file photo by Boyd loving
Going to the BCIA is a back-door way of going around the electorate, plain and simple.$250,000 in additional cost to the taxpayers because the bond vote failed 3-2.
At the meeting on January 6th a few things were made clear. One is that the “threesome” stands firm as a bloc and of course voted in perfect synchronicity, in spite of the gigantic number of objections to the huge garage. Another point is that Aronosohn is going rogue, going directly to the BCIA to get his funding, for which he only needs three votes.
Damn the laws of the land, just find a way around them. Another is that Albert’s trigger temper is still very much alive, as he went after a resident who alluded to the upcoming election. The resident was calm and polite, and Albert was wild, then Gwenn started holding up her cell phone. Such unprofessionalism from the dais, such calm in the audience.
A summary is SAME OLD SAME OLD. A million people spoke. Most were against the garage. The three amigos voted in favor of the bond. Susan and Michael voted against it. Aronsohn is immediately going to circumnavigate the law (legal, but still underhanded) and go to the BCIA, where he only needs three votes. He put that in motion before the ink was dry on the bond defeat. Good luck trying to find the Ustream on the new website. It seems to be nowhere.
The electorate voted for a garage
Of course he’s doing an end run….desperate to get that ‘atta boy’ from Paulie Vag….
We voted for A garage, not THAT garage.
We also voted for Knudson and Sedon. The three of you do not own the town.
And No One voted for Ed Sullivan.
The electorate voted for a garage in a “Non-Binding Referendum”.
The actual vote for the bond failed 3-2. That was the only vote that was binding.
Yeah, let ’em have it! The three of them voted 3-2 to introduce the BCIA Bonding Ordinance too! Shame! Disgust! Underhanded voting block! Oh wait, the vote to introduce BCIA bonding wasn’t 3-2 it was 4-1? That can’t be. It doesn’t fit our narrative. Dana… LINDA… Fr. RON… Sheriff! What do we do??!!
Susan voted to introduce the ordinance which allows it to be discussed. Unlike the other 3 she believes in airing everything out in public. She also voted to introduce the bond ordinance that she voted against last week. Take it to the bank Susan would not vote for the BCIA to fund THIS garage. In fact if they would come back with a reasonable design, Ridgewood could fund it without BCIA.
The electorate was also PROMISED that the sign and scale could be negotiated. The electorate was lied to and misled. Furthermore, there is not disagreement on funding so why go to BCIA? only to get the design the three want…how is that reasonable??
Everyone needs to understand the following:
The only leverage against the 3 Amigos is the bond vote.
As soon as they get the money, which will require a 4-1 vote OR a 3-2 vote to use the back-door BCIA route, you will be negotiating with a group that will only need 3 votes to do whatever they want.
There is a valid reason why the NJ Legislature requires a 4-1 vote.
Then Sir the Law is an Ass – if that same government can build a structure
Into the middle of a main thoroughfare and call that Legal Safe and beneficial to their restaurant backers,Any Major Fire or Utilily incident gas leak etc etc or accident needing a large response will be quite delayed where peoples lives are on the line.This is Insane,Streets are the main avenue for Safety,Emergency response and pedestrian evacuations,
Yes John Toole the vote for an interdiction not a vote to go to the county. Maybe you should educate yourself on how the village government work before you post or maybe your intension is to post purposely misleading information to gin up the 3 amigos base.
Correction (Introduction ) before you jump on that. The 3 Amigos do need a interdiction
10:48 Why do you think that Michael is not in favor of airing everything in public? What is he trying to hide by not allowing a discussion of the BCIA funding?
5:22 – Michael said in his pre-vote speech that he was voting NO because he tried his best to get involved – by voting for the 500k bond, by becoming a member of the parking committee and working with them, but it was clear to him that the Mayor and parking committee did not want to work out the revenue details before spending the money (which was important to him to save tax payers money) and it was clear to him that they want the biggest garage which he cannot support.
@ 5:22. I think Michael also made it pretty clear where he stood and he offered concrete suggestions on how to help the parking situation now. Now sure how you think the comment that Susan would allow discussion has any bearing on Michael.