During a Village Council Work Session held on Wednesday, August 3rd, Councilman Jeffrey Voigt publicly stated that he was approached by two (2) unnamed individuals who are “willing to testify” with respect to possible unethical, unlawful, and/or illegal actions that took place in connection with a previous Village Council’s introduction and subsequent passage of several ordinances related to the construction of high density, multi-family housing in Ridgewood. Councilman Voigt is proposing the formation of an investigative body, fully funded by Ridgewood taxpayers, to issue subpoenas, conduct interviews, hold public hearings, deliberate, and release findings/recommendations relative to this matter.
Although I wholly support finding out if there were any unethical, unlawful, and/or illegal actions that took place in connection with the previous Village Council’s introduction and subsequent approval of several ordinances related to the construction of high density, multi-family housing in Ridgewood, I am NOT supportive of the formation of a investigative body funded by Ridgewood’s taxpayers if Councilman Voigt, or anyone else on the Village Council, is already in possession of information that could be passed to an appropriate governmental investigatory agency, such as the NJ State Attorney General’s Office.
Why spend Ridgewood taxpayers’ money if there is already an agency that could handle this for us? Having an independent agency conduct the investigation would also serve to calm those who are already shouting “this is going to be nothing more than a witch hunt!”
If Councilman Voigt or anyone else on the Council has details of improprieties having taken place, he/they should PICK UP THE PHONE NOW AND CALL THE AG’s OFFICE – DO NOT HESITATE! There is no need to begin the long, drawn out, VERY EXPENSIVE process of forming a committee, issuing subpoenas locally, and conducting public hearings – I would view the initiation of such a process as intended to serve publicity purposes only.
Again, let’s cut right to the chase on this one – If someone is willing to testify that they are aware of things having been done that violated laws, DROP A DIME NOW!
Let’s stop the pussyfooting around and get on this immediately!
Thanks for listening to your Residents last night and for engaging in thoughtful, open dialogue about the issues facing our town. All kidding in the subject line above aside, I wanted to share
My list of key points from last night. You all have been thrown very quickly into a fire that has been burning in RW for years. The way out that is best for RW will NOT be comfortable or easy. You are clearly already taking some steps to mitigate future problems from the prior Council’s mess. But to really help us, and to do the job really right, it is going to be somewhat uncomfortable for a while. As I stated, for the past four years your Residents have really been the ones dealing with much of the uncomfortable stuff (along with Mayor Knudsen and Deputy Mayor Sedon) – rallying the troops, writing endless letters, filing lawsuits, being verbally abused by developers agents as well as prior Council members, Planning Board Members and their attorney, being physically threatened, being shut up, ignored, derided, etc., etc.
So, please don’t be afraid of the uncomfortable. We’re not. To truly lead, whether in business, in our own families, or in Ridgewood, we all have to face the uncomfortable to get to what makes things work better.
Here’s my list.
#1. PLEASE SET YOUR OWN AGENDA: For the past for years the developer and their compatriots in our village governance have asserted their agendas, forcing us to follow, react and defend. It’s time to be as strong as them and SET THE AGENDA. Let them react and defend for once, even if some of that has to happen in the courts.
#2. 3066: Continue your work to undo Ordinance 3066. Keep this momentum going.
#3. RESOLVE PARKING QUICKLY AND SMARTLY: Continue to solve Ridgewood’s parking issues in a sensible and comprehensive way. If the Zabriske Lot Closed Session discussion is regarding a lease for parking, that is fantastic! Keep working to get a garage size and location right. Regarding angled parking and removal of the parallel spot buffers, please review this with Mr. Jahr, subsequent to Chris Rutishauser’s comments. AND PLEASE GET SOME SIGNAGE DIRECTING DRIVERS TO THE PARKING LOTS!
#4. REPEAL HIGH DENSITY ORDINANCES: Repeal the three high-density ordinances now. We appreciated this discussion last night. Kudos. There is no reason for these laws to remain on the Village’s books as an inspiration to neighboring owners or other land speculators who might buy up Village properties and seek variances or new ordinances for more high density housing.
#5. TAKE A CREATIVE LOOK AT MEETING AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS: Take a real and creative look at ways to plan properly to meet our affordable housing needs. Perhaps you can amend some of the village property zoning on Chestnut St to allow for potential future Sr. Affordable Housing developments, a need clearly defined but not honestly met by the current developers. Look at other places where this can be done and include zoning for special needs.
#6. REDO THE MASTER PLAN REVIEW: Budget for a REAL Master Plan Review NOW and demand that the Planning Board replace the improper review done this year – where they even forgot to perform the necessary polling of residents for our views of Ridgewood’s future. Replace it with a real Master Plan Review, done by an unbiased 3rd party professional firm. I know you know we need this. We need a really planning bible, not a fake one. Please put the money aside now and start the RFQs.
#7. SETTLE LAWSUITS WITH YOUR RESIDENTS QUICKLY: Initiate discussions to Settle the lawsuits brought by your fellow citizens on the High Density and Valley matters. This is your decision to make, not the decision of the Council Attorney, or the Planning Board attorney. Regarding High Density, you can tell Matt now, that you want him to initiate settlement discussions this week with your fellow citizens. It is fully within your power to set that agenda. And don’t fear objection or intervention by the applicants. That’s great as it will bring the parties together. Be strong and bring them to the table too. Right now, nobody’s talking. If needed, ask Matt to have the court to appoint a mediator to oversee a settlement. But let’s get this done now. Let’s stop the need for citizen groups to continue to litigate the preservation of our Village. And please note that #8 below will help you settle these negotiations more quickly, because so much was wrong with the process.
#8. INVESTIGATE THE DEFECTIVE PROCESS THAT LED TO BAD ORDINANCES: Take Councilman Voigt’s Investigative Committee proposal very seriously… and please do it. The Village of Ridgewood, through its Council owes Residents clarity on the matter of how these very unpopular and defective high-density ordinances got passed. You don’t have to make this a witch hunt. Just as your Residents have done in their legal filings, take a look at the most serious issues, while also reviewing some aspects of the aggressive politicking and keep it short and sweet. But don’t avoid it because it is uncomfortable. For the past four years, your Residents have not avoided anything uncomfortable in our efforts to save Ridgewood. We will do our part to help by supporting you and providing you with a list of questions we have regarding the concerns, conflicts and issues with the defective and oft abusive process that led to passing of the high density ordinances. Again… we support a focused investigation towards clarity and eventual closure.
And last, please have Roberta and the Village’s tech staff get all the planning board minutes and transcripts back up on the website in a manner that can be found.
Thanks again for doing the right thing for Residents.
On July 20, 2016, The Ridgewood Blog posted a link to an Opinion Editorial written by former Ridgewood mayor Paul Aronsohn in which Mr. Aronsohn endorsed the construction of additional multi-family housing in Ridgewood, and also defended his active involvement in promoting the erection of a now contentious, multi-level parking garage at the intersection of Hudson and South Broad Streets in Ridgewood’s Central Business District.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Aronsohn’s editorial failed to include several key facts with regard to his tenure in office as they relate to multi-family housing and the proposed parking garage.
Firstly; public records available on line from the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission reveal that in 2012, Mr. Aronsohn accepted an “in kind” campaign contribution from a local real estate developer, Mr. John Saraceno, whose firm (Onyx Equities, LLC) has applied to construct new, high density, multifamily housing in Ridgewood. Undoubtedly, Mr. Saraceno, will profit handsomely once construction is complete and all units in his building are rented.
Secondly, Mr. Saraceno’s firm owns a large commercial/retail establishment located within the very block as the parking garage Mr. Aronsohn and his supporters wanted to build (exact address is: 54 East Ridgewood Avenue). In my opinion, the value of Mr. Saraceno’s property would have increased substantially if a several hundred space parking garage had been constructed within the same block as his property.
Finally, if you think that all of this wasn’t enough to raise the eyebrows of Ridgewood’s voters this past Spring, may I remind you that on July 3, 2013, Mr. Aronsohn, along with four (4) members of Ridgewood’s Village Council, attended a $1,000-a- head campaign fundraiser for Governor Chris Christie with free tickets to the event provided to them by Mr. John Saraceno. This incident subsequently became the subject of a lead editorial in The Record on July 17, 2013.
Personally, I’d had enough of Mr. Aronsohn many, many months ago, and the results of a local election held in May, in which all of the candidates supported by Mr. Aronsohn for election to Village Council lost heavily, suggest that the vast majority of Ridgewood’s voters who cast ballots agreed with me that it was time for a big change in local government.
Ridgewood NJ, Many readers have voiced concern and suspicions over Village committees, sighting the fact that several namely the Historic Preservation Commission and the Financial Advisory Committees have acted more like promoters of former Mayor Aronsohn’s special interest agenda than looking out for whats best for Ridgewood .
“I don’t like it and believe we already have too many advisory groups. They have too much clout and are not necessarily to be trusted. REAC’s first pronouncement was that turf is great. FAC said we need the biggest parking garage–and the chairman of the Historic Preservation Commission concurred, no doubt helping the first garage referendum to pass last November. I’d rather see them all disbanded and let the council do its own research. Appropriate people could still help.”
“A real concern is that the new council falls prey to this nonsense. Aronson was a disaster for Ridgewood. Continuing his policies is a mistake. Yes, there is a lot on their plate, but this council really needs to get moving fast to undo the damage he did. Fidgeting isn’t going to carry the day. And if they are not up to the task they said they were capable of performing, then they need to take a good hard look at themselves. Now is the time to appeal the Valley Hospital debacle and undo the Village massive family housing ordinances.”
Councilman Ramon Hache told the Ridgewood blog yesterday that the Ridgewood Chamber of Commerce will fill three positions on the Central Business District Advisory Committee . Ramon went on to say the point of the committee is to create a more inclusive dialogue unlike the previous administration that ignored residents wishes ,and only listened to a small group of people or packed committees with developers and or friends of developers creating a situation where Central Business Development plans were “out of whack” with what residents wanted giving Ridgewood residents no voice in the decision making process.
At the end of the day its a leadership issue ,although the new council is green they do appear to have all the necessary ingredients ;an open-mindedness,willing to listen ,independent thinking and a concern for the Village to lead Ridgewood into the future.
Glen Rock NJ, the Ridgewood Revolution is spreading . A group of Glen Rock residents has had enough and is petitioning Mayor Bruce Packer and the Borough Council not to approve an ordinance that would rezone Prospect Street.
Sound familiar , the ordinance would permit a developer to build 53 rentals unit housing complex on the street ie high density housing .
Prospect Neighbors started the online petition. The group claims the ordinance is “poor urban planning,” and sets a negative precedent for “high-density, multi-family rental development in all other residential areas of Glen Rock.”
People who commented on the petition homepage made statements we are all well to familiar with in Ridgewood starting with “its a small town and should stay that way we don’t need high density housing ” , others claim the project would increase traffic , ruin the single family charm and otherwise negatively impact the town.
Does this all sound familiar; “This type of housing doesn’t belong in this town. If Glen Rock has tough building regulations for homeowners wanting to expand their homes. Building this kind of apartments is hypocritical”
“This is just the thing that I expected to occur when Amy Martin was elected to council, followed by the election of Bruce Packer and democrat friends. The emphasis here should be on the rehabilitation of the Rock Road business district, not more rental housing down the street from the new Bottle King!”
Ridgewood NJ, The Village Council repealed an ordinance that has in many residents eyes opened the door to unpopular village master plan amendments that included clearing the way for The Valley Hospital’s expansion and construction of high-density housing downtown.
The ordinance, No. 3066, was adopted in 2007 and states that “any interested party” can formally request amendments to either the master plan or its development regulations. The requests must be reviewed by the village, and the ordinance also outlines how a party must file such requests, as well as the fee structure for doing so.
Village Planner Blais Brancheau authored the ordinance nine years ago and has steadfastly claimed it was to “establish a clear procedure” for handling amendment requests and let the village charge the requesting party the cost of the professionals involved. Brancheau claims that without the ordinance, those costs would be carried by Ridgewood taxpayers.Critics of 3066 have long felt the Village had lost control of the planning process.
It was introduced by the Village Council under Mayor Pfund in 2007 (https://www.ridgewoodnj.net/minutes/07RPMJUN13.pdf ). Chapter § 190-143 of the amended Village Code is the kicker; it established procedures for interested persions (i.e. developers) to request amendments to the Village Master Plan or development regulations.
Council members Mancuso, Ringler Shagin, Wiest, and Pfund all voted in favor of the ordinance. Chapter § 190-143 is here https://ecode360.com/6694062 .
Over the years many residents argue that this should be repealed to ensure that we don’t see overdevelopment at Valley and in the CBD in terms of densities and building scale. It’s felt this will better protect our property values.
But last night the council agreed to repeal Ordinance 3066 once and for all in all its glory which will allow the Village to once again gain control of its own destiny and close the door on incongruous non conforming development. The final repeal will come in the August public meeting.
Firstly, I wanted to compliment you all on an open and thoughtful first meeting as the newly constructed Council. For the first time in years, Residents heard truly open discourse between Council Members and real discussion on the topics before the board. That was so refreshing. Thank you.
I am writing today, as one agenda item put before you is cause for great concern: the request to dissolve Ridgewood’s in-house Construction Board of Appeals so that any relevant cases in the future will be heard by the County’s board. When this request was made, many Residents in the audience thought: “Oh no, here we go again.” In light of this request it felt clear that Residents, and the Council, will have to remain very tuned-in and vigilant even with the prior Council’s voting block gone, as elements of their agenda may remain.
There is no way that Ridgewood should dissolve the Construction Board of Appeals (CBOA) at a time when so much potential construction, and construction related reviews, disputes, and potentially even litigation, may stand before the Village. I was surprised that our Village Manager did not catch this and even appeared to support the request. The CBOA representative who requested the dissolution indicated that this board hasn’t had much to do for several years and so may not be needed. One of the reasons they have not had much to do is that many of the construction projects proposed in Ridgewood are of such a controversial nature that they’ve been held up for years. However, at least four of these construction projects filed site plans last month and hope to have construction permits asap. Despite the passage of the recent high density multifamily ordinances, promoted by the prior Mayor and Deputy Mayor, these ordinances and the related applicant construction projects remain controversial, due to their size, scale and density being at odds with the majority of Residents’ desires, as well as issue with the process by which they were passed.
Given this, Ridgewood absolutely cannot turn over any governance and or construction review to outside entities or boards. Ridgewood needs to control its own destiny and we are lucky to have so many Residents with the smarts, talents and experience to do that.
As such, please, do not dissolve our Construction Board of Appeals right at the time it may be needed the most.
Ridgewood NJ, Just a quick take on last night first council meeting with the new council , if tonight is any indication of things to come, so much is going to be accomplished. Ordinance 3066 is to be repealed.There was real talk about Ridgewood Water,even addressing the law suit.
The parking issues were addressed with real common sense and many new ideas as well as recognition of the immediacy of getting things done quickly. Roberta didn’t run the meeting and actually did what she is supposed to do, inform the council!
Rurik Halaby could not help himself. He had to praise the past council and once again went on and on about how there has never been anyone like Roberta. He gave Susan a mild lecture and talked about his belief that Valley is a done deal and to fight this would be the equivalent of endangering lives( lifes?)He cautioned Susan not to base her decisions on a few disgruntled neighbors and move Ridgewood forward into the future embracing change and growth. I might have made this sound better than it actually did! But she was very polite as usual.
Hopefully we go forward with a suit against Valley. maybe it would tie things up long enough for them to start developing all the other properties they have purchased and their argument that their expansion is for the greater good will not have as much impact in a court of law as it seems to have done with the current judge.
Below are two articles, from today’s WSJ and Bergen Record, on Monday’simportant NJ Appeals Court ruling on Affordable Housing (AH) that will: (1) substantially lower the overall number of AH units required by municipalities under AH laws, and (2) may cause further delay in defining the actual obligations of municipalities under AH laws. In the Record article, even Kevin Walsh, the Fair Share Housing advocate (whose threatening of “hearsay” letter was wrongly permitted to be read into the Planning Board’s record by attorney, Gail Price – as if it represented a legal determination – scaring some Board Members and improperly influencing votes) indicated the forthcoming delays from this ruling, saying: “it requires further studies.”
In short, this ruling and these articles support what I, and other members of CBR, tried to convey to the Planning Board and Village Council during the past couple of years of overstated AH ‘threats’ proffered by Mrs. Price: that the Affordable Housing/COAH matter is, despite her puzzling advice, very unsettled and will continue to lack real clarity, potentially for years to come. It’s been that way since the 80s. No Legislature wants to fully effect the laws because they recognize their often impossible demands on NJ’s municipalities. However, conversely, no legislature, or legislator (other than Christie), has effectively sought to rework them or strike them down due to the obvious political implications.
These laws are just too flawed, resulting in the tumult and dysfunction of the past several decades. Fact is: there are no clearly defined AH numbers for Ridgewood right now. And there’s a chance there may never be. Given this, our representatives need to govern planning based on “what is right for Ridgewood now and in the future” and not “what minimizes builder’s remedy lawsuits.”
I firmly believe Mrs. Price wrongly influenced the Planning Board decision on the Multifamily Ordinances by alleging that a “Yes” vote was needed on the Master Plan changes, enabling development at the excessive levels sought by developers, to avoid potential developer lawsuits based on recent AH court rulings. As many anticipated, these rulings have now been lessened, and to some degree, called into question. Unfortunately, Mrs. Price never properly educated the Board on how dysfunctional the AH/COAH laws and politics have been (and very well will be), and that until such time as an unlikely final verdict is delivered, they should be wary reacting too quickly to threats from developers.
The implications of Monday’s ruling serves to underscore the unwise, biased and, unacceptable for Ridgewood, process undertaken by the prior Planning Board and Council. While we can and should promote fitting and proper development (and proper “development process”) in Ridgewood, which does add affordable units to our housing base, we should never have done this in the manner – fraught with bias and influence – that occurred over the past four years.
Beyond this, I believe there are certainly other ways Ridgewood can more properly and proactively plan to meet future AF/COAH requirements. These ways may be more creative and better for both Ridgewood and those truly needing AH than those put forth by the developers. I look forward to discussing my thoughts on them with you. I have been in the multifamily business for two decades, have managed many properties with affordable and moderately priced units, and am happy to share my experience.
Lastly, it is important to note that if members of the prior Planning Board and Village Council voted out of fear of lawsuits, they already got one: and sadly it’s from their own Residents, the very people they were elected or selected to properly represent. It’s a suit that alleges decisions based upon conflict of interest, outside influence, and improper representation and, most importantly, seeks to correct the serious mistakes in planning, representation and judgement made by the prior Council and Planning Board.
While the AH/COAH laws truly lack clarity, what is clear is that Ridgewood’s Residents demand proper planning and process. There is a much better route than the one taken by the prior Planning Board and Council.
Best Regards,
Dave Slomin, Resident
Follow up _________________________________________________________________
July 13,2016
Dear Mayor, Council and Village Attorney Rogers,
My July 12th email provoked feedback from a good number of fellow Residents and representatives various Ridgewood citizen groups, including responses to my letter and the linked articles with concern that pro-development attorneys may contend the appellate decision does not “change anything.” As the agenda indicates tonight’s Council meeting will address litigation in closed session, I wanted to make sure my comments were placed in the proper context, asMonday’s ruling does impact things here in Ridgewood.
My point is that the ruling exemplifies the significant dysfunction and lack of clarity that continues to exist (as it has for several decades) in the Affordable Housing definitions and determinations at the State level. This highlights the Planning Board attorney’s failure to properly advise the Board on how to address these issues. Mrs. Price, as a professional land use attorney, was well aware of this dysfunction and should never have counseled our Planning Board as she did. By proceeding as if the now reversed lower court decision was new “scripture,” and by either misunderstanding and/or misapplying other standards, the Planning Board attorney wrongly influenced the public debate and Board members’ votes. Necessarily, therefore, the Village Council proceeded under a flawed process and construct.
I do understand that whether State rulings ultimately determine that Ridgewood owes 50, or 100, or 500, or 1,000, or 100,000,000 affordable units, we are well short of that number and need to provide some additional AH units. From that singular perspective the ruling has a more limited impact. However, that is not the issue at hand. Rather, the issue is the defective and conflicted process in our municipal governance effecting the passage of recent pro-development ordinances. As such, what the appellate court’s decision signifies to me – as a multifamily real estate professional, with several decades of experience – is that the law has been and will be in a state of flux for some time to come. That no one can predict with certainty what will happen should definitely have been strongly conveyed to the Planning Board and Village Council prior to their votes. It was not. That is why the willingness of the prior majorities on the Council and Planning Board to side with those speculating with our downtown is so particularly egregious. Rather than react and surrender to an imagined obligations, or cave to the potential of developer lawsuits, Ridgewood should have performed correct and proper master planning with proper construct and counsel. There were so many things wrong and biased in their failed excuse for “planning.” You have the opportunity to begin the process of correcting this and protect Ridgewood from reckless overbuilding now and in the future.
Thus, I urge the newly constituted Council to address all pending litigation in view of the voters’ mandate. And you do have a clear cut mandate. Mayor Knudsen and Deputy Mayor Sedon both won their council seats in a landslide two years ago. And in the recent election, not only did Councilmembers Voigt, Hache and Walsh win in another landslide, but they routed the candidates heavily promoted by Aronsohn, Pucciarelli and Hauck to promote furtherance of development at the excessive scale and density recently passed. Then, subsequent to these elections, Residents next defeated the oversized garage by a vote of 2 to 1. These were not just victories. They were repudiations. They represent the voices and the clarity with which Ridgewood Residents speak and vote once we know the truth. Residents have spoken. You know very well what your constituents want. The recent votes leave no questions whatsoever. Your actions need to reflect the mandate we gave you.
Now is the perfect opportunity for the Village to move forward in acknowledgement of the serious issues raised by litigation in the housing and hospital lawsuits. With these suits, along with the garage referendum matter, you need to rectify Ridgewood’s core problems. Let’s show progress by first openly acknowledging that serious mistakes were made by the prior Council and Board Members. We all know it… our votes showed it. A perfect starting point for that is to recognize the legitimacy of the issues raised by our fellow citizens’ lawsuits, and settle those lawsuits as strong representatives of your constituents and not as officials fearful of outside interests. Then, let’s redirect the Village’s resources to focus on the developers with either settlement talks or continuing litigation, whatever is required to do what is truly right for Ridgewood. If you do what’s right, you will have our endless support. If any shortcuts are taken, Ridgewood’s divisions will sadly remain. And it’s time to end our divisions.
Lastly, please note I am including Mayor Knudsen in this email, as I entered her email incorrectly in my email of 7/12.
Ridgewood NJ, looks like Ridgewood residents who questioned the over development of the central business district proved right all along. A state appeals panel overturned a court order that could have added thousands of units to developers’ plans.
Suburban towns are not required to address the so-called “backlog” of unmet housing needs that supposedly accumulated from 1999-2015. This is a very good development for Ridgewood. The developers have much less leverage than they thought they did. Now we have to press the point that we are fully built-out, have been for decades, and should not be obliged by any court to “build up”, city-style, to accommodate large numbers of new residents.
What a shame for Saraceno, Simoncini, Pucciarelli and all the others that stood to gain big time and pushed so hard to get all that housing into the CBD. Kudos to,the citizens who delayed all the development and stood up to Aronsohn and his horrible reign of terror, and Gwenn with her sparkly eyed talk about COAH.
New Jersey’s suburban towns got a big break Monday in the number of affordable housing units that must be built over the next decade, as a state appeals panel overturned a court order that could have added thousands of units to developers’ plans.
State law continues to mandate that cities and suburbs allow the development of low-income housing.
Ridgewood NJ, Who is behind PROGRESS RIDGEWOOD and the massive Hudson Street Garage “VOTE YES” campaign? Here is the answer.
Progress Ridgewood ad placed in the Ridgewood News, April 29. The number listed for Progress Ridgewood belongs to Onyx Equities LLC, whose co-founder and managing principal is John Saraceno. The exact same developer looking to build high density housing in downtown Ridgewood. You might recognize him as the guy always seen with Mayor Aronsohn, around town, lobbying for the parking garage.
What the ballot doesn’t reveal and what residents face, if the referendum passes, is an open gateway to massive housing and overdevelopment. Don’t be fooled it’s not about parking.
I hope everyone realizes the Progress Ridgewood postcard in the mail is the same old group of liars, and their propaganda….like, do I even need to point out that the quotes were taken out of context and distorted to make the point look like it was agreed upon??? I hope not.
Don’t be fooled by the flyer/mailer from Progress Ridgewood which claims that the new council elect wants you to vote yes. That’s simply not true.
Bernies quote was from 2011 or so when a CONCEPT was being discussed.
This new council is in support of parking solutions. Including a garage that fits the lot, and is appropriate to the neighborhood.
Let THEM decide the funding and look at all of the facts. Ridgewood voters came out in RECORD numbers in May to elect them. Now let them be responsible for what happens next. And do NOT be fooled, the outgoing lot of fibbers and thieves will do anything at all that they can to stick it to the village and to have their way.
Vote NO on Tuesday and let the new council decide. We can have the problems fixed by honest people with the villages best interest at heart. Not greedy developers and sneaky politicians. VOTE NO JUNE 21!!!! .
Ridgewood NJ, from the “take back Ridgewood ” Facebook page , “Mayor Aronsohn is spreading the word that the current council will not make any decisions on the garage in his last 9 days in the office, and June 21st vote will be for funding / bond only.
We ask if the newly elected council is going to make a decision on final size of the garage and other parking solutions, why is he so desperate for the bonding in his last 9 days? Why commit 11.5 Million dollars and start paying interest on it, if the new council may come up with a smaller option that may require less money? What’s his hidden agenda behind the rush to issue the bond?
Vote NO on June 21st. Not to the garage, but to Paul Arohnson, Gwenn Hauck and Albert Pucciarelli railroading the process on their way out. If you voted for responsible government, in other words, Jeffrey Voigt, Bernadette Walsh, and Ramon M Hache, you know to vote NO now. Let our new VC take the reigns!”
A panel of Appellate Division judges heard arguments Monday on whether New Jersey’s municipalities must zone for the many thousands of affordable housing units that were not approved between 1999 and 2015. David O’Reilly, Inquirer Read more
