Ridgewood NJ, The New Jersey Criminal Code (N.J.S.A 2C:1-1 et seq.) contains a number of offenses which are specifically directed at public officials and/or employees. Although this article is not intended as an exhaustive treatment of all state law on this subject, it will hopefully provide a working knowledge of the major acts or omissions which may give rise to criminal culpability.
Official Misconduct (N.J.S.A. 2C:30-2) A public servant commits official misconduct if with a purpose to obtain a benefit for himself or herself or another (or to injure or deprive another of a benefit) he or she knowingly commits an act relating to his or her office constituting an unauthorized exercise of official functions: or knowingly refrains from performing a duty which is imposed by law and is clearly inherent in the nature of the office. The “benefit” obtained may be of minimal value. Investigation Into Hamilton T.P. Board of Education 205 N.J. Super. 248 (App. Div.1985). This also includes benefits not received by the public official but rather by a third party. State v. Schenkolewski 301 N.J.Super.115 (App. Div.), cert. den.151 N.J. Super. (1977). To violate this section, the individual must be a public servant and the act must relate to the office. State v. Bullock 136 N.J. 149 (1994).
Ridgewood NJ, Note that the sign pictured, purchased with your tax dollars by the village manager, violates 2 village ordinances. <i>A study conducted in 2006 by Virginia Tech for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration showed that anything that takes a driver’s eyes off of the road for more than two seconds greatly increases the risk of a crash. The same study also concluded that nearly 80% of all crashes involved driver inattention just prior (within three (3) seconds) of the crash.</i> This sign sits at one of three roads in town that cross the train tracks and handles a massive volume of pedestrians, cars, and now sports a bike lane. So, do as we say, not as we do. <i>The Swedish research team suggests that digital billboards attract greater attention from drivers due to their: brightness; visibility from greater distances; and display of a constantly-changing series of advertisements. The team concluded that digital billboards “have the potential ability to keep up the driver’s curiosity over an extended period of time.” Previous human behavioral studies have shown that drivers are naturally inclined to notice bright, changing lights in their peripheral vision and to anticipate additional motion. The Swedish government had previously given temporary authorization to erect digital billboards in 2009, but as a result of this and related studies; the government has now ordered the removal of all digital billboards.</i> https://www.traffictechnologytoday.com/news.php?NewsID=45602 https://www.scenic.org/storage/PDFs/eebdd.pdf
Ridgewood NJ, While we looked away village expenses are now up 181%. We also now have the largest municipal government in Bergen County . Our village manager has hired a director of finance, a director of human resources and there are other hirings of part-time employees to fill in positions. Our village manager has not only a secretary but a full-time assistant. Some of the other positions also have assistants. Things must be good. We should expect a major tax increase down the line.
I am new to Ridgewood, so here comes a newbie question –
Were previous village managers also as politically active as the current one? i.e. supporting and promoting specific council members and their agenda, and withholding information from other council members? Shouldn’t that be a politically neutral position?
I have wondered why the village manager ,Roberta Sonenfeld has been such a vocal supporter for the council.
In the past is was a low key position, the managers just did their job.
Schoenfield was a member of the self proclaimed “Tiger Team” that worked as a self-important financial advisory committee. Now we have a permanent financial advisory committee that also is active in promoting the council projects. They are intertwined and hardly objective.
Ridgewood NJ, There were too many discussions focused on needing a garage or not. I voted no, but it passed, let’s build a nice one. We need to be talking about what it looks like and how we pay for it. The only design offered to date is ugly, doesn’t fit the lot, and the council is in a rush to build it. We don’t really know how it gets paid for. The traffic impact is going to be huge. The garage is going to be filled with train commuters every day- the village has been clear about that. The one traffic study (done over 4 hours on one day) says we need to know more about overall traffic impact. The village has a poor record dealing with traffic design. This is a traffic disaster waiting to happen.
Judging by comments to the council and online discussions, too many voters did not educate themselves ahead of the vote. A lot of buyer’s remorse and people who “assumed”. There were some amazing speakers who clearly and smartly got to the issue and were ready to dive into to the details the council wishes to avoid. There were also uninformed garage supporters who thought the architect’s renderings were fakes made by opponents of the garage. Quite the indictment when supporters of the garage have no idea what it looks like and even they think it can’t possibly “look like THAT”.
It is now crystal clear that 3 council members, led by the village manager and mayor, were not forthcoming about their intentions ahead of the vote. They promised a conversation about design and then offered one photo ahead of the vote and no options on design. The only design option was a meaningless 10′ difference. The village seems to revel in ignoring codes and statutes created to preserve what everyone loves about the village. The village should set the standard and go beyond what is required. This manager and 3 of the council now have a demonstrable record of doing the opposite. Let’s hope the promise of a new design to be created is true.
I can’t recall the Village Council ever approving a resolution permitting such an operation (at The Stable).
Does anyone know how this all happened and whether it’s legal? Are they operating there for free (on the taxpayer’s dime), or is money exchanging hands? All a mystery.
Ridgewood NJ , Several residents in the area of South Monroe Street and Washington Place reported to The Ridgewood Blog’s tip hotline that a vehicle displaying markings of RIDGEWOOD WATER was being used by Ms. Tracy Jeffrey, the Village’s new Code Enforcement Officer. Ms. Jeffrey was observed issuing written leaf collection policy warnings late this week to residents in leaf pick up area “D.”
Vehicles assigned to RIDGEWOOD WATER employees are paid for with revenues generated from RIDGEWOOD WATER subscribers. A pending lawsuit by the municipalities of Glen Rock, Midland Park, and Wyckoff suggests that the Village of Ridgewood is improperly using these revenues to support operations exclusive to the Village of Ridgewood. Ms. Jeffrey’s use of a RIDGEWOOD WATER vehicle may be a case in point. At least two of the tipsters who left messages on The Ridgewood Blog tip hotline questioned the connection, if any, Ms. Jeffrey’s code enforcement work has with RIDGEWOOD WATER.
Ridgewood NJ , “So am I to infer from your email that you are the one in charge of what does and does not get posted on the VOR website; is this correct? And, if so, is it within your purview to directly disregard the request of one of our elected officials regarding a posting on the VOR website?” Resident Anne LaGrange Loving .
This is a good question proposed by the Village manager , does she work for the town , the Bergen Democrats or does she work for the mayor? Can a Village Manager so openly disregard a request from a council person ? Whats the harm in pointed out an issue to the public?
Does this implies once again the Village government has no credibility with its residents ? Do people not understand after one fiasco after the other , the Village Hall, Valley Expansion, the golden toilets , firehouse in a flood zone , turf in a flood zone , traffic easement , Graydon ramp and the hits just keep coming .
Until we get a little more truth in government these controversy’s will continue to hurt the village , the merchants and the taxpayers .
Ridgewood News Letter: Be informed before you vote
October 30, 2015
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
To the editor:
Last Friday, readers of this newspaper may have been surprised to read a letter to the editor (“HPC supports parking garage”) from the chair of the Historic Preservation Commission stating that the HPC had endorsed a plan for a Hudson Street parking garage. Their instincts were correct: it’s not true.
In the letter, Vincent Parrillo asserted that the HPC “supports approval of the parking garage and encourages all residents to vote ‘yes’ for the Nov. 3 referendum.” Not so; in fact, Mr. Parrillo introduced the Oct. 8 HPC meeting (not Oct. 15, as the letter stated) as a “courtesy review” of garage drawings, stating the HPC does not vote on such approvals. I was there as council liaison.
The architectural firm selected by the council to prepare drawings showed components of a proposed design to HPC members, who asked questions and made suggestions. The meeting was entirely informational. HPC members did not approve the garage. At no time did the Village HPC discuss approval.
The letter, on official letterhead, has since been posted on the Village website. It was also published by The Ridgewood News in print and online. It’s been highlighted in the mayor’s communications, signed and sent by him through his personal email account, pressing voters to approve the garage.
Obtaining voter approval is the only reason for next Tuesday’s nonbinding referendum. Voters should therefore consider the following.
The proposed garage would occupy the entire 100-by-300-foot corner of Hudson Street, becoming the largest building in the Central Business District. At 50 to 66 feet high, it would tower over adjacent 25-foot buildings, meeting or exceeding the height of proposed multifamily housing that has been publicly repudiated as out of place in our historic downtown.
All existing on-street parking on Hudson would be eliminated, as would some spaces on South Broad. Traffic patterns on Hudson and nearby roads would be reversed. The garage would be cantilevered over 300 feet of the Hudson Street sidewalk with an additional two feet extending over the street. An additional 300-plus vehicles will be added to the already congested intersection.
To subsidize the project, the Village would increase meter rates throughout town and extend meter hours to 9 p.m. where they now end at 6 p.m. If Parking Utility revenues fell short, Ridgewood taxpayers would be held responsible for the bond and be sole guarantors of the principal and interest.
Voting “yes” would mean: “We 26,000 residents agree to pay lots more for parking, $15 million for a garage plus likely cost overruns, and maintenance and repairs forever.”
Voters harboring doubts about the wisdom of this project should consider carefully how they vote on Nov. 3. This is not a vote “for parking” but a choice about the height and mass of the proposed structure and whether Ridgewood taxpayers accept responsibility for being sole guarantors of a $15 million bond.
Even though it’s probably important to update the code, I shudder at who is doing it. They know nothing–any of them–including and especially Rogers. And I do not trust their motivations whatsoever. With any luck they’ll be too busy to do very much, and then the project can continue after the next council has replaced Rogers and Sonenfeld.
Past bad acts are still past bad acts on behalf of the village manager and council. This does not absolve them from their sins.
“In order to complete the project without an astronomical cost to the village, it was announced by Sonenfeld last week that Rogers would be doing the work free of charge.
“The cost for this would be significant,” said the attorney. “I just felt it was something that should be done, needs to be done and I wanted to get it done. The only way to do it was to donate the time.”
I wonder how much this complete overhaul will cost? I can see some very large bills from outside counsel coming as I don’t expect any of our in-house legal beagles to be up to the task.
Robertas letter to the editor last week: “..when we find an issue or a problem or an ordinance that is outdated, we don’t ignore it – we fix it.”
CORRECTION: when we find an issue or a problem or an ordinance that is outdated, WE IGNORE IT, do whatever the hell we want, and then when Knudsen, Sedon, or a member of the public pints this out we decide to fix it after the fact.
Roberta has done this multiple times in she short train wreck of a tenure with us
SEPTEMBER 18, 2015 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2015, 12:31 AM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
Last week, the Village Council discussed a possible change to an ordinance that would allow for the hiring of employees at a pay rate higher than the lowest salary possible on a case-by-case basis.
The ordinance would give the village manager discretion in hiring an employee with qualifications that suggest bringing them on at a higher salary, which officials said would allow the village to get the best employee for the position.
Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld characterized the change as an attempt to update an ordinance that has become obsolete. The amended ordinance would only apply to Civil Service classified positions that have already been budgeted.
“When you think about the police and bringing in inter-governmental transfers, we would not bring them in at step one. We would bring them in higher,” Sonenfeld said. “Or to the extent we’re bringing in somebody to the water utility that has certain licensing that has different market value than it had, those are the kinds of things I’m thinking about.”
Deputy Mayor Albert Pucciarelli said the change would be a good one since it would give the manager “flexibility” to do whatever is necessary to get the best candidate. The ordinance, as it is currently written, could eliminate candidates who might otherwise be desirable.
Pucciarelli also referenced a situation that occurred in January 2014 when the Ridgewood Police Department had more officers hired than the ordinance allowed as an example of why this change would be beneficial.
“I think that’s consistent with good management rather than as we saw, for example, a couple of years ago in the case of the police department,” said Pucciarelli. “We had a number of police that was established and I said ‘well, maybe we’re breaking the law, but that’s not a good law. Why should the council establish the number of policemen? That’s a management function and it should be done on a case-by-case basis or in conjunction with the chief of police.'”
So from what I am reading, some of you would blame the messenger for spreading the news, instead of blaming the one/s who committed the crime, enabled the crime, and covered up the crime. That makes no sense. Whoever it was that let the news media know, they are to be thanked. Otherwise yet another crime would be swept under the rug.
The truth will come out. Roberta will be unable to lock down everything on this one. Too many other agencies are involved. Neither NJDEP nor the Bergen County Mosquito Control Commission will hide any facts if requested via OPRA. And I’m sure that the RPD detective bureau would not want egg on their faces either.
And Yes, Roberta, you have everything to do with this. First of all, you are the MANAGER. And you are not managing. Second, you want to blame The BLOG for slowing down the investigation. Right, divert attention a la Halliby, – blame the blog when in fact you should have gotten right on top of this illegal dumping. Someone knows all about what happened, that someone should be identified and the matter should be settled. Instead you are tap dancing around instead of taking care of it. This should have been resolved one-two-three, instead you decided to try and keep it under wraps. Here’s an idea, why not send Bulldog Matthews out to interview employees? Pretty sure she will get the facts quickly. After all, she is a LEADS graduate, even though of course you never ever met her prior to hiring her.
Why would Village taxpayers be on the hook for anything here? Fine the contractor who illegally dumped the asphalt and concrete block at the site’s south end over a protective berm. Problem solved, Village exonerated. Where are the VM and the RPD on this, they get paid the big bucks to protect Villagers
Ridgewood NJ , Ridgewood Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld has officially confirmed that illegally dumped materials were recently discovered at the Village’s Lakeview Drive compost site during a routine inspection conducted by a NJDEP employee. Sonenfeld’s confirmation came in the form of a statement read during the Village Council’s August 5 public Work Session.
According to Ms. Sonenfeld, the illegally dumped material consisted of asphalt and concrete block and was located at the site’s south end, dumped over a protective berm. It is believed the materials were dumped during the months of June or July, this according to Sonenfeld. Heavy equipment and an operator(s) from the Bergen County Mosquito Control Commission are now being deployed to assist in removing the debris.
The Village Manager concluded her remarks by emphatically stating that an “active investigation” is still underway regarding the incident. No date was mentioned regarding the availability of a final investigative report via the OPRA.
Many taxpayers are anxiously awaiting the outcome of this “active investigation” so we can learn exactly how the dumping was accomplished, who was responsible, who will be held accountable (if anyone) and what monetary liability, if any, taxpayers will be on the hook for.
“The intent of the ordinance,” Sonenfeld said, was to clean up the language in the code “to reflect what is and has been reality.”
What a load of BS. Clean up the lanugage in the code? Come on, Roberta, do you think that we concerned citizens of this town are stupid? You hired for a position that did not exist. The Council knew you were doing this, and two objected. You did not care, because you had the vote of the threesome in your pocket, so you knew that the hiring would go through. Your “clean up” statement is clearly intended to imply that this was along-standing discrepancy, instead of a very recent discrepancy that you intentionally created in order to hire Ms. Matthews.
Paul – The system is not broken, I agree with you on this.. The system is fine. You and your buddies bent the rules, broke them in half. But the system that is in place is fine. If only you and Albert and Gwenn and Roberta had respect for the law.
JUNE 26, 2015 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 2015, 12:31 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
Print
Full council discussion needed
To the Editor:
Re: “HR addition spurs debate in Ridgewood,” The Ridgewood News, June 19, page A1.
I disagree with Councilwoman Gwenn Hauck; a discussion by all Village Council members regarding the addition of a Human Resources department was both warranted and appropriate. Any time taxpayer dollars are being spent, the full council should be given ample opportunity to openly weigh in before a decision is made.
This is not the first time Ms. Hauck has publicly suggested that an open discussion by all council members was not necessary because the majority of council members had already agreed on an issue, and this is not the first time I’ve publicly disagreed with her.
During a public meeting several weeks ago, she harshly suggested that there was no need to reopen council discussions on installing sidewalks along Clinton Avenue because the “council majority” had already agreed not to support such an endeavor. Seriously, there was no need for the full council to participate in a continued discussion on a matter related to the safety of school aged children? I think there was such a need, and so do many other taxpayers.
Councilwoman Hauck’s almost laughable suggestion that the democratic process calls for an end to open public discussion once a majority decision is reached, coupled with her continued public display of contempt and arrogance toward selected council colleagues, makes me wonder if this is the type of individual who should continue to represent the village’s taxpayers.
Letter to the Editor: Ridgewood manager deserve apology
JUNE 19, 2015 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, JUNE 19, 2015, 9:28 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
Village manager deserves apology
To the Editor:
I feel very strongly that Councilman Michael Sedon should apologize publicly to Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld. By telling her she misled him regarding the budgeting of the HR person, he is basically telling her, and publicly so, that she lied to him. To mislead is to lie.
If he can prove that Ms. Sonenfeld lied, then she should be summarily dismissed for it is a horrible breach of her position to lie to the council. Knowing Ms. Sonenfeld’s integrity and business acumen, I will bet my last dollar she was totally transparent in the budget deliberations.
So either Mr. Sedon was in above his head when the budget was discussed, or he was being willfully disingenuous to accomplish some political point. If either of these two possibilities is true, then Mr. Sedon should resign.
The third alternative is to put all of this behind us with Mr. Sedon apologizing gracefully and publicly to Ms. Sonenfeld. He owes it to her, considering this gratuitous insult. Considering the abject polarization of Ridgewood politics and Mr. Sedon’s proclivity to pander to his base, I don’t think I will live long enough to see this happen.
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_riaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 165
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_inhaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 166
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_mastodonIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 177
