Posted on 1 Comment

Ridgewood Councilmen Jeff Voigt : It is important that in these solutions we do what is best for our Village

Jeff Voigt Ridgewood Council

Councilmen Jeff Voigt speech full text:

Village Council speech:

First, thank you for your vote of confidence during the recent election. I am humbled by that confidence and committed to working towards solutions that are in the best interests of the Village.

Most especially, I would like to thank my campaign team: Sergio Alegre, Chad Chadwick, Wendy Dockray, Carol and Kevin Mattessich, Bill McCabe and Ann Spalckhaver. They are a great group of people who care deeply about Ridgewood. I would also like to thank many of you in the audience for your help during my campaign. It was a blast to work with you and I look forward to doing so moving forward.

We have a number of issues facing us over the coming years – a few of them 800 pound gorillas that are all too obvious. The solutions to these issues actually lie within this room with those who have influence over our Village – and I am talking most specifically about those in the audience. I sincerely hope this energizes you as; you are going to be asked to help in solving these issues. This also includes those with opposing views as; we need your inputs and help in this. They say that listening to, understanding, and incorporating opposing views and differences of opinion make for better decisions. I could not agree more. Let’s work together.

It is important that in these solutions we do what is best for our Village. These solutions can result in making our Village more user friendly, accessible, attractive to others, affordable and; a better place to live for us all. We as a community can do this if we keep this this in mind – namely in doing what is best for our Village.

Let’s also try and figure out solutions through less expensive and time consuming means such as compromise – meaning opposing sides sit down with each other and give to get and; in turn win in the end.

My goals over the coming 4 years are to work with you in solving these issues for the betterment of the Village and its residents. In touring our Village infrastructure with Roberta Sonenfeld, our Village Manager, I was struck by the fact we have a number of under-utilized assets that we can take advantage of for increased revenue generation – potentially marketing these services to other municipalities/businesses. These additional $$$ can be used for numerous initiatives, including lowering our taxes. We are going to look at maximizing these assets to increase our revenue streams with the committees I will be working on.

Job one, however, and I believe as well for my colleagues on the dais, is to solve our parking issue downtown, with a focus on a re-alignment of parking spaces and streets, a smaller Hudson St garage, and with innovative pricing – while simultaneously making our downtown more accessible, user friendly, and safer.

With innovative pricing, the parking utility can be a more significant revenue and surplus generator for the Village – helping to defray other costs. Let’s also re-think high density housing downtown in a way that makes sense, fits with, and actually enhances the character of our Village. Additionally, Valley Hospital needs to be a better neighbor and come up with solutions that actually make sense for our neighbors in the surrounding Valley area. Having relevant expertise in the field of healthcare, I am confident Valley can work towards this and in turn thrive in this rapidly evolving healthcare market. With these and other initiatives, I plan to reach out to all relevant constituencies whether they be developers, Valley, the chamber of commerce, and the residents to keep the dialogue going in order to work towards viable solutions.

Not surprisingly, some of these issues have been hotly contested with the outgoing council majority – Mayor Paul Aronsohn, Deputy Mayor Albert Pucciarelli, and Councilwoman Gwen Hauck. I have to thank them for teeing up a number of them. It can safely be said that there was never a dull moment in

Village Hall with you on the council. One of my concerns is that future council meetings may not be as entertaining as they have been in the recent past.

Interestingly, by your making us keenly aware of these issues it may make the path towards resolution easier. Let’s use any momentum that has been gained through this process in putting some of these issues to bed.

I look forward to working with the residents and various boards and committees on these and other initiatives. We have many committed, smart, and talentedcitizens on our boards and committees and in our Village who can help in figuring out how to make this a better place to live. This is what I am actually looking forward to most – in working with you to accomplish this. My commitment is to work hand and hand with you and; in ensuring those who do the work, get the credit and recognition.

I also look forward to working with the new council – Susan Knudsen, Bernie Walsh, Ramon Hache, and Mike Sedon. You the residents have voted in 5 independently minded people and now the fun begins.

They say what you put into something is what you get out of it. I wholeheartedly agree. This is going to be my second full time job and I am confident it will be time well spent and extremely gratifying.

Lastly, I would like to thank my family – my wife Patty and my children, Ryan, Kevin, and Emily. We have lived here for over 23 years and call Ridgewood home. It is a great place to raise a family and live the rest of your life in. Patty and I plan on doing so and in calling many of you our friends and neighbors over the coming years.

Let’s all work towards making Ridgewood an even better place to live than it

already is.

Thank you.

Posted on 5 Comments

Could a Brexit sentiment sweep Trump into office?

-donald-trump-candidacy-speech-thridgewoodblog

BY DAVID GOLDSTEIN

The 2016 race for the White House has weathered more shocks than an old pickup truck bumping along a pothole-covered road.

Now there’s Brexit, Britain’s stunning decision this week to bolt from the European Union, and possibly another jolt in America’s journey to the November election.

Political seismographs were busy Friday measuring the shock waves on this side of the Atlantic.

Does it help real-estate mogul Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, whose nativist, anti-immigration, anti-trade-deals campaign has channeled a similar current of anger among a large swath of Republican voters?

Or does former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic standard-bearer, benefit, given her foreign policy résumé at a time when the global order could come under increasing strain?

“What you’re watching right now is how candidates deal with it,” said Republican pollster David Winston. “Are they going to address the concerns, or have a traditional discourse of attacking their opponents?”

Read more here: https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article85877257.html#storylink=cpy

Posted on 1 Comment

The Preserve Graydon Coalition: Vote NO to GarageZilla, Tuesday, June 21

godzilla

All information courtesy of The Preserve Graydon Coalition

Events since our June 8 newsletter describing tomorrow’s special election reinforce the importance of voting NO.

The two continuing and three incoming council members do not support the current iteration of the garage, believing that anything built at the corner of Hudson and South Broad Streets should be smaller and not stick out into the street.

The same concern to preserve the Village’s historic character that led the Preserve Graydon Coalition to oppose ill-advised ideas about replacing Graydon with a concrete pool now drives us to join a number of grassroots groups and individuals to oppose the $11.5 million parking garage bond in tomorrow’s binding referendum.

More than a radical alteration in our skyline
Even now, at the 11th hour, many, perhaps even most, residents do not comprehend what’s at stake. And it’s more than a big garage.

Although the official word is that the $11.5 million bond that is the sole item on tomorrow’s ballot would not inevitably fund any particular garage design, it is generally understood that the contract, already prepared and ready to go, would force the new council’s hand, giving them little leeway in determining what, if anything, should be built on the parking lot at Hudson and Broad, and taxpayers would be stuck with the bill.

The garage construction contract that has been readied in hopes of a “yes” vote is said to incorporate a 6% penalty on either side for making changes even though it’s impossible to predict everything that will happen. If the referendum passed and the contract were quickly signed before the outgoing council’s final day, June 30, the new council’s hands would be tied. Apparently that is precisely what the outgoing council members desire, although they deny it. Tomorrow’s special election could have been scheduled for next month, weeks after the new council had taken office—but the “council majority” set it on the first possible day.

Several members of our Village Council have put their concerns in writing. Excerpts, with full text available through the links that follow:

Councilman Mike Sedon:
“I will be voting no in Tuesday’s special election.
In order for the new council to move forward with a comprehensive parking plan for the Central Business District, which includes a reasonable parking structure, it is imperative that we can do so without having our hands tied by the outgoing council majority.
A no vote will not defeat a parking structure. It will allow us, the new council, to incorporate such a structure into the fabric of our CBD along with other solutions that have been mentioned in the past by some of my other colleagues and myself.
A true parking committee should be formed that includes residents, property and business owners along with Village officials to further explore any other ideas that could improve our situation.
The mayor’s previous parking committee did not include residents, and in my opinion resulted in information that appeared filtered and then potentially misrepresented when it reached the wider public.
This outgoing council majority has proven over and over that they cannot be trusted, and I for one will not give them any more trust by supporting what has become a monument to deceit and manipulation.”

https://theridgewoodblog.net/councilmen-michael-sedon-urges-a-no-vote-in-tuesdays-special-election/

Councilman-Elect Ramon Hache:
“Ultimately we have a parking distribution problem in our CBD, not a parking deck problem. We have already begun planning for more cost-effective solutions that will require minimal expenditures. . . . The notion that a single parking deck will solve our parking problem is in itself an outdated 90 year old idea.”

https://theridgewoodblog.net/ramon-hache-the-village-of-ridgewood-needs-a-comprehensive-and-modern-parking-solution-that-is-both-innovative-and-reflective-of-the-world-we-live-in/

Councilman-Elect Jeff Voigt:

Short video:  https://youtu.be/hVcW-r8Q-qk

Letter to the Editor, The Ridgewood News, June 10, 2016:
“. . .the Hudson St garage addresses a symptom but not the disease. . . . I am voting no (to not adopt ordinance No. 3521) on June 21st. As a Village, let’s put together something that makes sense, is clear as to what our monies are to be used for, and makes our central business district more user friendly.”

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/ridgewood-news-letter-voigt-is-voting-no-june-21-1.1613884

Residents are shocked by the lengths to which Paul Aronsohn and his yes-persons on the Council have gone, along with the Village Manager and others, to make their garage happen.

Dave Slomin, representing Ridgewood Citizens for Reasonable Development (RCRD, formerly Citizens for a Better Ridgewood), notes that the garage would set new guidelines for size and scale that developers would use to obtain permission to construct bigger and more dense buildings here. High-density developers could seek garage-related “parking variances,” giving them the opportunity to build as big as they wanted under new high-density ordinances passed by the outgoing mayor’s voting bloc.

The group recommends voting no in the referendum for reasons outlined here:
https://theridgewoodblog.net/why-a-garage-no-vote-on-tues-621-is-important-to-limiting-high-density-housing-more/

RCRD supporter Jim McCarthy shares his views in this short video:  https://youtu.be/3MSgIMYcfyA

A new lawsuit and a new ethics complaint
A lawsuit has been filed in Superior Court claiming misuse of Village funds and employees’ time to create a video posted on the village website that urges residents to vote for the referendum:

https://theridgewoodblog.net/breaking-ridgewood-residents-file-lawsuit-against-village/

https://www.northjersey.com/community-news/town-government/lawsuits-emerge-over-garage-video-1.1617759

In addition, a complaint has been filed with the Local Finance Board in Hackensack—the agency that enforces the Local Government Ethics Law—by the Open Government Advocacy Project of the New Jersey Libertarian Party. The letter names Mayor Paul Aronsohn and Village Manager Roberta Sonenfeld as having violated “N.J.S.A. 40A:9-22.5(c), which prohibits a local government officer from ‘using’ or attempting to use his official position to secure unwarranted privileges or advantages for himself or others.”

https://theridgewoodblog.net/ridgewood-mayor-and-village-manager-accused-of-violating-local-government-ethics-law/

The video was watched several times by Rev. Msgr. Ronald J. Rozniak (Father Ron), Pastor of Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church, who wrote in his weekly bulletin yesterday (pages 2-3) that it “lists a number of entities that were consulted. You will not hear the name of Our Lady of Mount Carmel mentioned . . . . Incredibly, the single largest reality, neighbor, directly across the street from the deck, not four or six blocks away was ignored. This is despite the fact that Mount Carmel hired its own traffic consultant from an equally reputable traffic consulting firm.”

If reducing Hudson St. to two lanes would “eliminate the on-street parking on the church side of Hudson,” he wrote, it would “unquestionably have a negative impact on the operations of Our Lady of Mount Carmel.”

https://www.olmcridgewood.com/images/pdf/bulletin.pdf

More quarters in the meter for longer hours
To repay the bond—a loan, after all, not a gift—we would face extended street parking meter hours and fees, including at the Route 17 Park & Ride, rising incrementally over time. This would add insult to injury for taxpaying residents while driving shoppers and diners to the many surrounding towns that provide parking for free. Only a few years ago, when meter hours were extended to 8 pm, downtown business owners objected to the council and the end time for feeding meters reverted to 6 pm. Why would 9 pm fare better than 8 pm did?

For these reasons, we consider it essential to reject the proposed bond and to vote NO onTuesday, June 21.

If tomorrow’s referendum passes, the three outgoing council members, while stating repeatedly that the new council will be in control, are prepared to rush-approve a contract for an enormous garage via a special council meeting a week before leaving office. That would leave the new council in a “bind.”

Bonding…binding…bind.

Only by voting down the referendum can residents prevent GarageZilla from rising above all it surveys at the corner of Hudson and Broad.

Where to vote: wherever you usually do. Polls will be open from 6 am to 8 pm.

To share this message (please do), click on “Forward this message to a friend” below the pail photo below.

Swimmingly,
Marcia Ringel and Alan Seiden
Co-Chairs, The Preserve Graydon Coalition, Inc., a nonprofit corporation

“It’s clear—we love Graydon!”

[email protected]    PreserveGraydon.org

Posted on 2 Comments

Why A Garage NO VOTE on Tues 6/21 is Important to Limiting High-Density Housing & More

Vote No Ridgewood

Here is a letter from Dave Slomin, who has sent it on belahf of CBR:

Subject: Why A Garage NO VOTE on Tues 6/21 is Important to Limiting High-Density Housing & More – PLEASE VOTE 6/21!

URGENT REQUEST: Ridgewood Citizens for Reasonable Development (formerly CBR) urges you to Vote in the Garage Referendum THIS TUESDAY, 6/21. Vote at your normal polling place. While we always want you to vote upon your own beliefs, HERE IS WHY WE SUPPORT A “NO” VOTE in this election:
PLEASE VIEW THIS VIDEO, BY RCRD SUPPORTER, JIM McCARTHY:https://youtu.be/3MSgIMYcfyA
WE BELIEVE…
1. The Garage Design D developed by the outgoing Mayor and his Voting Block is TOO BIG, CREATING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING PROBLEMS. “TOO BIG” IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE:
a. It will set new size and scale guidelines that will be used by developers to enable them to build bigger and denser in our Village.
b. It offers opportunity for high density developers to seek ‘parking variances’ enabling them to build bigger denser properties. Without garage related variances, these developers don’t have enough parking to build as big as they want under the new High-Density Ordinances passed by the outgoing Mayor’s Voting Block.
2. Location of this massive garage does not solve the parking problem throughout Ridgewood.
a. Puts all new parking in one corner of town and will not help shoppers and businesses in other areas.
b. We need a better plan for improving parking throughout our downtown.
c. AND… in an essay written before the Mayor aligned himself with the High-Density Developers the Mayor himself said: “I am not convinced that we need a large, potentially expensive garage in our downtown area… In fact, the more I learn about the situation, the more I believe that a garage now would be a big mistake.” https://www.paularonsohn.com/writ…/time-for-action-on-parking
d. RCRD believes that before we sign contracts for a poorly-designed, over-sized, over-scaled, very expensive garage, we should make other parking improvements first:
i. Investigate the purchase of additional ground level lots, like the one behind the movie theater, to spread parking around
ii. Improve signage, alerting drivers to existing lots like the underused Cottage Street Lot
iii. Evaluate making CDB cross streets one-way with all angled parking to add many spaces
iv. Remove the existing archaic buffers between existing parallel spaces to add many spaces
3. Garage Financing Has Not Been Adequately Tested and may become a Tax Burden on Residents if untested projections fail:
a. The garage does not and will not fund it self
b. It will be paid for by raising parking rates in other downtown areas by up to 300-400% and increasing parking hours from 6pm until up to 9pm.
c. The last time Ridgewood tried increasing hours, the Chamber of Commerce themselves complained and hours were reduced back to 6pm
d. THIS NEEDS TO BE TESTED FIRST… AN $11,500,000 BOND IS TO MUCH TO GAMBLE ON!
SPENDING $11,500,000 ON A PROJECT THAT SHOWS EVIDENCE OF INADEQUATE PLANNING IS BAD GOVERNMENT AND BAD FOR RIDGEWOOD’S FUTURE
A NO VOTE WILL ALLOW THE NEW COUNCIL THE LEEWAY TO GET PARKING RIGHT FOR RIDGEWOOD!
LET THE NEW COUNCIL GET THIS RIGHT!

Posted on 8 Comments

Fourteen-year resident of Ridgewood , father of four Explains what the upcoming garage vote on June 21st

vote no on garage

June 16,2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

 

Ridgewood NJ, Jim McCarthy is a fourteen-year resident of Ridgewood as well as the father of four daughters and husband to his wife, Gail. Listen to what he has to say about the upcoming garage vote on June 21st.

Posted on 24 Comments

BREAKING : Ridgewood Residents file lawsuit against Village

Village of Ridgewood

June 15, 2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Hackensack NJ, A group of Ridgewood residents filed a lawsuit in Superior Court today, challenging a decision by the Bergen County town to place a political propaganda video and written propaganda on the municipal website “expressly advocating a “yes” vote on a bond referendum to finance a parking deck, which is slated to go before Ridgewood voters on June 21, 2016, and have urged voters to view this one-sided presentation. This action is brought to redress these violations of law.”

The filing comes less than a week after Ridgewood officials began distributing an 11-minute political video and four-page parking referendum guide, via the Village of Ridgewood website, urging voters to support an $11.5 million bond issue to build a parking deck on Hudson Street. The town’s mayor, manager, CFO, and engineer, along with the architect and contractor hired to design the garage. All appear in the video.

Ridgewood voters will go to the polls on June 21 to decide whether or not to adopt an ordinance that would allow Ridgewood to bond 11.5 million for a parking garage at Hudson Street. The $11.5 million is associated with what is known as Design D- 325 spaces, 4 stories, 5 levels, 5 ft over the footprint of the existing lot.

Ever since a 1953 ruling issued by former U.S. Supreme Court Justice and New Jersey Supreme Court Justice William Brennan, it has been illegal for local governments in New Jersey to use public resources to influence voters on a local election. While towns are allowed to send evenhanded factual material to voters, the ruling says it is “outside the pale” and “not lawful” for towns to spend money on political materials urging voters to pass or reject referendums.

According to the lawsuit, the video and the 4 page parking referendum guide on the village website, are “propaganda” that contains a “one-sided, slanted and unjust presentation” of the parking vote. Using “extravagant and dramatic language,” the ads argue in favor of the referendum’s passage, while disparaging the referendum’s opponents.

“The use of Ridgewood’s municipal funds to pay for political marketing is unconscionable,” said resident Gail McCarthy..

The lawsuit comes two days after Ridgewood’s mayor, Paul Aronsohn and village manager, Roberta Sonenfeld, were accused, by the New Jersey Foundation for Open Government, of state ethics law violations for their roles in the political video.“Aronsohn and Sonenfeld are certainly entitled to their own opinions about the referendum, but they are not entitled to use taxpayer dollars to aggressively promote a one sided opinion to the public,” added resident Lorraine Reynolds.

The lawsuit asks for an injunction declaring the advertising illegal, and asks for a formal accounting of all public money and time spent promoting the referendum. If the referendum succeeds, the suit also serves notice that the voters will seek to have the election set aside as being based on “payments and expenditures that are contrary to law, and not authorized by the election or other laws” of the State.

Posted on Leave a comment

Trump takes credit for ‘being right on radical Islamic terrorism’

NRA Holds Its Annual Meeting In Nashville

By Nolan D. McCaskill and Kristen East

06/12/16 01:34 PM EDT

Updated 06/12/16 04:53 PM EDT

Donald Trump wasted little time seeking political advantage in the massacre at a Florida nightclub, taking credit for “being right on radical Islamic terrorism” in the wake of the worst mass shooting in American history.

The suspect in the attack, identified by authorities as a U.S. citizen of Afghan descent named Omar Saddiqui Mateen, killed 50 people and injured another 53 during a rampage through a gay dance club in Orlando. He died in a gunfight with SWAT officers after initially firing shots into the club and later taking hostages.

“Appreciate the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism, I don’t want congrats, I want toughness & vigilance. We must be smart!” the presumptive Republican presidential nominee tweeted.

Trump followed up that tweet with a statement expressing “My deepest sympathy and support goes out to the victims, the wounded, and their families.”

But he also attacked President Barack Obama, whom he said “disgracefully refused to even say the words ‘Radical Islam'” during his comments on Sunday afternoon. “For that reason alone, he should step down.

Obama condemned the attack as “an act of terror and an act of hate,” but declined to identify a motive.

Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/trump-terrorism-tweet-224237#ixzz4BPGwKvMe

Posted on Leave a comment

Democrats’ Dumping of Torricelli Could Be Blueprint for What Happens to Hillary

Bob"the Torch," Torricelli

by JOHN FUND June 3, 2016 4:00 AM @JOHNFUND Plan B for November

Hillary Clinton’s mounting political — and possibly legal — problems over her e-mail server led me to write a column speculating that Democrats might move to install Vice President Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee if her poll numbers tank between now and the Democratic convention in late July. Biden might be joined on the ticket by fiery progressive senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts in an effort to placate furious backers of Senator Bernie Sanders.

My NRO colleague Andrew C. McCarthy called my suggestion “increasingly plausible,” and pointed out that Democrats had made just such a switch in 2002 when their one-vote Senate majority was in jeopardy. An ethically challenged senator, Bob Torricelli of New Jersey, was trailing his GOP opponent by double-digit margins following release of a devastating Justice Department report on his involvement in bribery and campaign-finance scandals. Democrats made Torricelli “an offer he couldn’t refuse,” forcing him to leave the Senate race only 36 days before the election and replacing him with former senator Frank Lautenberg. “The lateness of the switcheroo denied Republicans a meaningful opportunity to campaign against Lautenberg, in violation of state election laws,” writes McCarthy. “But New Jersey’s solidly Democratic judiciary predictably looked the other way.” Lautenberg went on to win in November (although Democrats still lost their Senate majority, and didn’t regain it until 2006).

Read more at: https://www.nationalreview.com/article/436160/hillary-clinton-robert-torricelli-precedent-dumping-her

Posted on 3 Comments

War on women has a Democratic front, too

hillary-clinton-what-difference-does-it-make

 

At first glance, you might think the Democrats would have their easiest time ever of accusing the Republicans of waging a war on women, with Donald Trump at the top of the Republican ticket.

But there are three powerful reminders this week that the Democrats have plenty of problems of their own.

First, former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, former chair of the Democratic National Committee and prominent supporter of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, explained that Trump will have trouble with women at the polls because there are “more ugly women in America than attractive women.”

Then supporters of Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders unleashed a jarring stream ofvulgar, sexist attacks on the chairwoman of the Nevada Democratic Party after Sanders got bested in delegates by Clinton.

Now Sanders’ campaign is engaged in a war of words with current DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, accusing her of being in the tank for Clinton.

And, finally, Trump served notice that whenever Clinton and other Democrats slam him for objectifying women, Trump will hit back at Bill Clinton, as he did in a television interview Wednesday, accusing the former president of rape.

Posted on Leave a comment

Facebook scrambles to contain fallout

facebook-dislike-1

By David McCabe – 05/13/16 02:40 PM ED

Facebook is scrambling to contain the fallout from allegations that it has suppressed right-leaning political content on its powerful platform — a charge that hits at the social network’s image of neutrality.

CEO and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg promised Thursday to meet with top conservatives about the allegations, a sign of how damaging any perception of political bias could be to the company.

“To serve our diverse community, we are committed to building a platform for all ideas,” Zuckerberg said in post addressing the issue directly for the first time.

“In the coming weeks, I’ll also be inviting leading conservatives and people from across the political spectrum to talk with me about this and share their points of view.”

Facebook’s problems intensified when unnamed former workers for its “trending” topics section told tech news website Gizmodo this week that colleagues had routinely omitted topics and news sources popular with conservatives.

This came after a separate report that said Facebook employees had raised internal questions about whether the company should be doing anything to stop the rise of presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump. Zuckerberg had also appeared to criticize Trump’s hard-line stance on immigration at a conference in April.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, has demanded answers about whether Facebook employees have manipulated the presentation of political content.

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/279835-facebook-scrambles-to-contain-fallout

Posted on 9 Comments

Ridgewood’s Hudson Street Garage by the Numbers

godzilla

May 9,2016

Gail and Jim McCarthy

In the name of promoting PROGRESS for Ridgewood, a huge amount of very slanted public relations has been spread about the Hudson Street garage project.Much of it has been in the form of “facts” that are not relevant.They are used only to obscure the real issues.

Here are 10 simple, TRUTHFUL facts that you should consider in forming your opinion.

1. 3236 voters who voted “yes” on the non-binding referendum never saw a drawing that placed the original design in context prior to the vote. We were told to “vote now for funding, and we can work together for a design later”. But plans had already been drawn up in October AND were withheld from the public until December.

2. BEFORE A FINAL DESIGN WAS PICKED, Our Village Manager said $295,000.00 was spent for “full site civil, landscape, utility, structural, plumbing, mechanical, electrical & fire” documents. They then had to issue a change order for $120,000.00 for the redesign because of this.

3. When the original design was finally illustrated in context, and released to the public, throngs of people came to a Village Council meeting and spoke out against the design, which jutted out into Hudson St. by 12 feet.

4. Per our Village Manager, “That garage could have ZERO CARS IN IT and it (the parking utility) can cover it.” She also recently confirmed we have plenty of empty parking spaces in the Cottage Place and Walnut St parking lots. According to her, we don’t even need to consider leasing the Zabriskie lot behind the movie theatre, and that would add 80 spaces immediately.

5. The Archdiocese of Newark, on behalf of Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church, has been consistent in asking that the garage be reduced one level. They were told the redesign would fit on the footprint and be taken down a level. It has only been lowered 30 inches, and does not fit on the footprint.

6. None of the buildings cited as references by “Progress Ridgewood” are 271 feet long. The three tallest buildings nearby all have front or side set backs of over 50 feet. Unlike all of the other “comparable buildings” in town, none of them jut out into the street by 5 feet.

7. The claim that the Village will spend $10 million to acquire 21 incremental spots if Design D is lowered one level, isn’t just bad math-it is an outright lie. The Village doesn’t own the Brogan or the Ken Smith sites, and the suggested garage will net the Village 187 parking spots.The truth about the garage size is that it needs to be a monstrosity in order to accommodate the parking needed for the high-density housing projects.

8. Resolution No. 16-110 is the resolution that was passed by the Village Council on April 27th after the petition was certified. It clearly states at bottom of page 2 that “the Village desires to submit the Ordinance(#3521) to the electorate at a special election to be held on June 21,2016 pursuant to the provisions of the Faulkner Act or, in the alternative, pursuant to the provisions of N.J.S.A. 40:49-27.” THAT IS THE HOME RULE ACT STATUTE. That language was included, according to Bond Counsel, “to protect the village from any litigation” – which means they know petitioners are correct.

9. $40-45,000.00 of municipal funds will be spent for a special election.The Village Council has every right call for one, under both Faulkner and Home Rule. That is a choice that the Council alone made, and for which the Council alone will be held accountable. Their inclusion of the Home Rule Act statute in Resolution 16-110 makes this abundantly clear.THEY ARE CHOOSING TO SPEND THE MONEY. NO ONE IS MAKING THEM.

10. JEFF VOIGT, BERNADETTE COGHLAN-WALSH AND RAMON HACHE refused to sign the pledge the other three candidates signed,which was created and put forth to the candidates by overzealous developers, landlords, business owners & investors.Bernadette Coghlan-Walsh, Jeffrey Voigt, Ramon Hache

HONESTY – INTEGRITY – TRUST A PLEDGE TO WORK FOR THE RESIDENTS OF RIDGEWOOD

Posted on 1 Comment

On May 10th, please vote for Jeff Voigt, Bernadette Walsh & Ramon Hache, and let’s get Ridgewood back on a path of trust in our local governmen

Vote Ridgewood

This is our Letter to the Editor, Ridgewood News today (April 22, 2016)

Merriam-Webster defines TRUST as “assured reliance on the character, ability, strength, or truth of someone or something”. In this upcoming election for Village Council, we believe finding candidates worthy of resident’s trust must be the priority, as they will be the representative stewards of our Village at this most critical time.

Jeff Voigt, Bernadette Walsh and Ramon Hache are candidates we believe meet that test. Each has a deeply rooted connection to the Village and is running for Village Council for their own, personal reasons. Each has an independently developed vision for the future of Ridgewood, and each has expressed a willingness and desire to work alongside the continuing members of the Council to improve resident input and the transparency with which our Village Council operates.
We have clearly seen the negative results of a unified political bloc’s agenda running roughshod over the normal give and take of municipal government. Let’s go for something better this time around.
Ridgewood is in desperate need of a comprehensive, long-term vision for the future. We need candidates who want to be a part of leading a Ridgewood that will progress and grow without sacrificing everything we all love about this town-the charm, the friendly atmosphere, the excellent schools and the safety for our families. We need council members who will put resident’s interests first.

On May 10th, please vote for Jeff Voigt, Bernadette Walsh & Ramon Hache, and let’s get Ridgewood back on a path of trust in our local government.
Thank you.
Jim & Gail McCarthy

Posted on 9 Comments

Ridgewood News Drops Key Election Eve Coverage on Ridgewood Council Elections

Reading_theridgewood_news_theridgewoodblog
Editors Note : Folks the Ridgewood blog would welcome the opportunity to host any letters in support of candidates ,even on election day it self ; email [email protected] Fyi the blog traffic nears 20,000 unique visits per month thank you
May 7,2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood Nj, Ridgewood News squashes story garage petition, certification and special election, days before pivotal Village Council election.

From the Facebook page It Takes a Village , “Before you read the Ridgewood News tmrw, please know this-We, Lorraine and I, were interviewed by a smart, new reporter recently employed by the Ridgewood News who was excited to report our side of the story on the garage petition, certification and special election. We had an hour long conversation and she even was speaking to our attorney to share her response.The reporter called me today to apologize and tell me they will not be printing the article due to “space constraints”. Maybe next week she said. I told her we know it was not her decision, and encouraged her to find a new job at a real newspaper. I have cancelled my subscription.”  , Gail McLaughlin McCarthyIt is also being reported that Janice Willet’s campaign manager is a long time employee of the North Bergen Media Group (who owns the Ridgewood News), Pam Wyne. Big surprise.!The inequity of the media coverage in our area is disgraceful. I hope everyone cancels their subscriptions to all of their publications immediately and sends them the message loud and clear that we do not tolerate bias in our journalism, period. Laurie Bender

If you do a quick search on line there are many instances of this-bias newspapers are part of our culture and are protected-they can turn ads away all they want if they don’t adhere to the publishers bias-and of course editorial content is under their discretion. The real problem is that ALL our local news outlets are owned by the same people-this is an issue worth examining. Ellen D’Arcy Simpson

We have already reported that the Ridgewood News decided not to print any letters to the editor in support of candidates on the eve of the election yet felt in necessary to post pro Village manager commentary and advertising.
Posted on 7 Comments

Vote for Voigt So I Can Go Back to Just Being a Ridgewood Dad

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

Until last year, I attended only one Village Council meeting in my entire life growing up in Ridgewood. In 1982, I watched in awe as my older brother, Ed, in his red, hand-me-down blazer, represented Orchard School during the “Meet the Mayor” ceremony hosted by Mayor Butler. Ed had a very important issue to address with the Mayor that night – namely, why our neighborhood pals couldn’t use the Bellair tennis courts as our after school street hockey rink. Those were simpler times in Ridgewood, when parents and kids mainly focused on family meals, school work and sports. We didn’t have to worry about whether our elected council members were doing what was best for our Village.

My lack of attendance at Council meetings ended this past September when I rushed from Willard’s “Back to School Night” to the Village Hall meeting about the construction of high density housing. Since then, I have attended or watched every Council meeting – mostly in shock about the “supersizing” of Ridgewood. Like many, I’ve become an “activist” out of pure necessity, meeting with fellow residents, discussing the challenges to the way we live, raising funds, and strategizing about how to preserve everything special about Ridgewood. We skip baseball practices, miss family dinners and go to work bleary-eyed from attending marathon Village Council meetings.

The truth is, I don’t want to do any of it. I want a Ridgewood where my elected Village Council members work together and compromise to make wise decisions that benefit the Village today and in the future. I think Jeff Voigt is the perfect candidate to do just that. I know Jeff and his family as both neighbors and fellow Mount Carmel parishioners. Jeff is very bright. And I admire that he’s also an independent thinker who isn’t running on a ticket. Jeff is very accessible and always willing to have a coffee or chat to hear different points of view. Jeff is honest and pragmatic.

I strongly endorse Jeff Voigt for Council. He will keep our Village a village. He will support sensible growth. He will choose residents over developers. He will give me the comfort that our Village is in good hands so I can go back to just being a dad, husband and coach.

www.voigtforourvillage.com

(I also strongly support Ramon Hache and Bernadette Walsh!)

Bill McCabe

Ridgewood NJ

Posted on Leave a comment

Garrett Demands that EPA Re-Evaluate Cleanup of Ringwood Superfund Site

House Budget Panel Holds Hearing to Receive  Views on Fiscal 2012

Apr 25, 2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ,  Rep. Scott Garrett (NJ-05) today called upon U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy and EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck to re-evaluate their decision to place a barrier over the 166,000 tons of contaminated materials at the Ringwood Superfund Site instead of pursuing complete removal of the toxic substances.

Recent discoveries of significant levels of 1,4-dioxane, a probable human carcinogen that may result in liver, kidney, and upper respiratory damage, at levels close to 100 times the state maximum standard, raises new concerns about the EPA’s decision to cap the site. Congressman Garrett demands that the EPA identify all potential toxic substances that may be present at the Ringwood Superfund Site and ensure that a new cleanup plan rectifies the presence of all hazardous substances once and for all.

“As you know, the Ringwood Superfund Site is a decades old and continued concern for New Jersey residents,” said Garrett in his request to the EPA. “The discovery of an additional toxic substance has increased public concern about the EPA’s decision to approve the plan to cap the site.  New Jersey residents deserve to know that a plan to mitigate hazardous substances in their communities will be successful and will permanently remove the public health threat posed to them.”

The Congressman is also demanding answers from a February 2016 letter where he requested information about groundwater tests when it came to light that they had knowledge of the presence of 1,4-dioxane. To date, the EPA has not responded to these requests.

Congressman Garrett’s Specific Requests from the EPA:

1. Is the EPA reevaluating the decision to cap the site instead of a full cleanup due to the discovery of a new toxic substance and the possibility that other toxic substances may be present?

2. What were the reasons behind approving the plan to cap the site despite the EPA initially supporting a full cleanup?

3. What are the criteria for pursuing the plan to cap the site and does the presence of a new toxic substance affect these criteria?

To read the entire letter, click here.