Posted on

Clearly, the judge saw the Village of Ridgewood as the bad guys in this case

Bike Valley theridgewoodblog.net 71

July 2,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, The Ridgewood blog consulted Ridgewood Attorney John Hersperger on the judges “90 days to clear way for Valley Hospital expansion”, and this is a verbatim quote:

“I completely expected this.  I attended most of the hearings, and it was clear from the start that  the Judge was convinced that the public interest outweighed Ridgewood’s interest, and she was going to contort the law and the facts to support Valley’s expansion.  I won’t expound on this now, but with respect to the law, the cases the Judge cites do not back up her reasoning, and in fact,  would support the Village’s right to zone the property as the Village sees fit.  On the facts, respectfully, she cherry-picked  what she needed and ignored decades of evidence clearly indicating that the Village never wanted a giant hospital at the site.

What was perhaps most disappointing was Judge’s remark (paraphrased) from the bench, in which she described that last decade of Valley’s applications as a “saga” for Valley, but just “history” for Ridgewood.  Clearly, the judge saw the Village as the bad guys in this case .  Honestly, after 60 or so public hearings and all the time and stress that residents endured, it was most painful to hear that kind of comment from a presiding Judge of this County.

So consider this, over the course of decades, Ridgewood has accommodated Valley’s multiple expansions  (except for this last one), which has allowed Valley to grow and become one of the busiest and  most profitable hospitals in the state.  And when we finally say “no”, we’re the bad guys.  And consider further we’re saying “no” to an expansion that would more than double the size of the facility.  I’d say that  contrary to the Judge’s ruling, Valley and the region actually owe Ridgewood a big “thank you” for being the municipality that took the brunt of Valley’s growth for all these years.  I agree with the Judge that Valley serves a regional public need.  But the delivery of that regional service, on our small local roadways, in a confined residential neighborhood, next to a middle school, should no longer be the sole obligation of Ridgewood.  It’s time for  a truly regional location for Valley, such as the 26.5 acres they own in Paramus, right between the Garden State Parkway and Route 17.”

Posted on

Readers say Valley Ridgewood Mediation Will be Tainted ,Ms Hauck is too Invested in Valley

Gwenn Hauck has absolutely no business representing us in a lawsuit. For crying out loud, this is glaringly apparent. This is not about what platform she ran for office on, this is not about whether she loves valley hospital. This is the fact that there is a major lawsuit against Ridgewood and one of the two elected official on the mediation is a person who donates big money to them. How can anyone not see the conflict here? She is supposed to be representing US against THEM in this lawsuit, but she funnels money to them.

If anyone thinks that she should represent us in the law suit all you have to do is look up the minuets Sept 19 H-Z hearing and she what she said. Then you tel me.

Speaking before the council during the “H-Zone” hearings to determine the fate of ‘Renewal’, Hauck said on Sept. 19: “Also, I trust Audrey Meyers, Megan Fraser, all the doctors and volunteers I work with and all the spokespersons of the hospital when they tell me that the hospital will have better services and healthier surroundings if they modernize and expand the way they’ve laid out because they’re the health experts…and I believe them.”

While it may seem unlikely a perfect solution will ever emerge, Hauck stressed a “healthy” and “reasonable” dialogue must emerge for any meaningful change to happen.

Any output from her “mediation” will be tainted. That does not serve the interest of anyone, including Valley. Pencil this in for another 10 year slog unless a good faith process for resolution is adopted.

In my experience, the vast majority of ethical types always recuse themselves from legal duties where there is the potential perception of there being a conflict of interest. The key word is “perception”. In a lot of these cases, the reality of an actual conflict of interest is slim to none, but in the interests of showing absolute honesty, they do in fact, recuse themselves. By not recusing themselves, it actually infers that they are in fact attempting to improperly influence a decision.