Glen Ridgers Pushing Petitions

Don't come to my house, I will not be signing that. Although I would like to see them get enough signatures for the referendum so the people who oppose the bond realize that the 50 people that show up to town council meeting complaining do not represent the whole town.

RidgeRes

I'm glad to hear you support the democratic process, we'll see if others want to pay for your recreation activities

Careful what you wish for res.

From here:

Last week, Glen Ridge hosted its third "A Taste of Glen Ridge – Gourmet Kitchen Tour", Rhodes Van Note & Company Realtors for underwrote the event. All proceeds from the tour will be dedicated to the replacement of the exterior entrance to the Ridgewood Avenue School Auditorium.

GlenRes,

I am all for doing this democratically. May the majority prevail. And above all, let's enjoy each other and the great town that we live in.

I totally agree with RidgeRes. If it comes back to bite us, then so be it. Fortunately, I don't think that will be the case. Should be interesting to see the excuses that come out after the bond is finalized.

Will "Glen Ridge Votes" be paying the $10,000 it will cost for the referendum or will they be wasting more town money and time?

Also interesting wording on the petitions. You failed to mention that #1 also includes Library, Municipal Building , Police Dept. ect.... very misleading.

That's funny: complain about a $10K referendum cost when the town's gonna incur at least $20K/month in interest charges on the bond.

to ?:

The first sentence of the first paragraph of the petition says the bonds are "for repairs to the municipal building, library, town yard, a bathroom at Sherman Field and artificial turf at two sports fields in town."

I don't think this is misleading at all.

But thats not stated on the Petition is it. Only the Fields right?

Appletony just asking where is the money coming from is it the town or the Great "Glen Ridge Votes" people?

"I am all for doing this democratically. May the majority prevail"

Majority? No need. All you need is a majority of the 2% who show up to vote on the issue.

So to the well mobalized go the spoils.

It seems to me since there are more likely to be more families who use the field than those which live nearby, the "Pro-turf" folks may have more of an advantage in mobilizing a group of voters.

You probably only need about 400 people on this, especially if it is a special election.

I think the "pro-turf" people should support the idea of a special election.

Why waste more money. The referendum will cost money. If Glen Ridge Votes is so confident let them pay the Bill. As some suggest. Hold a Bake sale for the 10,000

Yeah, the people who want a vote should have to come up with $10K, but those who want to spend almost $50K per month for twenty years should get to do so without a townwide vote. After all, it's for the children!

As a Montclair resident, I thank the town of Glen Ridge for taking up some of the burden of contentious town politics on these boards -- we can't do it alone!

Why do you care if you live in Montclair...The Council has already spoken for the people like we elected them to do.

I held my tongue through your other threads. I couldn't resist chiming in, though, when you had the gall to complain that your fellow citizens will cost a one-time $10K to bring about a vote on your $50K/month x 240 months expenditure. It cracked me up and I couldn't resist. Don't worry, I'll leave you to your brouhaha from here on.

Thanks.

do you know that the "paper work" for the bond alone will cost the tax payers $10,000?

So waste another 10,000 fighting it. smart.... Is Glen Ridge Votes going to pay it?????

According to NJ Statue, it is the town's legal responsibility to hold a public referendum if 15% of the registered voters disagree with an ordinance to incur a long-term debt against the town's credit. The petition is the mechanism, required by the statute, to demonstrate that 15% of the voters disagree.

You folks do realize that it is a 20 year bond and the fields have a 10 year life, don't you?

I'm sorry, but it is insane to borrow money for 20 years for an asset that will only last 10 years. In 10 years there will be another bond to replace the fields, and we will be paying for FOUR fields.

Lunacy, I tell ya, LUNACY.

the 20 year bond is not for the field. As was repeatedly stated by the mayor and council folks a portion of the bond will be for 10 years and a portion will be for 20. The fields would be covered in the 10 year portion. The financial figures that were released even showed the lowering of the payments after 10 years.

I'm sorry but it's insane to try to be relevent to a discussion without first paying attention or at least researcing.

ignorancy, I tell ya, IGNORANCY

Need to pay attention, Well put finally. I thought people in this town were somewhat educated. Apparantly not from most of the anti bond posts. I guess since we have high taxes we should just crawl in a hole and never repair or improve the town, just let it go and see what happens to the property value then... Thanks for trying to educate....

Are the actual ordinances online somewhere?

I tried to post the links here, but the new system will allow only one link at a time:

href="Ordinance 1457">http://www.glenridgenj.org/docs/Ordinance1457.doc
QQQ

3rd try:

href="Ordinance 1457">http://www.glenridgenj.org/docs/Ordinance1457.doc

"May those who desire the spoils of sport, not be those who are the most spoiled of sports".
-By Me.

This town has a long and successful history of obtaining and using private donations for capital projects associated with our schools (see above for one).

How do you think the students who performed on stage in that auditorium, felt looking out at their brothers, sisters, parents and grandparents sitting in seats with springs popping out. Don't think for a minute that those student, performers didn't want the best costumes sound, lighting and yes seats for their performances.

Like the kids who demand "Turf Now", they wanted the best.

The difference is the student, performers earned the money and valuable life lessons along the way.

yes it's great that the auditorium was fixed up. I even bought a seat. But that's no claim to fame since so many others did the same (or more).

However it seems me that we are really heading for problems if we are going to use that as the template for maintaining our facilities. I'm glad we have a great new facility. I'm outraged that it was allowed to slowly slip into such shoddy conditions that it finally became such a blighted eyesore that it had to be handled this way. Where was the preventative maintenance? where was the replacements for the seats when one by one they first went south?

I don't think we really want to live in a town where we will let everything slowly (or quickly) become torn up or wrecked and then expect volunteerism to fill the gap everytime.

Heck if we are going to do that, let's stop plowing the snow and let the residents each shovel their own streets. That'll save us a bundle in the very near future. I noticed that home depot has lots of salt stacked up today, time to all go get some!

Ugh!!!

For Ordinance 1457, past this into your browser:

http://www.glenridgenj.org/docs/Ordinance1457.doc

For Ordinance 1458, paste this into your browser:

http://www.glenridgenj.org/docs/Ordinance1458.doc

For other bond info, paste this into your browser:

http://www.glenridgenj.org/06bondinfo.htm

As always, if you have any questions, give me a call, or send me an email.

If this winds up going to referendum, we will have another information session, and we will try to put together a forum so that folks from all sides will have an opportunity to present their arguments.

Thanks Carl. BTW I was all over the web site and could not find a link.

A poster pointed out that despite the statements in the press that the bonds will be for 20 years, the portion of the bonds that will be for the fields will only be 10. Not that I would doubt the word of a Baristanet poster (jk) can you tell me where it says that? All I see is a reference to the term of the bond being at the discretion of the chief financial officer.

While other posters might be content to rely upon what they have heard, thanks to Carl I read the ordinances. There is nothing there that limits the term of the bond.

However, it appears that the bond cannot be for a term that is longer than "the period or average period of usefulness determined in the bond ordinance."

So, the Carteret bond can't be for more than 10 years, but the bond that will be used for Hurrell can be 15 years, which is the average period of usefulness under that bond.

So, with corrections as pointed out here, it seems that we are going to pay for at least Hurrell for years after it is worn out and needs to be replaced.

That assumes of course, that the fields actually last for 10 years. The way we use fields, that might not be a safe bet.

Has anyone thought about what will happen to the baseball field if lights and turf are installed on the football field? Would that mean baseball moves to Carteret? Come live on Belleville Ave. if you want turf and lights till 9:30 PM. Hope you don't need the ambulance that can't get out of Herman St.

"While other posters might be content to rely upon what they have heard, thanks to Carl I read the ordinances"

Yep I refer to what I have heard because I have been going to the meetings and paying attendtion. It's nice that after posting your mistakes you circled back now to check out the accuracy.

but you sill got it wrong. The field clause in 1457 is 10 years, not 15. I paste it here for your convenience, but the formatting is lost:

h) Improvements and renovations to parks and playgrounds throughout the Borough, including the installation of exterior potting shed, general site improvements and wrought iron fencing at Freeman Gardens. Improvements to Hurrell Field, Freeman Tennis Courts, Clay Field, Sherman Avenue Field, Freeman Tennis Courts, including all work and materials necessary therefor and incidental thereto.
$1,640,000
$1,558,000
10 years

By the way, since I do pay attention, I am not sure that the town website is showing the most recent versions of the bonds. It was stated by the council and the mayor that the final version of the bond would have several items removed, including the fencing at Freeman, but they still seem to be in the version that is posted. What's up with that?

As of Thursday the signatures have already surpassed the requirement and it would seem the "movement" is gaining momentum. I'm told another 30+ have signed on today alone.

Thanks to all who took part and made this town what it is.

face

The proposals for both Carteret and for Hurrell are for ten years. Look in section "a" of 1457 (For Carteret) and section "h" of 1458 (for Hurrell).

Baseball would remain at Hurrell under either proposal.

The council removed the funding for the wrought-iron fence in the last revision, the dollar figures in section "h" reflect that reduction.

Carl... how is that possible, (baseball remaining at Hurrell, if lights will be in the middle of the outfield? Or is the outfield going to be turf and the infield grass then have the outfielders dodging the light poles?

"Management is most important", Jim, you couldn't be more wrong.

Maybe you think a good manager shuts down the government, holds a cigar party with interns and then points in your face while lying under oath. I and most Ridger's would disagree with you.

Character is most important and comes first. Without character a you have nothing. Character is what makes our town great. Character is what rebuilt the auditorium. Character is why we become managers, because we know we will be able to make a difference. Character is something that our kids need to learn so that they may be able to make a difference.

"Heck if we are going to do that, let's stop plowing the snow and let the residents each shovel their own streets. That'll save us a bundle in the very near future. I noticed that home depot has lots of salt stacked up today, time to all go get some!'

Comments like this display little character or management skills. It is more of what we don't need. We can do better.

The statute says that the life of the bond can be for the "the period or average period of usefulness determined in the bond ordinance."

The "average period of usefulness determined in the bond ordinace" in 1458 is 14.98 years. The ordinance averages the useful life of all of the items in the bond.

From the ordinance:

(b) The average period of usefulness, computed on the basis of the respective amounts of obligations authorized for each purpose and the reasonable life thereof within the limitations of the Local Bond Law, is 14.98 years

Nothing stops the 1458 bond from being for 14.99 years.

"Nothing stops the 1458 bond from being for 14.99 years."

But again, as was discussed at the many town meetings. "The bond" would not be one issuance with a commond maturity date. There is to be varying maturity dates, with some items at 10 years and some at 20. Heck, even the mayor indicated that above.

But let's not have a discussion based on what has been stated, let's keep pushing the fear, uncertainty and doubt.

And it takes alot of character to try and pin my opinion on someone else. I'm not sure who Jim is, but he ain't me.

Again, it's great that we rebuilt the auditorium, but that character you talk of should have been evident all along and prevented it from becoming a mess. That character should be evident in all our facilities, which should not be neglected and allowed to decline.

And your right, we can do better. Certainly better than after years of neglect suggesting that as a muncipality we don't have a responsiblity for the conditions of our assets and their remediation

"prevented it from becoming a mess." "neglected and allowed to decline."
"years of neglect" , "responsiblity"

Doom and gloom and scare tactic senerios you sound like an anti Bush Ad.

A good manager has the can do spirit, not a defeatist attitude, that blames others. There is a big difference here, your comparison is apples and oranges.

With water, grass grows back. Auditorium seats do not. So yes the kids and parents who privately funded the auditorium have provided a valuable service to the community and in turn themselves. They have strength of character, and excellent management skills to see their goal realized.

Strength of character seems to be something that is lacking in the GRAA, and as a result the GRAA lacks good management skills,

The GRAA has allowed" the fields to "decline" because of "years of neglect". The GRAA could have "prevented it from becoming a mess", but they did nothing. Perhaps the change we need here is to look for new leadership volunteers for the GRAA, people with solid management skills. Don't blame others because you did nothing and then asked for a free ride. If there is too much usage on the fields, then the GRAA managers (bet your one) need make some decisions and reschedule. Or pay for the turf yourselves.

Why is it that you "We Want Turf Now" crowd (Member those signs around town?) will not even entertain a discussion on private funding for the fields? Those kids made those signs with the coaching of others, it's a fact, and now you hide. Why is it your right to have all of us pay for something that benefits the few? The GRAA has treated this like a campaign. If you had put as much 'management' energy into funding, you might already be done. Why is it our duty to provide your kids with a luxury item?

Um .. I'm not part of the GRAA, and while I was at that meeting my kids were not.

both of us are posting anonymously yet you say I hide.

How come you keep talking about character, but display little in your attacks?

Turf is not the need, turf is a solution. The need is for safe playable fields. It is suggested that turf is the most cost effective solution. If so then bring it on.

The need is for safe playable fields.

Um? Hello? The word you should use is "want" as in, "the want is for safe playable fields."

Needs are supposed to be things you actually need. Your inability to discern between wants and needs is going to cost Ridgers millions and millions of dollars!

This bloke is clearly a troll.

Doesn't "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

Slick Willie -

If you would like to convey a thought in english, or some other language, please do.

If you believe you already did, please explain it.

thanks

I am not the one coming to the town, with hat in hand for funds that are extravagant and unnecessary. To continually try to push this down our throats when you offer no other solutions, to me shows poor character.
And if you call this an attack, clearly you have never been a manager.

You suggest TURF is "most cost effective". The fact is, the fields are "playable" and they are "safe". They are just not ideal.

The GRAA has no contingency plan. You are hanging your outstretched hat on this bond. A good manager would never leave something so important to chance. You should have been fund raising to show an ounce of goodwill. It is evident, that new "managers" are needed at the GRAA.

I am done, You're fired.

Yes I guess you are done.

when all else fails, give up

Why attack the GRAA, volunteers... It's a town wide issue.

Why attack the GRAA, volunteers... It's a town wide issue.