I
Village Council Elections: I hope Aronsohn is NOT re-elected. I used to be for him
hope Aronsohn is NOT re-elected. I used to be for him, but after studying and reviewing a lot he has said and done, I no longer support him. I based my change in position not on what went on the other night alone, but on looking at many other things during his current term of service.
But I very much favor repealing those H Zone amendments and have said so many times before, including on this blog.
There must be a way to do that without endless lawsuits and legal wrangling. Why can’t the PB simply conclude that its predecessor members made a mistake in approving the amendments in the first place?
It should be easy to demonstrate grounds for that, since when the very same experts were queried by the VC, a lot of impt. new information sure came to light.
So why can’t the current PB simply cite that as proof its predecessor board did not get the full info as to the impact on the Village, and then decide based on those grounds that it should rescind the Amendments the previous Board passed?
Keith and several others were NOT on the PB that adopted those amendments, by the way. Tom Riche was however.
I don’t know the legal ramifications or procedures. I do know though that often what seems common sense and simple logic does not always work like that within the legal system, which can impose all kinds of other hurdles to something that ought to be relatively simple.
And by the way, I am not against Valley expanding or modernizing though I am against it’s current plan. With another plan that’s more modest, I might support that — depends on the details.
Maybe Aronsohn says he’s for rescinding the amendments because he knows there’s some legal problem with doing that? After all, he’s on the VC and has been privy to any internal discussions they’ve had about all this– along with the Vill Attorney etc.
So if he knows there’s a reason it can’t be done legally… but it’s popular in some circles to have that position — well, that seems like vintage Aronsohn to me based on looking at how he’s handled other things during his time in office.
Given his new endorsement of Hauck, who clearly supports Valley’s current plan, that sure gets me thinking… otherwise why would he say he’s opposed to Valley’s plan –yet endorse others for the VC who clearly have the exact opposite view and have said so?
I’ve lost any real trust in Paul after doing a lot of homework and I’m sad to say I feel his agenda is not really Ridgewood– it’s him — and only him.
Could an attorney -or maybe one of our highly paid Village officials pls tell the rest of us what exactly ARE the impediments legally to the current PB rescinding those amendments? Why can’t it work (for instance) like poster #4 above describes?
