Readers Once Again Question Gail Price’s Objectivity
I’ve said it before. Gail Price does not truly Ridgewood residents’ interests. Throughout her tenure, she has always given the benefit of the doubt to Valley, and disregarded and downplayed the residents’ and their consultants’ opinions. As a matter of fact, she treats us with contempt.
Her primary source of income us not acting as the PB attorney but in private practice representing commercial interests such as Valley in getting their plans through. She has no interest in curtailing Valley’s plans because they, or other similar entities, may not hire her for lucrative work in the future.
Gail Price may not be objective and impartial. Her firm’s website https://www.pricemeese.com shows that her occupation is representing these same
parties like “Medical Complexes and Hospitals” and also “Residential Developments” too which are now being discussed in the CBD.
It is really very hard to understand how our planning board’s attorney who is suppose to represent the public’s interest has a more encompassing job where she represents the interests of similar developers. This just isn’t right. Gail’s other interests along with her firm’s interests may conflict with the best interests of Ridgewood. Her role in these hearings and the downtown development hearings is too important not to pay attention to a possible conflict of interest. Let’s be safe. It’s time to dump Gail Price.
I find it very offensive that the planning board allows Price to in effect act as chairman. She should be there to answer questions from the board members, while being mindful that she is simply, yet, importantly, a resource to the Board and not its leader. She is a servant to the Board and to the people of Ridgewood. I find her conduct intolerable. But I am more confounded by the fact our leaders Nalbantian and Aronsohn seem to pander to her. Although it is just as shameful that the rest of the Board does nothing. (and, as always, evil prospers when good men and women do nothing.)
Our property values stand on a precipice. If the hospital goes through, or the 500 new apartments go through, we can count on property values across the Village going down. Why do so few people seem concerned with this, and why do so few of us show up at meetings to show our displeasure with Price & Co?
Although attendance has improved, you are right, not enough people really get what is happening here. You could tell that from the elections. If more people had paid attention Ms. Hauck would not be on the Council.
The character assassination should stop. Ms Price is an ethical lawyer and making up stories about her “possible” conflict will not advance Stop Valley
. I do not support the Valley expansion and I do not support the attacks on the character of a good person.
Without getting into the specifics of this matter, realistically, every planning board attorney has a private practice and unless you are a complete novice it is to be expected that developers would be your client base. This has never been viewed as a conflict per se unless of course your private clients are filing applications before a board you represent. To dump the current PB attorney you would need to replace her with someone with a fairly similar law practice, or, as I said, replace her with a complete novice who doesnt have any land use clients.
In response to #3, questioning whether Ms. Price should be the Planning Board’s attorney on the Valley and CBD applications is not character assassination. The implication is not that she has business with Valley. Nobody is saying that. What is being said is that Ms. Price has a bias towards these developers. This is the nature of her private practice where she represents similar companies and projects as a proponent of development.
Ms. Price has a pro-developer job and it would be illogical to think as the attorney on the Planning Board she would not have a bias for these developers. Many residents have cited examples of this bias. This is what she gets paid for at her firm. Wake up and smell the conflict of interest. We are not picking on Ms. Price. It is just common sense. Ms. Price herself would say, if objective, it is a possible conflict of interest and not character assassination. I agree she is an ethical lawyer and that’s why she should recuse herself immediately. Let someone else adjudicate these proceedings more fairly in the public interest and not the developers interests.
Yes, # 3, totally agree with # 5. I don’t think that anyone who objectively views her behavior would find it even handed. And, we only see what goes on in public. How does she treat the board members behind closed doors?
At the end of the day, if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
This is all about possible law suits brought forth by Valley against our PB and Council. Everyone, including the PB is afraid of Valley and their lawyers who will most certainly sue the village of Ridgewood, if proper procedure is not followed. This procedure (laid out in ordinance 3066) that Ridgewood’s Council put in place, will be the procedure that is the undoing of our town! Ms Price is trying to protect the PB and will probably advise them all to just pass this through to the council to avoid the threat of legal action against the PB members (brought on by Valley). The “ordinance” that allows such applicants this kind of power needs to be overturned….Ordinance 3066,was approved on a Wednesday night, July 17, 2007. The night of this meeting attendance was low and no one in the audience or on the council (save for Dave Pfund) fully understood the long term consequences of this seemingly benign (at the time) ordinance. Dave Pfund, acting mayor at the time, moved for this ordinance to be adopted and as quickly as it was enacted in to law, Valley and it’s legal team swooped in with their application. Basically, the back door had been opened. The ordinance was presumably put in place to allow the Planning Board to be self supporting and to set up an official procedure for applicants seeking Master Plan changes. Before this ordinance was passed, our Planning Board and Council could deny any application that did not fit into the Village of Ridgewood’s Master Plan. As a result, unfortunately, our planning board is anything but self supporting! Our PB is under the constant fear of lawsuits brought on by angry applicants who indirectly pay for (into an escrow account) the legal services and experts that advise our planning board. This ordinance has set our village up for complete failure. It is a twisted tale that will someday be told by all who have witnessed the Big Takeover of Ridgewood. What a lovely town it used to be…….
Frankly, I worry about the PB “experts” too. Why is it that the PB planne sat through countless meetings and said nothing until last week, Sept. 30th? He had absolutely no questions for Valley’s hired experts, but was ready to find fault with our Mr. Steck at the drop of a hat. I thought the bias in this regard was completely blatant.
These people have all been charged with the task of making it happen. We have to fight this!!!!!!!
Make it happen, build it they will come.
You may not agree with what she has to say but that does not mean that she is wrong. And it does not mean that she is biased.
Mayor Paul Aronsohn ” We must rescind the H Ordinance ” What happen CRR after all you indorsed him.
#12 if that is true then we should have signs and flyers with that quote.
If there is audio if should be played on a loop before every planning board meeting.
Gail Price is simply scared to death that Valley will sue the PB if things don’t go their way. What this says about the process is that it’s completely flawed – skewed toward any developer who wishes to build here. Yes, any developer, in this case Valley, can come into Ridgewood and bully their way into doing whatever they want.