acre, still higher than the 12 that is currently allowed, but not as high as the 35 proposed. 20-24 would be generous, profitable and would compliment the character of our downtown. 20 -24 units an acre” . The CBR statement on this –https://theridgewoodblog.net/citizens-for-a-better-ridgewood-cbr-calls-for-residents-to-attend-village-councils-public-hearing-on-september-16th-730pm/ , CBR supported 20-24 units per acre because that’s density that could be built over and over (instead of spot zoning for some units).
The CBR group searched for a visionary compromise and but were labeled as racist, a clever tactic by developers to garner support from those who are uninformed. Watching council meetings, everyone who goes to speak in support of the big garage or in support of very high density housing has no specific current facts ,just an over reliance on almost absurd assumptions put forth by developers and their supporters,that amount to nothing more than fantasies from the land of make believe . Their tune is always the same: “anyone asking any question here is nay-sayer”, “now is the time or no one else will do it”, “they don’t want any garage”, “they don’t want any development”.. “loud mouth vocal minority”…NIMBY…yada yada yada.
Ridgewood NJ, The blog was mention by our buddy Rurik Halaby, and the council spoke on how uncivil everyone is. The best part was Gwenn who spoke about not believing everything people write on Facebook. I guess she is the only one people should believe ?
Rurik Halaby as we said ,took yet another swipe at The Ridgewood Blog during Wednesday night’s Village Council meeting when, during a public comment period, he publicly announced that he’d been named “Villian of the Year” by The Ridgewood Blog.
Of coarse it was OK for the head of the civility committee to characterize all residents at Village Council meetings as “Grand Standing”.
As for civility you live in a town where the Deputy Mayor makes threats in public meetings more than once, anyone who speaks his mind get harassed, anonymous emails get sent to peoples place of business and do not let us forget a physical assault took place at a council meeting , but yes the meanies on the blog are a tough bunch …
RIDGEWOOD — The Village Council may introduce a bond ordinance Wednesday to fund a proposed municipal parking garage without using county money, despite recent approvals from the county.
The move is a sharp departure for the council, the majority of which agreed in January to ask the Bergen County Improvement Authority to bond for the garage’s approximate $12.3 million cost. That vote came after the governing body could not get the required four-vote super-majority necessary to authorize the municipality to bond for the project on its own.
But the idea of locally bonding the costs of the proposed Hudson Street deck was put forward again on Feb. 21 by Mayor Paul Aronsohn in an email to some community members. It’s seen as an attempt to assuage the unsatisfied council minority — as well as residents who’ve started a petition drive to force the funding issue into a public referendum.
“Although I still believe that a partnership with the BCIA would be a good thing for Ridgewood, I want to give my council colleagues another chance to make this happen,” Aronsohn said in the email.
The reintroduced ordinance will be for $11.5 million, a smaller number that reflects the garage’s newly reduced size — instead of 405 spaces, the garage would accommodate 325.
Some on the council initially favored the larger structure, but officials scaled back plans last month after vocal public opposition. Many residents said the building would be too large, protruding into Hudson Street and constricting local traffic.
file photo of the Council Majority …ie the 3 amigos
February 26,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, ,it does appear from recent OPRA requests that the Village harassed a resident who objected to Health Barn USA plan by calling DEP on them and conducting numerous property maintenance inspections.
The attached documents, obtained late Friday afternoon, February 26, 2016, in response to an Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request dated February 3, 2016, clearly identify who it was that “dropped a dime” on your family.
It’s all public information available to anyone who submits an OPRA request. You may wish to share this with your friends and neighbors.
We have also filed an OPRA request with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection just to see if anything additional turns up.
It certainly is a shame that your speaking out in opposition to an irrational plan proposed by the Village Council “majority” triggered what appears to be nothing more than a vindictive series of trumped up code enforcement actions directed at your property.
Ridgewood Nj, The people are taking back the town. No2BCIA ( https://www.no2bcia.com/ ) is on a roll. Keep the signatures coming, we need each and every one. This is a chance to save Ridgewood from a huge financial mistake. We will be able to bond in-town when all is said and done, we will not have a big fat county garage in the middle of town, and we will have full domain over the structure.
Several reports came in that the mayor was reportedly observed looking at the Elks Club building while standing in a nearby parking lot talking on his cell phone.
No2BCIA Petition
OLMC – AFTER EACH MASS
HUDSON/PASSAIC/PROSPECT STREETS
SUN FEB 21ST
Charlie and Nancy Nowinski, 2 Betty Court, Sunday, Feb. 21, 1-5:30 PM
Anne Loving, call cell 201-723-8017 to make appt to sign.
I am new to Ridgewood, so here comes a newbie question –
Were previous village managers also as politically active as the current one? i.e. supporting and promoting specific council members and their agenda, and withholding information from other council members? Shouldn’t that be a politically neutral position?
I have wondered why the village manager ,Roberta Sonenfeld has been such a vocal supporter for the council.
In the past is was a low key position, the managers just did their job.
Schoenfield was a member of the self proclaimed “Tiger Team” that worked as a self-important financial advisory committee. Now we have a permanent financial advisory committee that also is active in promoting the council projects. They are intertwined and hardly objective.
Ridgewood NJ, the purpose of the garage from the very beginning seems to have been to build a commuter garage for NJT and Bergen County in Ridgewood ,moving to make the Village a transit hub
The Village of Ridgewood (the “Village”) is undertaking the construction of an $11.7M parking deck on Hudson Street (the “Project”). There are two ways the Village can finance this Project over a 25 year period. First, the Village can issue its own General Obligation Bonds (the “Village Bonds”). Second, the Village can finance the project through the Bergen County Improvement Authority (the “BCIA”), which would issue County of Bergen Guaranteed Lease Revenue Bonds (the “BCIA Bonds”). In either event, the Village will be responsible to pay 100% of the debt service on whichever bonds are issued. (https://mods.ridgewoodnj.net/pdf/manager/hudson/20160129BCIAFin.pdf )
the choice :
Transaction Costs: The model includes up-front fixed costs of issuance of $162,500 for the BCIA Bonds vs. $92,500 for the Village Bonds. These costs include typical municipal bond transaction fees such as bond counsel, financial advisor, auditor, credit rating agency, printing, etc. In addition, the analysis assumes the underwriter’s discount would be essentially the same under either scenario. The BCIA Bonds also include the upfront authority financing fee of 12.5 basis points (“bps”) of total par amount of BCIA Bonds, the annual authority administration fee of 5 bps based on the annual outstanding par amount of the BCIA Bonds and an annual trustee fee of $1,000. (https://mods.ridgewoodnj.net/pdf/manager/hudson/20160129BCIAFin.pdf )
as per usually the most expensive for Village Taxpayers is the best choice .
Going to the BCIA , once the money is approved, it tends to appear almost instantaneously, accruing interest long before the project can even get started. That is a significant reason to reconsider this plan or ploy and an excellent reason, if it does happen, not to ask for a cent more than is needed. But losing control over the way commuter spaces are priced is a huge problem and there are undoubtedly more.
There will be approximately 320 car garage. 4 levels. The mayor said in the last meeting that 2 levels may be dedicated to commuters. That’s about 160 cars for commuters. We currently already have one level, which is mostly used by Ridgewood commuters. Lets say the second level is used by Bergen County commuters at no extra money compared to Ridgewood commuters. So, 2 levels are either used by out of Ridgewood commuters or commuters who are already using this lot today without the garage.
With remaining 2 levels, we will get 160 new spot, presumably for non commuters. Cost – 12.3 million in new bond, 500K bond has been already spent + 450k already spent on environmental studies in 2014 & 2015 on this lot. = 13.25M.
That’s 82,800 for every new parking spot created for CBD. This assumes that the project will not go over the budget. With the way this council and village manager are spending the money, this is highly unlikely to stay in the budget.
Ridgewood NJ, Other than by possible anonymous postings, we have not heard a word from Paul, Albert or Gwenn. Sadly, this is not surprising. Paul and Albert lost their tempers and spewed innumerable nasty adjectives to discredit a resident who was acting completely in accordance with the law, and Gwenn sat quietly and allowed this verbal onslaught to carry on. This is one of many, way too many, such meetings at which Paul, Albert, and Gwenn have allowed and enabled the public crucifixion of an elected official, an appointed official, or a member of the general public.
Whether a resolution is inserted into the code at a future time to require that all recording by private citizens must be announced, the fact is that at this time such an announcement is not required. Thus, their nasty characterizations were way, way out of line. It is entirely possible that they went over the line into libel and slander. Lawyers can decide about that. Well, lawyers other than the one who calls himself Deputy Dawg.
We, the people, have all the dates and transcripts of their vicious outbursts dating back 4 years, and in Paul’s case 8 years. For Albert and Gwenn, who are running for reelection, we will be happy to replay these over and over and over for the voting public to be reminded of your true colors. We do not need to say anything; your own words will say it all.
To use one of Albert’s favorite catch words – GOTCHA!
From the archives: Local towns paying heavily for Bergen County loan program meant to save time, money
DECEMBER 28, 2009, 8:47 PM LAST UPDATED: THURSDAY, JULY 22, 2010, 2:41 PM
BY STEPHANIE AKIN AND CHRISTOPHER SCHNAARS
STAFF WRITERS |
THE RECORD
This story was originally published Dec. 28, 2009.
A Bergen County loan program touted as a quick and easy way for local governments to pay for big-ticket items has instead plunged some of them into long-term debt.
The five-year-old Municipal Banc was supposed to let cash-strapped towns bypass conventional borrowing methods and get county-backed loans for emergency services and public works projects. The program promised 24-hour loan approval with no red tape, backed by the county’s AAA credit rating.
Most towns and school districts that used the program borrowed only what they needed and spent the money quickly. Many praised the program for its convenience and low fees.
But some towns took out loans for items as inexpensive as rope and firefighter boots, borrowed money long before they intended to make purchases and paid interest on money they never spent. In some cases, their applications were approved even though they provided little information about how the money would be used.
From 2004 to 2008, Rutherford, Fair Lawn and Hackensack let a total of more than $1.6 million in loans sit idly in Commerce Bank accounts while taxpayers paid more than $200,000 in interest and fees. Fair Lawn, for example, waited four years to buy a $130,000 generator.
“That’s like saying, ‘I’m going to buy a house, I’m going to pay a mortgage and interest on the house, but I’m not going to move in for three or four years,’” said Joseph Tedeschi, a Fair Lawn councilman.
TD Bank took over the program after it bought Commerce in March 2008.
Five consultants that donated more than $450,000 to Bergen County Democrats from 2004 to the end of 2008 were paid at least $1.8 million for professional services by the Bergen County Improvement Authority — the agency that oversees the Municipal Banc — including more than $180,000 for services tied to the loans.
Those consultants included Dennis Oury, the former counsel for the BCIA and the Bergen County Democratic Organization. Oury, who pleaded guilty to federal corruption charges in September, collected more than $1.1 million from the BCIA during that period. Oury resigned from the BCIA in early September 2008 after federal officials accused him of fraud.
The program auditor, Ferraioli, Wielkotz, Cerullo & Cuva, also was the auditor in three of the towns that were the heaviest users of the program: Fair Lawn, Hackensack and Rutherford.
I was absolutely shocked at the end of last night’s meeting to witness such extraordinary uncivil and intimidating behavior regarding the taping of public meetings.
First of all, a resident was permitted to verbally attack another resident (who was not even present) and make wild hypothetical accusations about what might or might not be done with a videotape of the meeting. Both Susan and Michael attempted to stop this diatribe and defend Dana, and Matt Rogers quickly explained that taping is legal as long as the individual is not disruptive. Susan, Michael, and Matt all did the right thing, and quickly, and I appreciate their actions. Unfortunately, they were unable to stop the Bob, Albert, and Paul.
Certainly Dana had not been in the least bit disruptive, quietly standing at the side of the room. That Bob Fuhrman was allowed to go on and on about how we are all at risk of some sort of unspecified internet wickedness was completely wrong. Gwenn remained silent, instead of trying to stop this barrage of accusations; silent inaction speaks volumes. Compounding the mess, Paul and Albert then fueled the conversation, agreeing with Bob Fuhrman, contributing to his rant, and bringing up another meeting (of the HPC) at which Dana was legally taping the proceedings. Residents as well as elected officials should not be allowed to attack other residents, and should be stopped from doing so immediately. Unfortunately we have seen you allow as well as participate in this repeatedly, but last night really went over the top. Just a few weeks ago I was publicly accused by Albert and Gwenn of being a stalker, a bully, intimidating, and weird because I had my cell phone up while I sat quietly in my seat; again, my taping was completely legal and nondisruptive.
Whether it becomes a requirement that those who wish to tape a meeting must announce their intentions before doing so remains to be seen if Albert introduces his resolution. But at this time it is not required, so Dana’s actions at the HPC meeting you cited were neither illegal nor disruptive. (really, since when is sitting quietly in a chair considered to be disruptive?). And Dana’s actions last night were certainly not in any way disruptive. Remember, Matt Rogers clearly stated that it is legal to tape these meetings as long as the person is not disruptive.
Last night’s meeting ended on a horrible note thanks to the actions of Albert and Paul, and the inaction of Gwenn. It was actually horrifying to witness this scene, in which it was clear that you wished to intimidate and discredit one of our citizens. I am expecting that corrective action will be taken to rectify the damage you have done.
Ridgewood NJ, The Ridgewood Village Council approved changes to the planned parking garage on Hudson Street by a 3-2 vote Wednesday night.
In the “newest version” of the Hudson Street Parking Garage ,residents were told the reduced size garage would provide close to 325 parking spots and will be 43 feet tall. The foot print of controversial structure will now be no more than 5 feet over the property line with Hudson Street will be slightly reduced in width but will stay at lest 25 feet wide so it will be able to maintain the three lanes, two for traffic and one for parking. The mystery of coarse is that no actual garage drawings were shown.
The encroachment onto Hudson street has become one of the most divisive issues surrounding the garage causing concern from Our Lady of Mount Carmel parishioners and many residents who voiced concerns over traffic congestion, fire safety as well the feeling the encroachment seemed very well concealed from referendum voters.
I think Boyd Loving summed it up best when he recounted the story of how he met his wife – His best friend from grammar school through high school came to him 41 years ago and said he’d met a girl that Boyd would probably want to marry someday. Boyd’s first question to his friend was “Well, what does she look like?” In short, it is insane to expect the public, especially property owners near Hudson Street, to wholeheartedly embrace the “revised” garage plan without first seeing what the hell it looks like.
Many felt that ,”To have the council vote on a design that doesn’t exist and to have our village manager justify the benefits of going to County is within the realm of farce.” , “Spin, subterfuge and slander are what I witnessed last night.”
It seemed that most resident questioned the amount of the change orders for the new plan. They also wanted to see the new design which was not available. Susan and Mike wanted some time to digest the new plan and speak to neighbors. So did most residents but the Council Majority were in a rush.
The interesting thing is Roberta said that bonding through the BCPA not cost anything it just about breaks even. Seemed a bit of a stretch ,there are paper work cost and attorneys fee. Plus what in it for BCPA ?
However the council did postponed the vote on entering an agreement with BCIA for funding but will likely do so at its next meeting, Feb. 10.
Disgusted. But not surprised residents especially love how the Deputy Mayor so smugly dismissed public protestation over going around a supermajority to the BCIA with “it’s perfectly legal…” but then are disgusted by Dana Glazer taping the HPC meeting even though that, too, is perfectly legal.
Legit or not residents remained very skeptical with the BCIA funding . The biggest issue was going through BCIA (besides not seeing the actual garage drawings)…even if the Council assumptions on rate savings are correct and the bond through BCIA vs bonding ourselves is a wash we create 2 problems by doing this:
1) give up additional revenue by not being about to charge out of town commuters more
2) create more out of town commuter traffic to the lot that actually takes away parking spaces for residents
Just seems stupid , the BCIA gets hundreds of thousands in fees (great deal for them), and we get more commuter traffic that we don’t get to charge a premium for.
The Deputy Mayor who previously lost his temper and made threats at a previous council meeting now has a problem in recording the public meetings. Councilmen Mike Sedon stated that the NJ Law allows one party consent for recording, and Matt Rogers stated that as per the case laws, courts have allowed anyone to record a public meeting . Deputy Mayor pushed his dissent and stated that he is going to introduce an ordinance to limit it.
Here we are yet again at yet another important Village Council meeting, Tonight at 7:30pm at the Village Hall. I don’t know about you, but I’m looking forward to not making VC meetings a must attend every few weeks.
But that’s just how it is. For now anyway. Until we can get some folks onto the council who we can trust will listen to us and do the right thing when it comes to our village. That day will come sooner than later but for now, we must remain engaged.
So, in case you didn’t know already, tomorrow is the night that the Village Council likely plans to vote on overriding itself and go to the County for a bond. This is without a parking garage proposal that fits within the footprint of the Hudson street lot. This is with us being on the hook for several hundreds of thousands of dollars for the County bond, not to mention the likelihood of millions more for the building of a garage. This is against many of the the findings of the Maser Traffic Study from October 15th, which Councilwoman Knudsen and Councilman Sedon were unaware of until late December. I could go on and on…
The bottom line is that, inconvenient as it is, we must remain vigilant and protect Ridgewood, which means showing up and voicing our concerns.
Hoping to see you tomorrow night. And if you can’t make it, please email our Village Council and Village Manager to let them know that even considering voting to go to the County for a bond at this point is against the better interests of our village.
Ridgewood NJ, A vote to go to BCIA is scheduled for this coming Wednesday. Our council members have expressed interest in voting for the bond in house without going to BCIA if a reasonable design / size is proposed that fits the lot, but the council majority is willing to push ahead with BCIA vote without finalizing the design first.
JANUARY 22, 2016 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016, 12:31 AM
BY EILEEN LA FORGIA
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
The walls of Ridgewood’s Village Hall are filled with artwork donated by residents, and the entire community is invited to celebrate.
The official launch of the Ridgewood Arts Council (RAC) and a ribbon-cutting celebration of the art installation of “Ridgewood Art at Village Hall” will be held from 4 to 6 p.m. on Saturday, Jan. 30.
“This is our flagship endeavor not only to put a stamp on the fact that the Ridgewood Arts Council is revived, but also to celebrate the breadth of artistic talent here in Ridgewood, past and present,” said Linda Bradley, the group’s chair.
Currently there are more than 80 pieces of fine art, photography and sculpture. It’s a permanent collection – artwork donated by Ridgewood residents and those with a Ridgewood connection. The collection of art started six months ago, and will continue to be accepted to cover the remaining areas at Village Hall.
“Mayor Aronsohn and I both campaigned with the promise to revive the Arts Council,” said Deputy Mayor Albert Pucciarelli. “The purpose is to pull together the wealth of artistic endeavors in the village under one volunteer organization that would promote art and artistic education.”
Pucciarelli believes that art has a humanizing effect and that residents in the New York metropolitan area are fortunate to live in the midst of so much wonderful art of all kinds.
Visit the official launch of the Ridgewood Arts Council (RAC) and a ribbon-cutting celebration of the art installation of “Ridgewood Art at Village Hall”. Currently there are more than 80 pieces of fine art, photography and sculpture. It’s a permanent collection – artwork donated by Ridgewood residents and those with a Ridgewood connection. The mission of the RAC is to promote and support the vital part all arts play in enriching the lives of children and the community.
Ridgewood NJ, Insulting people’s intellectual range, calling people idiots, inventing insulting names for people who have different opinions and calling those people’s opinions outrageous – all in one paragraph – doesn’t craft a winning argument for being “above the fray” or better than the average Blog reader… And if you indeed are a very devoted and vocal supporter of the current Council majority, I don’t think it reflects well on them either. You are not doing them any favors by being so nasty and quickly reduced to the level of name calling.
Why can’t anybody just discuss the issues anymore? Agree to disagree? I have strong opinions too but make an effort not to engage in that type of behavior. It is just unnecessary and unproductive. I think if you can’t hold it together, in public or in writing, people can probably sympathize with that feeling but maybe you should reconsider participating until you can pull yourself together. This thread of comments was not uncivil at all until you took it in that direction.
It goes to the very core of the problem when even Reverend Jan Philips at the beginning of the public comment session in a public meeting accused Ridgewood residents who were about to speak as GRANDSTANDING, when almost noone had had a chance to speak .Worse yet Reverend Philips, chairs the Civility Meetings, leading critics to only assume the whole civility process is nothing more than an attack on free speech and an attempt to silence dissent.
The Ridgewood blog is often the target of these Orwellian attacks of news speak where time and time again supporters of the council majority come on the blog name calling , bulling ,attacking and threatening posters always desperate to break the veil on anonymity that protects residents .
So the message is simple you get what you give , lack of respect breads lack of respect .
threats:
70.192.73.161
We can only hope that a tree falls on the little apartment that houses the server for this website….and puts us all out of our misery. Civility will return to the village once this forum of hate and intolerance is taken down.
70.192.64.104
I guess we’ll have a lot of residents pulling candidate packets to make a run at a seat….or do the malcontents just enjoy being keyboard bullies???
Rurik Halaby
Rurik@halaby.net
173.209.21.130
The guy with the bowtie is the Curmudgeon-in-Chief, founder of Curmudgeons for a Better Ridgewood, CBR, not to be confused with Citizens for a Dead Ridgewood. I can think of many vocalantis, rhymes with vigilantes, who qualify for Sasquatch.
If James sends me his email, I will be happy to send him photographs I took at Schedler, showing what a dump it is.
If Council Members Knudsen and Sedon were to pause for a minute and think of Ridgewood’s long-term interests and not just pandering to their base base, they would work positively with the Three Amigos to turn Schedler into something we can all be proud of and one that many Ridgewood Residents can enjoy.
Rurik Halaby
Rurik@halaby.net
173.209.21.130
Here we go again, the Pravda’s nasty campaign against perhaps the sincerest and hardest working member of the Village Council. Repeat a lie enough times and you hope it becomes the truth. You want to define nasty? Listen to the vocalantis, rhymes with vigilantes, with their viciousu guerrilla campaign to tke over control of the Council and then taking us back to C
Rurik Halaby
Rurik@halaby.net
70.212.5.69
James, have you no shame? Coming up with any BS idea you could muster, with little respect for your readers intelligence? And while you are at it, why not argue for the fact that Schedler needs to be protected since a susquatch was recently seen there. Susquatch? Look it up.
Anonymous
67.86.184.189
Friends of a bio-dump. What a creepy, crap-ridden place Schedler is and they want to preserve it inviolate? All of a sudden this neighborhood nobody even knew was part of Ridgewood is run through with dedicated environmentalists? Not likely–they just like having a place where they don’t have to worry about cleaning up after their dogs, and they want to avoid extra road traffic coming through their neighnorhood. Nothing more than that. No saintly motives, that much is for sure.
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_riaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 165
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_inhaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 166
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_mastodonIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 177
