Big win?
Much may be made of the Planning Board's decision to slow the process of finalizing the latest Master Plan revision. Some may view it as another blow to Mayor Katz's agenda, not unlike the retraction of the proposal to pave over a portion of Brett Park. However, before awarding a victory to those who hammered away at the Planning Board for its haste and a perceived lack of responsiveness to community input, it is worth considering what exactly they have won.
It's clear that the Teaneck Coalition for Community Preservation and like minded individuals demonstrated that the residents still have a voice. Keep the pressure on elected and appointed officials, turn out in force to meetings, and write letters to the Suburbanite, and the powers that be are forced to take heed. The assumption that the implicit support of a silent majority gives current government officials a powerful enough mandate to do as they please has been disproven. Score one point for the protesters.
However, when you take a look at the "redlined" version of the Master Plan posted on the TCCP website, you see that for all the teeth gnashing, hand wringing, and late night antics on both sides, there is not really a whole lot at stake. The professionals might see the dire implications of failing to include a "low-density" here or an "appropriate" there, but let's be honest: the sum total of the disagreement between the Planning Board majority and its opponents is a few minor edits and some wordsmithing.
It's no wonder that Planning Board Chairman Joseph Bodner was willing to allow time for some more public debate. Even the leading opponents are tactitly admitting that the substance of the Master Plan really was not all that controversial; apparently the issue was that they had not been asked to pronounce that verdict themselves. Now they will get that chance. If having an extensive debate about wording and phraseology can sweep away some of the anger, then let's all take out our red pens together.
posted by Teaneck Blog @ 11:20 AM
26 Comments:
It was all BS by losers.
Their is really only minor changes that need to happen to the master plan. The most glaring is the river front area... The rest is spelling and a few words. Is appropriate really better than creative? The red lined version masquerades as something important when it's not. In it's purest sense isn't it better to argue for creative than just boring appropriate?
Make no mistake about it: the TCCP, Marty Cramer et. al. represent the political opposition. That opposition is attempting to use the Master Plan to stir the political pot and get back into power. Cramer and his crowd got us into the tax pickle we are now in by their no growth agenda when they ran Teaneck's government. We can't afford to let them beck into office. They represent a discredited vision of what Teaneck could become. They are a threat to every homeowner.
Keep the losers out of town government. Power to the silent majority that wants tax relief.
"It's clear that the Teaneck Coalition for Community Preservation and like minded individuals demonstrated that the residents still have a voice."
Are you new to Teaneck??? We've always had a voice. (Even when some people stand up and read someone else's written statements as their own.)
This is not a new concept. The Mayor recently ask residents to voice their opinions by completing a questionaire? If you're not the questionaire type, his website, email and cell phone numbers have been public longer then he has been Mayor!!!
Allowing extra time for community imput is hardly a "blow to Mayor Katz's agenda", it was probably his idea.
Sounds like the 'voice' of the TCCP is the same 'voice' of TNB.
Of course TNB is the same as TCCP! The difference is that the uproar over the master plan and planning board decisions for development, not to mention current council leadership, has empowered more than those involved with TCCP. Quite a few people have been paying more attention to council decisions (or lack thereof) and to the steady stream of press Teaneck has been getting over the past few months, and whether it's NIMBY or just becoming more interested in township affairs, this subject is now the talk of the town. On one hand, that's good -- more people paying attention. On the other hand, it's dismaying to those whose trust in their leaders' direction has become shaky.
Are you new to Teaneck??? We've always had a voice. (Even when some people stand up and read someone else's written statements as their own.)
This is not a new concept. The Mayor recently ask residents to voice their opinions by completing a questionaire? If you're not the questionaire type, his website, email and cell phone numbers have been public longer then he has been Mayor!!!
Allowing extra time for community imput is hardly a "blow to Mayor Katz's agenda", it was probably his idea.
Ummm, are you new to reading? I don't think you understood my post.
In any case, there is a significant difference between being able to impact actual decisions and being able to e-mail or call in a suggestion that may or may not be heeded.
The TCCP is a bunch of right-wingers that want it the way is was in the old days... Of course the old days was a fantasy. I bet most of Marty Cramers speech writing is swiped from Pat Robertson. Good ole white boy family values.
Wouldn't it be terrific if this increase in concern about township affairs resulted in an increase in voter participation rates in the northeast and other underrepresented districts?
If that happened, we would have the current council majority to thank.
So who is running for school board?
There are three seats open.Two incumbents are running for re-election, Henry Pruitt and Barbara Ostroth, along with three others -- Sebastian Rodriguez, Margot Embree Fisher and Deborah Zatz.
Katherine Zatz, according to the Teaneck BoE website. Does she go by Deborah?
Who is Marty Cramer?
Swrugle, do you have any basis to claim that the NE suffers from lower voting rates than the rest of Teaneck?
Moronica represents the North East and boy do I feel sorry for them!!!
She represents the whole township, you should feel sorry for all of us.
She definitely does NOT represent me.
She probably won't represent any of us after the next Council election.
Anonymous said...
Swrugle, do you have any basis to claim that the NE suffers from lower voting rates than the rest of Teaneck?
That question should be directed at Alan Sohn, the man with the answers.
That question should be directed at Alan Sohn, the man with the answers.
I think it was fair to direct it to you, given that you made the claim that Northeast Teaneck was "underrepresented."
A quick glance at turnout statistics from the 2006 school elections indicates that turnout in Districts 13 & 14 was above the townwide average. Is there some other compelling evidence of low voter participation, or are you suggesting that representation is disproportionately low despite reasonable voter turnout (along the lines of the Justice Department investigation)?
Teaneck Blog - You're response is disingenuous. The Districts to which you refer are the two districts in the Northeast quadrant of town that have demographics that are more comparable to West Englewood, hence the high voter turnout rate.
Voter turnout is a real issue that impacts the outcome of elections in Teaneck. Based on the voter participation stats for the various districts we can infer that turnout among Orthodox Jews is significantly higher than other groups. We can also infer that turnout among African Americans is significantly lower than other groups.
If turnout among the non-orthodox population was higher in the last election, the make up of the council might be different today.
Alan Sohn has looked at voter turnout depth and can fill in the details.
Disingenuous? A strong word. I do not seek to mislead, but rather to follow up on the question raised earlier.
I'll admit I am only looking at the data from one vote, because that's what I have in front of me, but those two districts (which are literally on the Northeast edge of Teaneck) had higher turnouts than what I believe are the major Orthodox strongholds (11 & 12). Obviously one would have to examine data from multiple elections to determine whether turnout was depressed in some areas.
In any case, what did you mean by "underrepresented?"
Actually, I believe that what you saw in the last election was heightened participation in the Orthodx community after a long period of under-participation. It's been a while since I looked at the district breakdowns, but given the relatively small number of votes cast in any one district, it is difficult to say that the Orthodox turned out en-masse.
I believe that less than 20% of the voters participate in these local elections so it does not take an especially effective get-out-the-vote campaign to swing the elections. That was the case with the defeat of the "Teaneck Cares" slate a few years ago - when even their poorly conceived and run campaign raised concerns among BoE supporters.
Election results by district for the 2006 Township and School Board election are posted at http://election.tomabbott.net/. 2004 School Board results are also posted. If anyone has other election results or a map of the districts, I would be glad to post them as well.
Last night's meeting, like the open space meeting the night before, once again illustrated the excellence of our current mayor, Mayor Katz, and the disturbing descent of his predecessor, Councilwoman Kates, into incoherent irrelevance. Whereas Mayor Katz-- who punctured the baloon of the negative opposition by swaying the planning board to extend its master plan timeline-- only speaks when he has something to add to the discussion, Councilwoman Kates exhibited at both meetings her usual showboating. As she blathered on negatively, it was obvious that her sole purpose at meetings these days is to dominate the proceedings. Please give us a break and stop blabbing Jackie.
Post a Comment
<< Home