| Author |
Message |
    
Shaun McCormack
Citizen
Username: News_record
Post Number: 14
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 6, 2003 - 11:22 am: | 
|
I'm doing a "get out and vote" story for Thursday's N-R, and I'd welcome any comments voters might have about the campaign.
I've got a vague idea of it being cleaner than the last campaign... of course there's spin and interpretation on the issues, but I haven't come across any personal attacks or outright nastiness... but I don't live in South Orange.
How have the candidates done?
Email me: shaun.mccormack@verizon.net
I'll need a real NAME in order to use your comments. |
Brian O'Leary
Citizen
Username: Brianoleary
Post Number: 1335
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 6, 2003 - 5:14 pm: |
|
Do get out and vote, even if Shaun doesn't quote you 
www.opensouthorange.com
Vote Line B on May 13th
|
J. Crohn
Citizen
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 63
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 6, 2003 - 11:27 pm: |
|
If I may, I have a question for the candidates. (This is probably not the best thread in which to ask it, but I couldn't post to the debate threads, as I am not the moderator...)
Since coming here four years ago I've developed the impression that, compared with Maplewood, South Orange is at some level characteristically complacent.
I'm not sure this complacency emanates entirely from local government; perhaps some significant proportion of the S.O. community is less progressive than Maplewood's--by which I mean not 'less politically liberal', but simply, disinclined to innovation.
I think I have this impression chiefly because Maplewood enjoys a more active central business district than ours, Maplewood has bigger and better-advertised local festivals, Maplewood generally promotes itself to the press more assiduously. In fact, Maplewood appears, somehow, better organized than South Orange.
Thus I was disappointed, but not terribly surprised, to learn recently at a Parent Action Committee meeting with our district's head of security that while Maplewood Middle School has three youth counselors from the Maplewood police department on site, South Orange's middle school has not one.
When I inquired why this was the case, I was told that Maplewood sought and received grant money to employ these personnel to help keep gangs and drugs out of their middle school.
South Orange, on the other hand, apparently has not obtained any funding for youth counselors.
Mr. Rosner, I truly appreciate your efforts on this board. Alone among our trustees, you've taken the initiative to speak directly to your constituents on a regular basis. Can you tell us what keeps South Orange from seizing opportunities Maplewood routinely exploits? Where is our police department grant writer? Is anyone attempting the work? Or is this another case of our town resisting the impetus to hire professionals to maintain and improve our quality of life?
I realize personnel are costly. But what is the cost of falling behind? If our political culture is to blame for South Orange's timorousness, what part of that culture do you, as a candidate, represent?
Mr. O'Leary, you sit on the School Board. Can you address this issue as well? Given recent events, and particularly the spate of bomb scares at Columbia High School (averaging something nearly like one a month this past year), would it not be wise to ensure the South Orange PD has a youth liaison or two in our middle school? Do we have the means in our town to respond to problems as proactively as Maplewood has done, and if not, how would you change that?
With thanks in advance, I look forward to your replies.
J. Crohn |
David Lackey
Citizen
Username: Davidlackey
Post Number: 10
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 7, 2003 - 8:34 am: |
|
J. Crohn, you raise many valid points. It is my strong belief, however, that this sense of complacency is actually rooted in local government. I say this for two main reasons.
It has become clear during this campaign that the current administration feels that everything is just wonderful in South Orange. All of their brochures and their comments at the Candidates Forum last week (with the exception of Mr. Rosner) say, in essence, "Look at how fantastic things are in S.O. Everything is coming up roses, so re-elect us." And you know what? I think they (again, with the exception of Mr. Rosner) actually believe it. You will not be proactive in seeking an innovative solution to a problem if you refuse to see the problem. The examples you offer (active business district, local festivals, self-promotion and organization) are all extensions of local government.
Secondly, the current administration has not done much to encourage resident involvement in these activities. They seem to want to do everything themselves. Maplewood has a much stronger network of neighborhood organizations, something the S.O. government needs to actively cultivate. At the same time, the Board of Trustees needs to be more welcoming to residents that come to it with their thoughts and concerns, and let them become involved in the process. This is something that my running mates and I would like to bring to Village Hall. |
Brian O'Leary
Citizen
Username: Brianoleary
Post Number: 1344
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 7, 2003 - 8:37 am: |
|
I wasn't aware of the difference between the two middle schools. There is a police liaison in place full-time at CHS, and I am glad at least one of the middle schools is looking at ways to build communication and engagement between law enforcement and students. Regular contact helps build relationships that canned programs like DARE have trouble establishing.
A part of our platform is a commitment to building relationships at a different level, between South Orange and Maplewood as well as South Orange and the school district. This starts with engagement by elected officials to plan jointly, share information and ask for feedback and work out differences in a way that shows both respect and a willingness to come to a consensus.
One of the advantages I think our ticket offers is based in my experience in the schools, with Maplewood and at the state level. I know all of the elected officials in Maplewood, as well as those campaigning now, and I have seven years of understanding of how the school district is organized and functions.
For the MMS/SOMS example, I'd look to build a regular dialogue among professional staff in the three different bodies, so that good ideas are shared on a timely basis. In this case, I'd also look to the school district to highlight the opportunity and, if it feels it makes sense for SOMS, ask for support. If the staff has trouble making that happen, the regular liaison meetings that occur with M, SO and the schools are an easy forum in which to discuss and resolve those concerns.
I wanted to point out that some of this happens now on an informal basis. Mark Rosner has an interesting idea to help traffic around SOMS, and he asked me earlier this year about who to call and how to implement it. I would like to make the practice more regular (and make sure we implement Mark's good idea...)
www.opensouthorange.com
Vote Line B on May 13th
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 346
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 7, 2003 - 10:50 am: |
|
We actually applied for the grant at the same time Maplewood did. We were turned down last year but the indication was we would be getting that grant this year.
Speaking of grants, the village was recently awarded $440,000 for the firehouse and $140,000 for the old stone house. The $1,000,000 Irvington Ave. project has been funded with over $700,000 in grant money.
I will add that certain grants require the village to make a long term commitment long after the grant money is gone. The money for the office being placed in the school will not always be there and once we go ahead with the program we would not want to end it when the grant money disappears.
We have the same situation with the Jitney program, but we made the decision to go ahead because we believe it is a good thing for the village.
There is always room for improvement and I will just try and continue to push the village to be as good as it can be.
Mark
Trustee election is on May 13th.
www.leadershipwithvision.org
Vote Line A
|
J. Crohn
Citizen
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 65
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 7, 2003 - 6:52 pm: |
|
Gentlemen, thank you very much for your responses.
Mr. Lackey: "[T]he current administration... seem[s] to want to do everything themselves. Maplewood has a much stronger network of neighborhood organizations, something the S.O. government needs to actively cultivate."
To be fair, I'm not sure a shortage of (or disorganization among) neighborhood associations is the fault of S.O.'s town administration.
I have considered starting a neighborhood association on my block, but I've been deterred by the sense that certain people (mostly, those of us newer to town) will be sure to participate, while some others (long-time residents, less educated and less comfortable with the idea of political participation) will feel as though association members wish to change things that are fine the way they are. Still others won't be bothered to get together with their neighbors to discuss issues of very local importance: these represent a kind of isolationist suburban mentality. They just can't be bothered.
I'm sure such factions exist in Maplewood, too; but maybe to a lesser extent? People I know in Maplewood generally take it as a given that they are entitled to speak up. They expect responsive government, and when they don't get what they expect is their due as citizens, they act.
This is what I meant about S.O.'s political culture being comparatively complacent. But again, it's just an impression.
Mr. O'Leary: "Regular contact helps build relationships that canned programs like DARE have trouble establishing."
I agree.
"I'd look to build a regular dialogue among professional staff in the three different bodies, so that good ideas are shared on a timely basis. In this case, I'd also look to the school district to highlight the opportunity and, if it feels it makes sense for SOMS, ask for support. If the staff has trouble making that happen, the regular liaison meetings that occur with M, SO and the schools are an easy forum in which to discuss and resolve those concerns."
If you are elected, I look forward to seeing the lines of communication opened. And if you aren't elected, I hope whoever is, takes note of your excellent proposals.
Mr. Rosner: "There is always room for improvement and I will just try and continue to push the village to be as good as it can be."
I have no doubt of it.
Thank you for the information concerning the youth liaison grant. I hope we do receive the money this year. If we do, it would be helpful as well if the acquisition were reported in the Gaslight and/or SO Online. Should the Village need any help with such applications in future, someone among the trustees might wish to contact the PTAs of the various schools.
I'm not sure, by the way, that concern over losing funding for programs down the line should deter us too much from pursuing things the community needs. Particularly where school security is concerned, demonstrations of commitment tend to make future funding acquisition easier, not harder.
Thanks again for the dialogue.
J.C.
|
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 76
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 7, 2003 - 7:46 pm: |
|
J.Crohn: Thank you for raising the question of complacency in your eloquent and articulate way. I too have noticed a sense of complacency on many matters, which has had me puzzled at times. Even on the matter of taxes, whether they be municipal or school taxes, I at times find it difficult to comprehend why people just accept tax increases without at least asking whether something can be done or whether the process is flawed. I am hopeful that some awareness of this area has been raised in this forum and maybe the momentum can be maintained after the election, regardless of who wins. |
bets
Citizen
Username: Bets
Post Number: 296
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 7, 2003 - 9:26 pm: |
|
I agree that complacency has infected South Orange for many years. Voter turnout is pathetic year after year. But I think that's slowly changing.
Last election saw Patrick Joyce win against the incumbent's choice, and when the Board of Trustees denied his involvement in any issue regarding the quarry, the voters got a real wake-up call. Sure, Bill then recused himself from closed sessions and other official quarry proceedings, but not until Joyce was elected on a quarry platform and then denied involvement based on his home's proximity to the site (Bill's lived within spitting distance for years).
I'm really expecting a better turnout for this election. There has been more online participation than in years past; there was the League of Women Voters debate (why did "Leadership with Vision" decline the CCN debate??); and more people are asking questions.
And getting answers. From all three Open South Orange candidates, one very beleaguered trustee, and an occasional post from the village attorney.
I think the community deserved another chance to see both slates in another debate. I really question why an incumbent slate declined.
I guess these are my feelings about this year's campaign. My vote is decided: Line B, and Line B only. Don't skew the chances of a Line B candidate by voting for three trustees. Just vote for the two who we need to win office.
I do thank Trustee Rosner for having the courage to answer most of our questions this past year or more. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 354
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, May 8, 2003 - 9:39 am: |
|
Just to correct a couple of points above.
First, Bill was not allowed to sit in on meetings involving the quarry before Patrick Joyce was on the board.
The village attorney advised Mr. Joyce before the election that he would have to recuse himself on the quarry issue. At the Board's request we received a formal opinion on the matter from the state board of ethics and they said in no uncertain terms that Mr. Joyce had to distance himself from the quarry.
I offered to participate in as many debates as anyone wanted and I let Brian know the dates I was available early on in the campaign. Nobody got back to me until the night of the LWV debate and I reiterated the two nights that were still available. I have not been called by any one - not another candidate nor the organizers of the debate which is the way it is usually done.
The five trustee candidates did do meet with SHU on their radio station and they say that the questions and answers can be heard over the internet at their site. This Saturday morning Bill C and Brian O'Leary will be asked questions on the same radio show that will be live from 7 - 8 a.m.
I do encourage everyone to vote for all three trustee positions because they should make all their votes count and that each person should get to know each candidate as best they can. Most of the candidates have been campaigning on Sat. mornings in the sloan street vicinity or by the Post office.
Remember to Vote Line A on May 13th
www.leadershipwithvision.org
|
mayhewdrive
Citizen
Username: Mayhewdrive
Post Number: 256
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, May 8, 2003 - 10:01 am: |
|
Mark,
I take strong exception with your comment "Bill was not allowed to sit in on meetings involving the quarry before Patrick Joyce was on the board."
Prior to Patrick's election, Bill presided over ALL public meetings which discussed the quarry issue (go re-read the Meeting Minutes posted online for proof). I certainly can't personally speak for his presence at Closed Sessions, although he seemed awfully familiar with all the nuances.
It was not until AFTER Patrick was elected, did Bill step off the podium when the quarry was discussed. |
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 359
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, May 8, 2003 - 10:47 am: |
|
I can't disagree with you Mayhewdrive, but Bill was not allowed to participate in any closed session discussions.
I had thought it was ok for an elected official to continue to sit on the podium or even in the closed session as long as they did not participate when there was a conflict. I stated that in public when Patrick was told that he could not participate. I had actually thought that the ruling was going to allow both of them to participate since they were elected with full disclosure of where they lived. Obviously Patrick based part of his campaign on the quarry issue so I was very surprised at the final ruling.
When the board of ethics sent back their ruling and comments it became clear that both Bill and Patrick could not sit at the podium or in closed session. In fact they cannot even comment on the quarry development.
I have never discussed the quarry with Bill so I can't comment on whether he is familiar or not with all the nuances.
Remember to Vote Line A on May 13th
www.leadershipwithvision.org
|
mrosner
Citizen
Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 367
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, May 8, 2003 - 3:52 pm: |
|
Shaun: Since you started this thread, is there a way to provide the endorsements for this election that are in the News-Record today? I don't see it on the papers web page.
For those of you who have not seen the paper, they endorsed the whole Line A ticket.
Remember to Vote Line A on May 13th
www.leadershipwithvision.org
|
bets
Citizen
Username: Bets
Post Number: 301
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, May 8, 2003 - 3:54 pm: |
|
Snort. They sure don't endorse the whole picture. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page