| Author | Message | ||
     MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4475 Registered: 5-2001  |
For anyone who did not see through the 45 minute drama on Monday night, here is a condensed clip with the bottomline "alternative plan" for Tau: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoPyQt7fYRM | ||
| Sheena Collum Citizen Username: Sheena_collum Post Number: 761 Registered: 4-2005  |
I just realized that the online petition is still posted on MOL at the top. I think it needs to be taken down given that some circumstances have changed and any signature collected since Monday is null and void. If the effort is to still collect signatures because of the tax impact then a new one must be created. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 1082 Registered: 5-2004  |
I want to know what the new total expected budget is after this compromise. It clearly won't be $410,000. I remember hearing - possibly at the meeting - that the project is projected to cost an additional $60K which the Foundation will pay for. If that is true, then the total project cost would be $230,000. Since Ms. Arnedt very clearly stated that this was supposed to be a public and private PARTNERSHIP all along, why aren't we equal partners!? In my opinion, if the Foundation has fund-raised at least $100,000 with the stated purpose of getting Tau installed in our town, and IF the town is willing and able to permit it to be located in the open spaces of Meadowlands Park, why on earth wouldn't they be willing to share in the costs incurred to date? An equally shared cost would be $115K each, which means $55,000 could be reimbursed to the taxpayers by the sculpture foundation - money we certainly have multiple uses for, especially after "loaning" $3.6 million additional dollars to SOPAC, the Village's other big investment in the Arts! The changed location was a big step in the right direction for an appropriate compromise. Now we need a compromise on the financial issue. Many people in town don't want the sculpture at all, in any location. Many do want the sculpture, but not paid for with any tax dollars. The right thing to do is to compromise. It's not too late for the sculpture people to turn this around, treat the citizens in South Orange with respect instead of contempt, and get the project finished in a positive way. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 1083 Registered: 5-2004 |
Sheena, the purpose of the petition was to get the issue of Tau on a ballot - a referendum for the voters to voice their opinion regarding whether they wanted tax dollars spent for this work of art. The primary concern of those who chose to add written comments was monetary not only the location. | ||
| peteglider Citizen Username: Peteglider Post Number: 2100 Registered: 8-2002 |
I'd like to see a new ad and a new petition put up, to a BOT recall petition. Come on, the efforts of MHD and the (anti) tau web site developer MUST continue! /p | ||
| Sheena Collum Citizen Username: Sheena_collum Post Number: 762 Registered: 4-2005 |
Pdg - I disagree. The petition still references the Sloan Street location. And circumstances have changed since Monday including finances. New signers should be made aware of that and not signing an out-of-date petition. That doesn't mean the 1700 current signatures don't matter. Mr. Goldberg can keep those attached to the former language used and if he chooses to continue collecting signatures, there needs to be new language based on new circumstances. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 1087 Registered: 5-2004 |
Unfortunately that is not possible because there are not yet any concrete changed circumstances to note. All that ultimately happened Monday night was that the BOT agreed to consider the new space. The sculpture people did not submit a new budget, and frankly there is no absolute certainty that Sloan St. is not still the default if for some reason it is not possible to locate it in the Meadowlands! South Orange's open space is not necessarily up for grabs by this group - there may be deed restrictions, and of course those pesky RESIDENTS that should once again be considered! | ||
| bets Supporter Username: Bets Post Number: 23694 Registered: 6-2001  |
I think the petition needs to remain, of only to keep the public aware that their elected officials wish to quash their voices. Updating it to reflect the recent promises is fine, as long as those promises are contractually cemented. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4476 Registered: 5-2001 |
Bets, I like your idea & have just updated the language at the top of the petition. (The original language cannot be changed). I am still soliciting input from people to determine if $170,000 of tax dollars is an acceptable price to pay, with all the "needs" we currently have in town. Please let me know. Note to Trustee Jennings - This is NOT advertising. This is soliciting Public Input. You should try it some time! | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 1088 Registered: 5-2004 |
MHD, see my suggested compromise in my post #1082 above. (Wow. When did I pass 1,000 posts - hadn't noticed.) | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4478 Registered: 5-2001 |
Thanks, PDG. I do not recall hearing a new TOTAL cost for the Project and we probably won't know until the exact location within the park in known. However, if you look at some of the pictures here: http://www.notaxesfortau.com/other.html you will notice that many of these sculptures in park settings have no apparent landscaping, lighting, etc. Therefore, I would logicially think the costs can be kept down significantly with this location. If not, why not? | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 538 Registered: 2-2006 |
Let’s see, the BOT, town administrator and town counsel want to use $170,000 of a 2004 bond for sidewalk and street repairs to pay for the out-of-town fabrication, transportation and other expenses for Tau which they want to stick in Meadowlands park. I guess, according to the following NJ Statute, that bond money is no longer needed for sidewalk and street repairs. All the sidewalks, curbs, potholes, catch basins, and other related damages or upgrades have already been made in SO, none are needed, in the opinion of the trustees, Mr. Gross and Mr. Mathews. Any bets about whether they try to put a sidewalk or street around Tau, in the middle of a park open space, in order to pretend this is a legitimate use of the sidewalk/street bond? Will they fall back on other illegally applied slush funds to find a way to use $170,000 of the bond? SO’s home grown soap opera continues, albeit one residents are being stiffed for. New Jersey Statutes Annotated Currentness Title 40A. Municipalities and Counties (Refs & Annos) Chapter 2. Local Bond Law (Refs & Annos) 40A:2-39. Application of proceeds The proceeds of the sale of obligations shall be applied only to the purposes for which such obligations are authorized. If, for any reason, any part of such proceeds are not necessary for such purposes, such part shall be used to pay such outstanding obligations, or if in the opinion of the governing body it is in the best interest of the local unit such part may be appropriated to and used to finance the cost of any other purpose or purposes for which bonds may be issued. | ||
| SO1969 Citizen Username: Bklyn1969 Post Number: 360 Registered: 7-2004 |
This does raise an interesting issue...wasn't a big part of the reason they stuck with Sloan Street because it could be a sidewalk "improvement," if read very liberally? Which honey pot are they drawing from? | ||
| talk-it-up Citizen Username: Talkitup Post Number: 258 Registered: 3-2004 |
No more construction, lights, permanent structures, etc in the Meadowlands, get it, THE MEADOWLANDS.. grass, children running and playing, good green grass, no buildings, or other objects cluttering up the landscape. WE DESPARATELY NEED OPEN GREEN SPACE. A place where nothing imposes and opinion or impact on us. A peaceful place as intended. The BAIRD is not a cultural center. It is a recreational center. The Tau brings with it all the features not meant for the Meadowlands. LESS MY FRIENDS IS MUCH MORE. Everyone wants a piece of the orange and when we look back there will be nothing left. This is not a city and if that is what people want then they should go back to where they came from. THIS is the Village of South Orange. Small town main street, beautiful Village Hall , Fire House, Train Stations, etc. (yes we are waiting for the grocery, I know). Improvements do not mean you have to build. Maintain what you have and keep it well. Reduce the miscellaneous clutter that is not needed (signage, excessive lighting ) I for one love to see the stars and night and the peace and quiet that it brings. I for one want to be in a park setting. I would like to see gaslights without every piece of signage that can fit on them. Less is more. It make maintenance and upkeep more effective. I gives peace of mind. Enjoy the Village and preserve it for what it is. Are we only an Arts destination or is it ALL the components that make the whole? Nothing should be one sided. And I truely am offended by the fact that this turned into a one side against another side. The offended art people seem to enjoy expressing the abuses they have received from "those anti-Tau people". What is open minded and considerate about this. There are no groups here but individuals with opinions. I for one have a right to an opinion - MY opinion. I am not anti-Tau and have not expressed my opinion, every, about the art itself. This is not personal, it is business, it is logical, it is thoughtful. The representatives of TAU were allowed a great amount of time to give a very personal explanation for everything. They were also allowed to be insulting to people, many different people that had an opinion that was different than their own or had impact on their own. Meanwhile many people thought enough to sign and express their opinion more than any years I have seen lately. It is time for the residents to take back their Village and stay involved. Meadowlands equals open space. Don't let more and more encroach upon it. | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 5759 Registered: 1-2004  |
I think something else that needs to be asked - Why Meadowlands Park over Grove? I can think of plenty of good reasons for Grove Park, but not many for Meadowlands. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 1093 Registered: 5-2004 |
They want it to be IN YOUR FACE, that's why! | ||
| SoOrLady Citizen Username: Soorlady Post Number: 3454 Registered: 9-2003 |
JTA - Grove Park is too "isolated" - if you think about Meadowlands, it is active - kids at play, concerts, 4th of July, near several athletic fields, the Farmer's Market and the Duck Pond. Visability is key and Grove just doesn't offer the same visability. I know that you don't like this piece, but there are many, me included, who do. While I don't think that the town is in the fiscal position to spend the taxpayer's money on art, I do see it as a wonderful addition to the town. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4483 Registered: 5-2001 |
It appears that once again, things were misrepresented by the Sculpture Committee on Monday night. According to them, $170,000 has already been spent. However, according to the following documents: Landscape Design - http://www.geocities.com/theunofficaltonysmithproject/SculptureDesignContract.pd f Fabrication - http://www.geocities.com/theunofficaltonysmithproject/SculptureFabricationContra ct.pdf 1) The Landscape Design (for Sloan Street) was $71,500 2) The Fabrication Contract TOTAL is $100,000. However, according to the contract, only $60,000 should have been expended to date. The balance of fabrication ($25,000) is due "when the sculpture is finished and approved by the Tony Smith Estate" and the transportation and installation is an additional $14,000. A bus trip to witness the fabrication is planned for August 14, so OBVIOUSLY the sculpture is not finished and the balance of fabrication costs should not be paid, yet. | ||
| vermontgolfer Supporter Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 487 Registered: 12-2002 |
MHD, Help my feeble brain understand something. If $71,500 is for 'landscape design', but now the sculpture is going somewhere else, why do we need to spend this money? Not a rhetorical question, just inquiring minds want to know. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4484 Registered: 5-2001 |
VG, I THINK (someone can correct me if incorrect) that the Landscape Design (for Sloan Street) was already DONE last year. Although you will recall, back then everyone thought the money was coming from a GRANT! | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave  Post Number: 10251 Registered: 4-1997  |
What about the $30,000 line item for soil? | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4487 Registered: 5-2001 |
Um, Dave...it's Structural Soil and it's $55,000.  | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 551 Registered: 2-2006 |
You're on to them, Pdg. Horray for you (and us who benefit from you). | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 1098 Registered: 5-2004 |
MHD, the Village signed a contract authorizing the fabrication of the sculpture, right? However, did the Village hire a landscape designer re: the Sloan Street location? I think not, I think that little boondoggle was done directly by the Foundation. MRosner, are you out there? Can you please comment as to exactly how much money the Village has actually expended/contracted to spend to date? And if you don't know, please let us know who has to know so we can ask. Thanks! | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 1099 Registered: 5-2004 |
SOrising, you're welcome, but I think you really meant to thank MHD who has really spearheaded this little taxpayer uprising! MHD for BOT! He is clearly motivated, persistent and honestly working for the benefit of his fellow taxpayers! (Well, except for all the "free advertising" he's getting at the BOT meetings!) | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2874 Registered: 4-2002 |
Pdg: John Gross has the exact figures. An accounting should be given to us at the same time the TS committee comes back to the BOT with the site location plans and what the total cost will be (to both the village and how much will need to be raised). | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 1100 Registered: 5-2004 |
Thanks Mark! Should we contact Mr. Gross individually, or can we count on you to share the numbers on MOL? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2875 Registered: 4-2002 |
I will share them. | ||
| Nuff Sayid Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 456 Registered: 6-2005  |
The free advertising statement was so ridiculous - that I'm embarrassed for her.....  | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 733 Registered: 6-2005 |
I found the attitude of the Tau-ettes quite condescending and arrogant at the BOT meeting. "Some" people as they were clear to emphasize were not in favor of the project. Well what is the definition of "some," and when do we crossover to "most"? As a pollster, Ms.Arnedt ought to be more careful. How many signatures did she get from registered voters in town showing they were in favor of the project if given the facts? And her inference that signatures collected in front of Kings in Maplewood were somehow suspect is ridiculuous. A registered South Orange voter counts, no matter where they are solicited. While I understand that she has spent considerable time on the project, so have those who have gathered signatures and who want a say in this project. Our BOT found time to thank the Tau-ettes, but could have cared less about those who worked so diligently to represent the mainstream voter in this town. | ||
| Nuff Sayid Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 457 Registered: 6-2005 |
... and that is the trajedy of our governance in a nutshell. A propensity and attraction to appease the few (viewed by the polo heads as significant others) at the great expense and mindless inconsideration of the overwhelming majority of residents. | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 5770 Registered: 1-2004 |
SOLady How is Grove Park too "isolated?" It's the main road in town that many people travel each and every day. It is near stores, where people can spend money. The sculpture people claim the sculpture will bring many people to town who will spend money in town. I think there is more of a chance people will spend money walking up the Ave to see the sculpture then those at Meadowlands Park. As you mentioned, there are lots of kids at play in Meadowlands Park. Being near the athletic fields isn't really a plus. I think putting it in Grove will help bring more people to that side of town, something the businesses would love. Has nothing to do with not liking the piece. (My nephews think it's looks like a Pac Man and want to know why it isn't yellow). If there is going to be this connection with the sculpture and SHU, it would be perfect in Grove because SH is right there. It would be a perfect anchor for that side of town, with SOPAC on the other side. | ||
| peteglider Citizen Username: Peteglider Post Number: 2109 Registered: 8-2002 |
JTA -- Sounds to me like you're trying to get the thing closer to SHU ;-) Even better -- how about on the SHU campus -- and how about SHU pays for it? Pete | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 5771 Registered: 1-2004 |
This paragraph from an article regarding Tau on the front page of today's Snooze Wreckered really bothers me. Does it bother anyone else? >>>The Smith sculpture has been years in the making. Wukitsch’s late husband, Lennie Pierro, thought of honoring Smith after attending a retrospective of his work at the Museum of Modern Art. He was surprised to learn that Smith was a native of South Orange.<<< According to this paragraph, it appears the original idea of bringing a sculpture to town was not to honor someone who lived here. It was after the idea was hatched, it was discovered Mr Smith had lived here. SOUTH ORANGE, NJ - The Tony Smith sculpture will be located at Meadowland Park instead of by the South Orange train station, officials said this week. Cheryl Arnedt, vice president of the Lennie Pierro Memorial Arts Foundation, the volunteer group in charge of the project, said her group and the Tony Smith Estate reached an agreement to put the sculpture there. Originally, it was supposed to go on Sloan Street in downtown South Orange, but there was an outcry from some in the community. Critics, upset the village was using tax dollars on the project in first place, charged the sculpture was too big for that site. Residents began to circulate a petition stating public outrage to use tax dollars for the project. Howard Levison, who was part of that effort, said more than 1,700 people signed their names. To him, the issue came down to priorities. With village buildings crumbling and the public library without air conditioning, he questioned why South Orange officials would spend tax dollars on the sculpture. Arnedt said detractors waged a “malicious campaign” that stirred up “rancor” against the sculpture project. Village officials, caught in the middle, said they supported the move to Meadowland Park, Trustee Allan Rosen called it “a very gracious and reasonable proposition.” Fellow Trustee Arthur Taylor called it “an alternative which captures a lot of the views of both sides of this very controversial issue.” Michael Goldberg, also part of the petition drive, called it “a tremendous victory for the residents who expressed their desire” to keep Sloan Street as it is. The change in location still allows the sculpture to be installed this fall, said Judy Wukitsch, president of the Pierro Foundation. “It’ll be magnificent in the park,” said Wukitsch, who also works in the village recreation department. Arnedt added her group was sticking to that deadline to avoid having taxpayers pay for storing the sculpture, which will be village property. “That’s why that’s our deadline,” Arnedt said. The project has involved a mix of public and private funds. Of the $250,000 the village committed to the project, $170,000 has been spent, Arnedt said. She added the village will be released from the balance of its commitment. “It’s a private project from here on out,” Arnedt continued. The foundation will have to raise money to cover the balance. The Smith sculpture has been years in the making. Wukitsch’s late husband, Lennie Pierro, thought of honoring Smith after attending a retrospective of his work at the Museum of Modern Art. He was surprised to learn that Smith was a native of South Orange. Pierro died before seeing his vision through, but Wukitsch picked up the mantle. A group of volunteers formed the foundation bearing Pierro’s name. The Smith estate gifted the design rights to one of his sculptures, Tau. A Tau sculpture is located in front of Hunter College in New York City. The foundation had to pay for fabricating the sculpture and related costs. A bus trip to the Rhode Island-based foundry, to witness the process, will leave South Orange on Aug. 14, Wukitsch said. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 1101 Registered: 5-2004 |
My favorite part was reading "The foundation had to pay for fabricating the sculpture and related costs." If only that were true! | ||
| Soparents Supporter Username: Soparents Post Number: 2416 Registered: 5-2005  |
Another case of incorrect and unchecked journalism.. | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 5779 Registered: 1-2004 |
Peter- You aren't the first person to suggest placing the sculpture on the campus of SHU. I know several others who thought it would be the perfect place. Pdg- I love how they said they ***had*** to pay... For something Cheryl and her crew insist MOST / the majority of the town wants, and something the VP was quoted as saying the town was '100 percent behind' and as this fantastic 'Arts Community' we're supposed to be, why are the sculpture people having so much trouble getting people to donate their cold hard cash toward this project? Why are the taxpayers footing the bill? I blame Cheryl, Judy, and the others on the sculpture board as much as the BOT. I'm guessing it's because 'some people' made such a fuss those who wanted to donate were scared off? Also, if you look at the numbers, I'm guessing it's something like 6 to one (six against vs 1 for) spending taxpayer money on the sculpture. I think many of us are still waiting to see Cheryl's poll. Soparents- Agreed! | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 558 Registered: 2-2006 |
Pdg & SOP, I suspect who is giving orders about the sculpture is still partly a secret. I would not be surprised if the sculpture volunteers actually told the fabricator to begin and even put up a deposit for it. It would mean that the town would be reimbursing them for money THEY already paid. It is such a back-room deal between a handful of people lead by Arnedt and Wukitsch and the BOT that details really aren't known. There seems to be no written contract between the sculpture volunteers and the town even though there is one between the town and the fabricator. I thought reports in the News Wrecked that A&W were PRing a field trip to see the sculpture fabricated were interesting. It suggests that as of that date (Aug 14) the sculpture might not be finished. Who knows (another secret), it might not even be very far along, or even commenced. | ||
| vermontgolfer Supporter Username: Vermontgolfer Post Number: 490 Registered: 12-2002 |
Just to add, I thought there was a condition in the agreement with the fabricator that they would store it at no charge, so where does Arnedt come up with the town incuring additional storage charges if it's not placed by September? Just asking! | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 3658 Registered: 5-2004  |
Just watching Arnedt (I've lost respect for her enough to mention her more respectfully) a few comments and questions... If this location is near the "other" cultural hub, why was this site not originally considered? If it's a community project, why was the community not involved? There is a difference between the Trustees and the community. Her comments about why the No Taxes for Tau folks should stop are simply ridiculous. While money has been spent (I'm curious exactly how much has been disbursed, versus approved), there is no reason why private funds should not be able to cover the full cost. Who will spearhead the fundraising? How about you? Are you saying you're going to raise $x, and when that happens, you'll simply stop asking, even if there is more money to be raised? You'll stop campaigning because you are upset by people who want reasonable accountability for our tax dollars? I love her scare tactics. How will stopping taxes bring used for Tau bring a halt to the Pierro Foundation's other work? She talks about the best place for the sculpture based on experts int eh field of art, yet again, she refuses to acknowledge that there s a community that will be affected by this piece. More than simply artistic aesthetics should be considered. And to me, THAT is the root of her arrogance about this. Everything is about The Art. But when you are talking about Public Art, other things must be taken into consideration. She does not seem to understand that this was not personal until she made it personal. People were opposed to taxes for Tau, not Tau. They were opposed to the way the BOT snuck it into an unrelated bond ordinance. It was Cheryl who, at a BOT meeting months ago, took any opposition of this project as a personal affront to her and the other volunteers working on the project. She should not be upset the the NTFT folks, but the BOT for bringing about this mess. She simply does not get that No Taxes for Tau s just that. No TAXES for Tau. Not NO TAU. But she does not seem to get the difference because she is so personally invested in it. Did I mention how obscenely arrogant she came across? As for Ms Wukitsch, she repeatedly mentions artists and communities working together. However this was nothing of the sort. That is the whole problem. It was a foundation and a BOT working without the full knowledge of the community. Her comments about the NTFT partition is simply wrong. If she has issues, she should have given details, not simply made statements about its inaccuracies. Harassing people on the Midtown Direct? I never saw anyone harassing anyone. At least, no more than all the other petitioners that are around at various times. Her comment about Kings in Maplewood is similarly ridiculous for points others have already made. I have no knowledge about the calls she mentions, but I have no problem with someone calling the Smith Estate. I can just imagine how filtered the information that they get from the TSSP group is. It all depends how that was handled. The point is not the statue itself, but the BOT. If the call was the let them know that the BOT misled the residents, good for them. If it was to harass the Smiths, or to imply that people didn't want or like the statue, that's another story. As for the golf pencils, I never heard about that. Nice touch. And I love her comment about having better visualization capabilities than many others, when asked about where exactly the sculpture would be located. Who cares about your visualization capabilities? More arrogance... "The vision here is absolutely perfect." Then why was this location not considered at the outset? I am amazed and offended to hear that the VA, VP, and members of the BOT have put the onus on the TSSP for the things that people are complaining about. No TAXES for Tau. TAXES. Does the BOT and other members of the administration not understand that this is not simply about location? It is not about liking or not liking art? It's not about whether people think Tony Smith is worth honoring? The only thing the TSSP folks could do to alleviate people's frustration about this is to find a way to pay for the whole thing. I'm quite certain no one in the administration even remotely considered asking them to do that. What concerns me even more is that now the TSSP people appear to be compromising, when they ignore the fundamental issue that people have with this. Mark is the only one who gets it. It's sad. I am actually not opposed to Tau, nor am I opposed to this location. I was not truly in opposed to the other location, but the fact that there was something there already disturbed me. Moving the project, however, does not change the fundamental fact that the town was misled by a BOT that did not seem to know ITSELF where the money was coming from. That is something the TSSP people should not be responsible for. More later... |
