March 22,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, Pro City residents continue to harp on the refrain: Didn’t an Didn’t an overwhelming majority of Ridgewood Residents vote in favor of a garage? To say the council only cares about builders, restaurant owners and party bosses is a lie – they are listening to the majority of us who are in favor or a garage. vote in favor of a garage?
Ridgewood Council members have even expressed concern over the “overwhelming majority of Ridgewood Residents”. The staff of the Ridgewood blog turned up some interesting foresight with a recent OPRA request of the Mayor Paul Aronsohns emails .
“I voted for the parking deck like many other before realizing how big the plan was to be . It will never be self supporting inless it is filled with commuters who will clog the narrow streets . There of coarse will need to be stop lights put at the intersection of East Ridgewood and Broad . The parking lot as it now stands is a disgrace and dangerous .certainly build something but not the huge facility that is envisioned now. Floral Park Nassau County ,Long Island also built a parking lot near the LIRR and it was said it was going to be filled and self supporting .It never was and the tax payers make up the difference .”
The OPRA requests turned up many such emails , with the conclusion being that many voted for a garage but not the over sized monstrosity proposed . More did not believe the Mayor and sugested a lack of confidence in the Village decision making process
Remember too, about 10% of ridgewood’s voters came out and voted for and about 7% came out and voted against the proposal at the time. Its an insult and misleading to say that “an overwhelming majority” of voters came out for the garagemahal. That is propaganda passed around by Araohnson, Vagimous and Sarenceno.
lies lies and more lies. welcome to the new ridgewood
with every day I dislike this town more and more… it is becoming so not special.
Try facts. About 5000 people voted on the garage referendum. There are 15k registered voters. So 1/3 of the registered voters voted on the parking garage and 2/3 of those supported it.
An overwhelming majority of the people who showed up to vote voted for the garage. That is a fact.
It is very sad that only 33% of the voters bothered to vote but you can only really count the people who manage to show up to vote.
8:04…. You are right, people voted for a garage ON THE LOT! Voters were told, nothing has been decided, this rendering here (option A) is just an idea of how it will look, not size. While point blank lying to residents there was no intention of discussing size. They also knew to build what they were promising, that it would pay for itself, it had to be built on the street. They purposely hid the fact, lied, that it was on the street. Is that okay with you, that our council lied to get the vote? THAT is not ok with me. How do people defend that? The end result is what they want so lying to residents is acceptable? Everyone who wants a garage turns their heads to this issue, that is pathetic. That 2/3 vote would not have happened if the truth of their intentions were clear. Right? Bet you won’t answer these questions, and to support such makes you no better than them.
Mr. Facts guy 8:04 – stop being ‘with the in team’ and start supporting what’s right. You are becoming irritating now.
The fact is that voters were told LIES before the election, so those results don’t matter.
8:04 here on lunch break–I am not sure where you were leading up to the garage vote, but I was well aware of what I was voting for. A parking garage. Having seen parking garages in the past, I knew what a parking garage looks like and what would be built. The finances seem solid. I havent seen anyone who actually studied the numbers who disputes that parking revenues in Ridgewood will cover the cost of the garage. Some speculate but the people who crunch the numbers seem confident. I didnt really need much more information to decide.
I dont even understand the street part of the argument. There are parking spots there now. There will be parking spots in the garage after construction. What difference does it make if the street gets a little more narrow?
The results of that vote were not dependent on the specific garage. The results were a clear demonstration that the residents of Ridgewood want a garage. It is silly to suggest that the details would have swayed 33% of the votes in the other direction.
12:46….you are okay with the fact our leadership lied to voters because you got what you wanted, a garage. Details…. 12 feet on the street is not a small detail, and most certainly would have affected the 2/3 vote, to suggest otherwise is ridiculous. If they were honest in their intentions, it would never have passed, most people would not have voted for a garage this large, unless you have rocks in your brain or potential $$$ to be made. People assumed these council members were trustworthy and would build a garage on the lot. You don’t care how it looks or how it was accomplished because you got what you wanted.
8:48am-
Who ever promised that the garage would “pay for itself, by itself”? Do you have that “on the record”? The financial models that were released before the vote clearly indicated that the “overall parking system” would pay for the garage, not that it would self-funding. Who lied? When did they do it?
What is your evidence that that info on size was “purposefully hid”? Do you have evidence from an OPRA request that info was deliberately not released before or after the vote?
Size was discussed at several meetings after the vote. Three options were presented, though they only varied by height, not by footprint. The proposed footprint was enormous. The public reacted very strongly to that footprint, and the design was rightly reduced in size significantly. If the size was already decided, why create Option D at all? Why not just proceed with Option A through the BCIA?
The current design still doesn’t fit the lot (by 5 ft). I’m personally okay with that, since it fits the lot much, much better than the previous design (total building width reduced by 18 ft). It’s not a huge lot. There was always going to be something sub-optimal about the project. I think 2/3 of the voters probably know that nothing is ever “perfect”, and still voted yes anyway.
i believe John you said that over and over ,changing your tune like the 3 amigos
James,
Pay for itself? My first comment on the garage was about the Walker Report (from October!) which clearly indicates that you’d have to raise rates across the whole town to fund the garage. Give me a break…
give us all a break please , back to clear cutting trees
James, feel free then to dig up some “evidence” that I’ve changed my tune here. I’m all ears.
5:09 pm – John, there is a simple answer to your question. Option A was dropped because OLMC opposed it and filled the meeting room. (Paul, Albert, and Gwenn really don’t care about the ‘residents’).
Fr Ron does not get involved in this (and is not getting involved in option D/bonding etc), but he opposed option A, because Paul met with him in July and informed him about a ‘deck’ project. He was never informed of the street encroachment, height, change in traffic direction or loss of street parking. If you think the council majority could have acted on option A with STRONG opposition from OLMC, you may be wrong.
They dropped BCIA because of the petition.
Neither of these two changes – ‘option a to option d’ or ‘switching from BCIA to self funded bond’ – were done as a ‘compromise’ / ‘in good faith’.
7:55am-
I guess I’m confused re: design changes. A design was revealed publicly. The public (including OLMC) didn’t like it and reacted strongly against it. The design was revised. The new design was then approved. Isnt that just about the definition of a compromise process?
I agree re: BCIA funding and said so publicly last night. Good work by the No on BCIA team to force things back to council.
John V.- As you seem to be one of the more knowledgeable contributors(not meant to be disrespectful to others) to this blog, I have a question. Why do you think we even need this garage ?