| Author |
Message |
    
Larry David
Citizen
Username: Larry_david
Post Number: 8
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 11:29 am: | 
|
Maybe I finally had enough and decided it was time to start posting. Because I don't agree with you does not make me a Calabrese puppet. I do not agree with most he does. I do know John Polgany and I do not agree with your assesment. I do not find him to be the one to lead our village. I think Jeff Dubowy will make an excellent trustee. He has no other agenda and has no one to answer to. I find it disturbing having John sit on the board knowing about the law suit, knowing that he will not be able to vote on many crucial issues affecting the village.
You sound like a petulant child who is not getting his (or her) way |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 1057
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 12:16 pm: |
|
I think knowing who the campaign managers are is helpful.
I dealt with Elaine Harris a few years back, so have a sense about her.
And I know Marc Bromfield from the neighborhood.
These kinds of things are very relevant. With 9 candidates running -- I don't know as much about each one as I like, but then knowing this info -- helps fill in the puzzle for this voter.
Pete |
bets
Supporter
Username: Bets
Post Number: 1184
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 12:23 pm: |
|
I think it's only 8 candidates, but it's such a whacky election, who knows? Maybe there was an extension to the March 17 filing deadline granted.
Larry, you not only sound like the petulant child you call me, your spelling is atrocious. Ever hear of spell-check? You should look into it. |
Jeff DuBowy
Supporter
Username: Jeffd
Post Number: 81
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 12:32 pm: |
|
Thanks for the support LD!! I hope the community understands my agenda which is to respresent openly and serve the needs of the South Orange community.
I have remained totally independent. The campaign to this point has been much work. My fate will be determined on May 10th. It would be my honor to serve the community. I will work very hard to represent the voices of our community.
I started a thread re: campaign finances. In the interest of transparency, I feel the candidates should make this information know to the voters before the election.
Jeff DuBowy
www.jeffdubowy.com |
Eliot Spitzer
Supporter
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 1026
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 2:14 pm: |
|
Anybody know what's happening to the old rug store? Is the soil which was used for fill contaminated? Sayad was to give a soil analysis report to the Planning Board April 4. |
User58
Citizen
Username: User58
Post Number: 67
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Monday, April 25, 2005 - 9:36 am: |
|
I have a question for Larry david.. What is the law suit you speak about? You are saying that Elaine harris and mr.pogany had a law suit against our town? When was this and what was it over. |
User58
Citizen
Username: User58
Post Number: 68
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Monday, April 25, 2005 - 12:55 pm: |
|
mr rosner do you have any information on the law suit larry david is talking about? |
SoOrLady
Citizen
Username: Soorlady
Post Number: 2071
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 25, 2005 - 1:15 pm: |
|
If he does, User, it's a good bet that he can't comment on it. But, Mark - in the event that you can comment - I'd like to know too. |
John Pogany
Citizen
Username: Pizzaz
Post Number: 1767
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 25, 2005 - 1:27 pm: |
|
Doublea: Good question, I guess the redevelopment "blight" is an issue to overlook if your main concern is to belittle and degrade a trustee candidate or his campaign manager. Do you think MRosner is pushing this effort with User58 and Larry David? I hope not.
BTW: No need to respond, I think people see through this thread well enough to understand.
Vote May 10th
South Orange-ADE
www.howard-levison.com
www.johnpogany.com
www.ericdevarisfortrustee.com
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 1869
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, April 25, 2005 - 1:37 pm: |
|
I can't say I remember all the details. I am sure Wash will jump all over me for half-truths, but I hope (s)he will fill free to fill in any information I leave out. Also, I assume Larry David will correct me if it is a different lawsuit he referred to in an earlier post. And for the record, I was not on the BOT when the lawsuit took place.
Elaine Harris was the attorney and represented two residents (I do know know their names) in suing the town to try to stop the redevelopment. The cost to the village was in excess of $200,000.
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 1870
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Monday, April 25, 2005 - 1:54 pm: |
|
John: I am annoyed at your hint that I am pushing "posters". I have never accused you of being the puppet master of Washashore or BETS who have shown that are not fans of mine and clearly have supported anything you say or do while attacking anyone who dares to disagree with the "ade" ticket.
|
User58
Citizen
Username: User58
Post Number: 70
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Monday, April 25, 2005 - 2:41 pm: |
|
Mr Pogany what do you mean by asking if Mr. Rosner is pushing his effort with me? Mr. Rosner to the best of my knowledge would not know me if he bumped into me in town let alone on this sight. I asked questions and he seems to respond to mine and anyone who posts a question to him. So what are you talking about?
|
Larry David
Citizen
Username: Larry_david
Post Number: 9
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Monday, April 25, 2005 - 3:33 pm: |
|
Yes, I am talking about the redevelopment law suit. I think it's very important for the residents to know all the facts about the candidates and their associates.
I do not answer to anyone, least of all Mr. Rosner. Why can't there be more than one person who disagrees with you.
Reading old posts, it bothers me that the people supporting A D & E are all negative. I was unable to find one positive post. |
Taylor M
Citizen
Username: Anotherusername
Post Number: 456
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 26, 2005 - 1:28 am: |
|
Jeff-
Do you sgree with the mud Larry's throwing? Please acknowledge...
BTW I think I remember several years ago when the Village TRIED TO TAKE AWAY LESLIE's PLACE OF BUSINESS for redevelopment or something, Leslie and John fought back. I don't blame them. So it's not as if he 'sued the Village...'
John please correct me if I'm mistaken. |
bets
Supporter
Username: Bets
Post Number: 1196
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 26, 2005 - 1:42 am: |
|
Why is my name always in caps? BETS?
I'm sorry that you haven't earned my respect, Mr. Rosner, but then again, you failed to exercise a conscientious vote on several measures while representing ME.
It is a very sorry statement that Larry David cannot come up with anything positive to post about the candidates on the A, D, and E lines, after hours of searching.
It's hard work!!! He's working Hard!!!!
And Taylor M - you HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD!!
DING DING DING!!! |
Soda
Supporter
Username: Soda
Post Number: 2977
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 26, 2005 - 9:23 am: |
|
Taylor: Bunnie's was never slated to be condemned, siezed, or in any way messed with by the Village for "redevelopment or something".
The Pogany-Harris lawsuit was ill-conceived, and they did NOT win it.
-s. |
Larry David
Citizen
Username: Larry_david
Post Number: 10
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 26, 2005 - 9:28 am: |
|
Taylor M I am not throwing mud, I am trying to let the voters know all about the candidates. I think it's very important for all to know about the law suit which cost the village quite a lot of money. I do not believe anyone tried to take away Bunny's. Maybe one of the trustees can comment on the lawsuit or better yet Ed Mathews.
bets, why don't you let me know the positive features about ad&e |
Two Sense
Citizen
Username: Twosense
Post Number: 88
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 26, 2005 - 12:48 pm: |
|
Since this thread started as, "What is going on with the old rug store location?" does anyone know if S.O. is now permitting Saiyd to start another development around the corner on Church Street, when he's shown no evidence he can develop his hole-the-ground on West South Orange Avenue (unless illegally filling it with contaminated soil counts as progress)?
Also, is there any truth to the rumor that he has almost 20 outstanding building code violations on his other properties? |
Scooby Doo
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 1009
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 26, 2005 - 12:59 pm: |
|
Rather than all this friggin' innuendo, why can't one of you simply post what the lawsuit was about? Then let us judge. Otherwise, please stop dragging up all this nonsense. This isn't a presidential election, you know. We should have higher standards. |
Two Sense
Citizen
Username: Twosense
Post Number: 89
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 26, 2005 - 2:10 pm: |
|
The lawsuit was about defining what constituted a blighted property for redevelopment. Historically, government used eminent domain only to condemn property for public benefit, e.g., schools, highways, flood control, government buildings.
The redevelopment law (N.J. 40A:12A-1 Local Redevelopment and Housing Law (www.state.nj.us/dca/lgs/authreg/statutes/40a_12a_1.pdf) extendeds the right of eminent domain to neighborhoods that are "blighted," permitting government to condemn properties for the ultimate benefit of the community by transferring development rights to developers, who will build for-profit projects. While the the law offends civil libertarians (i.e., property owners shouldn't be forced to sell their properties), it's been used to redevelop many blighted areas in N.J.; and, similar laws have been used positively in other states.
In S.O., the plaintiffs aggressively argued that the village abused the law by classifying as blighted properties in good condition with rent-paying tenants and customers. Ironically, Bunny's was exempted from the redevelopment zone (the map reveals some bizarre, politically-negotiated gerrymandering), but its owners allegedly help finance litigation to stop redevelopment. Hence, all of the animosity.
Unfortunately, while redevelopment can improve blighted areas, S.O. government has made such a mess of redevelopment, the plaintiffs are now looking wiser than ever -- albeit for the wrong reasons.
LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING LAW
40A:12A-1. Short title
This act shall be known and may be cited as the "Local Redevelopment and Housing
Law."
P.L. 1992,c.79,s.1.
40A:12A-2. Findings, determinations, declarations
The Legislature hereby finds, determines and declares:
a. There exist, have existed and persist in various communities of this State
conditions of deterioration in housing, commercial and industrial installations, public
services and facilities and other physical components and supports of community life,
and improper, or lack of proper, development which result from forces which are
amenable to correction and amelioration by concerted effort of responsible public bodies,
and without this public effort are not likely to be corrected or ameliorated by private
effort.
b. From time to time the Legislature has, by various enactments, empowered and
assisted local governments in their efforts to arrest and reverse these conditions and to
promote the advancement of community interests through programs of redevelopment,
rehabilitation and incentives to the expansion and improvement of commercial, industrial,
residential and civic facilities.
c. As a result of those efforts, there has grown a varied and complex body of laws,
all directed by diverse means to the principal goal of promoting the physical development
that will be most conducive to the social and economic improvement of the State and its
several municipalities.
d. It is the intent of this act to codify, simplify and concentrate prior enactments
relative to local redevelopment and housing, to the end that the legal mechanisms for
such improvement may be more efficiently employed. |
Husky
Citizen
Username: Husky
Post Number: 4
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 11:22 am: |
|
User58 et al,
In response to your question, "What is going on with the old rug store location?", I can report the following.
The Planning Board will be meeting on Monday, May 2nd to (probably) vote on changing the zoning for the Church Street Redevelopment zone to allow for higher-density buildings. (Residents of the surrounding area have had several meetings with the Planning Board & developer regarding the changes).
Saiyd and partners own several adjacent parcels of land on Church Street and it is my understanding that they intend to develop if the zoning is changed.
While there will be several more meetings regarding this developement before it actually starts, I share your concerns regarding the town allowing a developer who does not have a good track record with one building in the downtown area to demolish even more buildings in the same area. |
bets Betsy Elizabeth
Supporter
Username: Bets
Post Number: 1210
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 11:31 am: |
|
User58,
Please don't expect an honest answer from the village. Based on the details that have been revealed about the developer's agreements given to Beifus and New Market, they will not be open and honest about Sayid's plans and/or progress at the rug store OR on Church Street.
That's why it's time for ADE! |
Two Sense
Citizen
Username: Twosense
Post Number: 94
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 11:32 am: |
|
Scooby Doo:
Now that you know what the lawsuit was about, have you had time to judge? |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 1018
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 12:07 pm: |
|
Two Sense, thank you for posting that. I just got a chance to read it. That definitely helped. What was the outcome of the lawsuit? Was it continued? I assume that the plaintiffs lost, since the town has been doing some level of redevelopment using condemnation.
And now that I know that, I have no problem with the lawsuit, and it will not sway my voting decision. |
User58
Citizen
Username: User58
Post Number: 72
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 2:11 pm: |
|
I think everyone in this town should be disguisted with the OWNERS of the rug store and beifus and midas. They show no respect to the residents of our town. And their goal is to build and then benefit financialy from the residents of this town.
At the very least these locations should clean them up and atleast make them presentable. In NYC construction locations have nice fences with faux painting. |
peteglider
Citizen
Username: Peteglider
Post Number: 1063
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 2:22 pm: |
|
User58 -- agreed -- the issue is not what we villagers think about it -- its the policies the BOT puts in place to encourage (and discourage) this from *not* happening! To me that's much of what this election is about -- Pete |
Two Sense
Citizen
Username: Twosense
Post Number: 97
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 4:50 pm: |
|
Rastro: My understanding is that the plaintiffs lost, and again lost on appeal. However, I believe that a comparable case is now coming before the Supreme Court.
P.S. While S.O. has the power to condemn in its redevelopment zone, I don't believe it's yet used this power. But, the threat of condemnation usually brings property owners to the table to sell based on negotiated terms, which probably is what happened with the Shop Rite parcels. |
bets Betsy Elizabeth
Supporter
Username: Bets
Post Number: 1217
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 5:37 pm: |
|
quote:However, I believe that a comparable case is now coming before the Supreme Court.
Please note the this case was instituted in Connecticut, not South Orange, NJ. |
Two Sense
Citizen
Username: Twosense
Post Number: 98
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 6:03 pm: |
|
bets Betsy Elizabeth: What part of the words "a comparable case" did you confuse with the words "this case"? |
bets Betsy Elizabeth
Supporter
Username: Bets
Post Number: 1219
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 6:09 pm: |
|
Sorry about that. Still at work and reading while multi-tasking! |
User58
Citizen
Username: User58
Post Number: 75
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 10:01 am: |
|
Pete not so simple. I believe in most towns it is impossible to force property owners to rent their property. My point is this....we always like to blame government in our town about the condition of beifus, rug location, property next to bunnys, midas and I am not saying the town should not push and fine when possible these property owners but what I am also saying we all must not forget that the owners of these properties are allowing this to happen in this town. They have no respect for the residents of our town. To allow their property to sit in disrepair or leveled like an earthquake hit is absolutely disgusting and a slap in all our faces. SO stop only blaming the BOT and start blaming the owners of these locations. |
Larry David
Citizen
Username: Larry_david
Post Number: 16
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 10:07 am: |
|
Well said User58 |
User58
Citizen
Username: User58
Post Number: 76
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 10:13 am: |
|
Husky.....In my opinion all of Sayiad properties should be seised by our town. He has torn down a building in the center of town with absolutely no signs of rebuilding. Before anyone is to demolish a building they should first be required to have a completely approved redevelopment plan with all of the funds necessary to rebuild in place along with a approved developer in place ready to go. There must be a time frame established to rebuild or the land and the redevelopment money is seised. Beifus has torn down a building in the center of town after letting an abondened building sit for 10 years. When does it stop. When do we not allow people to come to our town buy property and demolish it without a law that protects the comercial district. |
Matt Foley
Citizen
Username: Mattfoley
Post Number: 159
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 3:58 pm: |
|
Something tells me the Sayiad character will slither off into the sunset within the next few months.
keep your eyes peeled
foley out |
bets Betsy Elizabeth
Supporter
Username: Bets
Post Number: 1252
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 1:46 am: |
|
peeled eyes sound painful.
Served! |
Washashore
Citizen
Username: Washashore
Post Number: 240
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 1, 2005 - 9:25 pm: |
|
Larry David and User 58: Anybody want to check and see how much money Sayid has contributed to Calabrrese's campaigns over the years? |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page