| Author | Message | ||
     mayhewdrive Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 304 Registered: 5-2001 |
Congratulations to South Orange for FINALLY receiving $50K in extraordinary aid from the state. Although, it's interesting how the Star Ledger notes that towns with Democratic leadership faired better than Republican ones. Is that why West Orange received 10 times as much aid as South Orange? http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-4/10576423085690.xml | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 486 Registered: 4-2002 |
It is beyond comprehension how W. Orange received so much, but congratulations to them. The BOT debated about even putting in the application this year since we questioned whether we would ever get any aid. It proves that we need to make sure we apply every year. I don't remember the Star-Ledger making a big deal out of the Republican towns receiving far more when Whitman was in power, but clearly the controlling party considers how a town voted when making a decision. | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 35 Registered: 4-2003 |
Mr. Rosner: When you say "clearly the controlling party considers how a town voted when making a decision", seems to imply that S.O. voted majority Republican. If my memory serves me, S.O. voted majority Democratic for McGreevey as well as for Gore. Allegations of S.O.'s claim to being "Republican" may more likely be a reference to Calabrese, Gross, etc. who gained their power through the "non-partisan" election process in S.O. (Calabrese) and personal patronage (Gross). | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 36 Registered: 4-2003 |
Addendum to my last post: It is not the "non-partisan" election process, or personal patronage that led to S.O. being perceived as "Republican", but rather that Calabrese and Gross ARE self-identified Republicans, who have leadership positions in a largely Democratic town, because of the "non-partisan" election process for one, and patronage for the other. | ||
| Edwin R. Matthews Citizen Username: Edwinrmatthews Post Number: 46 Registered: 3-2003 |
Washashore: I assume you are just crap strrring with your last two posts. John Gross' appointment as Village ADMINISTRATOR WAS ANYTHING BUT PATRONAGE. HE WENT THROUGH AN OPEN SCREENING PROCESS AND HAD ABSOLUTELY NO CONNECTION TO SOUTH Orange when he was selected. | ||
| nwyave Citizen Username: Mesh Post Number: 83 Registered: 1-2003 |
Am I not calculating something correctly - a "half cent off the tax bill" - seems like its really dollars - $20 off a house that pays over $20k in taxes per year. I multiplied assesment by .005 and divided by 100. If this is correct, then while its nice to get, it doesn't seem like its something to get too excited about. Am I doing the calculation correctly? Thanks. | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 37 Registered: 4-2003 |
Mr. Matthews: Perhaps you should re-visit the Meeting Minutes of the Search Committee that was created to search for, interview, and recommend qualified candidates for the position of Town Administrator. Mr. Gross is no where to be found on the list of candidates recommended for hire. Did I mention that John Gross is a pharmasict, and was a personal friend of Bill's prior to his appointment? | ||
| Brian O'Leary Citizen Username: Brianoleary Post Number: 1508 Registered: 3-2002 |
I read the Star-Ledger article about the Democratic skew on aid, but in the end I wasn't sure what was cause and what was effect. In occasional conversations, I've heard various people conjecture that our non-partisan status (which I like) makes us neither fish nor fowl in the state deliberations. These folks claim that it is this "non-status" that makes it hard to get legislators to take up our cause. I don't know if I yet buy that notion, as Maplewood has had its hardships getting aid, but it is interesting enough to post  | ||
| Brian O'Leary Citizen Username: Brianoleary Post Number: 1509 Registered: 3-2002 |
Also, nwyave's math seems correct. The estimated tax rate rose from $5.01 to $5.30 (although, as pointed out above, it is an estimate that may decrease when the state numbers come in). A home that paid $20K in taxes last year was assessed around $399,200. Based on the estimated rate, next year the tax bill for the same house will be $21,158, an increase of $1,158 (5.8%). The half-cent decrease in the tax rate (to $5.295) makes the revised tax bill on the same house $21,138, a savings of $20. If memory serves, the median house in South Orange is valued around $220,000; these properties would save $11. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 490 Registered: 4-2002 |
Washashore: I did not know what John Gross's party affiliation was but if you say he is a republican (not that there is anything wrong with that) I will take your word for it. I have known Bill C over five years now and I have never heard him mention any political party nor have I ever heard him endorse any candidate. I think you read too much into his running as a republican for freeholder many years ago as to what his party affiliation is. I have no idea what his favorite party is and I don't think it matters one bit at this level of government. We did not receive any aid when there was a republican in charge (Whitman, Kean) and this year we did with a Democrat in charge. I do not think we would have received a penny had the republican candidate won. While $50,000 is not much compared to the $500,000 that W. Orange received it is a lot better than what the traditional republican towns received. So when I said the controlling party plays a part I was saying that knowing that S. Orange usually votes for the Democratic party candidate and that was the reason for us getting any aid at all this year. We are a small town and we received a small award. W. Orange is a large town with a much stronger Democratic party base (Codey, McKeon). | ||
| Edwin R. Matthews Citizen Username: Edwinrmatthews Post Number: 47 Registered: 3-2003 |
Washashore : In response to your question you did not mention that John is a pharmasict and was a personal friend of Bill's prior to his appointment. If you had you would only have been half right. John is a pharmacist but was not a personal friend of Bill's before he was hired. Indeed he did not even know John until the interview process and then only after John had been interviewed by myself and several others. I have never seen any minutes of meetings of the search committee and indeed none were ever filed with clerk's office. I was asked to interview a number of candidates (which I did with several other people) and make recommendations; which we did. I know John was among those interviewed and recommended. I don't recall a list being prepared. Perhaps if you have minutes and the list of recommended candidates you could share it with me. | ||
| mayhewdrive Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 306 Registered: 5-2001 |
Mark, For the record....last Summer I returned from my job in NYC and found a campaign flyer (illegal!) on the windshield of my car with a picture of Bill Calabrese proudly endorsing Candy Straight (who was running for County Executive as a Republican) He is also clearly registered as a Republican on the Voter Registration list. If that isn't enough "evidence", certainly his atrocious attitude towards development of the quarry at any expense PROVES he's a Republican! | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 38 Registered: 4-2003 |
Mr. Matthews: We do agree on one thing: John Gross was interviewed by the Search Committee. He was not, however, recommended by the Committee for hire. Perhaps he was recommended for hire by you. In any event, one person (you? Bill?) or a small group of people OTHER THAN the appointed Search Committee determined the victor, while the appointed Committee's considerable time and effort at soliciting, and interviewing, many candidates went unheaded. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 494 Registered: 4-2002 |
mayhewdrive: Ok, it is just that partisan politics has never entered any discussion I have ever had with him. I have never paid any attention to anyone's party affiliation because I can't figure out what it has to do with local politics (well, maybe it helps us to get extraordinary aid). I think a permit can be obtained to put flyers on cars in the parking lots, but I am not positive. | ||
| bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 3197 Registered: 5-2001 |
I don't see how distributing political flyers can be considered illegal what with the Constitution and all that. I think even Justice Thomas would consider that one a no brainer. For the record, a sidebar to the story in the Star Ledger indicated Maplewood is getting $200,000. Some of you know I am a supporter of non-partisan local elections. However, sometimes, well, uhm, yah know........ | ||
| mayhewdrive Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 307 Registered: 5-2001 |
bobk, Perhaps "illegal" was misleading....I have heard of numerous instances that Village Code Enforcement has reprimanded groups for leaving leaflets on vehicles. Perhaps Mark can clarify if there is an actual orindance against this. | ||
| bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 3199 Registered: 5-2001 |
Political speech is viewed differently than commercial speech, or so I have been told. I am not a lawyer btw. | ||
| Edwin R. Matthews Citizen Username: Edwinrmatthews Post Number: 48 Registered: 3-2003 |
Washashore: I am not sure what you are talking about. Any committee set up was to screen candidates (on a confidential basis. By publishing that John was not recommended (assuming that to be accurate which I do not believe it is) you or who ever gave you the information violated the confidentialty of the committee.) Since you hide behind a screen name I don't know if you were on the committee. Any committee's recommendations are just that recommendations. The decision is that of the Village President with the consent of the Board of Trustees. I know I was asked by the Village President to interview several candidates (along with others). I do nor know how any of the people were selected. I do know there have been times where search committees have recommended names and when they were further interviewed the candidates withdrew or were found not to be acceptable. Whether the search committee was asked to interview additional candidates or whether Village officials went from the resumes already received I do Not know. No effort of search committees has gone unheaded. I renew my request for the minutes you profess exist and the list of recommended candidates. Please tell me who was on this search committee. My recollection and that of some I have talked to is that John Gross was always under consideration for the appointment. Perhaps you are confusing what happened in 1998/99 with what happened in 11994/95 when Barbara Sacks was selected as the administrator. In any case it appears that for some reason you don't like John Gross. He has been here and performed well for over four years. His appointment no matter how he was selected was not as your original post suggested a patronage appointment. It was made by the Village President with the advise and consent of the Board of Trustees after consulting with other members of the professional staff. It was in the end nothing more than and nothing less than a merit selection. He was the best candidate available to the Village. Your personal vendatta against John doesn't change that. | ||
| Edwin R. Matthews Citizen Username: Edwinrmatthews Post Number: 49 Registered: 3-2003 |
Mayhewdrive: No body has ever had to prove Bill Calabrese is a Republican. He has always admitted it and never denied it. He has twice run for political office as a republican. You are showing what lengths you will go to to falsely attack peolpe. Bill Calabrese never endorsed Candy Straight. Indeed he actually endorsed Joe D. His endorsement of Joe D was well known as Bill actively campaigned for Joe D. | ||
| Washashore Citizen Username: Washashore Post Number: 39 Registered: 4-2003 |
Mr. Matthews: responses to your last post to me: 1. You assert I may have "violated confidentiality." I assert that the Village PResident who, as you agree, makes the decision on hiring (with the consent of the BOT), violated the trust of those residents he asked to serve on the Search Committee, who spent countless hours doing so, IN GOOD FAITH, and interviewing candidates IN GOOD FAITH, and making recommendations as to qualified applicants IN GOOD FAITH, that went unheeded. 2. "Committee's recommendations are just that - recommendations. The Village President makes the decision". Precisely. Most people in town think that the job of Village Presdient is without power - only to vote to break a tie. Let's get the news out there that the Village President makes the hiring decisions, NOT the BOT (who only get to consent to what Bill has already done). 3. I have lived in town long enough not to confuse John Gross with Barbara Sacks. I also took an anatomical biology course in high school. 4. You state that "John has performed well for 4 years." How do you know that? There has NEVER been an Annual Performance Appraisal of his work, or of any other Village employee, in the last four years, and beyond. 5. And, just for kickers, how about throwing in that when John Mosca, the former Village Treasurer needed to be replaced, Bill called together a resident Search Committee, who solicited candidates, conducted interviews, and made recommendations. In that case, the person who rose to the top, and was "offered" the job, did not want to relocate to S.O. (as I understand it. The reason for the quotes around the word "offered" is because if it was known in advance that she would not relocate, requiring her to do so would by default disqualify her). Shortly after she was offered, and rejected, the job as Treasurer with S.O. because of the need to relocate, she was hired, and is still gainfully employed, as Treasurer, by Maplewood. Why was residency for Treasurer so crucial? After she declined the position, a decision was made (by Bill? Chris Hartwyk?) not to hire a separate full-time Treasurer, but to have those duties added on to ones already ascribed to the Town Administrator. Now we have our full-time Town Administrator also assuming the duties of a previous full-time Treasurer, and, yes, now also serving as Acting Executive Director of SOPAC. (Yes, I know he has an Assistant.) |
