« Montclair BOE Meeting Cancelled | Main | Pot Dealing Mom Spotted at Montclair Pizzeria »

Mattox Files Suit Against Township

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Ted Mattox will not be muzzled and Montclair's council meetings (yes, there's one tonight) are thisclose to becoming reality TV. Baristanet has learned that Mattox filed a lawsuit against the Township of Montclair on Friday. The suit, which names Mayor Remsen and all the other council members as individual defendants, was brought by Mattox and a group of concerned citizens including anti-wayfinding activist Pegi Adams.

The suit takes specific aim at the MEDC and the Montclair Arts Council. Mattox, who has been questioning the town’s funding process for months, has called for an independent review to determine if either the MEDC or the Montclair Arts Council meet the criteria under the local public contracts law to be considered an "extraordinary and unspecifiable services contractor."

Mattox also wants the selection process for the recent Wayfinding Project investigated, which he claims was flawed, taking seven months, instead of the required 60 days. "They say they received 11 bids," says Mattox. "Well, no one's seen any of them. Clearly citizens have voiced opposition. I wonder what is driving this project."

The injunction would not affect many of the current contracts because there is a 45-day limit in which to contest the award. It may, however, impact the MEDC and the MAC contracts renewed in July, as well as any payments scheduled for Cloud Gesham Consulting, the consultants involved with the Wayfinding Project debacle.

"I hope this legal action will serve as a wake-up call to the council and prevent any future contracts from being handed out before undergoing thorough scrutiny," says Mattox. "I will challenge every contract that comes up for renewal, and systematically weed out the bad ones. Montclair now has 20 contracts with outside agencies, but I can only find paperwork on nine. This is only a starting point, but I believe it can save taxpayers up to 1.5 million dollars."

[Yes, but what will the lawsuit cost...?]

Just how taxpayers' money flows from the town to these contractors is unclear, says Mattox, and the answers are not forthcoming.

"I don't know if the council is just playing dumb, or if they are knowingly breaking the law," he says. "The goal of this legal action is to make sure the groups receiving funds are legitimate in the eyes of the state. The victory will be a tax savings for Montclair residents, because every contract will be subject to the laws of the state, not the whims of our local government."

Township manager Joe Hartnett has described the funding process to The Montclair Times.

According to Hartnett, nonprofits seeking funds from the municipality submit their requests to the manager and council at budget time, similar to municipal departments. The manager then makes funding recommendations to the council and the council decides appropriations.

“The township only provides funding to nonprofit organizations for the performance of public services that benefit the taxpayers and citizens of Montclair,” Hartnett stated in his e-mail to The Times. “Naturally, there may be some disagreement on this issue, which is certainly normal in a democracy, but the elected officials make the final determination.”

Text of the lawsuit (as a Word file) is here.

Posted by Annette Batson on September 12, 2006 8:45 AM
Email this story |
 

So, who pays for the lawsuit?

Posted by Ms. Taxpayer | September 12, 2006 8:56 AM
 

I'd like to know who is funding Mattox's lawsuit? His personal funds? Township funds? That of "contributors"?

Posted by Right of Center ™ | September 12, 2006 8:58 AM
 

[Yes, but what will the lawsuit cost...?]

My question exactly. While his intentions are good, lawsuits to me are a last resort and I think it will hurt the township in the long run. The irony is that he's upset about waste and frivolous spending but he's spending taxpayer $$$ to make his point.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 9:10 AM
 

Any costs associated with the filing of this complaint will not be paid by taxpayers. The twp. has an attorney and he is a salaried employee.

Posted by Ted Mattox | September 12, 2006 9:31 AM
 

Ted, has there been any movement by the remainder of the council to address these issues since the lawsuit was filed?

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 9:33 AM
 

Right! So lets let KING REMSEN "the puking mayor" have his day.

Posted by NOT NOT NOT | September 12, 2006 9:34 AM
 

Ted--yeah, the township has an attorney, and you're SUING HIM! Please explain how this is going to work, and not cost the rest of us taxpayers any more money than all the stuff you're objecting to! (And why isn't Seltzer handling this pro bono for you--you engaged another attorney instead...)

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 9:39 AM
 

Go Ted GO. Next a recall for the Remsen Regime please!

Can you tell us if you are taking donations to help pay for the lawsuit?

I would like to contribute.

Posted by A concerned taxpayer who has had enough! | September 12, 2006 9:39 AM
 

A recall would be free; this suit won't be. (And this is a different Hiding than the first two here.)

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 9:42 AM
 

Why is no one writing in to call Remsen to task for his treatment of both TED and US and his blatant DISREGARD for the LAW?

Posted by Remsen spends OUR money like there's no TOMORROW | September 12, 2006 9:48 AM
 

The council will vote tonight on a resolution to not proceed with the wayfinding project (at this time).

BTW. I've exhausted every avenue attempting to kill this colossal waste of money. I've been talking about this case for almost a year now.

Got to go to work....

Posted by Ted Mattox | September 12, 2006 9:49 AM
 

I guess the question is how do you get the town's leaders to pay attention.

Close to 350 people signed a petition to stop the Wayfinding Project. 2 supported it, both business owners who will benefit by it.

Things happen in this town for reasons that defy explanation.

Maybe lawsuits are the only solution, until new elections are held. Maybe the new elections should go along with a new change in the way the town is run, i.e. drop the Town Manager model.

And while we're at it, let's get an elected BOE and have the opportunity to vote on the budget! Remember, there was general agreement not to do the Woodman Field "move" of $850,000. Many, many said "we just can't afford it." What happened? They spent most of the money anyway, saying they needed to move home plate 17 feet so that the lacross team and the baseball team could play at the same time. Now they say "whoops, that's wrong, they can't play at the same time." But we still are paying close to $700,000.

Maybe even more lawsuits are needed. OPRA requires responses in 7 days, not 7 months. Maybe lawsuits would help here too.

The list goes on and on.


Go for it, Ted!!


Posted by Montclairlover | September 12, 2006 9:51 AM
 

First, let's get real: "colossal waste of money"??? the township gives MEDC $40,000 per year, for which they get the services of a qualified, experienced staffperson and a 17-member Board of Directors with deep and impressive backgrounds. Mr. Mattox has never made clear what his objection is to the organization other than the fact the Ed Remsen started it. Please. Give us something to discuss, please, Ted, and don't waste our money or our Attorney's time on this.

Posted by Helen | September 12, 2006 9:54 AM
 

Helen, the vote tonight will be to stop the payment of $126,000 for consulting fees for wayfinding which surely would have lead to another $650,000 or so for the actual project that had been estimated.

Yeah, that is a colossal waste of money.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 10:05 AM
 

No, Ted, won't the salaried township attorney DEFEND the township against the suit.

Who is paying for the other attorney and other legal expenses?

You? Contributors?

Openess cuts both ways.

Posted by Right of Center ™ | September 12, 2006 10:08 AM
 

Helen, the council will be voting tonight, because of this lawsuit, to stop payment of $126,000 for wayfinding consulting which would have lead to a projected $650,000 for the actual project. So yes, that is a colossal waste of money.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 10:09 AM
 

"Bring Lawyers, Guns, and Money, the sh&t has hit the fan"

Posted by offhand | September 12, 2006 10:11 AM
 

It seems to me that the suits against MEDC, etc. are more a matter of "process" rather than substance. Process is important.

MEDC and the arts council make important contributions to life in this town!

Wayfinding, on the other hand, is a different story! The business owners should pay for it if they think it valuable.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 10:13 AM
 

David, why do you care who is paying for Ted's lawsuit as long as it is not the taxpayers?

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 10:14 AM
 

People are so predictable.

First we complain about our elected officials, that they might be doing something wrong. Well, then someone files a complaint to stop it, and people start asking----how much is this going to cost us.......Damn, you people are crazy. Every corruption case that the State, or federal government brings forward has a cost associated with it, yet no one talks about it. If this puts and end to evil doings, illegal doings, I say, its the way to go. The only thing necessary for people to do evil, is for good people to do nothing.
Way to go Ted, keep doing something.

It might be time for the other council members to duck. It's going to get ugly.

Posted by minority majority | September 12, 2006 10:15 AM
 

David, why do you care who is paying for Ted's lawsuit as long as it is not the taxpayers?

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 10:18 AM
 

I think it is time for "our" council to finally realize, that they CANNOT continue to spend OUR money for unneccessary luxuries, such as the Wayfinding Project. We are currently in the midst of a serious property tax crisis. The property taxes in New Jersey are the highest in the nation! Governor Corzine instituted a committee to find solutions to this crisis. But in the meantime homeowners are being taxed out of their homes. It has to stop! The council has to change its priorities now. #1 priority has to be cost control. When I spoke about this in the last council meeting I felt, that the council has no understanding of homeowners' difficulties. Read Mr. Hartnett's explanation on how we are getting a great deal on our LOCAL taxes on the town's website. In other words: the council is blaming the Board of Education and the County Government for the high taxes. Well, start saving locally, then we'll address the BOE and the county next.

I am glad, that Ted Mattox is standing up for all of us. I support him and his critical approach. Opposition is exactly what we need in Montclair. If this law suit can redirect the councils' attention and uncover inappropriate business practices, it has served its purpose. There should not be a SINGLE dollar spent in Montclair without a proper reason. Every single dollar counts.

Posted by Sylvia | September 12, 2006 10:22 AM
 

WHo's David?

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 10:22 AM
 

Hiding, if you are talking about the wayfinding program, then talk about that. MEDC is supported by the township to the tune of $40,000. The money for the wayfinding program has nothing to do with whether the town should support the organization at all. And what is the beef with MAC? They are doing a great job.

Posted by Helen | September 12, 2006 10:26 AM
 

and by the way, when the marboro inn became a court case, to try to stop that developer. No one ever talked about who was going to pay the legal fees. Who do you think paid the legal fees. This talk about the cost of a law suit is only a foolish attempt to find the real issue. Is the practice of giving away the public's cash out to friends and no profit organizations, without a bid legal. The courts might rule and say that it is,,,,,but I doubt it......So it off to court for Montclair, The town Council and the citizens. Everyone just remember this. Democracy is not a spectator sport, sssshit or get off the pot.

Posted by minority majority | September 12, 2006 10:31 AM
 

Helen, wayfinding was part of the lawsuit. Considering the council appears to be passing a resolution to stop the funding to this program, there must have been some merit to that part of the lawsuit.

The beef from what I read is that the MEDC and MAC are given money for projects that have not been bid out and as they don't meet the definition of an extraordinary service (as per the lawsuit), bids must be put out over a certain $ limit. So let them bid if necessary and then do the work. If that's the law, let's follow it.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 10:39 AM
 

m.m.: So everyone should listen to you, an anonymous voice, rather than what the courts ruled. Because....why, exactlY?? If you believe you are an expert qualified to ignore court rulings, show your credentials.

Posted by fred | September 12, 2006 10:45 AM
 

Or, to quasiquote you, 'S-t or get off the pot'

Posted by fred | September 12, 2006 10:47 AM
 

Fred = ROC

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 10:51 AM
 

The council can blame the BOE all it wants. Lets remember who appointed the BOE-Remson and slate. Therefore, Remson approved the baseball field move, the $2 million for the gym and will approve the extra millions for soil remediation as soon as ground is broken for the gym. All this and town residents cant even use these facilities themselves.

Posted by jimmy229oz | September 12, 2006 10:56 AM
 

Fred is dead. That's a what I said. Everybody's misused him, ripped him off and abused him. Another junkie plan, pushing dope for The Man. A terrible blow, but that's how it goes.

Posted by Freddie's On the Corner Now | September 12, 2006 10:57 AM
 

Not only did they appoint the BOE, but they sit a majority on the Board of School Estimate, so they are even more directly responsible for BOE expenditures.

That makes them responsible for 84% of our tax bill.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 10:59 AM
 

Please note:
"Montclairlover"
is not me.

Posted by Montclair Lover | September 12, 2006 11:10 AM
 

Wrong Hiding. The BOE is independent of the Council. The Council does not have majority vote. Since we have an unelected school board we taxpayers do not have a say in how the majority of our tax bill is spent. Period.

Posted by jmo | September 12, 2006 11:14 AM
 

Who sits on the Board of School Estimate?

Who appoints the BOE?

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 11:17 AM
 

Since I was one of the organizers of the last attempt to change our BOE from appointed to elected, which incidentally was defeated by a considerable majority, my beef then as it is still now is that members are appointed by the sitting Mayor and the BOE Estimate I believe has two members of the current council sitting in minority. There are current members of the BOE appointed by Mayors prior Mr. Remsen. The real issue then as is now is do we want to have a BOE that is subject to budget scrutiny by the taxpayers or not? In 1995, voters seemed to think that taxpayers were not educated enough to participate in a School Board election and budget vote. I found it then hyprocritical and condescending that were not allowed that choice. BTW if you lived here then you might recall that the League of Women Voters came out against having voters exercise their right to vote. Curious don't you thinkn?

Posted by Jmo | September 12, 2006 11:25 AM
 

JMO
I fully support what you tried to do in 1995 and will stand up with you if you try again. I did not live in Montclair then, I moved here in 2003. My taxes were $8500. In 2006, they are $11000. At this rate, I have less than a decade before I need to move. Unfortunately, the re-evaluation will probably accelerate that.
As the BOE wields the biggest stick in the budget, lets start cutting there as soon as the council is held accountable.

Posted by jimmy229oz | September 12, 2006 11:35 AM
 

jmo, the correct info is this...

The board of ed is appointed by the mayor/council.

The board of school estimate consists of 5 members. Tobin, Schlager, Remsen (that's 3 from the town council) and 2 more from the board of ed, Baskerville and one other. 3/5. Majority from the council. They can stop expenditures in thier tracks.

Sooo, the council does have a majority vote and I would say the BOE is not "independent" of the council if they were elected by them.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 11:35 AM
 

From the Montclair Times:

BOEs: Appointed vs. Elected

Posted by Hiding in Baristaville | September 12, 2006 11:36 AM
 

I went to the BOE website. At least four of the members of the board were appointed by Bob Russo. That is a majority of the members. Those of you who are blaming the current council for the adventures of the BOE should really direct your anger towards Russo.

Posted by shelly | September 12, 2006 11:54 AM
 

School Board of Estimate...3/5 are council members.

And the point is that the Board of Ed is appointed by the town council. Maybe not entirely by this council. But that can always change whenever they decide to.

So to always pass the buck that BOE expenditures are totally out of thier hands is simply not true.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 12:02 PM
 

The BOE's actions on Woodman Field have convinced many supporters of an appointed board that changes need to be made.

The BOE is spending $700,000 to move home plate SEVENTEEN feet!

Does this sound responsible?

And they are doing this AFTER there was general agreement NOT to spend money to upgrade the ball field!

So, if electing a board, and voting to approve spending, is the only way we can stop this out of control spending I guess we'll have to try and do that!

If the BOE behaved responsibly, this wouldn't be necessary.

Science Lab in the HS $0
Gifted Coordinator $0
HS Solar Project $0
Useless Ball Field
Upgrade $700,000

If the money is burning that much of a hole in their pockets, give the teachers raises, or better yet, give the money to the principals to give the outstanding teachers raises!

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 12:09 PM
 

Dear Hiding, I stand corrected on the majority/minority comment. I was mistaken. One point though, the BOE sets the agenda, the Council may influence, but on the new school budget it was the Council that pushed a pared back capital cost. Perhaps if we didn;t have principals that who were unionized and contract negotiations by NJNEA, we might be able to get ongoing expenses not just out of whack capital projects. Remember the sale of the Grove Street School?

Posted by jmo | September 12, 2006 12:22 PM
 

The Board of School Estimate consists of the mayor, two council members and two members of the BOE I think that the mayor appoints the two council members, not the whole council. The majorty of the people on the BSE are, therefore elected.

Members of the school board are appointed by the sitting mayor (NOT BY THE COUNCIL) for three year terms, so that by the end of his term, Mayor Remsen will have appointed the entire BOE. Right now I believe that he has re-appointed one of Mayor Russo's appointees and has made two appointments of his own.

Although I would personaly like to see the entire council vote on the scdhool budget,that is not allowed in NJ. A town can either have an appointed board and a BSE or an elected board and have the voters vote on the budget.

Posted by Bitpusher | September 12, 2006 12:37 PM
 

The BOE may set the agenda, but ultimately the School Board of Estimate approves expenditures, which means the council can decide what gets spent if they so decide.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 12:37 PM
 

jmo,

Which "out of whack" capital project did they cut? They cut a much needed science lab at the HS, but what else? They permitted the BOE to spend the $700K on the ball field!

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 12:40 PM
 

"A town can either have an appointed board and a BSE or an elected board and have the voters vote on the budget."

I like option number 2 better.

Posted by Miss Martta | September 12, 2006 12:47 PM
 

Look it up - In the minutes of EVERY single council meeting - Mattox has been careful not to comment on whether the MEDC and MAC are doing a good job. In fact, he only questioned the MEDC's agreement at first… and it was at the Mayor’s suggestion that the Council look at ALL the agreements of the non-profits in town. Mattox is doing exactly what the Mayor didn't think he had the balls to do.

Ed shot himself in the foot.

Furthermore, Mattox has said these groups don't qualify for a "no bid" agreement, not that they didn't provide the twp. with services. So looks like his beef is not with the actual groups, but with the PROCESS by which those groups were awarded contracts/agreements.

Can anybody tell me when Eva, the MEDC Executive Director came aboard? She claims Mattox attended only one meeting but she was hired long after Mattox was assigned to the MEDC in June of 2004. Was she taking attendance before she worked there?

The MEDC/Remsen bunch wants to make this personal…but it is not. This is about open bidding, fair process and equal opportunity for ALL service providers…not to mention chipping away at an “old boy” network that is pervasive throughout this town.

Posted by Anonymous | September 12, 2006 1:16 PM
 

It's also about violations of the VIOLATIONS OF THE OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT which the Town Council has said that they are against.

Talk about hoisted by your own petard.

Maybe we'll get to see Ed "the puking mayor" Remsen get his comeupance.

Posted by Hoisted by your own Petard! | September 12, 2006 1:22 PM
 

It's also about violations of the OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT which the Town Council has said that they are against.

Talk about hoisted by your own petard.

Maybe we'll get to see Ed "the puking mayor" Remsen get his comeupance.

Posted by Hoisted by your own Petard! | September 12, 2006 1:23 PM
 

Hate to leave but fiscal reform won't come fast enough.

Does anyone really think that you won't have another 5% increase in next years property taxes? And each year after that?

It's over for me, VERY sad to leave but I don't see and end to this fiscal train wreck and don't want to be caught in a position where my house value begins to move inversely to property taxes(and not positively).

Good luck to all who remain I'll be rooting for you.

Posted by Mandates Cost Too Much | September 12, 2006 1:27 PM
 

Eva Santiago was hired by the MEDC as executive director in 2004--spring, I believe, but certainly by June, so yes, she WOULD know if Ted ever came to a meeting.

Posted by sorta hiding | September 12, 2006 2:03 PM
 

Does anyone know where I can get a list of members of Leadership Montclair? Is there a web site somewhere?

Posted by Hungry Joe | September 12, 2006 4:48 PM
 

Does anyone know where I can get a list of members of Leadership Montclair? Is there a web site somewhere?

Posted by Hungry Joe | September 12, 2006 4:48 PM
 

I went to the BOE website. At least four of the members of the board were appointed by Bob Russo. That is a majority of the members. Those of you who are blaming the current council for the adventures of the BOE should really direct your anger towards Russo.

Thank you for pointing this out. Some of these bazaar folks are "old race think" - (whites) we need a black person; (blacks) we need a black person. Hence, you end up with folks being on Council slates or BOE based on an irrelevant biological criteria! (Renee Baskerville-Russo,and Ted Mattox - Remson's frankenstein). And, Russo tried to give us Michael Strahan!

Elected BOE - If you want to change a reasonably functional school district into a politically motivated mess where votes and contracts, not children and learning, come first, then go for an elected BOE.

The last time Newark had a BOE that actually educated children, it was an appointed school board and a town that had a diverse middle-class population.

Screaming is not synomymous with leadership or strategic planning.

Posted by black nana | September 12, 2006 4:58 PM
 

Did Eva say this under oath or just in conversation?

Posted by under oath is better - somewhat | September 12, 2006 5:04 PM
 

Didn't she write it in a letter to the Mtc. Times?

Posted by sorta hiding | September 12, 2006 5:25 PM
 

Is that under oath?

Hartnett said that there were 3 Rutgers certified arborists working for Montclair during an interview with the Montclair Times.

It turned out that Rutgers doesn't certify arborists and that they weren't ISA or NJ State certified either.

talk and writing are cheap.

Posted by talk and writing are cheap. | September 12, 2006 5:43 PM
 

Is this a good time to mention that it costs $21,000 per student for an MHS education? Geez, time to do some comparison shopping with school other districts. NJ Monthly paints a very bleak picture for the much tauted school district. Who is our brilliant PR person in town, anyway? Well, someone was asleep on the job this time, we don't even show up in the top 75 HSs of NJ? It'll be a buyers market here soon enough, folks. Hope you didn't get too undervalued on your taxes.

Posted by woeismontclair | September 12, 2006 9:17 PM
 

I think that Joe Hartnett
(ridiculously overpaid at $165K per year) has no business criticizing Ted Mattox's job performance.

Hartnett is simply the second coming of Terrence "Spending Spree" Reidy (with a housing allowance.) Exactly what has Hartnett accomplished besides padding his pockets with sweetheat perks, and raising property taxes??

Explain to me how my taxes increase every year, but I STILL can't get my garbage picked up twice a week? Why is my 4th Ward neighborhhod not getting bulk waste pick up for September, because the first Monday of the month fell on Labor Day?

It's truly amazing how much of OUR money is wasted, on nonsense like wayfinding, and other irrelevant consulting projects.

When I attended Montclair High from 1981-1985, we had a school bus to take us there. Why do our children
(who live 2.5 miles away from school) have to pay for a NJ Transit bus to go to school? I suppose under this council, wayfinding is more important, than school transportation for our children.

I'm a 3rd generation Montclair resident, and Ed Remsen is the WORST mayor on record!! He's an arrogant clown, more concerned with pleasing developers than taking care of taxpayers. Fortunately, your term is almost over. Maybe one day, you'll actually get a full time job.

Sandra Lang is a joke. She was elected to serve the 4th Ward, but doesn't even return phone calls. We will remember that when you run for your next term. Also, when families are grieving at funerals, PLEASE KEEP YOUR TIRED POLITICAL AGENDAS TO YOURSELF!!

Posted by Montclair 1967 | September 13, 2006 1:40 PM
 

montclair 1967,

just a quick comment on the bulky waste issue for september. consider yourself lucky! sector B has their pickup on the second monday of each month -- which means -- that there is no pick-up in october due to columbus day, and no pick-up in november due to veterans day. Same thing happened last year -- even though november had 5 mondays, and there was NO pickup on the fith monday. so ... in sector B, if you didn't get your stuff out last monday ... you have to wait until DECEMBER for bulky waste.

Posted by Anonymous | September 13, 2006 9:49 PM
 

So, now it's pointed out that whoever does the bulky waste schedule can't read a calendar.

How about a petition, since I'm sure you've called 205 and have been ignored.

Posted by Sign my petition | September 14, 2006 12:05 AM
 








Weather
Movies
TV

Gmail
NJ Transit
DeCamp
People Search
Google Maps
Dictionary
Google News
Homeland Security
Essex County News
High School Sports
» MONTCLAIR LINKS
ABOUT
Official Montclair Website
Montclair Center
Montclair Schools
Montclair Community Pre-K
Montclair State University
American Towns
Town Profile
THE ARTS
Arts Montclair
Montclair Art Museum
Montclair Arts Council
Peak Performances
Youth Orchestras of Essex County
ATTRACTIONS
New Jersey Jackals
Presby Iris Gardens
Van Vleck Gardens
COMMUNITY
Montclair Adult School
Montclair Public Library
Montclair YMCA
Mountainside Health Foundation
Red Cross
Toni's Kitchen
COMMUTING
The Clever Commute
Montclair-Boonton Line Train Schedule
FORUMS/BLOGS
Montclair Journal
Montclair Watercooler
Montclair Unmoderated
NJ.com Montclair Forum
Montclair Kids
ORGANIZATIONS
Bike Montclair
Brookdale Park Conservancy
Friends of Anderson Park
League of Women Voters of the Montclair Area
MEWS
Montclair Engineers
MFEE/Montclair Reads
Montclair Fund for Women
Montclair Historical Society
Montclair PTA
Montclair Wildlife
Outpost in the Burbs
OTHER
New Jersey Life and Leisure
VillageRadio

» GLEN RIDGE LINKS
» BLOOMFIELD LINKS
» OUTER BARISTAVILLE
» OF INTEREST BLOGS
BARISTAS
jjschiffer.com
Madeleine Bake Shop
Politics of Place
Read Me, Love Me, Buy the Book
stopkatie.com
Wanderful!!!
ARTISTS

Artisan Studio Underground
Artist / Blacksmith Charlie Spademan
Dust and Rust
habit-image-reaction
I Will Kick Your Ass For World Peace
Regia Richest
CULTURE
Authentic Organizations
La Tertulia
FOOD
Cat Food
Chowhound
Hungry Chef
Mano a Vino
Table Hopping with Rosie
FORUMS
E-gullet NJ
Know Neighborhood
Springsteen Forum
GARDENING
The Gardeners Apprentice
The Gardening Guru
GO GREEN
Green Jersey
Reuse and Recycle in Montclair
HEALTH
Medicana
NEW JERSEY
Bada Bing Blog
Blog Net News NJ
Jersey Side
NJ.com
NJHotShots
NJ My Way
Weird NJ
OF USE
Craig's List NJ
PetFinder
Urban Dictionary
PARENTING
Au Pair Mom
Dante's Inferno with Children
FinSlippy
Looky Daddy
The Mamahood
Raisinology
Toys Not For Tots
Who's the Grown Up?
PERSONAL
55 Secret Street
Act of Contrition
Anovelista
CarreFemme
The Daily Doormatt
Detox Moxie
From Bloomberg to Bloomfield
Green Music Life/a>
I Hate Decamp
Inclusive Ceremonies
Joe's Journal
Little Brown Pen
Living With Cancer
Man With a Pen
Martta's World
Maui Girl's Meanderings
The Media Drop
Meg McGonagall
MOM & Pop Culture
My Life as a Rabid Blog
Richieville
Tina Bell
Snake Oil Sam
The Society for Conscious Craft
Wellness Woman
Wine Lover's Journal
Yenta Diva
POLITICAL
Gold Finch Tech
New Jersey Politics Unusual
REAL ESTATE
Crystal Ball Real Estate
Eco Realty

Email us to link your blog