Ridgewood NJ, Perhaps some residents Leaving the village hall Couldn’t help but notice the mayors car had some pretty distinctive campaign information strategically placed in the rear window.
Please take these events serious only a few votes in 2012 launched the Village into this disastrous mess.
2012 Ridgewood Election Results
Albert J. Pucciarelli – 2078
Keith Killion – 1711
Rissell R Forenza – 817
Paul Aronsohn – 2479
Mary Jane Shinozuka – 1484
Gwenn H Hauck – 1727
Final voting registration for the May 10th Municipal Election is April 19th. To register to vote, individuals may register in the Village Clerk’s office from 8:30 AM to 4:30 PM or in the Ridgewood Library Lobby on April 19th from 4:30 PM to 9:00 PM.
FORMAT AND QUESTIONS FOR THE VILLAGE COUNCIL CANDIDATES NIGHT,
WEDNESDAY,APRIL 20 7:30-9:30 PM AT VILLAGE HALL COURT ROOM
SPONSORED BY THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF RIDGEWOOD
April 12,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ,the Ridgewood blog has procured information on the League of Women Voters Village of Ridgewood Candidates night on April 20th at the Village Hall.
Please take these events serious only a few votes in 2012 launched the Village into this disastrous mess.
2012 Ridgewood Election Results Albert J. Pucciarelli – 2078
Keith Killion – 1711
Rissell R Forenza – 817
Paul Aronsohn – 2479
Mary Jane Shinozuka – 1484
Gwenn H Hauck – 1727
Final voting registration for the May 10th Municipal Election is April 19th. To register to vote, individuals may register in the Village Clerk’s office from 8:30 AM to 4:30 PM or in the Ridgewood Library Lobby on April 19th from 4:30 PM to 9:00 PM.
Please get informed and vote responsible as many have now learned the consequences can be dire to yourself and your family.
The Women Voters Village of Ridgewood Candidates night format for the evening will include welcome from the president, flag salute, and an introduction of our esteemed moderator and the candidates. The moderator will then take over.
Opening statements 11/2minutes each
Questions # 1 2 3 1 1/2 minutes each question
Cross talk on each question 5 minutes in total each question
Questions from the public 40 minutes
Closing statements 1/1/2 minutes each
1. During the recent budget proceedings, Ridgewood Water outlined a six year, approximately 40 million dollar capital plan to
update the facility which serves not only Ridgewood but also Glen Rock, Midland Park and Wyckoff. Should the town invest the money
to update the facility or should we consider selling the utility and why?
2. We are looking at potential new development in Ridgewood , in the downtown area and the Central Business District (garage and
multi family housing at several locations). What measures would you propose to minimize disruption to traffic flow, local businesses and home owners and to ensure pedestrian safety?
3. Regarding the Town Garage location on Franklin Avenue and the adjacent municipal lots, the Department of Environmental Protection has cited these properties for remediation due to underground fuel tanks that are leaking diesel and hydraulic fuel into
the surrounding ground water. There has been talk of charging the cleanup to a potential developer or acquiring the garage site by
eminent domain and doing it ourselves. How do we address this problem in the most expedient manner so that no further
contamination occurs and serves the best interest of the village?
Ridgewood NJ, Village council candidate Ramon Hache responds to Ridgewood blog reports yesterday that the Village’s Streets and Parks Departments were ordered to remove any campaign signs, specifically those belonging to Ramon Hache, found erected on Village owned properties.
“I am very troubled by the decision of the Village to take down my campaign signs. It is my understanding that, as of last November, there is no ordinance that prohibits them from being on village-owned properties. Although I didn’t personally place the signs at the locations in question, I understood that my supporters were not violating any local ordinances. It is very discouraging as a candidate, but especially as a resident, that a double standard has been applied when it comes to my signage. I guess my candidacy, unlike the “Vote Yes For Parking” initiative, is not in line with the Council’s agenda.”
Ridgewood NJ, The Ridgewood Blog has just learned that employees of the Village’s Streets and Parks Departments have been ordered to remove any campaign signs, specifically those belonging to Ramon Hache, found erected on Village owned properties.
This bizarre directive comes just months after many Village owned properties were literally plastered with “Vote Yes For Parking” signs and Village Attorney Matthew S. Rogers indicated that there was NO LOCAL ORDINANCE that prohibited the erection of election related signage on Village owned properties.
So Ms. Sonenfeld, if there is NO LOCAL ORDINANCE THAT PROHIBITS THEM FROM BEING ON VILLAGE OWNED PROPERTIES, why are Mr. Hache’s campaign signs being torn town by Village employees?
Readers say , “no money need change hands for a conflict of interest to exist. It even looks worse when you see it all in writing. NJ Law states that a conflict of interest need not be financial in nature but merely a perception of partiality to the issue in question. This is clearly more than a perception, it is a reality. Gwenn morally should have recused herself but since she hasn’t , the Council should have asked her. It is their right and also protects the reputation of the governing body.
Ms. Fraser was more than an employee of Valley, but also an officer. And yes, she was already an officer at the time of the donation.
Can anybody donate to a cause they approve of? Sure. But Ms. Hauck was running for a representative elective office that was going to make important decisions about the hospital. Even merely to protect her from any taint of a conflict (political donations are in the public record), most people would not donate to the campaign. The fact that that happened was one of many indications of how confident they were about being immune.
Regarding Bernie Walsh, I don’t get it. Any candidate can express an opinion. That means she never pretended to be neutral. or lied to get votes, unlike some. And no money changed hands.
Ms. Fraser is of course entitled to her opinion but would have done better to protect her favored candidate by not donating to her campaign. Council members of a different stripe might have urged such a person to recuse. The killer is that recusal is entirely a matter of conscience.
As for Mr. Albano, why do you think a call was made (in my opinion, not an email message) to Mike Sedon’s employer claiming a “conflict of interest” (which did not exist) to try to force him choose between his job and his council candidacy, leaving the field open to candidate Albano?
Between Valley, Pfund, and Aronsohn, and the connections there are far too close for comfort, Ridgewood has been infested and overcome by a nasty virus for which there seems to be no vaccine. We can try on May 10 but the damage is done; guided by professional marketers and funded by construction unions and others, they craftily played the long game and won. Every possible committee, board, and commission (including a couple that hadn’t even existed before: Financial Advisory, etc.) as well as the council itself was carefully padded with acolytes, lackies, and the self-righteous and selfish who were promised various things to vote as instructed. They duly complied and what a mess we are in. In the history of Ridgewood there are various enemies of the state but Pfund and Aronsohn take the lead.
Bizarro World (with apologies to Seinfeld) by Anne Loving
So tonight at the Village Council Meeting two very strange things happened.
1. Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld stated that she has started going around to parking lots to check on availability and has found ample available spots in the Cottage Place lot as well as in the N. Walnut lot. First of all, why is she doing an informal unscientific study of available parking when countless dollars have been spent on actual parking studies? Second, so many people have stated that there are always available spots if one is willing to walk a couple of blocks, so this is not news. And, of course, most bizarre of all is why in the heck is Roberta reporting about all this available parking when she is spearheading the gigantic garage that is supposedly so necessary?
2. Councilwoman Gwenn Hauck issued a parental reprimand to those who use social media (she being a major contributor herself). She said that before anyone posts, they should do a “gut check” (I think that was her term) and ask themselves if what they are about to post is something they would put in a national newspaper. Wait a minute, this is coming from the person who has called residents various unflattering (and highly inaccurate) names including “stalker,” “creepy,” and “terrorist.” And this same councilwoman kept dead silent when a member of the public called an entire group of fellow citizens “fornicators.” Huh? Might one suggest that the good Councilwoman gut-check her own language, and control the council meetings when members of the public use vulgar language.
Well, it’s not our government, so it’s on us to Take Back Ridegwood!! Go Monday night to the Valley meeting. Sign the garage petition, talk to your neighbors and friends!! We have a choice we can roll over and do nothing, or get vocal, participate and give it all we got! I know it’s not easy… Exhausting, irritating but we are near a positive change…. The election. Stay strong people, we are near the end of a long and terrible reign.
REGISTER TO VOTE IN THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION
Final voting registration for the May 10th Municipal Election is April 19th. To register to vote, individuals may register in the Village Clerk’s office from 8:30 AM to 4:30 PM or in the Ridgewood Library Lobby on April 19th from 4:30 PM to 9:00 PM.
From our attorneys regarding the referendum petition to repeal Ordinance #3521:
“We are confident that the bond counsel is wrong. Bond ordinances are NOT controlled by the Faulkner Act or Walsh Act
or any other general act that gives NJ residents the right of referendum. The right to repeal a bond is a right shared by ALL
New Jersey residents under the Local Home Rule Act, not just Faulkner Act towns.”
New Jersey Statutes Annotated. N.J.S.A. 40A:49-10 reads as follows:“Any proposition submitted to the voters of any municipality under the provisions of section 40:49-9 or of section 40:49-27 of this title shall be voted upon at the next general election held in
the municipality at least thirty days after the filing of the protest or protests herein provided for, unless the governing body thereof
shall call a special election therefor.”
If a special election is called, and $40-45,000.00 of municipal funds are used, that will be a choice that the Council alone makes, and for which
the Council alone will be held accountable.
Reader says , “I think that Mrs. Hauck is the most egregious example of Ridgewood’s poor representation. While negotiating the Village’s settlement of the Hospital’s lawsuit against us, she gave Valley virtually everything they’ve ever asked for – even after Valley acknowledged that their expansion will be detrimental to Ridgewood (but good for the region – yay!). I understand that Mrs. Hauck has deep affection for and a long affiliation with Valley, but as a Council person she should be looking out for the people she was elected to represent. It’s a shame that the Village will be changed forever over the handful of votes that she won by.”
Ridgewood NJ, Village Council Candidate Ramon Hache shared some of thoughts on the Valley Hospital Expansion issue. Ramon said,” I would be willing to work with Valley on a moderate expansion. I understand the needs of Valley Hospital have changed significantly. But the current expansion plan is way too aggressive:
Size from 400k square feet to 1.4mm sq feet
Height from 48′ to 80′
The setbacks are reduced significantly, within 30 feet from the property line, which would make the new structure appear even larger, dwarfing the surrounding residences. I cannot support it. It is too large and not consistent with the character of our village. I also cannot support all of the phases of construction happening all at once. Proceeding with all phases of construction simultaneously is inconsiderate to the nearby residents. I am also concerned by the traffic safety issues for the kids at BF.
I was hoping that the negotiations with Valley would have yielded a greater mutual compromise.”
Ridgewood NJ, Council Candidate Jeff Voigt shared his thoughts on the “Whispering Woods hearing” last night . According to Jeff , “It was disappointing not many people showed up to the Whispering Woods hearing. This is a huge issue for our Village – with the hospital and its environs effectively doubling in size. My guess is that many people think this is a fait accompli and that Valley will get what they want. It is not. I also think many of the Villagers are likely tired of having to address one huge issue after another in our Village – parking, high density and now this. This is very draining. It was however, nice to see those Villagers who have spent a significant amount of time on this at the meeting – most importantly Pete McKenna for the Concerned Citizens of Ridgewood and Megan Fraser from Valley Hospital.”
Jeff continued , “If I was a betting man, my guess is that the planning board more than likely will vote in favor of the mediated agreement. It will then become a draft ordinance which the Village council votes on. Again there will be more hearings on this at the Council level. If this draft ordinance is heard/evaluated by the current council, Albert Pucciarelli (one of the council members) has recused himself – leaving only 4 council members to vote. Conceivably, this could result in a 2-2 vote. My understanding is that a 2-2 tie means the ordinance would not pass. We are therefore back to where we started with Valley possibly continuing with its lawsuit. Another possible scenario is that the evaluation of the draft ordinance does not occur until the new council comes in, in July. My guess is that if the NJ Supreme Court judge who mediated this, understands the 2-2 conundrum, she will request it goes before the new council – so that a majority would result. My thought/suggestion is that we need an educated community on this issue to help provide insights/inputs to the existing and 3 new council members. Therefore it would be great if more of the Villagers could attend to present their comments and understand this. Personally I am going to be at every one of these hearings in order to talk with others, listen and understand the issues, and ultimately figure out how best to move forward for the Village.”
the Ridgewood also asked Jeff about Councilwomen Gwen Hauck perceived conflict of interest with Valley Hospital Jeff said , “My guess is the Gwen’s conflict of interest (even though I think there is one) ultimately will not matter in this.” Jeff then emphasized, ” I may have mentioned this to you previously, as it relates to my tenure with the Zoning board, if there is even a “whiff” of a conflict of interest, the board member will recuse themselves. A perfect example of this is when our Chairman, Joel Torielli, recused himself a couple of years ago from one applicant hearing because his children and the applicant’s had several play dates – even though he did not know the applicant. Additionally even if we live within a certain radius of an applicant and; we do not know them, we recuse ourselves (I have done this). It just seems to me that the Council should be setting the example on how best to govern – and not have a “lesser” board showing the Council how to do so.”
LWV of Ridgewood Candidates Night: Wednesday Night, April 20th 7:30PM – 9:30 PM The Village Hall Courtroom
Ridgewood NJ, the League of Women Voters (LWV ) will host a Candidates night for the Village Council Candidates . There are Six candidates for 3 open seats on the Village Council. This is an opportunity to meet the candidates and hear their views.
Each candidate will receive 3 questions in advance along with the format. The moderator will be a League trained, seasoned moderator residing in another town to ensure impartiality.
Ridgewood NJ , Council Candidate Jeff Voigt give the Ridgewood blog his take on the March 23rd meeting .
Jeff started off , ” last night – no surprises. Yes we need parking (I actually voted for parking on Hudson St). However, I did not vote for the options presented by the council to the public. My mistake was actually believing that the council majority would be reasonable in coming up with a garage that would fit on the Hudson St/S. Broad area. As it happened, the Village residents were presented with 4 bad options and the council asked for input/feedback from the community. This was called compromise by the council majority. Compromise in my mind is when two parties, who are on opposite ends of the spectrum, meet somewhere in the middle. If this has occurred, a much smaller parking deck would likely have been the result. What occurred, however, was nothing but a multiple choice test amongst 4 bad choices.”
Jeff mentioned a new petition , “There is a petition going around (which I support) for repealing Ordinance 3521 (Ridgewood bonding the garage) – for the very reason that the garage does not fit in this space as it is currently configured. The website https://www.its2big.com has more information; email:[email protected]. As you can tell by this website, the garage is way too big (5 levels; 4 stories; with 60+ foot high towers [note: that zoning in this area is for 45 feet]) and; does not fit with the aesthetics of the surrounding area. The committed Village citizens leading this petition initiative include: Jacqueline Hone (phone: 201-377-8556), Anne Loving, Gail McCarthy, Ellen McNamara (phone: 201-874-0966) and Saurabh Dani (phone: 973-903-5361). As well please reach out to Lorraine Reynolds (phone: 201-264-8151). Thank you to all of these people for heading this up.”
Regarding high density housing and the Ordinances 3489-3492 that were passed, Jeff said he left the meeting with the following impressions and thoughts:
“· Affordable housing is driving the Master Plan and appears to hold precedence (from a legal standpoint) over the Village employing spot zoning to address it (note: the NJ Supreme Court has ruled that spot zoning is illegal; Riya Finnegan LLC v Township S. Brunswick; 2008). It also appears the current council majority is holding good land use planning (via our Master Plan) hostage to affordable housing. While I am not against affordable housing and agree that Ridgewood should do its best to meet its obligation, we still do not know what this obligation is and; we have no plan for it. This makes no sense to me. As well, it would be nice to understand from some good lawyers, which of the following holds precedence if the 2 are intertwined – the use of spot zoning (to address an issue – is this legal or not) or affordable housing.
· What would be optimal regarding Ridgewood’s affordable housing obligation is for the Village to wait and see what this obligation is from the state and then plan for it. It is hard understanding why we are chasing an elusive target and zoning in a willy-nilly fashion (e.g. new AH-3 zone on Rt. 17 North across from the park and ride). This new zone, AH-3, was presented on at the 3/15/16 planning board meeting – where the Valley Hospital resolution was also presented. Note: Since the agenda for this meeting was published on the Ridgewood website only 3 hours prior to this meeting, only about 10 people attended. The open public meetings act requires that agendas be published 48 hours before a public meeting. Therefore, no surprises as to why so few people attended and why so few people know about it. “
Ridgewood NJ, Readers say , “The only way to stop this is to fill up the room and let our Village Council know how we feel about this vote. It is important that everybody in town come out tonight. It is probably the most important vote in Ridgewood history because it is a question as to whether we want to continue living in a village or make it into a city. If the Village Council votes in favor of this high density master plan amendment, nothing will ever be the same again in our town.”
As Dave Slomin from CBR pointed out, “Ridgewood’s future held by the current powerholders in our Village Council and Planning Board, and that of a large majority of Residents. These powerholders see downtown Ridgewood as bigger scale, taller, denser, and much more bustling. They are planning a town center with a more urban look and feel, not a small town character. I don’t really know what is influencing them, as virtually every Resident CBR has spoken with – 1,000s of them over the past 4 years – wants Ridgewood to maintain its small town feel. Residents want to give their children and grandchildren the same wonderful town we enjoy.
Slomin went on , ‘Oddly, all three of the Council Members who support this over-scaled development are not running again. Why? We can only guess. But what we do know, is that in approving such unprecedented development as a Council Majority, but a Ridgewood Minority, they leave the mess to the next Council and to every Resident of this town… and to our children. Again, bad and unfair planning.”
Most readers find the idea that there will be No material impact? Really? These studies were hastily arranged at best and are not at all credible. If 70 units is so immaterial, why can’t you and your developer friends and family live without them?
The reality is that most residents for or against the planned development have no confidence in the Village Council majority aka the 3 amigos and do not think they are the people who should be making this decision . The current council majority has no overall vision of the future , and no plan just funding from special interests ,turning the Village into an urban environment .
