Candidates Bare All For Star Ledger

WEEKEND OBSERVATIONS?
A few things I noticed the campaigns doing at the Tour de Montclair:

JOYCE MICHAELSON (for MAYOR), with bike helmet in hand, appeared to be the first candidate on hand. She had a long conversation with the president of Bike Montclair. Seemed awkward but did talk to many people. She doesn't seem to be a natural politician. Did anyone see her riding a bike on the course? I didn't see a bike and I didn't see her during the tour. Maybe the helmet was for show.

CARY AFRICK (for 2ND WARD) was there with his video camera. He could use some exercise but he's still no Remsen.? He's very comfortable with the masses. A lot of smiles.

ROBIN SCHLAGER (for AT LARGE) gave a big kiss to the infamous town manager Joe Hartnett. I think that's all that needs to be said. She seemed more comfortable in a non-town council setting. It must be hard deciding how to vote when your MFEE boss sits next to you on the town council. It will only get worse if her boss is the mayor.

GERRY TOBIN (for 1ST WARD) doesn't fit with the Unity Montclair slate. It seems calculated. His survival as a small town lawyer must rely on him getting business through membership on the town council. His heart doesn't seem in it. No biking for him. Probably to much to ask after a morning swim.

http://www.gerrytobin.com/about.htm

JERRY FRIED (for MAYOR) got to the event before the start but later. I don't think he did the tour in his always colorful jacket and tie. Some organizers were wearing Unity Montclair stickers.

KATHRYN WELLER (for AT LARGE) was looking very pregnant. I noticed her after the tour. She seems to like being out in public. She is pretty much the opposite of Joyce Michaelson.

I didn't see anyone from the Mattox slate. Probably didn't want to waste time with a Fried-leaning crowd.

thomas

READ ALL ABOUT IT

All we need is a Mayor whom believes he is above the law or at the very least is so ignorant that he doesn't recognize that parking facing the wrong way on a street is illegal unless a sign is posted.

From Sunday's Star Ledger, on Ted Mattox

"More recently, he said, he got a $65 ticket for parking on the wrong side of a street that becomes a one-way-only at pickup and drop-off times at the Watchung School. There is no municipal sign announcing the restriction, he said.

I am going to fight that one," Mattox said of his pending municipal-court appearance."

READ ALL A PLAWKER ABOUT IT

From Sunday's Star Ledger...

"K. Roger Plawker works for the legal firm that defended ex-Nets player Jayson Williams in his reckless manslaughter trial, though he notes he wasn't actually on the defense team. "Not too much," the candidate said of his role. "We're a 30-attorney firm."

More Lawyer speak? Did you work on the case or not? What does the K. stand for...I "Kinda" worked on the case.

Saw Joyce M and Plawker out campaigning this morning while waiting for the bus. All Joyce kept saying was "we have the most experienced ticket." I don't see too much to be proud of from the current administration, so I'm not sure that experience is a great thing in this case. I can't see much of anything changing under her. Plawker seemed very nice and intelligent. Between him, Tobin and Murnick, I'm leaning towards Plawker. (Mostly through process of elimination.)

I have problems with all of the mayoral candidates. Not sure what I'm going to do next Tuesday.

A jewel in someone's past the Star-Ledger didn't catch.

EZVote - EzFraud

Why doesn?t Jon Corzine save everybody the trouble and just mail in everyone?s vote:

In the past two weeks, thousands of voters across New Jersey received a glossy, four-page brochure announcing "New Jersey's new EZVote by mail program."

The brochure even came with a handy "voter's guide" on New Jersey's gubernatorial election and a pair of pre-printed absentee ballot applications. Each application bears the automated signature of Sandy Castor of Montclair as one who "provided assistance" to voters filling out the form.

Castor, it turns out, is a paid partisan in the employ of Democratic candidate Jon Corzine. The state Attorney General's Office says there is no EZVote program.

And the brochure is a cleverly disguised campaign mailer designed by Corzine adman Steve DeMicco. With a magnifying glass, you might see the words "Corzine for Governor" in tiny type across the bottom of the first page.

The officials said many voters are wondering why the state would send them an absentee ballot application that is already filled out. Voters are also perplexed why a stranger from Montclair, Sandy Castor, wants to assist them on their application when they didn't need any assistance at all.

Some voters are electing to scratch off Castor's name. Others have written in the names and addresses of people who actually did assist them with the application. Still others are so confused they are sending in incomplete applications.

"They apparently think that everything is already filled out for them and Castor's signature is all they need," said Hudson County Clerk Javier Inclan, who is also president of County Clerks Association of New Jersey.

http://enlightennj.blogspot.com/2005/10/ezvote-ezfraud.html

http://www.redorbit.com/news/politics/280033/ezvote_mailer_for_corzine_is_clever_confusing/

From RomanEmpire's source article:

"Republican strategists who saw the ad for the first time Thursday acknowledged that it was a masterpiece of sly deception. "Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant," said one GOP operative who asked not to be named."

The article starts off with this, so it must be the most important part:

Peter Zorich is the son of Oscar-winner Olympia Dukakis and a newsman who once produced "The O'Reilly' Factor" for Fox News.

The important question (for Montclair voters) is, is he the son of a a newsman who once produced "The O'Reilly' Factor" for Fox News,

or

a newsman who once produced "The O'Reilly' Factor" for Fox News??

Or more importantly, how is it that "newsman" and "The O'Reilly Report on Fox News" end up in the same sentence?

what does zorich do now. Unless your boobs begin with a capital B, there is no severance package at fnc.

Ted sues people when things don't go the way he wants. David Herron sues people when he doesn't get what he wants. And then Herron writes letters to the Montclair Times laying out vicious ad hominem attacks on other candidates in support of Ted. Yeah, this sounds like a friendly group of folks looking to usher in a new day of cooperativeness and openness in Montclair.

"what does zorich do now. Unless your boobs begin with a capital B, there is no severance package at fnc."

Zorich's linkedin profile says he's currently a producer at Bloomberg News. Bloomberg? Now there's a Boob with a lot of capital.

LOL, Croiag, my sediments exactly. I am really finding it difficult to read the Star-Lecher's coverage of this Montclair election. One, because I don't live in Montclair, it seems to be a monumental bore to me, even though the "sleaze quotient" is between orange and red; second, Phil Read is about as exciting a read (pun intended) as "Millard Fillmore's Laundry Lists," so I rarely get past his lead. I think I will enjoy reading about the McGreevy divorce proceedings a lot more than the Montclarion Mud Slinging championships. Do any of the candidates have an ... interesting ... pastor we can out?

From the July 24, 1997 issue of the New York Times:

"Peter Zorich is partner in firm called Famous Fixins, which links celebrities with food products and which has come out with Olympia
Dukakis Greek Salad Dressing"

Maybe he can help Joyce sell "Joyce Michaelson's warmed up leftovers"

From Sunday's Star Ledger, on Ted Mattox

"More recently, he said, he got a $65 ticket for parking on the wrong side of a street that becomes a one-way-only at pickup and drop-off times at the Watchung School. There is no municipal sign announcing the restriction, he said.

I am going to fight that one," Mattox said of his pending municipal-court appearance."

Posted by John Duh! | May 5, 2008 1:13 PM

1) The story says he parked on the wrong side of the street, not that he was facing the wrong direction, even though the latter makes more sense.

2) Last time I was on that street, late last year, it was one-way all day on school days. Either it's changed or the S-L got that detail wrong.

Maybe he drove down the street the wrong way and parked.

In which case he should have received at least 2 tickets!

He obviously DOES think he's above the law.

I live in the First Ward. Based on track record, there's no way I can vote for Tobin. I've spent time talking with both Murnick and Plawker. I was very impressed with Plawker's passion for the issues. He's a really bright guy that seems to truly care about getting our runaway local gov't spending under control. Murnick seems like a great guy to play poker with (in Vegas or AC maybe?)but I found him severely lacking in his grasp of the issues and how to remedy them.

Before I decide who I'm voting for, I thought I'd take a look back at some of the promises made during the last election. These are all from the Star-Ledger, four years ago:

JOYCE MICHAELSON
"I will hold the council and the manager, as well as myself, accountable for delivering defined objectives....In order to control spiraling property taxes, I will seek efficiencies, establish increased collaboration with other government entities....Parking: I will serve as the point person to address the legitimate parking requirements of residents, commuters, shoppers, merchants and educators."

GERALD TOBIN
"I will work to stabilize property taxes by watching where every tax dollar goes in the operating and capital budgets; working with the new town manager to streamline and consolidate services and expand opportunities for shared services to achieve cost savings..."

SANDRA LANG
Candidate did not respond.

TED MATTOX
"I would work with our town manager to improve basic services, expand our relationships with the many nonprofits we partner with, and communicate effectively with our customers - the homeowners, tenants and merchants in Montclair."

After thorough review of these particular candidates, I'm still undecided. But I gotta say I'm swaying towards Sandra Lang. There's not one campaign promise she hasn't kept. Too bad I don't live in her ward.

I don't see that Sandra made any campaign promises.

I'll vote for the someone if they would stop talking flowery nonsense about "listening to the will of the voters and ensuring completion of greater aspirational objectives" or some such BS, (including any use of "partnering" or "collaboration" in any way) if they can give me some CONCRETE things they will do. Since this is my own personal fantasy these are the things I want:
- Stop pursuing unwanted and ridiculously wasteful projects like a 2 million dollar expenditure to enact a train whistle ban
- Actually DO something to lobby NJT about why we still don't have weekend train service instead of putting up more obstacles to it
- Eliminate the archane overnight parking ordinance
- Fire the Town Manager on day 1

Drob,

If your personal fantasy is to fire the town manager on day 1, then I think Joyce Michaelson might be your dream candidate. This is from her personal website, July 2003:

"I am heading up the effort to identify and hire a new Township Manager. We have contracted with Dan Mason of Jersey Professional Management to coordinate our search...We have reviewed resumes and have selected candidates who have received an extensive questionnaire. From these replies we will determine whom to interview."

I'm sure, with the help of a consultant group like Jersey Professional Management, Joyce Michaelson will have no problem once again finding a qualified town manager. And all it will cost us is the price of Harnett's 6-month severance package, plus conslutancy fees, ads in the local papers, and perhaps a housing subsidy. This is the perfect example of why we have to re-elect someone like Michaelson who has the hands-on experience to get the job done right the second time.

"- Fire the Town Manager on day 1"

Nice one. That leaves out Joyce anyway.

"conslutancy fees"

I LOVE IT! So true....

This was e-mailed to me by a new supporter of the CONSOLIDATED CHANGE SLATE:

------------------------
They said it is from the Montclair Times (May 1, 2008).

Michaelson noted that she founded the Montclair Fund for Education Excellence (MFEE), which is a nonprofit that supports public education in town.

When Mattox addressed the question about the school district tax, he alleged that the MFEE director is paid for with public money.

Michaelson interjected: "That's not true."

"She is not paid by the Board of Education," Michaelson said. "If you say something three times, it doesn't make it true."

When asked whether MFEE Director Lois Whipple's salary is paid by the Board of Education, Montclair Schools Superintendent Frank Alverez responded in an e-mail: "No. I believe the district issues her check, but MFEE pays."

The Times contacted Whipple to ask whether she is paid by the Board of Education.

"It is inaccurate to say that my salary is paid by the Board of Education," Whipple said. "The way I'm paid is the amount is determined by the MFEE Board and I receive a paycheck from the Board of Education. We are billed periodically by the Board of Education, and the MFEE pays back to the board in full the (MFEE director's) salary amount."

Whipple told The Times that she receives medical insurance through the Board of Education for which the MFEE is not billed. Whipple said that she belongs to a public pension plan through the Board of Education.
--------------------------

This is troubling on several levels.

We can all start nonprofits with the Board of Education picking up pension and benefits? I don't think so.

Partnership At-large candidate Robin Schlager is also listed as a staff member at the MFEE. What's her deal? And, do we really think she can vote her mind on the council with her boss looking over her shoulder?

The cozy and incestuous relationships are wrong. It's why we need a CHANGE.

thomas
Much thanks to all those contributing this type of information to me. Keep it coming.
pamphleteer76@gmail.com

It is interesting and troubling that the tax payer is paying for an MFEE employee's benefits and pension (and maybe her salary, who knows if the reimbursement is true).

It's also troubling that when Mattox confronted Joyce with the info, she lied about it.

So if Mattox dug up this great info, why isn't he on the "consolidated" ticket you propose?

THE PEOPLE'S CONSOLIDATED CHANGE SLATE:

Mayor-Jerry Fried (Unity)
At-Large-Starr Daniels (Thrive)
At-Large-Kathryn Weller (Unity)
First Ward- Roger Plawker (Thrive)
Second Ward-Cary Africk (Unity)
Third Ward-Nick Lewis (Unity)
Fourth Ward-Dr. Renee Baskerville (Independent)

We are proposing this merged slate to keep Joyce Michaelson's PARTNERSHIP slate (establishment, status quo) from winning the election.

The UNITY and THRIVE slates will split the CHANGE vote. That will give Michaelson the election with less than a majority of the vote. It happened in 2004. It will happen again unless something is done.

It would be great if the two CHANGE slates merged to combine forces. We know that's not likely to happen.

That's why the silent majority of this town must act to insure CHANGE.

We can do this.

"We are the ones we've been waiting for."

thomas
pamphleteer76@gmail.com

I like the late James Brown's slate: PEACE! UNITY! LOVE! AND HAVING FUN!

It's because we don't need a hothead who refuses to work within the system as a mayor.

Mattox = hothead

Ted Mattox may be a tad on the bombastic side, but after a few lengthy conversations with him, it's hard to argue that his heart is not in the right place. The only thing he is truly guilty of is pointing out the type of misuse of power and incestuousness of local government that we currently have in Montclair. He'll get my vote for having the courage of his convictions. The others strike me as nothing more than panderers with their own agendas.

Here's the agenda that you have in store for you:

Get ready to pay for more lawsuits- both from Teddy (hothead) Mattox and his buddy David (lawsuit king) Herron.

Wow, this is the same bs that David Grill is planting on the Watercooler. Mattox (or his wife) posted that he had no intent of putting Herron on the BOE.

"I would work with our town manager to improve basic services, expand our relationships with the many nonprofits we partner with, and communicate effectively with our customers - the homeowners, tenants and merchants in Montclair."

Wow - he fought viciously with the town manager (and everyone else), he sued over the relationships with non-profits, he thinks citizens are customers? I think the consolidated list is looking pretty good!

He sued over the council's decision to give out no-bid contracts to their buddies (Remsen, Tobin, Trembulak all either founded or worked with the MEDC). Also, over the wayfinding program which would have cost approx. $800k and which was immediately dropped by the rest of the council upon receiving the lawsuit.

I was his wife who said that she knows exactly what he's thinking, what his intent is, and what he'll do. Yeah girls, would you claim that!

Teddy doesn't bother to post on the watercooler. He's afraid of the questions that people will ask him. He's afraid of putting anything in writing.

why?

Think lawsuit. think litigation!

I believe it waws Kevin Courtney that posted a long list of questions for the candidates, that reported only Ted had answered them...not Cary, not Fried.

Fried doesn't post on the watercooler either. What's he afraid of putting in writing? Or is it just that he actually has no real ideas other than his hippy dippy feel good vibe?

I beleive that Cary Africk had answered those questions previously- you only have to read his posts.

Has Ted answered any other questions on the Watercooler...did Ted answer those questions...I beleive that Ted said that he would answer those questions and that was the only answer that was given.

Kevin then thanked Ted for responding to him but the questions were never answered.

From the Watercooler, the post in question. Michaelson and Fried have not answered the candidate questions, Mattox has. Why would you lie about this?

"I ask candidate Michaelson
to answer the questions and clarify her positions on the issues. In the event
that she cannot or will not, please let me know. I will stop asking.

On another note, I am very pleased to share that candidate Mattox has taken the
time to address all of the issues. I will post his responses on Saturday,
unless he posts them himself earlier. I commend him on his openness and
willingness to state is positions.

Finally, I am also looking forward to reading candidate Fried's thoughts on the
issues."

"I will post his responses on Saturday,
unless he posts them himself earlier. I commend him on his openness and
willingness to state is positions."

So his responses were NOT posted just like I said.

Why is Mattox not posting his responses?

No, they are posted. So Mattox answered the candidate questions. Where are Fried and Michealson's answers? Do they have any?

Here is the post...

I am very pleased to post mayoral candidate Ted Mattox?s response to the
questions that I posed on the Watercooler. I highly commend him for
publicly stating his positions on these issues. I continue to be
disappointed that none of the other mayoral candidates have cared to
respond. I honestly believe that it is their responsibility to address
these issues so that we can elect the best possible representation.

For the record, I am not a member or a supporter of any political slate. I
am a 25-year Montclair resident who wants to make an informed selection in
the voting booth. Finally, I still encourage candidates Michaelson and
Fried to respond, as we still want to know!

Regards,

Kevin Courtney

I have not received them from the Watercooler. They have not been posted. They were promised to have been posted but they have not been.

A promise but no results.

You claim that Mattox posted his responses- where are they

there are no answers to any question in the post that you brought over from the Watercooler.

I see no answers

He also provided his home phone # and email address for any follow up questions.

When will Fried and Michaelson post answers?? I've seen Joyce post on the watercooler previously (though not since the slates were formed) and I don't remember Fried ever posting, at least not recently.

I tire of this sham.

You said that Mattox had posted his responses. He has NOT.

Courtney posted Mattox responses. They are in the Watercooler. Stop being stupid...if you really want to see the answers, they were posted on the watercooler at 1:07 pm by a Kevin Courtney.

Again, when will Fried and Michaelson let us know where they stand on these issues/questions.

Balderdash!

More misinformation coming from the THRIVE campaign.

There has been NO POST FROM MATTOX

Are you slow? I said that the person who asked the questions, Kevin Courtney, posted Mattox's responses.

For anyone actually interested in reading the answers from Mattox to the questions put forth for all of the candidates (again, only Mattox responded), the post was by Kevin Courtney at 1:07, message 59715.

There still has been no response from MATTOX just one from his wife who says that Ted has posted his response.

BUT ALAS TED HAS NOT POSTED ANYTHING

I went back and found that I never said Ted had posted the answers, but that he had answered a post from Kevin Courtney and Kevin posted the answers Ted sent him...why is it so important for you to mislead people on this issue?

Is this how Fried's and Africk's minions try to mislead people?

I will copy the entire post here for anyone without a Watercooler membership.

Sorry for the length, it is copied in it's entirety...

I am very pleased to post mayoral candidate Ted Mattox?s response to the
questions that I posed on the Watercooler. I highly commend him for
publicly stating his positions on these issues. I continue to be
disappointed that none of the other mayoral candidates have cared to
respond. I honestly believe that it is their responsibility to address
these issues so that we can elect the best possible representation.

For the record, I am not a member or a supporter of any political slate. I
am a 25-year Montclair resident who wants to make an informed selection in
the voting booth. Finally, I still encourage candidates Michaelson and
Fried to respond, as we still want to know!

Regards,

Kevin Courtney

Answers to Questions Posted on the Montclair Watercooler:

Board of Education:

Q: Elected vs. Appointed B.O.E?

A: There is no evidence to support whether an elected or appointed board is
more efficient or fiscally responsible. I support a referendum. To
suggest (like the other mayoral candidates did during our Mayoral Forum on
channel 34) that the people who ultimately pay the bills are irresponsible
and couldn?t possibly determine, via voting, their own future and that of
their children is an insult. Schools in Montclair will always be funded
appropriately because even those folks who don?t have children in the school
system realize that good schools mean higher resale values for their homes.
I say give the residents the credit they deserve by letting the ?people?
decide. I would also add to the conversation the possibility of a ?hybrid?
board, with members who are both elected and appointed, as we have seen
deployed in Camden Public Schools, Washington, D.C., Detroit and elsewhere.

Q: Taxpayer Approval on B.O.E. Budget?

A: This issue may or may not be tied to the question above depending on the
type of board the municipality has selected. My own feeling is that the
public should be able to vote on any single cost of more than more
$50,000.00 annually. This excludes essential operating costs and required
maintenance, but would include labor contracts and optional upgrades of
facilities, etc.

Q: Do I Support Building a New School?

A: Yes, I support building a new school, but the school as originally
promised with the original price tag. That means a school with a pool and
community center. I would not support a school at a cost of $40 million.
This project is already three years behind schedule and an estimated $8
million dollars over budget already.

I?ve gone back ten years on this issue, and to my knowledge an official
report does not exist that performs a cost benefit analysis between building
a new school versus offering each existing school approximately 35 million
dollars in upgrades and expansions staggered over the same bonding period as
the purposed new school. The township would save millions in interest alone
and each existing school over the bonding period of the new school would
have been completely renovated/expanded.

Let?s not forget, the district?s own numbers predict that enrollment is down
by more than 100 students next year alone.

Authorities:

Q:Abolish the Water/Sewer Authorities?

A: After having seen the gross mismanagement of these township services to
the tune of half a million dollars, separating these services out seemed the
only option in an effort to gain financial clarity of these deficit ridden
departments.

Now we are at a point where the township has regained fiscal control over
the situation and we no longer need this type of internal relationship.
There are however a few fiscal and funding advantages to separating out
water/sewer.

Bottom line: We need to find a way to include the fees for these services in
the property tax bill so it can become deductible. I have no real issue
with reversing the creation of the Sewer and Water Authorities. The
township should present this issue to the residents so that the people can
decide. For the most part, this issue is about funding this service. The
service to residents has not materially changed.

Development:

Q: Do I support restricting developers to buy, raze and rebuild bigger or
multiple dwelling units?

A: Yes. I would discourage residential units (more trash, congestion, less
parking, more school kids, etc.) and promote commercial ratables whenever
possible.

Q: Do I support selling parcels of township land to developers?

A: For township land which is already developed, such as the contaminated
former gas station on Orange Road, I would sell. There is no real
opportunity for a park or green space there (did I mention it was
contaminated?). I would not sell the Wildwood lot though, we must preserve
what little green space we have in town. In fact, as the Township Master
Plan dictates, I would look for every opportunity to create additional green
space. We should not be afraid of not building.

Municipal Government:

Q: Do I support restricting Montclair Municipal Employees from Moonlighting
for other towns while they are full time employees.

A: Yes, for non-union management employees. Here is why: I believe that
managers and above in general make enough in salary and wages to dedicate
themselves to Montclair?s issues. Further, I always wonder how well
employees can self regulate their commitments to two management positions,
family and all of life?s ups an downs before it affects their ability to
think proactively about doing the best job they can for a single employer.

A: No, for all other employees. The theory is that if a non-management
employee, for example, a janitor, wants to work after hours for another
school district, I believe this would be okay. His task and obligation to
the township of Montclair is limited and extremely focused with a daily
finite, measurable goal?.. to clean the school. While I do not expect
?thought leadership? as a part of that position?s requirements, I would
expect the ?janitor? to make efficiency recommendations from time to time.

It should be noted that there are dozens of legal and employment issues that
surround this topic.

Q: Do I support privatizing services such as garbage collection to reduce
the cost of municipal government?

A: Yes, for the obvious reason of saving money. We should also consider
making trash collection a shared service with surrounding towns or a county
issue.

Q: Do I believe that the town council should vote their conscious or vote
representing the desires of their constituents when there is a difference.

A: The council should never vote together for the purposes of getting along
with each other. Each individual councilor has his/her constituents. Each
councilor should fight for what their constituents want as long as it not
illegal or doesn?t pose a public safety threat. It it?s illegal, we can
look at making it legal if the issue is within the municipality?s
jurisdiction. I was elected to the council by the residents, not my fellow
councilors. I will only be held accountable by the residents of Montclair.

Affordable Housing:

Q: Do I support local government mandated affordable housing?

A: Yes, Montclair?s commitment with respect to affordable housing is
reflected in our voluntarily adopting state Council on Affordable Housing
Guidelines (COAH). Montclair has exceeded the requirements set forth by
those guidelines.

The COAH website defines the commitment as:

New Jersey municipalities enter the COAH process voluntarily. We do so by
filing a housing element (required by the Municipal Land Use Law as part of
each municipality's master plan) and a fair share plan establishing a
realistic opportunity for the provision of a predetermined number of units
affordable to low and moderate income households as well as an affordable
housing obligation directly related to certificates of occupancy issued for
residential and non-residential market rate development.

http://www.newjersey.gov/dca/coah/about.shtml

Q: If so, how much taxpayer money would you allocate to fund this
initiative?

A: Currently we support Homecorp, a not-for-profit here in Montclair, as our
point organization regarding this issue. They have been awarded a no-bid
contract worth about 40K per year along with a forgivable loan of another
200K to provide additional affordable housing units that developers don?t
provide.

Affordable housing in Montclair is extremely tricky. Any taxpayer funding
increase over current levels that raises taxes endangers those residents
currently finding it difficult to support the current tax burden. I will
not support additional affordable housing if it will financially endanger
those residents already living on the financial edge in Montclair.

Also, I?ve been seeking a legal way to exempt senior citizens who are
retired and living on fixed incomes from continued tax hikes. Simply put,
at retirement, their taxes would remain at that level until they sold the
property or expired.

Q: If so, what would be the mission of this program (affordable housing for
seniors, low-income citizens wanting to move to Montclair, or low-income
residents)?

A: In order: Seniors, low-income residents, low-income citizens (any
person, not just citizens) wanting to move to Montclair.

Thanks to Kevin Courtney for these questions. Please keep in mind my post
repeated below:

POST:

I would be more than happy to answer all these questions, although complex
issues such as affordable housing and how to fund it (or not) are not
answerable in one word. I hope not to offend anyone but to suggest that
complex issues can be answered in this manner only demonstrates a serious
misunderstanding of municipal government and how it must sync up legally
with county, state and federal laws and still represent the will of the
local residents as best it can.

Additionally, giving a one word answer is only helpful if all the readers
have an in-depth understanding of the issues to begin with. If someone
doesn't understand the intricacies of the issue, my one word answer, while
clear, will still mean different things to people that have varying levels
of understanding.

Should you have any more questions, please call me at home, 973-744-3772 or
contact me via contactus@... directly.

Ted Mattox

Candidate for Mayor

Councilor at Large

So,

The post above was NOT posted by Mattox? Is it so that Mattox can disavow it.

His wife was on the watercooler this morning claiming that Mattox had posted this before it was posted by this other person.

SO THIS POST WAS NOT FROM MATTOX. Why doesn't Mattox post his own responses. Maybe it's so that he can sue the Watercooler for publishing responses that didn't come directly from him.

What? Are you seriously deranged or desperate?

People, the post was in response to a Watercooler member's questions on the election issues. Mattox responded to this person and he posted the answers. No conspiracy there.

Read the answers, if you agree, maybe vote for Mattox, if you don't, vote for Michaelson or Fried. it's not rocket science.

If Fried or Michaelson answert these questions, I'll also post them for people to read and decide.

Jerry Fried's Watercooler answers to issues. This was also not a direct post by Fried, but posted by Kevin Courtney (the original questions were his)....just in cas that is still confusing to anyone.

From: Jerry Fried [mailto:jerryfried@...]
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 7:27 AM
To: Kevin Courtney
Subject: Re: Critical Questions for the Upcoming Town Election

Hi Kevin,

Sorry, time constraints have made it hard to get this done. Here is what I've
got:

Board of Education

* Do you support an elected or appointed BOE for Montclair in the future?
Appointed, with a new Nominating Committee which Unity Montclair is
proposing to make sure that ALL candidates for the BOE are vetted through the
town's education experts and citizens.

* Do you support requiring taxpayer approval of the BOE budget by taxpayer vote?
The present system doesn't allow enough public input and oversight.
The budgeting process should have AT LEAST one more month of public forums and
debates on specific items.

* Do you support continuing to build the new middle school?
The original school proposal was a visionary plan to use the new school to
revitalize and strengthen the neighborhood with a community center, pool, shared
parking for local businesses, etc. Now it's just a VERY expensive school which
adds very few seats. With the new state funding formula, our big issues will be
classroom size and maintaining the quality of the programs we have in place. I
personally question whether the town can afford a very expensive and not
particularly outstanding school at this point.

Authorities

* Do you support the Water/Sewer Authority or would you work to abolish it?

The idea of rewarding citizens for "good" actions (like saving water,
driving less, or recycling better) is an important and underutilized policy
area. Having said this, the implementation of the "sewer tax" was a disaster and
ended up penalizing those with the lowest income because of the loss of the
property tax deduction for that portion of their expenses. I think the question
of how best to serve the common good is the issue. Breaking down government into
authorities can diminish the power of government to effect change- for instance,
a Parking Authority will attempt to maximize the amount of parking revenue
irrespective of the need for public or alternative
transportation.

Development

* Do you support restricting developers to buy, raze, and rebuild bigger or
multiple dwelling units?
YES. We should also REQUIRE "economic impact studies" to KNOW what the effects
of any new developments will be.

* Do you support selling parcels of town land to developers?
Usually not. There may be some specific instances where it is necessary, but
selling off our most valuable resource to balance budgets is irresponsible and
ultimately self-defeating.

Municipal Government

* Do you support restricting Montclair?s municipal employees from
?moonlighting? for other towns while they are full time employees?
Yes.

* Do you support privatizing services such as garbage collection reduce the cost
of municipal government.
Only as a last resort if it's clear that we're not getting what we deserve from
our employees. We can do a MUCH better job of improving local services. A good
salary in exchange for outstanding work should be the goal.

* Do you believe that the town council should vote their conscious or vote
representing the ?desires? of their constituents when there is a difference?
Council members should be facilitators, leading and guiding the dialog about
policy. After the debate has reached a conclusion and all the opinions have been
weighed, individual council members need to make their own decision. They should
never be expected to vote against their conscience.

Affordable Housing

* Do you support local government mandated affordable housing?
Yes, as part of the implementation of our Master Plan, which speaks eloquently
about the need to maintain affordable housing.

* If so, how much taxpayer money would you allocate to fund this initiative?
Maintaining the character of our town (which includes our unique diversity) and
with creating a vision for what a future Montclair will look like, is one of the
most important functions of local government. The answer is: as much as it takes
to achieve the goals in our Master Plan.

* If so, what would be the mission of this program (i.e. affordable housing for
current senior citizens, or for low-income citizens who want to move to
Montclair, or for low-income citizens who want to stay in Montclair, or other)?
Preserving the character of Montclair. These may not be the most important
questions for all voters, but I believe that I will be able to identify the
candidates that best represent my view of how Montclairshould be governed. I
suggest that other members of the
Watercooler ask the questions that are relevant to them.

Candidate?s qualifications and experience are important. Their positions on the
major issues are critical. Candidates and representatives, please take the time
to disclose your positions on these and other important questions. It is your
responsibility to the people that you seek to represent.

Regards,

Kevin Courtney

Yes this was sent to Courtney on 4/29 well ahead of when mattax "was the only canidate who answered the questions"

EAT YOUR WORDS Brandnew Thrive representative!

Balderdash...What are you talking about, Fried never posted any answers on the Watercooler.