| Author |
Message |
    
mem
Citizen
Username: Mem
Post Number: 4855
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, May 26, 2005 - 10:41 pm: |     |
mplwdian,
60 story buildings? Bulldoze over residents? That's nothing! I heard that at one of those panicked coffees they discussed how Fred is proposing to transfer the Financial District here and is discussing building the Freedom tower right where the Bette White building is! Luxury!
Please someone please pass the joint.
 |
jem
Citizen
Username: Jem
Post Number: 1292
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, May 26, 2005 - 11:25 pm: | |
The candidates answered the pre-submitted questions starting at 7:30 pm. Questions from the audience began around 8:15 pm. The first question from the audience was about the Citizen Action canvassers. It wasn't so much a question as a harangue, and it was fairly obvious that Fred couldn't wait to expand on it. I would guess that Fred got to his answer, in which he used the words "bait and switch" sometime around 8:20. Trapper's new thread, using the words "bait and switch" is timestamped 8:03.
And as for the "60 story building" claim, try 50 feet - which is the maximum height allowed in Maplewood. At our coffee, Vic spoke about the possibility of a 50 foot height of a proposed development.
Talk about trying to scare people!
|
Lucifer
Citizen
Username: Lucifer
Post Number: 22
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 12:18 am: | |
Can anyone confirm with documented record that Profeta said he wasn't interested in the petition without names of people he respects?
Is the Profeta camp doing coffees? What is being said there?
Can people who haven't attened coffees please refrain from posting what was said at the coffee?
If our town was very homogenous in terms of race and socio-economic status, I would say that the address of TC members or mayors would not be important. However, no one here can claim that that is true. There is an undeniable difference throughout the neighborhoods in town. Fair representation is important, since different people have different needs.
And you are all way, way off. At the coffee last night we dressed in dark robes, huddled around a fire, and conducted a black mass. I think something went wrong though. Lawn signs started raining down on us from the heavens. |
mem
Citizen
Username: Mem
Post Number: 4858
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 12:30 am: | |
Lucifer,
A Vic supporter with a sense of humor! Unprecendented.
And we all know that a sense of humor is a sure indicator of higher intelligence. He's lucky to have you then.
As a devil worshipper (a natural result of defending myself against jehovah's winesses at my door) I applaud you. Now, come over to the light.
|
Woodster
Citizen
Username: Woodster
Post Number: 98
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 1:58 am: | |
Who is actually splitting the town? Fred!! Read his mailer "Evicted the pornagraphy busisness on SA by the Union Hall." and "Closed down the brothel near the Prospect St./Sa intersection. The man is a bold face liar. Fred makes it sound like the eastside of town is horrible but him with his super hero cape will fix it all. Let's clear this up once and for all.
First-there was one woman who was massaging a bit more then she should have been, but it was hardly a brothel as Fred makes it sound like. Second-the porno business sold adult videos and was never open. Uninviting maybe, but not this big bad sex filled store as Fred would have you believe.
Also, Fred had nothing to do with "brothel" leaving. Ask the landlord or some of the businesses next to it. They will tell you who spoke with the landlord and who found him a new tenant. I can promise you it wasn't Fred or Ian.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 8567
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 4:48 am: | |
Woodster, so you feel porn shops and brothels are good for Springfield Avenue? Wow, I knew this town was liberal, but this is over the top. |
trapper
Citizen
Username: Trapper
Post Number: 202
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 8:33 am: | |
Kathleen,
I'd be curious to know if you've seen the petition submitted regarding the Bette White location.
The reason I ask is that I asked to see it and was told no, although I was asked to sign it.
Fred Profeta never ever said he wasn't interested in the petition if it didn't contain names of people he "respected." He wanted to review the petition and the names on the petition to make sure that it was a true representation of Maplewood citizens. He wasn't going to take a stack of paper waved at him at face value without verifying the facts.
About the petition:
• People have been known to sign petitions more than once. For example, Jeff Markel signed Vic DeLuca's petition to get on the ballot for this primary election more than once. Sometimes people forget. Sometimes people don't think they'll get caught.
• Were there really 1,600 signatures, as you claim?
• How many of the signatures were verifyable Maplewood residents? I know for a fact that there are non MW residents on the list. The petitioners were more interested in quantity.
• How many signatures were from people that clearly understood what they were signing?
I think we'll agree that if, after scrubbing the list of petioners from repeat names, false names and out-of-towners, even 1/10 of the names remained, it's a lot. And worth pausing and taking notice. And reconsidering one's opinion.
If I were to wave a ream of papers in front of the township committee claiming 2,000 signatures were collected to (oppose something, propose something) the prudent thing to do would be to collect the petition and verify. I expect that from my governing body at the very least. |
Lucifer
Citizen
Username: Lucifer
Post Number: 25
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 9:58 am: | |
I ask once again, can anyone provide documented evidence of what Fred said when presented with the petition, someone who was there or has looked at the record.
Can anyone comment on whats being said at Profeta/Grodman coffees?
Trapper is completely correct, a petition of that kind (or any kind really) should absolutely be presented for verification. However, it is important to note the difference between asking for verification and saying you're not interested if the signatories are not respected people, registered voters, gay, black, single, married or devil worshippers. Lets try and get some hard evidence into this conversation. |
Woodster
Citizen
Username: Woodster
Post Number: 102
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 10:24 am: | |
Bobk,
No they are not ok. My point is that neither of these businesses was on the level that Fred has made them out to be. I highly doubt the people who didn’t come to SA didn’t come because of these stores. And, I highly doubt they are coming now that they are gone.
My other point was that Fred had nothing to do with the “brothel” closing up. And, again where were his PBA friends while this was going on. This topic was discussed for months on MOL before they ever made a bust.
|
trapper
Citizen
Username: Trapper
Post Number: 204
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 10:44 am: | |
"I would guess that Fred got to his answer, in which he used the words "bait and switch" sometime around 8:20. Trapper's new thread, using the words "bait and switch" is timestamped 8:03."
Jem, what's your point? That Trapper <me> time-stamped a description of NJCA unethical fundraising practice as "bait and switch" 33 minutes after the Hilton debate started, but 17 minutes before Fred used the same term?
It's a common term to describe exactly what NJCA did. "Bait" people with requests of monetary support (CASH please!) of Social Security, then "switch" the pitch to push DeLuca.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 8576
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 10:58 am: | |
Woodster, I don't particularly like the idea of a brothel in our town. The police can't just wander in and arrest everyone. They need a warrant and probable cause. Eventually the landlord was convinced to evict the massage parlor.
To be honest if the Porn Store had been discreet as is/was the case with European Video on the other side of SA I wouldn't have a problem with it either. |
Jeff Markel
Citizen
Username: Jeffmarkel
Post Number: 102
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 11:32 am: | |
It's nice to know that Trapper is actually the Profeta campaign committee (since no one else is likely to be looking at nominating petitions to challenge them). In any case, since my name came up, I thought I'd say what the deal was.
When Vic first began collecting signatures for getting his name on the primary ballot, he asked me for, and I gladly gave, my signature. A couple of months later, I was asked to gather other people's signatures, which I was also happy to do. One of the requirements of a nominating petition is that the person who gathers the signatures and is vouching for them must also have signed that specific petition sheet, so that's what I did, in order to make that petition legal. I was pretty sure I had signed one earlier, but knew that the duplicate would be removed by the board of elections - the duplicate was entirely a by-product of the way nominating petitions must be submitted. End of story. |
Sherlock
Citizen
Username: Sherlock
Post Number: 2
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 11:33 am: | |
Lucifer, I watched the tc meeting in which the petition was presented, fred said that he didn't believe that the petition represented maplewood because there were several addresses listed that were not from maplewood. His implication was that some of the signatures were therefore suspect, fake, whatever. But here's an alternate possible truth, the signatures represented both maplwoodians feelings about the bette white site, and the people who frequent the bette white site. Some of whom happen to live outside of maplewood. Is that a crime. What business in maplewood either survives solely on an exclusively maplewood clientle? I don't think any do. I don't think any can. In order to survive, all businesses have to draw on as large a pool of customers as possible. And doesn't fred say that he wants to make maplewood a destination? wouldn't that mean you would have to come from outside maplewood? The question then begs, was fred's real problem the fact that some of the addresses were irvington? would he have had the same problem with a millburn or a short hills address?
So let's leave the petition aside, like fred. How about the people who showed up and spoke about there feelings on the bette white site. Fred said then and in the news record, I believe, that they were the voices, vic's among them, of the vocal miniority. He stated that he had to stick up for the silent majority. That's a new one.
And yet he needed a poll to determine what maplewood wanted. They did not want the bette white site.
Now fred claims that he's is flexible and sensitive to the people of maplewood.
It seems to me that he refused to deviate from his own chosen course until he was forced to. That kind of flexiblity is not good leadership.
|
jem
Citizen
Username: Jem
Post Number: 1293
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 11:56 am: | |
My point, Trapper, is simple: It wasn't spontaneous. It's clearly a campaign strategy. |
berry festival
Citizen
Username: Berry_festival
Post Number: 141
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 11:11 pm: | |
I would like to attend a DeLuca coffee. If anyone is aware of one taking place before the election, please post it or privateline me.
Thank you. |
jem
Citizen
Username: Jem
Post Number: 1294
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, May 29, 2005 - 6:47 am: | |
It looks like there are still a few more coffees scheduled. Look here on the DeLuca website and call the number listed to make arrangements to attend. |
berry festival
Citizen
Username: Berry_festival
Post Number: 142
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 29, 2005 - 9:09 pm: | |
thank you jem |
johnny
Citizen
Username: Johnny
Post Number: 1254
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 30, 2005 - 8:42 pm: | |
One of Vic's campaign workers called me today to see if I would like to attend a tea with Vic. I declined.
I don't mind if people want to actively campaign for someone but please don't call me on Memorial Day or any other holiday. |
wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 1132
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 30, 2005 - 10:16 pm: | |
I wouldn't call someone inviting you to a coffee "actively campaign[ing.]" That is what would happen AT the coffee. Sometime after dinner someone came to my door actively campaigning for Fred about a week ago. I politely told the person that she would be better off spending her time with other neighbors as I knew who I was supporting by then. I certainly didn't mind this person actively campaigning for the person she was supporting. You seem very sensitve johnny, very sensitive. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 3219
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 2, 2005 - 11:18 am: | |
I've been to two of Vic's events, and have spoken with him on a number of other occasions recently, and the only thing even vaguely resembling what his opponents are putting in his mouth is that he doesn't think "big box" stores are the answer for Springfield Ave. The rest of it is bull.
By the way, his point on big box stores is well taken: the profits of chains leave the community, whereas locally owned business keep the money in town. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 963
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 2, 2005 - 6:15 pm: | |
OK Tom:
all the nail salon money stays in town??????
Here's five dollars that most of it travels west (to the far east)out of this country.
so much for the big box theory.
many big boxes have local community development $'s.
But Vic is used to handing out grant money and probably doesn't know much about private monies.
|
L'Angelo Misterioso
Citizen
Username: Misterioso
Post Number: 277
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 9:17 am: | |
Reflective: Is NetNomads a nail salon? Is Wooden You Know? Or The Beaded Path? Or Astah's Art Gallery? Or Here's 2 The Arts? Or Burnett Barbecue? Or Topf's Pharmacy? or the new Skate Shop? Or Stories In Motion? Or the new Yoga place? Or the Parkwood Diner?
I didn't think so.
Not that I ever get a manicure, but personally I'd prefer my money to be sent by actual working people here directly to their families, wherever they happen to be.
Of the money spent in those big-box stores, the lion's share goes into the coffers of huge corporations. Despite any "good citizen" poses, they try as hard as possible to avoid paying any taxes at all. Out of the little bit that remains, most goes to pay somebody in China 20 cents a day. |
aquaman
Supporter
Username: Aquaman
Post Number: 267
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 9:49 am: | |
You're missing the point of redevopment, Hari Georgison.
Firstly, I don't recall any candidate talking about Walmart, Costco, BJ's or huge corporations or "boxes" like that, but more appropriate-sized "boxes". Big box could mean a supermarket. Our King's is hardly a big box. It could mean a bowling alley. It could mean a mixed residential/commercial development with attractive condos above a theater, restaurant and bakery.
I think the real point of "Big Box" development is to dramatically alter the commercial and residential climates for the better. More shoppers and residents (in appropriate numbers) will make a fallow area much more attractive. Property values - not of the boxes themselves, though that's a bonus - but of the surrounding areas would increase.
The imbalance of rising property values with respect to Hilton vs. Wyoming would be attenuated. The homes near or in walking distance to a revitalized Hilton Village would be much more attractive to home buyers. Crime would be reduced with evening customers dining, movie-going, sipping lattes, or browsing for bargains.
Jitney routes, police foot patrols, new restaurants, a new liquor license for a new pub/restaurant/club, etc. The "big box" can lure customers for secondary purchases, increasing the "local" profits you hold so dear.
If I missed your point, I apologize. The point I need to make is that it's not about where our spent dollars wind up, but how many dollars the redevelopment can produce - for the town and for the homeowners and for the merchants. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 8655
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 10:21 am: | |
First off I wish Vic and friends would define "big box". Given the size of properties on SA (especially lot depth) "big" has to be a relative term. I don't think most people here would object to an Applebees, an Anne Taylor Loft or most of the other stores mentioned in the economic development report for any other reason than they represent "big business" and that big business is inherently evil. Profits may go elsewhere, but salaries are likely to remain local and the draw of these stores will do nothing but improve business for people like George, Marie and Denen (whose name I probably spelled wrong once again). Also, not all small businesses in town are owned by people who live here.
As I said before, "Welcome to the Peoples Republic of Maplewood".
|
mem
Citizen
Username: Mem
Post Number: 4884
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 10:24 am: | |
Ann Taylor Loft please! Thanks Fred. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 7246
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 12:43 pm: | |
And it's not just where the revenues end up. A locally owned printer buys paper from a local paper supplier, whereas a company such as Kinkos buys it centrally and distributes it to the stores. Locally owned businesses can have a healthy ripple effect. |
crabby
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 89
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 1:07 pm: | |
Langelo mystery, are you against nail salons?
|
Fruitcake
Citizen
Username: Fruitcake
Post Number: 214
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 4:38 pm: | |
Let's don't forget that Vic DeLuca wanted to bring a corporate owned KFC to Maplewood. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 7268
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 4:44 pm: | |
...until he saw that it was a bad idea. |
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 155
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 5:01 pm: | |
Bringing the KFC to Springfield Ave. was Jon Ziefert's idea, not Vic's. I learned that reading the MOL debate, in Vic's rebuttals to Fred, No.3:
"Lastly [Fred] suggests that [Vic] brought KFC to Maplewood. That is not true. It was Mr. Jon Ziefert, husband of Mr. Profeta’s personal aide, that had the initial discussion with KFC. Mr. Ziefert was interested in that property and began negotiations with Rose Delia from the property division of KFC."
But Fred's minions just keep repeating that because they cut their teeth in local politics discovering that a lie repeated often enough in MOL threads will find fools to believe it.
|
bottomline
Citizen
Username: Bottomline
Post Number: 273
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 5:23 pm: | |
Kathleen, puh-leez.
Jon Ziefert is a real estate attorney. His job is to help bring interested parties together. DeLuca was mayor at the time and was, indeed, a very interested party. He actively supported the KFC proposal for over a year until it fell apart under its own weight.
As I explained in another thread a couple weeks ago, I was also involved with Vic in the early discussions with KFC and later, of course, with the planning board’s hearing. Ziefert was nowhere to be seen in any of this; he was strictly an incidental player. The proposal survived only because DeLuca championed it.
Like Vic, I was initially receptive to the KFC proposal provided they met many strict conditions. However, I became disillusioned with it sooner than he did. As I said in my earlier posts, I see no shame in public officials changing their minds in the face of public opposition and/or new information. My beef here is with dragging Jon Ziefert’s name into this – it’s just cheap scapegoating.
- TC
|
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 168
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 6:08 pm: | |
"Puh-leez" what, Tom?
Who is "cheap scapegoating" whom? Did Vic make the contact? No. Jon Ziefert did. Can I guess why? Because he saw merit in it -- or do you mean to suggest that a Maplewood resident whose wife is a volunteer for town improvement, did it just for the money?
Jon saw merit in having a KFC there. You saw merit in having a KFC there. Vic did too. Trying to hang it around Vic's neck, as the above poster, did is cheap scapegoating, but that doesn't seem to merit a rebuke from you. If memory serves me correctly, Jon was already working for Fred before the final KFC decisions were made, and Fred made his grandstanding entry on the scene suddenly announcing his opposition and taking credit for keeping it off the avenue.
Will the Fuddrucker's you and Fred see as "exciting things" for Maplewood (your words at a presentation of the report to the TC) be very different in kind?
Or are you no longer supporting Fred? Today would be the day to annoounce that, believe me.
|
dytunck
Supporter
Username: Dytunck
Post Number: 268
Registered: 3-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 7:46 pm: | |
Kathleen,
What's new on the blog? Should I check there, or are you repeating yourself here on maplewoodonline?
This is what you call "doing everything you can to get Vic DeLuca elected"?
Where's the beef? |
bottomline
Citizen
Username: Bottomline
Post Number: 274
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 8:53 pm: | |
Kathleen,
This is really very simple. Do you want the readers to believe that Jon Ziefert made Vic DeLuca support the KFC proposal? For over a year? If Ziefert has that sort of influence maybe we should encourage him to run for office.
You can’t have it both ways. Either DeLuca was his own man or he wasn’t. Either the mayor was driving this economic development proposal or he wasn’t. But focusing on a real estate lawyer is pure subterfuge.
|
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 170
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 9:45 pm: | |
Tom,
What a childish comeback. Myopic, too. I said in my post Vic saw merit in Jon's proposal. Did Vic make you see merit in it?
You've precisely hit on the problem with Fred's government, in more ways than one. Vic accepted somebody else's idea and tried to develop it. Why shouldn't a Mayor be influenced by what citizens, including you, have to say about any corner of Maplewood?
Fred starts out believing Fred has all the right ideas and all that's missing is having the absolute power to make them happen. Fred will say and has said any lie to the elecorate just to get elected, not so he can live up those "promises," He just wants the power to do what Fred wants to do. Those promises -- like the one to try Ken and Kathy's plan to revamp the police station on Dunnell -- get trashed.
When Fred the candidate turned up at the last possible minute to proclaim himself the "leader" of the anti-KFC movement, he announced grandiously: "We can do better." What's he done?
But far worse than that, Fred is determined not to accept any good idea if it came from Vic DeLuca. Fred has an obsession -- and you know it -- of trying to kill anything that might possibly reflect credit on Vic. This utterly selfish politics has cost the town millions of dollars in cost overruns for the police station and delayed improvements to Springfield Ave.
My point is that Vic did indeed listen to Jon Ziefert, to you and to a lot of different people from all over town on ideas to better Springfield Ave. Did you and he always have the right answer? No. Did he organize people to make concrete and obvious improvements to make Springfield Ave a better place to spend money, whether you were a shopper or business investor? Yes, 30 times over.
Fred has no such record of bettering Springfield Ave. What's to point to? So he's running on glossy renderings of "promised" buildings, not Fuddruckers but Trader Joe's, vapors about tax relief from ratables and lies about liberals.
Fred is an autocrat who doesn't trust in democracy because he doesn't respect people's ability to govern themselves. Fred's kind of government creates its own little hell, and then lives in such paranoia about the critics. it no longer recognizes the lies it made up about them aren't true.
Still supporting this guy, even after today? There's more to a good future for Maplewood than ratables, you know.
PS: In my previous post, I was referring to Jon's unpaid work as a volunteer in Fred's campaigns.
|
crabby
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 91
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 3, 2005 - 10:36 pm: | |
Vic's "obvious improvements"?
Where have all the red crosswalks gone?
Long time passing.
Where have all the red cross walks gone?
Long time ago.
Where have all the red crosswalks gone?
Red paint flecks everywhere.
When will they ever learn?
WHen will they ever learn? |
bottomline
Citizen
Username: Bottomline
Post Number: 275
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 12:03 am: | |
Kathleen,
I recently suggested to the Profeta-Grodman campaign committee that we send you an official letter, on campaign letterhead, thanking you for your efforts on behalf of our campaign. I’m sorry I didn’t push my idea harder; you really deserve the recognition.
- Tom
|
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 173
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 12:38 am: | |
I believe you.
Does the offical stationery have Ken's name on it? If so, just as well. I'd rather not have looked at that.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 8674
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 11:42 am: | |
And let's not forget the "homerun fence" in Maplecrest Park with a tree hanging over the field. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page