| Author | Message | ||
     MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 1347 Registered: 5-2001  |
I see the following items for tonight's agenda that I would like more information on: An Ordinance to Provide for a Petition to the Legislature to Enact an Amendment to the Special Charter of the Township of South Orange Village (1977). (Compensation) I thought this FAILED - why is it coming up AGAIN??? An Ordinance to Amend the Code of the Township of South Orange Village, Section 92-200.2, Supplemental Regulations for the Planned Residential Cluster I assume this is related to the Pulte Pit in the Quarry. Can someone explain what changes are being made? Thanks! | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 1348 Registered: 5-2001 |
I just noticed that the 2nd point above also says "and to Delete Flats as a Permitted Principal Use in the PRC A Zone". Is that the only change? Has the entire property been re-zoned to allow a maximum of 69 units, yet? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 1387 Registered: 4-2002 |
At the last meeting when the compensation issue did not pass, the village president requested that we vote on it again when all six trustees are there to vote. As for your other questions, I will wait for an explanation from the village attorney. | ||
| bets Citizen Username: Bets Post Number: 722 Registered: 6-2001  |
Why, then, isn't every ordinance "re-voted" when the full panel is present? | ||
| snshirsch Citizen Username: Snshirsch Post Number: 220 Registered: 1-2003 |
Is this the way our village government is run? A bill does not pass one week, particularly when not every voting member is there and the village president asks for it to be voted on again next week? What if it's something that he is not interested in? Seems like a whole lotta B.S. Let's just keep voting until it passes. Why wasn't the vote floored until next week, if they voted it should be a done deal. Sounds like four squares, "DO OVER!" | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 1388 Registered: 4-2002 |
snshirsch: The vote should have been floored and if it does not pass, unless a change is made I don't think it should come up again. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 1349 Registered: 5-2001 |
Mark, So does this mean you will now vote AGAINST it, in order to uphold the prior legitimate decision? | ||
| Howard Levison Citizen Username: Levisonh Post Number: 87 Registered: 1-2004 |
Is the first Charter Resolution that passed going to be read for the second time? | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 1352 Registered: 5-2001 |
I missed the meeting on TV last night. What happened regarding the SECOND request to begin paying the Trustees? What was the other issue regarding the quarry about? | ||
| Allan J Rosen Citizen Username: Allanrosen Post Number: 100 Registered: 4-2003 |
MHD: The compensation ordinance passed by a vote of 4-2 (no great surprise). The "quarry" ordinance also passed (unanimously) and in addition to deleting flats also limits density to the 69 units previously negotiated. Both ordinances have to be passed on second reading at the June 28 meeting. | ||
| bets Citizen Username: Bets Post Number: 723 Registered: 6-2001 |
This behavior is exactly what makes me question the integrity of the board of trustees. The ordinance came up for vote during a regular meeting and was defeated. Why was its resurrection allowed? If it is possible for an ordinance pertaining to trustee/VP compensation to be "reconsidered" on first reading, can ordinances that were passed without the full trustee vote be revisited? Specifically, one that ties the village to a 5-year, incentive-heavy contract? | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 88 Registered: 12-2001 |
Of all the things the BOT in this Village has pulled since I moved here over 5-years ago, this one takes the cake. MROSNER, when Mr. Gross was given his 5-year contract was the entire BOT present? If not, then why was this vote not taken again? I guess we keep voting on issues until we get the desired outcome. I hope you enjoy your money as we continue this "budget crisis" with ever increasing taxes. There are plenty of folks in this town who would take the trustee position for no financial gain (I know it's small but it's the principal). If you need money so badly why not get a job at McDonalds? I can't even take my daughter for a ride on her bike since the sidewalks and streets in my neighborhood are in such disrepair yet we hand out money to the employees and elected officials of this town like we have it to burn! I pay over $16K a year in property taxes on a small house and there are potholes, broken sidewalks and streets that have been here since the 1930’s! I AM SO ANGRY! This may be the incident that finally convinces me to leave this corrupt, mismanaged and declining town. The scary part is that the idiot voters actually sent you back. I respect the fact that you come online and share your views, but your vote on this topic (and how it was handled with 2 votes until the desired outcome was achieved) clearly shows you do not have the taxpayers of this town in mind. Make sure if you run for re-election that you proudly inform your constituents of your greedy needs at our expense. I am sure you can use the same pictures of what is “coming soon” that you have used in your previous two campaigns. Who are the other three members who voted for this? | ||
| Pizzaz Citizen Username: Pizzaz Post Number: 331 Registered: 11-2001  |
The time for this municipal form of government has come and past. We need to regionalize services, downsize (big-time) political patronage jobs, and get professionals to oversee our public safety/works employees. Redevelopment has to be channeled to an authority which has a bigger view than just how much stipend and/or pension benefit one receives, and ensure in all instances that the legal definition of Blight is not taken for granted by the whim of elected officials and their hired planners. I think discussions on the reunification of South Orange and Maplewood is a starting point. Action is required now. The sole funding of the school system must be a State burden. We need to solicit our State Representatives to talk to us, and not just mogul to Trenton thinking we'll get a little more for our constituents from the state and say we won. Most importantly, and the easiest task to undertake, is we need to allow for a systematic process (similar to CA) which promotes Initiative and Referendum for the residents of New Jersey. If you really believe that the voters should decide, try this question for the ballot come November - "Should the Township of South Orange Village engage in discussions with the Township of Maplewood for the sole purpose to set forth a plan for the reunification of the two-sister Towns?" (Art: A question like that belongs to the voters, give me that one and not whether you need a stipend or not). | ||
| guessagain Citizen Username: Guessagain Post Number: 110 Registered: 12-2003 |
If the Two Towns reunite, shall the trustees all be paid stipends as they are now in Maplewood??? | ||
| Pizzaz Citizen Username: Pizzaz Post Number: 332 Registered: 11-2001 |
Hey Guess: Again, let the Voters decide, at that time. Currently, a sitting trustee should feel empowered to vote whether or not the position of "Town Father" should be compensated. Historically, it has not been, and with no change in the form of governance then it should remain uncompensated (that would be historically correct). Volunteerism is what they signed up for, if you don't like the working conditions, don't run again. | ||
| Howard Levison Citizen Username: Levisonh Post Number: 88 Registered: 1-2004 |
I would suggest that if we are against the Charter modification to allow for "salaries", then we need to begin to campain/communicate the issues. Start a new thread - | ||
| Dave Citizen Username: Dave Post Number: 7397 Registered: 4-1998  |
I don't mind the idea of stipends for elected officials, but the way this vote has been handled makes it look odd, as in, "let's get the headline that we voted it down and then we'll vote and pass it" odd. | ||
| D. Richards Citizen Username: Baddriving11 Post Number: 4 Registered: 6-2004 |
Singlemalt: "...we hand out money to the employees and elected officials of this town like we have it to burn!..." Please be correct, they arbitrarily hand out money and incentives to specific employees. The regular employees of this town are actually low paid and (ie: police and fire) cannot get the township to negotiate contracts in good faith. Maybe they need Mr Gross's attorney, because whoever that was got him a decent deal. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 1391 Registered: 4-2002 |
Dave: The news-record reporter had been told that it would probably be voted on again since the village president requested that it be put back on the agenda. My feeling is that if one part of the charter review is going to be on a referendum, then all parts should be. Pizzaz: Both towns have been meeting and we both passed resolutions to look at sharing services and that everything should be on the table. We agreed to hire an outside consultant who has experience with this matter. My feeling is that we should let the consultant do the report and everyone should keep an open mind (for every option that might be proposed). Singlemalt: Just for the record, the ordinances must be sent onto Trenton for their approval (super majority is required) and then it comes back to the voters in the form of a referendum. If a stipend is approved, it will not start until after the elections in 2007 which means that whomever is on the BOT at that point will have won election in either 2005 or 07. So any pay to be received does not affect any need I might have for money at this time, but thanks for the job tip. Patrick Joyce, Art Taylor and Steve Steglitz also voted in favor. Bill Calabrese indicated he would vote in favor had there been a tie. | ||
| Pizzaz Citizen Username: Pizzaz Post Number: 336 Registered: 11-2001 |
Sorry Mark, I'm not speaking to sharing services, my point is re-unification. I'd like that to be brought forth in a referendum. Might you spearhead that initiative for public vote? |
