file photo Boyd Loving
Ridgewood Council must follow meetings protocol
To the Editor:
In response to concerns voiced by several residents regarding Village Council members’ adherence to provisions of the Open Public Meetings Act, the council unanimously adopted Resolution 13-87, “Village Council Meetings and Communications Protocol,” in April of 2013. This document, which was developed by the council with the very best of intentions, is a list of “dos and don’ts” for the five elected council members to follow when discussing, investigating, or preparing for deliberation of municipal business.
Item No. 4 in this list reads as follows: “Telephonic or electronic communication between or among Council members or between a Council member and a member of the public during public meetings is prohibited.” In the 2013 public work sessions at which this document was edited, the clause prohibiting contact with members of the public was specifically inserted.
At both the Oct. 22 and Nov. 5, 2014, Village Council meetings, it was revealed that some members have their telephones and/or tablets on during meetings, and receive and reply to messages from family members. Resolution 13-87.4 does not allow for any exceptions to the prohibition, and family members are certainly members of the public. Both Mayor Aronsohn and Deputy Mayor Pucciarelli have clearly indicated that they have no problem breaking this rule in order to communicate with their families. As one resident stated on Nov. 5, this does not meet the high standards they set for themselves.
Our Village Council members put in long hours conducting business for Ridgewood, so one can imagine their temptation to be in touch with family during an evening meeting. Unfortunately, when their own rule is being broken, with private communications occurring during public meetings, members of the community are left with no way of knowing whether electronic exchanges might be taking place regarding substantive matters on the council agenda. If such interactions were to take place, this would seem to contradict the principles of the Open Public Meetings Act.
It is my hope that, moving forward, the Village Council will start following this document to the letter of their own law. Having telephones and tablets turned off and out of reach during these public meetings would completely eliminate any hint of impropriety.
Anne LaGrange Loving
Ridgewood
Once elected to the council your family is relegated to the category of “member of the public?” Disgusting and disrespectful to families that already make accommodations so their loved ones can serve our village.
Yeah yeah yeah. They asked for the job. If you don’t want to sever communications during meetings don’t run. We all know the formulaic attacks to follow.
Let’s codify a common sense policy that lets parents still be parents even if they are sitting on the dais.
Texting during meetings? They can’t make it through a meeting without answering the all important question “where is my backpack?”
I find it hard to believe that adults cannot have time away from the phone.
At all of our jobs, all of the time, there are meetings or conferences during which phones must be turned OFF. We all do it. Everyone can be reached in an EMERGENCY. Jokey emails from the wife or “where are you?” Emails from an ADULT son are NOT emergencies.
The defiant reply of the Deputy Mayor and the Mayor tend to indicate that they don’t take their elected positions very seriously. So…..seriously….why don’t you both step down?
Right #3 They need their handlers to call and tell what to do. If there is a family emergency call the PD and have an officer walk upstairs and tell the Council person. The Deputy Mayor feel if he doesn’t like the law or rule he just won’t obey it. This Council is about as transparent as a brick wall
The question is are you going to still vote for the people in 2016?
Let’s see….you would not text or answer emails during church, would you? During a funeral? When at the movies?
So can’t they just follow their own rule and log off during public meetings?
Hand over the phones/tablets to the Clerk during the meeting. If there is an emergency she can forward the information.
So here is a question for the two who admit to breaking the law and defend their right to do so:
Is it OK for the two you to exceed the speed limit, to cruise through a stop sign, to have a few drinks and then drive home, to skip out on a restaurant bill because your daughters babysitter is running late?
It is never OK to break the law, especially when you carefully crafted the law.
Arrogance beyond arrogance.
Two idiots!
this two clowns must be joking!
1) in the private sector you would be fired
2) it is plain rude
3) two phones what Jim” McGreevey is making a comeback n
4) no one is going to call either of these two losers
5) talk to you gynecologist on your time
6) better yet move back to hudson county were you belong
That shows how narcissistic they are. Their self importance trumps any law. You never know the President may be calling to get some help on immigration or Obama Care.
I would vote for a pig with lipstick on before I would vote for those three
Anne and Boyd would be a lot of fun at a picnic or block party.
Big Al you on this blog again?
Big Al is ALWAYS on this blog, and it is always so obvious when he posts.
Palbert (the two-headed monster known as Paul and Albert) – struck a nerve with you two, clearly. You two are in the wrong on this, and everyone knows it.
What is this ridiculousness???? This council breaks,their own rules? Yes, #1, family are members of the public. No, you cannot communicate privately during an open public meeting. Are you on board with respecting the Sunshine Law or not???? Turn off your phones and iPads and pay attention to the meeting, just as you would do in a Broadway Show or church or at a meeting with a client. #1 is so obviously either the Mayor or more likely the Deputy MAyor (based on the snotty, dismissive language). Do you honestly take this job so lightly that you will break the open public meeting act willfully???
This is only the latest example of Mr. Aronsohn’s, Mr. Pucciarelli’s and Mrs. Hauck’s behaving as though “rules are for others”. They all accepted free tickets to Gov. Christie’s fundraiser from Mr. Saraceno in violation of the Council’s own gift acceptance policy. The 3 have also been caught meeting with developers in violation of the Sunshine Laws. Twice. Mrs. Hauck was allowed to cast her vote for Mayor from vacation but Mrs. Knudson was not able to vote remotely on another issue.
Just ask Mr. Richie, who these 3 tarred and feathered over the “perception of a conflict” when Mrs. Hauck publicly advocates for Valley Hospital’s expansion. Just ask our former Village Manager who was publicly ridiculed and dismissed over what these 3 considered to be his failure to follow the rules.
Never have I seen such blatant double standards. None of these 3 would ever have a shot at maintaining standards to which they hold their critics.