Thrive Montclair Brings New Orleans Flavor To Loft Launch Party

Teddy,

Lets continue the conversation here. Isn't it true that you've voted on a number of variances for Mr. Pfloker. Inclucding the extension of his right to "park" his liquor license.

Isn't it a conflict of interest to rent his LOFT space. Did you get a special price for this event because of your relationship with Steve?

With all of Ted's "listening" and "reaching out" to folks, how does this translate into an effective Mayor?

And really, does he need to go to New Orleans to have someone explain to him what our problems are? Or what to do?

Morial's position as head of the Urban League may simply be a case of, oh well, the rascal's run out of mayoral terms, we've got to put him somewhere as a means of saving face. (Kind of like Geraldo Rivera keeps getting hired by assorted TV stations and networks.) Since he left office in 2002, the charges of corruption in his administration just seem to keep coming and coming. He also tried to pass legislation that would have allowed him to run a third time; that this measure was roundly defeated by NO voters and led to the election of such an obvious fool as Ray Nagin shows that Morial's reign wasn't exactly heartily endorsed by his constituency.

So this is who Ted Mattox wishes to proudly stand alongside? Neither gentleman, I suspect, is terribly "badass."

(That's a figurative "go to" New Orleans to those reading literalists.)

Thanks cathar,

I love when history catches up to folks...

BTW, does Thrive have a website? I can't find one...

Prof, it's www.thrivemontclair.com, though it won't currently tell you much more than that $65 is the "suggested minimum donation" to party with Morial and Mattox.

Thank you...

This tells me much, at the very least Cary Africk's UnityMontclair site is up and has bios, info, etc.

Is it so hard to get simple info on a site?

So while I don't agree with Mr. Africk on many issues, he does seem to grasp the need to communicate in a quick and easy fashion.

Are you listening Ted?

The press release fails to mention voter fraud and corruption in connection with Morial. Interesting how campaign contributors wound up with large construction contracts. Then there is the police force scandal, hiring local residents with criminal records that were expunged so they could legally go out onto the streets with guns. The list is long, I would bet that most Montclair residents would not be in favor of this peculiar brand of transparency.

Excuse my prior post - I forgot to add "alleged" before voter fraud and corruption.

In a rare moment of semi- agreement with you, jerseygurl, I doubt very much that the word "alleged" is necessary before any reportage on instances in NO of voter fraud and corruption.

Let us not forget the N.O. saintly spirit of passing blame to the Governor and the President when the Mayor busses friends and family out of town leaving his city to peril.

I know it was his successor. I was gearing toward the mentality.

WOW

Teddy

Your slogan, YOUR VOICE, YOUR MONEY, OUR FUTURE, fits right in with Marc Morial's outlook on ethics.

Morial wasn't living in New Orleans but continued to file for a homestead rebate certifying that his home in New Orleans was his primary residence. He and his immediate family were actually living in their 1.1million dollar home in Maplewood, NJ.

Stanford Barre, a friend of Marc Morial, pleaded guilty in January to plotting to skim more than $1 million from a $64 million, 20-year contract for energy management services in the final days of Morial's administration.

Others convicted in the City Hall probe include Terry Songy, a former project manager for a city contractor; and Kerry DeCay, Marc Morial's director of property management from 1994 until 2002.

The brother of a former New Orleans mayor whose administration has been the target of long-running corruption probe was sentenced Wednesday to six months of home detention for failing to file federal tax returns.

Morial's uncle Glenn Haydel was accused of defrauding the Regional Transit Authority of a half-million dollars in a fraudulent bond refinancing scheme.

Glenn Haydel's wife, Lillian Smith Haydel pleaded guilty to a scheme involving the New Orleans Public School system.

"Thrive Montclair is the only slate with respect for transparency and open government, and with a track record of standing up to reckless spending and routine tax increases. It is the only credible choice for change."

Good sound bite above yet Teddy chose to vote against the revampment of the Sunshine Laws.

Teddy, Please let us know why you voted this way.

Do you think they can pull in more than the 20or so people that attended the UnityMontclair event?

I'm sure that they can since they are offering to pay people to attend the event.

Is that what you call "cash at the door"?

Isn't that illegal?

Thrive Montclair is having their bash at the Loft, owned by Steven Plofker, a Montclair developer who routinely applies for and is granted variances.

What kind of connection do you have with Plofker Teddy?

This is certainly transparent and shows a great "respect for transparency and open government".

VOTE LARD-ass, he knows who to grease!

Such nasty people!

Anyway, UnityMontclair had a free party that almost no one attended (do you count the band and the band's family?)

We'll see if Thrive can do better even though there's a donation to attend.

Who's lard-ass? Cary Africk? Nick Lewis? Both are rather large, though calling them lard ass wouldn't be nice.

How about lives at home, sponges off the parents and never had a real job ass? Which one of the two stellar at-large candidates would that be?

How about, the candidate that writes letters to his constituents..."Please do not listen to unfounded rumors and write e-mails to us without learning the facts. They do not help believe me. And why you think this holier than thou approach helps your argument is beyond my understanding. Gerry Tobin"

Not the nicest guy.

And why he continues to cover up for his buddy, the town attorney, when it comes to ripping off the town on the train station fraud, I'll never understand. And to continue funding organizations he was a member of with no-bid contracts??? And to try to push through a nearly $1M plan to put signs around town even after the public comments was overwhelmingly against??? Well, maybe he just thinks he knows what's better for the town, regardless of what the rest of us think. Oh no, grouch ass Tobin and his band of misfits has got to go!

Oh yeah, vote badass!

"Good sound bite above yet Teddy chose to vote against the revampment of the Sunshine Laws."

Wow, it's true a little bit of information (or in this case, misinformation) can be dangerous, at least to the feeble of mind.

The sunshine ordinance was voted down by all members of the council, including Tobin. It was a 7-0 vote. It was done on the advice of the league of municipalities.

The only thing this ordinance would have done is reduce the wait time from 5 days to 3 days to turn around an OPRA request. That's it. It would have also necessitated waisting more taxpayer monies to hire additional staff for the town clerk's office to accomplish this...just ask Linda Wanat.

As great as Linda and her staff are, they have too much work and too little staff as it is. They barely made the county deadline for counting the upcoming campaign petitions. And the only reason they made the deadline was that candidates were submitting their petitions before the town deadline. Imagine all 23 candidates turning up on that Thursday petitions in hand. The clerks office wouldn't have made the deadline.

So if you think the faster turnaround (3 days vs. 5) is worth hiring additional town employees, including benefits, pensions, etc. is worth it. Please identify yourself so i can make sure I don't vote for the candidate who's platform is to waste additional taxpayer money!

And since you seem to be a big Tobin proponent, ask why he too voted against this ordinance.

waisting=wasting

Bobbi Brown (not Plofker) was paid the market rate for rental of the loft...check the election fund report, it's a public document.

oh yeah, vote badass!

It is inappropriate for Marc Morial to let Ted Mattox use the National Urban League as a tool in a local election campaign kick-off. This is typical Ted - black DNA is only something he uses for publicity. Wait until the NUL Board Chair, and donors find out that this is how Marc Morial is wasting their tax exempt dollars and using their historic organization's good name.

And, suddenly Ted Mattox is problem-solving? Ted has had four years to engage constituents in intelligent, strategic problem-solving in Montclair. All Mattox has done is bicker, file a legal action against his own community so everyone else could bicker, sponsor gripe sessions to promote open mike bickering, and attack other black elected officials and the entire black middle class of Montclair when they refused to join his call for segregated recreation or be dragged into bickering.

BTW, is this campaign kick-off Ted's first time in the 4th Ward since he engaged in public breast-beating and make-believe mourning over the "black bones" that were not?

Teddy,

Bobbi Brown and Steven Plofker both own the Loft so quibble quibble quibble away.

Market Rate- I sincerely doubt it.

So you still think that you're running against Tobin for Ward 1. Keep campaigning that way.

Isn't it Plawker who is running for Ward 1 on your "slate".

Roger Plawker, a 10-year Montclair resident, is a managing partner of the Roseland-based law firm Walder, Hay-den & Brogan. Plawker has ?experience in criminal defense, complex commercial litigation and attorney ethics,? according to the release.

Has this guy ever been to a town council meeting - I don't find his name in any of the minutes. Has he ever been to a BOE meeting?

So, Teddy it's really all you. You're going to run the show, big assed showman that you are!

Thank you Nana, you said it much better than I could!

"Market Rate- I sincerely doubt it."

Do you have any proof, or are you just throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks...market rate baby, check the public records or confirm your ignorance.

"So you still think that you're running against Tobin for Ward 1. Keep campaigning that way."

It's his slate. He assembled it after being rebuffed by the citizens (come on, he couldn't get 250 signatures, even Noel Brogans had almost that many). He assembled it after trying unsuccessfully to steal two of Ted's campaign mates.

Have any of your unitymontclair candidates, other than Cary, been to meetings? The answer is no, so what's your point. Besides, Roger is one of the candidates Gerry tried to lure away, so that's basically a vote of confidence from Gerry! Tobin's new campaign...Vote for Roger, he was my first choice for 1st ward before I had to step down!

Belletones, you forgot to answer why your boy voted against the sunshine ordinance!

Oh yeah, Vote badass, not nasty to my constituents ass or showing my junk off around town ass!

"Oh yeah, Vote" LARD-ass", not nasty to my constituents ass or showing my junk off around town ass!

Just the kind of ass who knows whose palm to grease.

Teddy - I don't have a "boy" in this race and I'm not running for office. But it's very clear that YOU are running in the first Ward and that you want to be a council person and not the Mayor.

Wow, that made no sense!

You're grouchy and nasty just like your boy! Or are you that boy!

Vote badass, not no sense of humor and nasty to his wife ass!

Oh yeah, still no reply regarding the sunshine ordinance and your boy's vote? what's up with that?

Don't vote for nasty to his constituents ass!

Don't vote for, my first choice for 1st ward wouldn't run with me, so vote tobin...2nd choice is OK too!

Teddy,

I'll say it one more time. I don't have a "boy" or a "dog" in any of the races nor am I running for office in Montclair.

I asked why you voted against the Sunshine Laws and you fabricated a reason that there was only a faster turnaround in metting note posting.

WRONG-O TEDDY

Key Points of S1219/A2762
Amends the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA)
and the Open Public Records Act (OPRA)

Use of Internet
Requires a public body to either a) post meeting notices, agendas, minutes, resolutions, ordinances and an inventory of closed meeting minutes on its Internet site or b) release that information to a qualified volunteer who will publish it on the Internet at no cost to the body.

Meetings to be Audio Recorded
Requires public bodies to record the audio of all its public and private meetings and to retain the recordings for six years.

Open Government Council
Changes the name of the Government Records Council to the Open Government Council and empowers the Council to enforce both the OPRA and the OPMA.

Public Comment Period
Requires public bodies to allow members of the public to comment at the beginning of all non-emergency meetings of all public bodies, not just municipal governing bodies, with each member of the public given at least five minutes to speak. In addition, members of the public will be given three minutes to comment before the body takes final action on any item.

Redefines Public Body
Brings committees and subcommittees of public bodies and advisory committees within the scope of the OPMA and eliminates the exemption for party caucuses if all of the members of a body belong to the same political party.

Redefines “Meeting”
Requires “virtual” meetings (e-mail, instant messaging, chat rooms, etc.) by public bodies to be advertised and opened to the public just like traditional, in-person meetings.

Better Minutes
Requires public bodies to keep “comprehensive” minutes of its meetings and to make the draft minutes and audio recordings publicly available within five business days.

Executive Sessions
Requires public bodies to a) specifically disclose the subjects to be discussed in executive session,
b) to cite the specific legal basis for excluding the public and
c) to review their closed session minutes and audio recordings at least quarterly to determine if any portions can be released to the public because secrecy is no longer justified.

Attorney Fees
Permits members of the public to recover attorney fees from a public body even if the matter complained of becomes moot (e.g. the requested record is released after the complaint’s filing).

Penalties
Establishes monetary penalties of up to $5,000 for public officials, including attorneys, who “substantially violate” either the OPRA or OPMA and establishes special “presenters” to prosecute those violators.

Personal Liability
Violators of the OPRA or OPMA are personally liable for fines incurred and cannot be reimbursed from the taxpayer money.

Burden of Proof
Places the burden of proving compliance with the OPRA and the OPMA upon the government agency.

*************************

As a violator of both OPMA and OPRA you could be personally sued.

Ted,

"The only thing this ordinance would have done is reduce the wait time from 5 days to 3 days to turn around an OPRA request. That's it. It would have also necessitated waisting more taxpayer monies to hire additional staff for the town clerk's office to accomplish this...just ask Linda Wanat."

The post above shows that what you've stated here just isn't true.

The fact that you characterize the requirements of the Sunshine Laws as "WAISTING [sic] MORE TAXPAYER MONIES" shows your lack of understanding of what is needed for transparency in government.

It also shows that you didn't read the text of what you were voting on before you voted. This is something that has been pointed out quite a few times.

Why would you vote on any item without having read it? This is an abuse of voter trust.

We require that you know what you are voting on BEFORE casting your vote.

Please explain why you voted against the revamping of the Sunshine laws.

wow, doing the sock puppet thing again...that's nice.

Most, if not all of these items are already done. the main difference the public would see is the faster turnaround in the OPRA requests. The cost to accomplish this would have been very high requiring additional bodies in the clerks office. Yep, that's right more admin positions and all that goes along with it. A 7-0 vote including your boy. So ask him why he voted against it...I'd love to know the answer. I'm sure it's along the same lines.

But let's be honest, we can continue to bash each other, it's fun. the problem is, Joyce is the clear frontrunner in this election and since I'm mainly in the "anyone but Joyce camp" that's where I'd like to focus my energy, so...

What is the deal with Joyce choosing a candidate with access to firearms and apparently a history of substance abuse when around firearms?

What's the deal with Joyce choosing a candidate with access to other's money who is a professional gambler and takes money that doesn't belong to him to the tune of an SEC fine and suspension?

What's the deal with Joyce choosing a candidate who just days earlier made a public statement that he would not run against, and would support his friend, a 4th ward candidate, even though he actually pulled a candidate package a few days earlier?

What's up with Joyce choosing a candidate that receives "look the other way" favors for her family from the MPD and one of the candidates already mentioned?

What's up with Joyce giving away a school in town only to now have to spend $35M plus to build a new one?

What's up with this deal at the BOE Joyce is promising one of her candidates to run with her? Isn't the BOE budget large enough already? Do we really need to create new positions due to political favors?

Vote badass, not sock puppet ass! And definitely don't vote, "I've had 7 years to come up with a new approach or solution and didn't, but I'll promise it now" ass!

Ted,

Finally some rhetoric against someone that you are actually running against.

I agree, Joyce is disingenuous, Joyce doesn't care about her constituents, Joyce has voted against her constituents interests again and again, Joyce has picked some very interesting (not in the positive sense of the word) people to run with her, Joyce has made promises to her running mates that she should not be able to fulfill (but will because of her backhanded dealings, Joyce IS the enemy.

A vote for Joyce is a vote for double-dealing, politics as usual, the good ole boy/girl network, and a person who cannot be trusted with our money.

Now Ted, what positive things do you plan on doing for us? How will Montclair politics change under you? Will you support the present Town Manager?

Why should we vote for your ass?

Hey, something we finally agree on...a common enemy!

Now, I'll assume you're smart enough to know I'm not really Ted (you are, aren't you?). That being said, I'd love to see him post here and will encourage him to do so if I see him.

Do you want him to support the current town manager? I don't believe they've had a very friendly relationship, though Joe did try to broker a deal to end the lawsuit, which Ted agreed to. Unfortunately the other side did not (remember that every time they bring up the lawsuit and lie about trying to settle it)!

You should vote for Ted because he's the only one that seems to care what the people who voted for him actually want! I've seen Joyce so dismissive of anyone that disagrees with her to the point of, as mentioned, walking out of the meeting.

I'd also vote for him as he seems the only one on the council interested in at least trying to keep the tax increases in check (don't forget our 15.4% increase this year not to mention a double digit increase the year before). Unfortunately when you are the minority in trying to do so, well, you've seen a lot of 6-1 votes against when it comes to spending.

Many people are either going to pick up and move because they can't afford to live here anymore or because they do want to live here, but not at the rapidly increasing price. Ted seems to be the only current council member actually (action opposed to lip service) aware and concerned about this.

So vote badass, not "I don't bother to listen to the lowly people that voted for me" ass!

Teddy,

We know it's you. You can deny it but we still know!

Oh well, I guess you're not smart enough.

And you didn't answer the question?

Teddy,

I'm smart enough to know that it's you and yes please get rid of Hartnett if you win.

Send him back to Rahway where he belongs but first figure out to give him as little of our money as possible.

No golden parachute for that guy!

You overestimate your level of intelligence, obviously...while Ted is at a coffee chat tonight, I'll be posting here continuously!

Ted already publicly stated he would get rid of Hartnett if he won (you should have come to his listening night, but I guess reading the Montclair Times is just as good as speaking to the candidates!)

As far as your 3rd paragraph...Mattox was the only council member to vote AGAINST giving Hartnett more than the state mandated minimum severance....you got it, another 6-1 vote. So now Hartnett gets to leave with MORE of our money then necessary thanks to Tobin, Remsen, Michaelson, Schlager, Lang and Frier.

Not sure how you (conveniently) missed that vote??

Will your boy Tobin do the same? (And get rid of Trembulak who now has residents doing his work for him a la the lawn signs)?

Oh that reminds me...whyt didn't we have proper insurance coverage on the train station that burned down?? Ask Trembulak who is not only the township attorney, but the lawyer for the leaseholder of that space!

BTW, Trembulak, friend and next door neighbor of Tobin! And don't forget their ties together along with Remsen to the MEDC!

No, John Doh is not Teddy, he's Henry.

How dare you accuse a man or woman of wrong doings while hiding behind an alias.

Our town is better than that and this election should be above that.

I call for all candidates to disavow themselves of these dirty and nasty tactics.

And I impore the voters to hold those candidates, Mayoral or otherwise accountable and vote accordingly.

We will never heal this town of the dire problems that we face until we focus on the issues and the sound solutions that should be provided by our candidates.

You know, crazy idea, but I'll throw it out there...since you have so much interest in Ted's platform, why not show up tonight at the coffee chat and actually ask him? I know it's a radical idea, but hey, you never know. His entire slate will be there and you can get ALL of your questions answered! Much better than sitting around here waiting for him.

And while you're there actually speaking with Ted, I'll drop a few posts from home!

you know....badass!

FYI...guess which candidate.

NASD Regulation Fines GKN Securities And 29 Brokers

NASD Regulation, Inc., announced that GKN Securities Corp., and 29 brokers and supervisors have been fined $725,000, and will repay more than $1.4 million to investors who were overcharged as the result of a two-year program of excessive markups in eight securities.

Nearly 1,300 investors from 39 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico will receive payments from GKN within 120 days. These overcharges were uncovered after an investigation by the national NASD Regulation Enforcement Department and its District Offices in New York and Atlanta.

Three of the firm's top officials?Chief Executive Officer David M. Nussbaum, President Roger N.
Gladstone, and Executive Vice President Robert H.
Gladstone?received significant fines and suspensions.
All of the violations occurred at GKN's offices in New York City; Stamford, Connecticut; and Boca Raton, Florida.

GKN and 29 of its supervisors and brokers neither admitted nor denied the allegations that, from December 1993 through April 1996, GKN dominated and controlled the immediate aftermarket trading in eight securities it underwrote so that there was no competitive market for them. As a result, GKN was able to charge excessive markups ranging from six percent to as much as 67 percent over the prevailing market price in more than 1,500 transactions. At least 90 percent of these transactions were fraudulent because the mark-up exceeded 10 percent (a level considered fraudulent).

"Today's case is another example of our focused effort to put an end to fraudulent practices in the micro cap market. These sanctions underscore NASD Regulation's commitment to obtain restitution for victimized investors," said NASD Regulation President Mary L.
Schapiro.

The eight securities involved were: European Gateway Acquisition Corp. Class A warrants; Trinity Americas, Inc. Class A and B warrants; Restructuring Acquisition Corp. Class A warrants; Entertainment/Media Acquisition Corp. Class A warrants; YES!
Entertainment, Inc. warrants; Mako Marine International, Inc. warrants; and Batteries Batteries, Inc. warrants.

As part of the settlement, GKN must pay a $250,000 fine to NASD Regulation, and hire an independent consultant to review the firm's trading policies and procedures for 18 months. This consultant will also recommend necessary improvements that the firm must implement. Further, GKN is required to disclose to customers on their confirmation slips whenever a broker's compensation exceeds 10 percent of the gross transaction amount.

The following supervisors (who are still employed at
GKN) were sanctioned. Unless otherwise indicated, all suspensions will begin with the opening of business on Monday, September 29, 1997.

David M. Nussbaum, Chief Executive Officer, was fined $50,000, suspended for 30 days in all capacities (beginning December 12, 1997), and censured.

Roger N. Gladstone, President, was fined $50,000, suspended for 30 days in all capacities, and censured.

Robert H. Gladstone, Executive Vice President, was fined $100,000, suspended for 30 days in all capacities (beginning November 5, 1997), suspended for three months from acting as a supervisor (beginning January 28, 1998), required to re-qualify as a registered principal, and censured.

Richard Buonocore, Head Trader, was fined $50,000, suspended for 30 days in all capacities, and censured.

Vincent Bruno, the firm's compliance director at the time, was fined $30,000, suspended for 30 days in all capacities (beginning October 22, 1997), and censured.

David Greenberg, branch manager, was fined $15,000, suspended for ten days from acting as a supervisor, and censured.

Martin Schaffer, branch manager, was fined $10,000, suspended for seven days from acting as a supervisor, and censured.

In separate settlements, 22 brokers were fined from $3,000 to $25,000 each, and suspended. NASD Regulation found that these individuals were also responsible for overcharging investors because they accepted excessive gross commissions of 10 percent to 40 percent. Unless otherwise indicated, all suspensions will begin with the opening of business on September 15, 1997. The brokers are:

Dmitry Aranovich ($8,000 fine, five-day suspension,
censure)

Jeffrey Attamanuk ($3,500 fine, three-day suspension,
censure)

David Baum ($6,000 fine, five-day suspension beginning September 29,1997, censure)

Anthony Colombo ($15,000 fine, seven-day suspension,
censure)

Paul Cooney ($4,000 fine, three-daysuspension,
censure)

Irving R. Edelstein($5,000 fine,three-day suspension,
censure)

Mario Figuero ($25,000 fine, seven day suspension,
censure)

Edward Gallagher ($4,000 fine, three-day suspension,
censure)

Carlos Garceran ($11,000 fine, five-day suspension,
censure)

Mark Grenier ($3,500 fine, threedaysuspension,
censure)

Dmitri Kardonski ($10,000 fine,required to re-qualify by examination as General Securities Representative, and censure)

Eugene Kingman ($25,000 fine, seven-day suspension,
censure)

Scott Kliewe ($15,000 fine, ninemonth suspension which began August 18, 1997, censure)

Elliot Kurz ($4,500 fine, three-day suspension,
censure)

Robert Lesser ($7,500 fine, five-day suspension,
censure)

David Macias ($15,000 fine, seven-day suspension,
censure)

Richard Murnick ($4,500 fine, three-day suspension,
censure)

Kevin Neumark ($4,000 fine, threeday suspension,
censure)

Victor Palomino ($5,000 fine, threeday suspension,
censure)

David Siegel ($6,000 fine, five-day suspension beginning September 29,1997, censure)

Alan Weiss ($4,000 fine, three-day suspension,
censure)

Steven J. White ($3,000 fine, threeday suspension,
censure)

The firm will pay $1,159,245, plus interest of $313,729, to the affected investors.

A New York City-based firm, GKN currently employs approximately 350 registered representatives in five offices in New York, Connecticut and Florida.

"How dare you accuse a man or woman of wrong doings while hiding behind an alias."

Uh oh, Joyce/Robin are pissed. Stop being so indignant. Is there something incorrect in what I posted? Luckily you don't make the rules here.

"We will never heal this town of the dire problems that we face until we focus on the issues and the sound solutions that should be provided by our candidates."

We will never fix what is wrong with the town council as long as Joyce is there making here shady back room deals and giving favors (and business) to friends.

"No, John Doh is not Teddy, he's Henry."

Nice try Joyce, but as you can see, I am not Jon Doh.

Ouch!

vote badass!

"Nice try Joyce, but as you can see, I am not Jon Doh."

All that proves is you are smart enough to use more than one User Name.

Sadly, that same intelligance does not allow you to see the damage you have done. One day, you may or will want to raise a family in this town like the candidates you have written about.

You will be known as the man and the campaign by association that sunk into the gutter.

Joyce Michaelson has voted for Every Tax Increase, Every No Bid Contract, and Every Addition to the Municipal Debt for Six Years.

Taxpayers Cannot Afford Joyce Michaelson

May 13th Vote Line C for Change!

Did Joyce Michaelson really vote to sell one of our schools for $1 million a few years ago?

If true, it makes her efforts to help build a new school for $30 million somewhat shocking.

It's kind of funny. We're also looking at experience (Michaelson) versus judgement (I'm not sure who that would be) on the local level.

It would seem that good leadership would have kept the school and rented it out to a private school. That way they wouldn't have to build a new one some day.

Did she really vote to sell it?

Why do todays taxpayers have to spend 35 million dollars on a new school?

Because Joyce Michaelson voted to sell the Deron School on Grove Street for 1 million dollars in 1988.

"The building is not needed for school purposes now or in the future. It has not been used for a number of years"

This is an exact quote of Joyce Michaelson from a 1988 Montclair Times article.

Taxpayers Cannot Afford Joyce Michaelson!

May 13th Vote Line C for Change!

A simple IP addy check would show to different people.

$35M to build the new school + $5m to acquire the land + $XM to demolish the existing buildings (which increased due to the discovery of asbestos) + $xM to renovate the old Rand school to make it useable for middle school kids. It's a lot more than $30-$35M.

Michalson may have experience, but it's not the type of experience we can afford to have continue.

Why do todays taxpayers have to spend 35 million dollars on a new school?

Didn't Mr. Maddox vote for a $45 million dollar school, and then sued after the price was reduced to $35 million by removing the pool? The suit was because the Little Y was a historic building. Wasn't the Little Y just as historical when the projected cost was $45 million?

word out on the street is that Morial, the ex mayor of New Orleans, has called off
coming to speak at Ted's function tomorrow nite.

I guess he didn't want to pick up the litter that will be generated when all of the cars are papered.