Congressman Frank Pallone: Fifteen-Dollar Minimum Wage Is Critical for Economic Growth
$40 hamburger in your future ?
Where is the Ridgewood Chamber of Commerce ?
On the eve of the national day of action for the “Fight for Fifteen” movement aimed at increasing the minimum wage to $15 per hour, Congressman Frank Pallone (D-6) and the healthcare-focused SEIU union held a phone in tele-townhall to discuss why they believe the proposed hike is a critical one. Currently the minimum wage in New Jersey sits at $8.38 per hour. Alyana Alfaro, PolitickerNJ Read more
Seattle sees fallout from $15 minimum wage, as other cities follow suit
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/22/seattle-sees-fallout-from-15-minimum-wage-as-other-cities-follow-suit/
We Are Seeing The Effects Of Seattle’s $15 An Hour Minimum Wage
Tim Worstall
Possibly the best starting point of this argument is this rather newer post here.
Some time back I wrote a piece entitled “We can predict the effects of Seattle’s $15 an hour minimum wage.” It’s here. And without going into boring detail it essentially said that we’d see what we would expect to see from a rise in the price of something, that is a fall in the demand for it. Ever since I’ve had comments from people insisting that human labor just doesn’t work that way. That if wages rise then actually more people are going to get employed. An example came in only this morning:
Between January and December of 2014, while Seatac’s business owners (and their customers) were absorbing the cost of paying minimum wage employees $15, unemployment decreased 17.46%, falling from 6.3% to 5.2%. It turns out that you CAN increase the minimum wage (even in large increments) and increase overall employment at the same time.
8 Drop-In Classes + Unlimited Playspace
In November and December
only $240.00
Gym Music Art Dance
Call us at 201-493-1234 to purchase your Flex Pass online https://www.kidville.com/ridgewood
* Fine Print: Only valid at Kidville Ridgewood. Limit one per child. Price is per child and is not transferable between locations or children. All services must be used by the same customer. Fall Flex Pass classes expire on December 23rd. Must call to schedule each class in advance. Classes are subject to availability. Cannot be combined with any other offers, promotions, or discounts. Promo code and credits are not applicable.
38 Oak St
Ridgewood, New Jersey
(201) 493-1234
https://www.kidville.com/ridgewood
NOVEMBER 3, 2015, 10:35 PM LAST UPDATED: TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2015, 10:42 PM
BY STEVE JANOSKI
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD
RIDGEWOOD — Village residents voted to support a referendum proposal Tuesday that would bond for up to $15 million to construct a parking garage downtown.
The non-binding referendum, which was meant only to assess public sentiment on the plan, passed by a nearly 2-to-1 margin — 3,236 voted in favor, while 1,777 opposed. Village officials said voter turnout was around 30 percent.
The proposed garage, which officials hope to break ground on next spring, will be built on the corner of Hudson and South Broad streets, the referendum stated, and paid for “principally” with parking revenues. It would add about 300 parking spots to the dense commercial zone.
It is expected to benefit local commuters and residents, as well as customers of downtown shops and restaurants.
Village Mayor Paul Aronsohn said he felt “very good” about the results.
“This is something we’ve talked about in Ridgewood for decades, and it looks like we’re on the verge of making history,” he said. “A parking deck is something we really need. And the folks in Ridgewood came out in large numbers and they spoke with a very compelling voice today.”
Funding for the garage would come from Ridgewood’s parking utility, as well as county and state monies, the referendum said.
“Investigating the flyer” BRING IT ON. The Three Amigos and the Chamber should tread lightly.They may get caught up in any investigation for what they have done. I suspect the the person or persons that mail the flier have done their homework
Oh by the way, the law has been seriously broken; a major crime has been committed according to some speakers at tonight’s Parking Forum.
They wonder who committed the so-called crime of making Vote No parking flyers and didn’t sign name.
Don’t you know that only Vote Yes Parking signs are allowed. Those signs are not signed either; but that is OK.
And it is OK that they are placed all over Ridgewood on PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Dictatorship is alive and well in Ridgewood N.J.
So what are we going to do about it. Well, I am going to vote no on parking.
Watch out for dictatorial council practices in future. Attend meetings and let them know that democracy is NOT being practiced in Ridgewood.. Democracy in name only; not in practice.
Investigating the flyer? Are you kidding me???? What the heck is going on around here? Do they investigate every real-estate postcard that comes in the mail? Every advertisement? Such an investigation is illegal I am sure of it. And by the way, Mr. Transparent Mayor – where was all this super sleuthing when the anonymous email was sent to Mike Sedon’s employer? You were not in the least bit curious or concerned, and in that instance a HUGE ethical breach had been committed.
Let them go ahead and accuse someone about the flyer. We will be all over them like fire ants. They will rue the day they started this investigation.
NOVEMBER 2, 2015 LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2015, 11:35 AM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
A presentation of the current plans for the proposed Hudson Street parking garage was provided to the village’s Planning Board at the Oct. 20 meeting, allowing members the opportunity to have a question and answer session with designers and architects.
Tim Tracy, principal for Desman Design Management, gave the board a primer on the garage, which will give Ridgewood a net gain of approximately 300 spaces over the current set up on Hudson Street.
Tracy reviewed the size constraints for the site as the process by which Desman arrived at the solution of building a cantilever over the sidewalk for the top levels of the garage that was able to give the village more spaces and better parking efficiency by adding an additional row of spaces.
Although the garage is exempt from zoning standards, Tracy noted they tried to come as close to complying with regulations as possible without sacrificing efficiency. One example is the rear yard setback, which is required to be 26 feet. With the eastern end of the garage considered the rear of the property, the setback there is approximately 23 1/2 feet.
The five-level, four story parking facility currently sits at 51 feet high, although Tracy said when the final design is complete, the building will be closer to 48 feet. A couple of the driving factors in that regard are the eight-foot clearance required on the ground floor and the supporting slabs on the cantilevered section.
The height of the building was certainly the concern of some board members. Nancy Bigos asked if the garage could be built as at least a partially underground structure to ease the scale of the deck.
Key verbatim assumptions/findings taken from the Village Council commissioned parking study prepared by Walker Associates:
Easing crowding does not, in and of itself, create a new revenue stream; it transfers revenue
from other metered spaces in the Village. The garage will likely encourage people to come
downtown who have been avoiding it due to parking constraints, but this is not a quantifiable
revenue stream and is not included in our analysis. More conservatively, we project the
following net new revenue streams for the garage:
• The 72-space Brogan Cadillac lot on South Broad Street at Essex Street and at the 92-
space Ken Smith Motors lot just east of the train tracks and north of Franklin Avenue are
going to be demolished for development. Both of these dealerships have closed and
lease out their parking. The Ken Smith Lot is permit parking for downtown employees.
The Brogan Lot accommodates commuters during the day and is leased out for
restaurant valet parking at night. We anticipate these demand streams would transfer
to the garage.
• We understand from Village staff that there are other restaurants downtown that use
valet services in private lots that would use the garage instead (probably doing away
with valet service since self-park options would be easier).
• The Village used to have 120 non-resident commuter permits, but doubled non-resident
permit rates because there was not enough space for these commuters. Currently
there are very few non-resident commuters parking in the train station area. The Village
plans to reduce the non-resident commuter rate to $875/year to increase that demand
stream again.
It is typical in downtowns that the revenue stream in a given garage is not sufficient to cover its
operating costs and debt service. Downtown parking systems are just that – systems – that rely
on pooled revenue from all resources, and especially the on-street meters (which tend to
have the highest turnover), to cover the higher cost associated with building and operating a
garage. This is the case in Ridgewood, where the net new revenue projected for the garage
is not projected to offset its expenses. Therefore, our revenue projection includes all downtown revenue and all expenses associated with the parking system. To operate the
garage and have a revenue-positive parking utility (with funds available for other parking lot
maintenance projects), we project that the Village will increase meter rates as follows:
• In 2016, meters will be extended until 9 p.m. and meter rates on key downtown streets
will increase to 75¢.
• In 2017, 75¢ meters will be increased to $1 and the rest of the on-street and off-street
meters will increase to 75¢.
• If needed, rates would increase by 25¢ after five years.
• Commuter permit rates would increase by $25 in 2021 and 2025.
Televised Parking Deck Information Session – Tonight- Nov 2 @ 7:30PM
Cablevision (Channel 77) and FIOS (Channel 34) will broadcast live tonight starting at 7:30PM the CBD Forum with details of the Hudson Street Parking Deck. If you cannot attend the meeting at Village Hall tonight, please tune in!
Ridgewood Information Forums – Hudson St. Parking Deck – November 2
Two important forums scheduled in Village Hall – 4th Floor Court Room – to discuss the proposed Hudson Street Parking Deck: Wednesday, October 21 and Monday, November 2 from 7:30pm to 9:30pm. Village professionals as well as the design team from Desman Associates will be on hand to discuss all aspects of the proposed parking deck, including the design and financials. All are welcome to attend. All questions are welcome!
Questions:
Official Parking Referendum Question
Community Support
President of the Chamber of Commerce statement
Financial Advisory Committee Statement
Historic Preservation Commission Statement
Study,Design, and Analysis
Walker Parking Preliminary Financial Analysis – October 2, 2015
Walker Parking Consultant Study – July 5th, 2015
Walker Parking Floor Plans
Resolutions
Resolution 15-222 : Non-Binding Referendum – Nov 3, 2015 Ballot
Does the fact that this Parking Garage Plan up for a vote mean that it is a political issue? Please read the following:
——————————–
A quote from the IRS web site is below.
(begin quote)
The Prohibition on Political Campaign Intervention
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to all campaigns including campaigns at the federal, state and local level. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Those section 501(c)(3) organizations that are private foundations are subject to additional restrictions that are not described in this fact sheet.
What is Political Campaign Intervention?
Political campaign intervention includes any and all activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention. Distributing statements prepared by others that favor or oppose any candidate for public office will also violate the prohibition. Allowing a candidate to use an organization’s assets or facilities will also violate the prohibition if other candidates are not given an equivalent opportunity. Although section 501(c)(3) organizations may engage in some activities to promote voter registration, encourage voter participation, and provide voter education, they will violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention if they engage in an activity that favors or opposes any candidate for public office. Certain activities will require an evaluation of all the facts and circumstances to determine whether they result in political campaign intervention.
(end quote)
Some more info at this link: https://www.blueandco.com/nfp_03082012.html
——————————-
The above is from The Blog in 2012 regarding Mr. Aronsohn using a Jamboree emailing list to promote his own campaign. Now we have a situation where a private email listing was used by one of our elected officials to promote the VOTE YES campaign. What does anyone think about this? I mean, besides the fact that it was unethical and just plain wrong. For his information, it totally pissed off some of those who received it, who felt it was beyond the pale. Can you say BACKFIRE?
Ridgewood Nj , So the big vote is tomorrow and where as cynics would suggest residents will have the option to once again agree or disagree with a proposed project that will be jammed down their throats whether they like it or not . Not buying it ,take one look at Schedler Field ah Park or what every you call it .
A historic land slide loss for the RBSA backed candidate in the last Village Council election ,who’s sole purpose was to put a “turf field in every pot” has resulted in a you guessed a turf field for Schedler Field . So much for the electorate has spoken .
We decided to actually speak with some people in the Central Business District who actually make a living from their business in Ridgewood .
Several reminded us of promises past . That promise was that all the parking meter money would be used solely for the purpose of building a Village Parking facility . Yes this promise was made to justify the installation of parking meters in the Central Business District way back in the late 1960’s, yes we said 1960’s. Little did anyone know that change would leave the building mysteriously in 50 pound bags unnoticed by anyone . Too many old timers , the garage has been paid for over and over.
The next issue many brought up was and we have seen this with our own eyes , that the metered spaces are all ready filled before 10 am . Funny but not many businesses are open that early . Some merchants felt that spaces are taken by commuters, CBD employees and now the valet parking people . The valet parking is thought to provide parking for a select few while most merchants and their customers are left fighting over the few remaining spaces. The merchants we spoke with all felt the garage would go along way to alleviating those issues. Maybe the valet parking , or commuter parking can concentrate in the garage while shoppers use street parking.
Another old issue that popped up was the so called $13 summons lawsuit that lost the CBD over 90 spaces, that my friends is a tale for another time .
Merchants on Oak Street complained about the the multiple valet parking issues leaving their customers with no place to go but to out of town locations. While others felt the rents due to taxes and fees ,triple net leases , left little wiggle room and the loss of a couple of sales a month would be the difference making it or closing up when the lease expires.
Yes most would agree there would be more traffic , but again take that up with the “traffic easing specialist ” in Village hall .There are just too many choke points in the Downtown already but if you want a vital and unique business district you need traffic .
Most didn’t mind the extension of metered parking hours giving dinners a chance to share in costs while merchants feel their customers are currently subsidizing the whole, but extended hours does not mean anyone was a fan of higher parking fees .
We asked many about cost over runs , and the answer was vintage entrepreneur; create a community over site board of all those who oppose the garage idea and have then audit the construction process and make sure the quarters end up in the right hands .
Many of the merchants clearly understood the public’s reluctance to finance the garage and said the Village had lost all credibility since the Village Hall fiasco , pursuing one foolish folly after another and not being up front with taxpayers . We all know there is going to be more traffic , stop the lying and lets prepare for it. We all know Ridgewood water is woefully un prepared stop lying and lets fix it . We all know if we build in the CBD more kids will attend the schools stop the denials and lets deal with it . We all know Valley needs to update, time for a realistic plan not fantasy monstrosities. Leave tito’s alone , focus on building the business downtown not wrecking it. We got the feeling like most of the regular readers for this blog ,that some vision and leadership is sorely needed.
While we could not help feel a sense of doom hanging over the downtown , it seems for too long the Village has taken the CBD for granted and the Chamber of Commerce has played footsie with the Village council . New Jersey is not exactly a business friendly environment, so the Village needs to decide whether it wants a unique vital down town or not . The parking garage is not a panacea but in combination with proper vision and a little planning the downtown could play a significant roll in the Villages future.
I have just sent the following email to the Village Council:
“Dear Members of the Village Council: I have just filed a police report, with Officer D’Amico, concerning the theft of the pro Parking Garage sign from the front of our house. At least seven other signs from our immediate neighborhood were also stolen. Putting up a sign expressing my views on a political matter is protected as free speech under the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Whoever stole my sign is trampling on my Constitutional rights, and I will do what I can to see that he/she is prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Ridgewood politics continues its descent to a new abyss. Richard Nixon must be looking up, from wherever he is, with a big smile on his face: Dirty tricks are alive and well! Thank you Rurik Halaby”
Ridgewood Nj, Is the latest controversy over the so called Historic Preservation Commission Endorsement letter of the downtown parking garage enough to derail the entire project ?
“Any endorsement from the Village of Ridgewood Historic Preservation Commission will have great influence on Village residents. Hence, to ensure its integrity, such a letter must be held to the highest standard of accuracy. Mr. Parrillo’s 10/23 letter is not reflective of any discussion amongst HPC members during the October 2015 meeting. The October 8 meeting was merely a courtesy review. Members reflected on the appropriateness of the structure in the Historic Central Business District. Discussion topics included size, height, mass, cantilevers, sconces, arches, parapets and more. At no time was there any talk of “approval” nor was there any discussion about encouraging residents to vote “yes” on November 3. It never happened. Mr. Parrillo certainly could have composed a letter reflecting his own views. I wish he had chosen to do so.” Councilwomen Susan Knudsen.
“I believe that it is highly inappropriate for any elected official to so openly and blatantly work so diligently to promote a project that they themselves have arranged to be voted on in a public election. We need to carefully consider the information available and show the public that their input matters. Promoting a yes vote shows residents that your mind is made up regardless of available information or opinions reducing the referendum to a sham.
To your point on the Historic Preservation Commission’s endorsement letter, it is unfortunate that that committee’s integrity has been compromised, and it has basically been reduced to the council majority’s sounding board. With all of the other parking propaganda floating around the chair of that committee should have just wrote a letter supporting the project as a resident without dragging the HPC into all of this noise. ” Councilmen Michael Sedon
At its monthly meeting on October 15th, the Historic Preservation Commission met with representatives from Desman Associates regarding the proposed parking garage on Hudson Street and Broad Avenue. Many people realize Ridgewood’s need for such a facility as part of our infrastructure.
However, the commissioners were, and remain, primarily concerned with the visual impact of this multi-story structure on the streetscape. For example, a strictly functional, concrete construction—such as the new parking garage in Hackensack—would not only present a modern, monolithic contrast to the small-scale, older-style buildings on those streets, but also would create a visual barrier from the opposite street sides.
What is needed here is an architectural design that acts as a seam, harmoniously joining together the sides of both streets, and thus maintains the character of the district. Happily, one architectural design—the one we endorse—offers an excellent complement to the streetscape. Its brick façade, varied surface dimensions and upper sightlines; the streetlevel, arched pedestrian walkways; and corner tower combine to produce an edifice that works. It incorporates elements of what already exists in nearby buildings, thereby complementing what is there, while cleverly muting the reality that it is a parking garage.
Also, the design team has agreed to return to an HPC meeting for its review of the final plans to enable us to ensure the compatibility of the garage with its neighborhood.
Taking all of this into consideration, the Historic Preservation Commission supports approval of the parking garage and encourages all residents to vote “yes” for the November 3rd referendum.
Vincent N. Parrillo,
Chair Ridgewood Historic Preservation Commission
Dear Roberta, Please immediately remove the Historic Preservation Commission letter, dated 10/23/15, from the Village website. (reference: https://mods.ridgewoodnj.net/pdf/manager/2015HPCPGLStatement.pdf)
The letter does not accurately reflect the Historic Preservation Commission meeting held on October 8, 2015. Minutes and audio are available from Michael Cafarelli or I can send a direct link to access.
As you know from the email we received today at 2:57 PM, Vince Parrillo stands by the letter and has affirmed through polling all of the HPC members today (one could not be reached) that they all agree that the letter truly reflects the HPC position.
Thanks, Roberta
Best regards,
Roberta
Roberta Sonenfeld
Village Manager
201-670-5500, ext. 203
I can add one point/question – why do all of our major choices about development projects in Ridgewood come down to a yes or no on something that is just too big? Valley – needs to modernize, not double in size. Sealfons, Ken Smith and Brogan sites – need to be developed but not at triple the current density. Schedler Property – can be improved to serve the people of the village that owns it but without cutting all the trees down. Parking – we need to improve the parking situation in town but not with a multi-story structure that will be as big as the churches across the street and around the corner.
It seems that both the Planning Board and Council have failed to “get it”. Valley has been shot down on multiple occasions. The apartments are on hold because an angry mob showed up to shout the Council down before they could vote on it. The neighborhood east of 17 is resolved to vote any Council person out of office as they come up for re-election. And now this parking behemoth comes before us.
Our Council bears a healthy dose of the blame for all of this. In each case they appear to have made up their minds far in advance of finishing any impact or financial studies and even farther in advance of weighing public opinion. In addition there always seems to be some cozy relationship between one or more Council members and the applicant. Our Mayor is sending out personal appeals to vote “Yes” on the parking structure just as the (less than complete) “studies” are released. I always feel like the Council is rushing to get things pushed through and approved before the public has a chance to digest what’s being decided.
It’s with a healthy dose of skepticism that I’ll vote NO on Garage-zilla. Back to the drawing board folks – please present us with some smaller options.
OCTOBER 28, 2015 LAST UPDATED: WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2015, 12:10 PM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
A resolution has not yet been reached in the matter of the façade color of East Ridgewood Avenue restaurant Tito’s Burritos.
The matter before the Planning Board has been carried to the first meeting in December.
The applicant, Sonic Wave ll, LLC seeks a minor site plan application to keep the restaurant’s blue exterior, which the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) contends is at odds with the guidelines set forth in the village code that aims to preserve the village’s historic downtown area.
David L. Rutherford, the attorney for Tito’s Burritos, said his client had met with the village’s Historic Preservation Commission in September, but noted that “consensus was not reached” at that meeting.
Owner Michael Caldarella said the issue boils down to “visibility” for Tito’s Burritos. The restaurant’s façade is somewhat obscured by the set of stairs that sit on the western side of the building. The navy blue exterior allows the business to stand out and draw customers in, he said.
Clearly you are not aware of the backstory. If you were, I am sure you would understand that CBR had to pay a lawyer for almost 3 years to attend every meeting for every hour to represent their and ultimately our interests as residents. I am sure you understand how much lawyers charge per hour and the amount they bill when they are doing research aside from meetings. I am sure you realize they did fundraise but ultimately there is a big gap that they filled personally for years. How much did you contribute?
Ultimately CBR was holding our council responsible and paying a fortune out of pocket for what our elected officials should do as standard operating procedure. We are at the point now with the clock running out on this council. Hopefully residents are now paying attention and will be putting pressure on so the right studies are done and responsible decisions are made.
I assure you there is nothing beyond that. No promises of anything else.
