Posted on

Ridgewood Ex-Councilmen Claimed He Was Being Denied Access Via OPRA Requests but the Court Said ,NO

Jeff Voigt Ridgewood Council

file photo by Boyd Loving

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, ex-councilmen Jeffrey Voigt file a complain in March of 2021 called a Denial of Access Complaint with the Government Records Council (“GRC”). The Complainant disputed the Custodian’s extension of time to respond to the subject OPRA requests, noting that she failed to provide a reason for it upon his request on February 26, 2021. The Complainant argued that it was not until he threatened to
file a complaint with the GRC that the Custodian replied stating that responsive records would be provided.

Continue reading Ridgewood Ex-Councilmen Claimed He Was Being Denied Access Via OPRA Requests but the Court Said ,NO

Posted on

Former Ridgewood Councilmen : What’s good for the goose is NOT good for the gander

Jeff Voigt Ridgewood Council
the staff of the Ridgewood
Ridgewood NJ, former Councilmen Jeff Voigt seems to write a letter to the editor almost weekly complaining about the Village Council.  Now he is forgetting from one letter to the next what he has written, and is contradicting himself.

Continue reading Former Ridgewood Councilmen : What’s good for the goose is NOT good for the gander

Posted on

UPDATE : Ridgewood Taxpayers Paid $15k for Reports that they are Not Allowed to See

0 6

Proposed Ridgewood Police Firing Range Update:

by Boyd Loving

Ridgewood NJ, I attempted to obtain copies of the two (2) “feasibility studies” prepared in connection with the proposed police firing range, but both of my OPRA requests were denied because the requested documents are considered to be “drafts” only at this time, thus exempt from being OPRA’d.

Continue reading UPDATE : Ridgewood Taxpayers Paid $15k for Reports that they are Not Allowed to See

Posted on

Reader says ,“Fixing” ballots after an election deadline is a recipe for disaster

103650800 2321728694789307 5540443672997515601 n

“Fixing” ballots after an election deadline is a recipe for disaster.

The point of an election is to confer power to someone voted for by a plurality of the electorate — the candidate with the most votes. An equally important point is to convince the supporters of the loser that the winner deserved to win — that the count was fair and unbiased.
Continue reading Reader says ,“Fixing” ballots after an election deadline is a recipe for disaster

Posted on

Towns push back against open-government bills

Jeff Voigt Ridgewood Council

file photo by Boyd Loving

Nicholas Katzban, Staff Writer, @NicholasKatzban

In the mid-1970s, the Open Public Meetings Act created the basis for government transparency in the state of New Jersey. A little more than 15 years later, the Open Public Records Act followed, replacing the nascent “Right-to-Know Law.”

Since then, the laws have seen few face-lifts, and the wrinkles are beginning to show.

“We want to bring the bills into the 21st century,” said state Sen. Loretta Weinberg, D-Teaneck, “some parts of which were written before there was such a thing as an Internet.”

https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/bergen/ridgewood/2017/10/15/towns-push-back-against-open-government-bills/756622001/

Posted on

Harassment complaints against Ridgewood councilman dismissed

Jeff Voigt Ridgewood Council

file photo by Boyd Loving

“As a public official,” Schwager told the court, “what the defendant did might be labeled stupid, wrong or inconsiderate, but we cannot prove it was criminal beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Nicholas Katzban, Staff Writer, @NicholasKatzban

HACKENSACK — Three separate harassment complaints against Ridgewood Councilman Jeffrey Voigt were dismissed Thursday after the the prosecuting attorney determined there was insufficient evidence to prove a criminal act had taken place.

The harassment complaints against Voigt were filed by residents Lorraine Reynolds and Boyd and Anne Loving, who alleged that the councilman had made their cellphone numbers, emails and home addresses known to the public when he posted copies of their requests for public records — known as OPRA requests — on Facebook in May.

The plaintiffs testified that while their cellphone numbers, email and home addresses were visible in the councilman’s posts, he had obscured the same personal information for other persons listed on the records requests.

“Mr. Voigt took the time to block out personal information about others, but not mine,” said Anne Loving during a July hearing before Judge Roy McGeady. “I felt personally targeted.”

https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/bergen/ridgewood/2017/09/14/harassment-complaints-against-ridgewood-councilman-dismissed/665977001/

Posted on

Councilmen Voigt continues his attack of Village residents Making OPRA Requests

Voigt OPRA

June 4,2017

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, Councilmen Voigt continues his attack of Village residents over the weekend with more posts on who is making legal OPRA requests .Voigt and his cronies on the Financial Advisory Committee clearly prefer to operate in a vale of secrecy .

While this is clearly an attempt to pressure residents , from exercising their legal rights and limit and restrict public access to information in the Village .

Councilmen Voigt  continues to attempt to squash OPRA requests by pushing the idea of a vast Mayoral conspiracy against him. However years of running this blog would suggest that sunlight is still the best political sanitizer.

Screenshot 2017 06 04 at 7.33.36 AM e1496577271920

So what is OPRA:

SECTION 1 – OPRA DEFINED What is the Open Public Records Act (OPRA)? OPRA is the State statute that replaces the old “Right to Know Law” which governs thepublic’s access to government records in New Jersey. The law is compiled in the statutes as N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq.

In accordance with the Open Public Records Act, Village offices, officials  and departments  have to make available public records through formal requests. Requests may be submitted in writing by submitting a “records request form”  by completing the online form below.

According to the  Citizen’s Guide to the Open Public Records Act – State of New Jersey ; OPRA provides overriding public policies in the legislative findings (N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1) which must be considered during the handling of all OPRA requests for access to government records. Those public policies are:

 Government records must be readily accessible for inspection, copying, or examination by its citizens, with certain exceptions, for the protection of the public interest.

 Any limitations on the right of access to government records must be interpreted in favor of the public’s right of access.

 A public agency has a responsibility and an obligation to protect a citizen’s personal information that is in the possession of a public agency when disclosure of that information would violate the citizen’s reasonable expectation of privacy.”

In fact, in Burnett v. County of Bergen, 198 N.J. 408 (2009), the Court held without ambiguity, that the privacy provision “is neither a preface nor a preamble.” Rather, “the very language expressed in the privacy clause reveals its substantive nature; it does not offer reasons why OPRA was adopted, as preambles typically do; instead, it focuses on the law’s implementation.” “Specifically, it imposes an obligation on public agencies to protect against disclosure of personal information which would run contrary to reasonable privacy interests.”

If you want to exercise your legal right to access records under the Open Public Records Act this is how you do it in Ridgewood :
How to Request Government Records?

1. All government records are subject to public access under the Open Public Records Act (“OPRA”), unless specifically exempt.

2. A request for access to a government record under OPRA must be in writing, hand-delivered, mailed, transmitted electronically, or otherwise conveyed to the appropriate custodian. N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5.g. The seven (7) business day response time does not commence until the records custodian receives the request form. If you submit the request form to any other officer or employee of the Village of Ridgewood, that officer or employee must either forward the request to the appropriate custodian, or direct you to the appropriate custodian. N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5.h.

3. Requestors may submit requests anonymously. If you elect not to provide a name, address, or telephone number, or other means of contact, the custodian is not required to respond until you reappear before the custodian seeking a response to the original request.

4. The fees for duplication of a government record in printed form are listed on the front of this form. We will notify you of any special service charges or other additional charges authorized by State law or regulation before processing your request. Payment shall be made by cash, check or money order payable to the Village of Ridgewood.

5. You may be charged a 50% or other deposit when a request for copies exceeds $25. The Village of Ridgewood custodian will contact you and advise you of any deposit requirements. You agree to pay the balance due upon delivery of the records. Anonymous requests in excess of $5.00 require a deposit of 100% of estimated fees.

6. Under OPRA, a custodian must deny access to a person who has been convicted of an indictable offense in New Jersey, any other state, or the United States, and who is seeking government records containing personal information pertaining to the person’s victim or the victim’s family. This includes anonymous requests for said information.

7. By law, the Village of Ridgewood must notify you that it grants or denies a request for access to government records within seven (7) business days after the agency custodian of records receives the request. If the record requested is not currently available or is in storage, the custodian will advise you within seven (7) business days after receipt of the request when the record can be made available and the estimated cost for reproduction.

8. You may be denied access to a government record if your request would substantially disrupt agency operations and the custodian is unable to reach a reasonable solution with you.

9. If the Village of Ridgewood is unable to comply with your request for access to a government record, the custodian will indicate the reasons for denial on the request form or other written correspondence and send you a signed and dated copy.

10. Except as otherwise provided by law or by agreement with the requester, if the agency custodian of records fails to respond to you within seven (7) business days of receiving a request, the failure to respond is a deemed denial of your request.

11. If your request for access to a government record has been denied or unfilled within the seven (7) business days required by law, you have a right to challenge the decision by the Village of Ridgewood to deny access. At your option, you may either institute a proceeding in the Superior Court of New Jersey or file a complaint with the Government Records Council (“GRC”) by completing the Denial of Access Complaint Form. You may contact the GRC by toll-free telephone at 866-850-0511, by mail at PO Box 819, Trenton, NJ, 08625, by e-mail at grc@dca.state.nj.us, or at their web site at www.state.nj.us/grc. The Council can also answer other questions about the law. All questions regarding complaints filed in Superior Court should be directed to the Court Clerk in your County.

12. Information provided on this form may be subject to disclosure under the Open Public Records Act.

Click here to download OPRA Request Form

Posted on

Ridgewood Councilmen Jeff Voigt Comments on Recent OPRA Requests

Jeff Voigt Ridgewood Council

At the May 24, 2017 council meeting I mentioned I would be posting the OPRA requests of my emails that Mayor Knudsen and her supporters have filed with the Village Clerk. At the May 10, 2017 council meeting, Mayor Knudsen mentioned in reading the emails she had obtained to the public, that they were deeply disturbing and hurtful. The emails she is referring to are my correspondence with Alfred Doblin, an editor of the Bergen Record from May . I do agree with the Mayor that they are deeply disturbing in that they demonstrate the lengths the Mayor will go to denigrate others. As far as them being hurtful, I believe the comments made in the emails are factual and are borne out in the recent actions by the Mayor regarding the flying of the gay pride flag. I will let you decide if they are either/both deeply disturbing and hurtful. Moving forward, each of the OPRA requests from the Mayor’s supporters will be posted on my facebook page as I receive them from the Village Hall clerk. The purpose of doing so is to ensure you as residents are informed, have the facts, and none of this is editorialized on as happened on May 10 and May 24th by the Mayor.

Jeff Voigt

Posted on

OPRA requests are now not affordable in Ridgewood :There cannot be smoke without fire

village-hall-theridgewoodblog

January 25,2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood Nj, OPRA requests are now not affordable in the town. They have now (since last 2-3 months) started charging hundreds of dollars for each OPRA request because they don’t want residents to questions all these things happening at the same time with unprecedented push, without satisfactory answers from the council and administration. The Mayor uses his personal email account for most emails and some of them use their cell phones (text) to communicate, even when they are sitting at the public meetings.

There cannot be smoke without fire. If so many residents are going to these council meetings and they are frequently going to 1-2AM with residents speaking for 6-7 hours, there must be something wrong going on. Hopefully this new prosecutor will look at this and get to the bottom of this, which we the normal residents can’t do without access to all the data.

There are state laws limiting the amount of fees that can be charged for filling OPRA requests (Open Public Records Act ). Anyone being charge excessive amounts should check that out and file a complaint.

How much were you charged?

https://www.nj.gov/grc/public/complaints/fees.html

What is a special service charge?

A special service charge is essentially a labor fee that may be charged when a request is voluminous, requiring extensive time and effort, or when the request required extensive use of technology. Special services charges must be reasonable and based on actual direct cost of fulfilling the request. Actual direct cost means the hourly rate of the lowest level employee capable of fulfilling the request (no fringe benefits).

The imposition of a special service charge is extremely subjective and the determination is made on a case-by-case basis. No special service charges can be established in advance by ordinance.

The custodian must notify the requestor in advance of the special service charge. The requestor has the right to disagree with the special service charge. If the custodian and requestor cannot reach an agreement regarding the special service charge, the request is considered denied. Complainants may challenge a custodian’s special service charge by filing a Denial of Access Complaint with the Government Records Council or filing an action in the Superior Court of New Jersey.

The following is an example of a special service charge for a voluminous request:

Request: Meeting minutes from 2005 to present. There are 1,000 pages of responsive records which will take the custodian 2 ½ hours to copy. The Custodian may charge her direct hourly rate for the 2 ½ hours required to fulfill request. Custodian must estimate cost and notify requestor before fulfilling the request.