Posted on Leave a comment

Update Town Garage: Controversial Eminent Domain Hearing Scheduled For Friday, 5/16

>Town+Garage
The Honorable Peter E. Doyne will preside over tomorrow’s scheduled Village of Ridgewood vs. Ridgewood 120 LLC eminent domain hearing. The hearing will begin at 9:00 AM in Room 323 of the Bergen County Courthouse.

Village officials are seeking to condemn Ridgewood 120 LLC’s property, located at 120 Franklin Avenue, to facilitate construction of a parking garage/retail complex.

Ridgewood 120 LLC’s principals have filed a counterclaim, which accuses Mayor David T. Pfund, Deputy Mayor Betty G. Wiest, Councilman Jacques Harlow, Councilman Patrick A. Mancuso, and Councilwoman Kim Ringler-Shagin of reneging on several “secret promises” regarding the plaintiff’s acquisition of the property.

Hotwire

Posted on Leave a comment

>Valley Hospital Update:Planning board asks for amendment to village plan

>Tuesday, May 13, 2008

BY BOB GROVES

THE RECORD

STAFF WRITER

The Ridgewood Planning Board has asked for an amendment to the village master plan that balances Valley Hospital’s desire to expand with the fears of residents that their neighborhood will be overwhelmed by the new structures.

The Planning Board decided it must first change the village master plan before it can decide on Valley’s building plan. The board asked village planner Blais Brancheau to draft an amendment to the master plan and its hospital zone ordinance.

The move follows months of heated discussion over Valley’s proposed $750 million plan to replace two old buildings with three new ones and to add a above- and below- ground parking ramp.

Without changes in the master plan, Valley would have to continually seek variances from the village board of adjustment, which is “a dysfunctional process,” said Planning Board Chairman David Nicholson.

This will further delay the Planning Board’s vote on Valley’s plan, which Nicholson had hoped would take place by the end of this month May.

“No one is more disappointed than I am” at delaying the vote, he said. “But I think in making some changes to the ordinances, we can improve the process dramatically.”

“We would certainly like to move this along,” Nicholson said at a special public meeting of the board on Monday at Benjamin Franklin Middle School. About 50 people attended.

At the meeting, the board also received documents from Valley in response to its request for more information.

Valley, for example, said it could not shift the loading area of its north building to a location further south on its campus because it would disrupt ambulances dropping patients at its emergency department.

The hospital also supplied drawings of a taller, tiered “wedding cake” design building, a concept that opponents had suggested as a less obtrusive alternative because the height would be in the center of the building.

A “wedding cake” structure, with two levels of ventilating equipment on top, would be 132 feet high, compared to Valley’s proposed 80-foot high buildings, said Megan Fraser, a hospital spokeswoman.

“I can’t say how seriously the board members would really take that idea” of the wedding cake, Nicholson said.

The board, he said however, is concerned about maintaining proper building setbacks, such as the 38 feet that Valley’s parking ramp must be from Linwood Avenue on its south border.

He noted, however, that Bergen County has rights to an easement on Linwood, and could decide to widen the roadway to accommodate hospital traffic.

Earlier this year, Valley asked the Planning Board to amend the master plan and hospital zone ordinance to allow what it contends is needed modernization. Concerned Residents of Ridgewood, a neighborhood group which opposes the hospital plan, asked for amendments to “limit its impact on the community and preserve the village’s residential character.”

Fraser said she was “delighted that the board overwhelmingly recognized the need for change.”

Paul Gould of Concerned Residents said he agreed with the board that setbacks are of “primary importance.” The group, he said however, “still believes that the proposed size of the expansion is too big for this village.”

The Planning Board set May 27 as the tentative date for its next public meeting on the issue.

Posted on Leave a comment

>Title 9 Not the Answer for Scientific Men’s Club

>My take on the following article is that it is more evidence that the constructivist death grip Ms. Botsford holds on the Ridgewood district’s math and science programs stems from an agenda having nothing to do with encouraging academic excellence.

Title 9 Not the Answer for Scientific Men’s Club
Allison Kasic
Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Graduation season is upon us. In the coming weeks thousands of American students will celebrate their accomplishments, reflect on four years’ of memories, don silly robes and hats, and graduate from college. The majority of those students will be women, who nationally make up 6 in 10 college students.

Women have made tremendous strides in all aspects of life over the last few decades, but perhaps none is as pronounced as in higher education. In 1970, only 42 percent of undergraduate students were female. Women now dominate campus life, raking in the majority of bachelor’s and master’s degrees awarded each year. But those tremendous accomplishments won’t stop those dedicated to convincing women they are victims.

The latest charge from the gender equity crowd is that women face widespread discrimination in STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). They say government action (in the form of increased Title IX enforcement) is needed to correct this imbalance.

Much of the hysteria can be traced back to a 2007 report from the National Academy of Sciences. Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering looked at the different rates of participation between the sexes in STEM fields and concluded that discrimination was the key factor holding women back. The report has been taken as gospel since its publication, but policymakers need to take a closer look at the potential causes of this gender disparity before jumping to “fix” the discrimination problem.

Most likely several factors are at play. Unfortunately, some of the likely factors are considered so taboo in the modern academic environment that few people will openly discuss them. Larry Summers came under tremendous fire at Harvard when he suggested that innate biological differences between the sexes might be a factor. Summer’s detractors may have been offended by his comments, but that doesn’t mean that there isn’t an element of truth in there. There is a growing body of research revealing biological differences that affect how men and women learn and process information. Women also tend to profess different interests and priorities. The key question is how big of an impact do those differences have on the disparity in STEM fields.

At this point all potential factors should be on the table for serious inquiry, including differences in aptitude, learning styles, temperament, interest, work-life priorities, and discrimination. To jump ahead and label discrimination the key factor is, at best, intellectually lazy and, at worst, purposefully misleading. I, for one, find it incredibly unlikely that discrimination is the key factor. Women have broken down countless barriers in recent history, including “boys clubs” like business school and law school. Are we really to believe that the last unbreakable bastion of sexism in the academy is being led by scientists in white lab coats?

Even if there is a problem that needs fixing, politicians should pause before looking to Title IX as the solution. Currently, Title IX enforcement is most visible in college athletics where it is lauded for increasing female athletic participation over the past 35 years. But the successes of Title IX have often come with a serious price tag. Too often, Title IX gets used as a weapon against male athletes in the form of cut teams and roster caps rather than a positive force for women’s athletics. The problem lies in the controversial proportionality measurement—the gender breakdown of athletes must match the gender breakdown of the student body. That leaves schools with two options: recruiting more female athletes or cutting opportunities for men. Schools often go for the latter. It’s hard to see how that sort of quota mentality would benefit women in STEM fields.

Universities should aim to ensure that any remaining barriers to fields of studies are removed so that students are free to choose their preferred area of study. Yet any effort to create a politically correct gender balance is a misuse of power that disserves students.

Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

Posted on Leave a comment

>Ridgewood challengers keep it civil

>By Matt Friedman

RIDGEWOOD – Anne Zusy recently registered as a Democrat to vote for Barack Obama. Paul Aronsohn likes Hillary Clinton. And Keith Killion, who’s registered as a Republican, is a John McCain supporter.

But the three stood outside of a post office in Ridgewood today to run as a team for three council seats, saying that the village needs new blood in its government. The fact that the three of them could run together, they say, is evidence how seriously this traditionally Republican town takes its non-partisan elections.

Their opponents are incumbent council members Betty Wiest, the town’s Deputy Mayor, and Jacques Harlow. Wiest spent most of the day at home calling supporters to get them out to the polls, while Harlow competed in a senior citizens’ tennis tournament, which he said would help take his mind off of the election.

At least one of the challengers will get a spot on the council, and a voice to choose whether Mayor David Pfund will keep his post (if he wants to) or whether he’ll lose those stripes and become merely another councilman.

Zusy said that she’s only focusing on the council election and hasn’t thought about whether she’d be interested in becoming mayor herself. Killion and Aronsohn both say that they’d prefer one of the council members with more experience to take the reigns.

As they paused to shake hands with the occasional passer-by and ask whether they voted yet, the three challengers lamented what they said was the slow pace of the village government.

“I’ve watched the council for quite a while, and there’s a failure to get things done in a timely manner,” said Killion, who’s retiring as the village’s Captain of Detectives in July.

Killion was upset to learn that he was lumped with Wiest and Harlow in a robocall put out by the county’s Republican organization – which both Harlow and Wiest, who said they had nothing to do with, have condemned.

“I am suspect, not necessarily of Betty Wiest but I’m suspect of the whole incident,” he said.

Aronsohn, who worked in the Clinton State Department, served as former Gov. Jim McGreevey’s press secretary and ran for Congress before taking on this decidedly lower profile task, also condemned the call.

“It’s injecting partisan politics into a non-partisan election,” he said.

That robocall was the first flare-up in what has been, up to this point, a race with about as much conflict as the average meeting of the county’s notoriously lock-stepped Democratic organization.

But this is not a Bergen County battleground, and things are generally kept civil in this upper-middle-class village.

“I think that Ridgewood is a town known for its gentility. Everything is kind of handled with kid gloves,” said Zusy.

To Wiest, the complaints about the glacial pace of council business are founded in unrealistic expectations. Only when you’re in the position, she said, do you understand all the hoops you have to jump through to do something as simple as, say, put a fence around a pool.

“It’s not that we’re not responsive. If you don’t dot your i’s and cross your t’s in the end, if something goes wrong it’s very difficult to get back on track,” she said. “Having been there for four years, frankly, until you’re in the spot, you don’t realize what you have to go through. And I can certainly list a whole page of accomplishments that we’ve managed to take to fruition.”

And Wiest, whose husband was mayor from 1986 to 1990 and is considered a potential pick for the spot if she wins reelection, would prefer not to address that aspect of the race.

“I’m not going to go there…. I haven’t made any claim or innuendo,” she said. “I’m here to tackle issues and try to do something for the village in a positive way.”

Posted on Leave a comment

>School board elections may move to November

>Monday, May 12, 2008

THE RECORD

BY ELISE YOUNG

STAFF WRITER

New Jerseyans would elect school-board members in November rather than in the spring, under a bill approved by an Assembly committee Monday. But voters also would lose the power to decide multimillion-dollar district spending plans, which account for at least 50 percent of their property taxes.

The two-pronged bill drew a curious mix of testimony before the Assembly Education Committee. Representatives of the 200,000-member New Jersey Education Association and other lobbyists were displeased about the change in balloting date, but championed the decision to remove voters from the decision on spending.

Some committee remembers referred to a dismal voter participation rate, an average of less than 15 percent statewide.

“We need to have much more participation,” said Assemblywoman Joan Voss, D-Fort Lee. “This is disgraceful. We have to do something to get more public input into how money is spent.”

This year 14.3 percent of eligible voters voted in school elections, and they defeated 26 percent of the budgets, according to the state Department of Education. Last year 13.9 percent voted and rejected 22 percent of the budgets.

Critics acknowledged the low turnout, but argued that a move to November would politicize what is — officially, anyway — a nonpartisan event.

Ginger Gold, representing the teachers union, went so far as to suggest that the change in voting dates could be likened to a trap, forcing people to cast ballots when they rather would not.

“Just because people go into the booth doesn’t mean people will vote. You may not increase voter turnout as much as one might think,” Gold told the Assembly Education Committee. “We don’t force people to vote.”

Gregg M. Edwards, president the Center for Policy Research of New Jersey, a nonprofit public-issues group, testified that opponents to the November balloting feared a loss of power.

“It comes down to this: They don’t want more people voting,” Edwards said. He referred to his longer written testimony, which read: “The fewer the voters, the easier it is to affect election contests. The largely invisible and inaccessible April election magnifies the influence of certain special-interest groups.”

The bill was sponsored in part by Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts, D-Camden, an indication that it has significant support among the majority party.

Some committee members — including Assemblyman Scott T. Rumana, R-Wayne, who voted against the measure — said they were uneasy about excluding voters from the budget process.

“Taking the vote away from the public is a big concern for me,” he said. And as a practical issue, he said, a ballot with multiple contests may not be able to accommodate only so many names.

Some who testified pointed out that even if voters reject a local spending plan, state officials have the power to restore it. Even Edwards, so in favor of a November election, called the budget vote “a sham” and “largely symbolic.”

New Jersey’s Board of Education elections are a perennially odd rite of April: Historically low numbers of voters decide how the majority of property owners’ tax money is spent. Statewide, just 15 percent of eligible voters turn out for the contests, which take place apart from races for any other elective office. By comparison, 77 percent of eligible Bergen County voters cast ballots in the 2004 General Election.

Would-be trustees often are longtime Parent-Teacher Association activists or educators employed outside their hometowns. Their campaign budgets rarely reach four figures, a fund so limited that many candidates try to reach voters via a Web site or in interviews with weekly newspapers.

Rosemary Bernardi, a trustee in Evesham, Burlington County, told the committee that if school elections were in November — particularly in a presidential year — voters would be too preoccupied learning about candidates for more visible office.

“How much press time would you have for a school election candidate? None,” she said.

Richard Snyder, a Ramsey trustee, testified that a November election date would expose would-be candidates to machine politics, in which well-funded organizations could back a slate. Candidates who resist the machine’s overtures, he said, would be outspent and unseen.

Edwards, however, said a change to November — when voters are more aware about politics in general — could raise awareness about trustees’ role, possibly drawing more people to run.

“This could dramatically change the way school districts work,” Edwards said.

Posted on Leave a comment

>Why business is fleeing the state

>Thursday, May 08, 2008
It’s like watching a car wreck in slow motion.

What the Democrats are doing to the state’s economy, I mean. Pieces are flying off in all directions. In terms of taxes and regulation, New Jersey was once a relative haven, a cheap place to do business. But for most of this century, we’ve been slowly losing high-income residents and high-income jobs. James Hughes and Joe Seneca of the Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers have been documenting this in a series of depressing reports about the state’s economy.

“When business decisions for expansion are made, they’re just not being made in New Jersey,” said Seneca when I spoke to him yesterday.

The primary source of job growth in recent years has been in government, not private industry. And that represents a death spiral. Public employment creates higher taxes, which in turn discourage private employers from locating or expanding in New Jersey.

Don’t worry, though. The Corzine administration’s doing something about the business climate: It’s making it worse. That Family Leave Act the governor signed recently will raise payroll taxes and will also force employers to grant leave to workers for up to six weeks at a time.

And then the other day the Department of Community Affairs adopted new affordable-housing guidelines that put a burden on businesses not seen in any other state. If you want to construct a store or office complex in New Jersey, you can be required to construct or finance housing nearby. Democrats are even pushing for a statewide 2.5 percent tax on all commercial construction to fund that home building scheme.

This anti-business environment began with the first major action Jim McGreevey took in 2002. He raised the corporate income tax. The small increase in revenue doesn’t make up for the jobs that will go to lower-tax states.

“All we’re looking for here is a billion more,” said Assemblyman Joe Cryan at that time. Cryan has since risen to state Democratic chairman thanks to the attitude embodied in that quote.

To get that billion, McGreevey had to tax corporations through an “alternative minimum assessment” even in years when they had no profits.

By 2004, a CFO Magazine survey of corporate tax officials showed New Jersey to have “the least fair and predictable” tax system in America. But McGreevey was just getting started. He proposed a so-called “millionaire’s tax.” The Democrats got it through the Legislature with the false claim that it would cost the typical taxpayer in the over-$500,000 bracket a mere $846 annually. The actual average cost was $29,000 a year.

Rich people can do math even if Democrats can’t, and that tax chased some high-income retirees to Florida and wealthy Wall Streeters to Connecticut.

Just in case any of those rich guys had any thought of moving to the beautiful northwestern section of New Jersey, McGreevey also pushed through the Highlands Act. Theoretically, the bill was supposed to protect the unspoiled wilderness. But shortly after it was adopted, I visited a guy who owns a strip of land fronting on the highway in a commercial district of Mount Olive. He wanted to build an office park there but was prohibited by the new law. Other states dream of attracting such businesses because of their clean, high-paying jobs and their role in reducing property taxes for homeowners. Not Jersey.

When Wall Street whiz Jon Corzine took office in 2006, he had a chance to change the anti-business climate created by his predecessor. And he had a promising start, by which I mean he kept promising to do so.

As for keeping those promises, no dice. His pledge to “call a special legislative session to deal with property taxes” led to a systematic process of rejecting any ideas that would cut the cost of government. A low point in that effort came when Corzine appeared at a rally of public employees outside the Statehouse and pledged to protect the workers against seniority and pension reforms that might be part of any property tax reform proposal.

To his credit, Corzine did eliminate McGreevey’s alternative minimum tax. Other than that, his administration has been as anti-business as McGreevey’s, though he at least has toned down the rhetoric.

As for his latest moves in the area of family leave and affordable housing, that stuff might sound nice, but it makes New Jersey even less competitive, says Hughes.

“Pennsylvania will make the argument that New Jersey is not business-friendly,” Hughes told me. “It’s a business climate effect other states will use against us.”

And it’s a business climate that never would have developed if not for a deliberate policy of the past two Democratic administrations.

As I said, this has been like watching a car wreck. But there’s one difference: This is no accident.

Paul Mulshine may be reached at [email protected]. To comment on his column, go to NJVoices.com.

Posted on Leave a comment

>Ridgewood could see a new mayor this summer

>By Matt Friedman

Ridgewood Mayor David Pfund isn’t up for reelection tomorrow, but he may not keep the mayoral seat much longer.

The town’s five member council, governed under the Faulkner Act, chooses one of its own every two years to become mayor. Pfund has been mayor for four years, and his council seat is not up for reelection until 2010. But with five candidates vying for three seats on the body in tomorrow’s election, Pfund may either step down and allow someone else to take the helm. Or he could try to hold on for reelection at the council’s July 1st reorganization meeting.

As of right now, Pfund isn’t letting on what he’s going to do, though some local insiders have suggested that he’s getting ready to step down.

“The focus right now is on the municipal election, and afterwards we’ll have a closed-session meeting and we’ll discuss all these issues to move forward in the next term,” said Pfund.

The position of mayor pays $5,000, as opposed to the regular $3,000 council salary. While the mayor leads the council, most of the day-to-day operations of running the municipality are the responsibility of the village manager.

One possible contender for the mayoral spot is Councilwoman Betty Wiest, who’s running for her second term on the council and whose husband, Quentin Wiest, served as mayor between 1986 and 1990. She was the top vote-getter in the 2004 municipal elections.

Also running for council is incumbent Jacques Harlow and newcomers Paul Aronsohn, Anne Zusy and Keith Killion.

Pfund has stayed neutral in this year’s election.

Posted on Leave a comment

>I have always voted Democrat and I like Paul Aronsohn…..

>I have always voted Democrat and I like Paul Aronsohn. In fact I would like to one day see him in the State Senate or even in the US Congress. That said, I also feel that he is just using Ridgewood to further his career and he doesn’t really have a stake in the community. This has put me in a dilemma for the past few weeks. I am torn between wanting to see him advance, but not wanting a professional politician on the council. I understand what he is doing and in a way support it, but I wish it was not in MY town. Why couldn’t he run for village council in some other town? I would fully support THAT as a stepping stone for him to move onto bigger and better things (in which I would support him).

As much as I like him, I do not like being used. Someone here earlier said (something like) that all of his decisions would be made based on what would better advance his career and not what would be in the best interest of the community. I have to agree with that and it gives me pause. I have been turning this over in my head for weeks now and recently came up with another unsettling thought. If Paul succeeds, will the party see Ridgewood as a good place to launch politicians and promote another outsider when Paul moves on? I don’t want Ridgewood to become the clearing house for professional politicians on their way to bigger and better things. I wouldn’t like that.

So, just this weekend, I came to the conclusion that I cannot vote for Paul. I feel that he is bright enough and young enough and skilled enough to advance his career from some other means than through the Ridgewood village council. And when he does, I will be out there supporting him… but just not this time.

Perhaps this will help some of you, but if not, I just feel better getting it all out.

As for the other candidates, Keith has my vote. I still do not know what I am going to do with the other 4 candidates (all of which don’t look particularly appealing).

Match.com

Posted on Leave a comment

>"non-partisan election…"

>I have to laugh at phrases like:
“…non-partisan election…”

As soon as Paul Aronsohn stepped into the race, it became partisan.

He is not for Ridgewood. He is a hard core party favorite (supposed to be rising star, but more like sputtering star) and this is just an attempt by him to regain his footing and use Ridgewood as a stepping stone. Having been in state government as McGreevy’s spokesman and Federal government, and having failed at getting into the State House with a failed attempt at the 5th district, why would he want to be on a village council and make decisions about swimming pools and security cameras or whether or not to approve repainting the village police cars black and white?

Face it… Aronsohn is just using Ridgewood to hopefully re-launch his stalled political career.

Pay a penny for shipping on orders $99 or moreshow?id=mjvuF8ceKoQ&bids=141136

Vote how you’d like, but know what you are voting for…

Posted on Leave a comment

>“let them eat ah…Pizza”

>marie

So I stopped in to pick up a pie at Ridgewood Pizza (37 Godwin Ave ,(201)444-1055) the other day and was informed that my pie was now a whopping $10 a full 25% increase from the $8 previous Monday, Wednesday Special price. Yikes …so what’s going on with Pizza prices. Seems the global commodities price explosion has hit home. Prices of wheat, flour, sugar as well as prices for oil, natural gas, coal and precious metals to name a few have not seen these kinds of price increases since the 1970’s . Unlike many other places on earth there is no need for food riots or the offing of heads of inept despots ,in America making money of human folly is fair game .Yes but isn’t investing in volatile commodities very risky you ask? Risky yes but now because of the miracles of modern technology you can invest in Precious Metals, Gold, Oil, Natural Gas ,Agriculture Equipment, Green Power and so on through the use of what we call Exchange Traded Funds or ETF’s for short. What is an ETF you ask? An ETF (Exchange Traded Fund) is simply a basket of stocks that is bought and sold on a stock exchange as if it were a single stock. ETF traded funds are a great way to play a particular sector or diversify your portfolio. So if you want to take advantage of say a falling dollar or just looking to make some extra bread to treat yourself to a pizza give me a call your friendly neighborhood investment advisor and remember that these investments as all securities carry risk of loss of principal and are not insured like bank deposits and you could lose all or most of your money.

James Foytlin
Investment Representative
54 Washington Place
Ridgewood NJ 07450
Toll Free 1(866)492-359
1(201)301-2780
Fax 1(201)301-2762
Cell 1(201)966-788
https://onesmallvoice.blogspot.com/