Council opponents on the couch
The Master Plan revision recommends a series of moves to loosen restrictions on building in Teaneck's business districts, in the hopes that current property owners and developers will choose to invest in the types of improvements that would bolster Teaneck's tax base and spread the tax burden more evenly among residents and businesses. At the same time, the document firmly opposes the encroachment of new development into residential neighborhoods, and is quite clear on the desire of its authors to maintain the existing character of Teaneck's residential neighborhoods.Neither the substance nor the tone of the recommendations contained in the plan was surprising given the many natural constraints on development in Teaneck. Nonetheless, the moderation and balance of the report seem to have done little to quiet the vocal opposition to the ongoing efforts of the Council to promote development in town. Flyers and e-mails warn residents to stand up to the Council and Planning Board before it is too late and Teaneck is damaged permanently. While a core group of bitter opponents of the Council majority and its plans is widely cited as the source of these stirrings of discontent, given that, with the possible exception of a few details, the contents of the Master Plan are basically innocuous, it seems that something else must be motivating this knee-jerk response.
Interestingly, a careful reading of this week's Suburbanite sheds some light on this question. A series of quotations and letters from some of the most visible critics of the Council majority suggests that perhaps it is not so much the content of the proposed Master Plan or the details of specific projects that troubles the anti-Council crowd so much as it is their new position on the outside looking in. A common theme emerges from the quotations cited below: an older generation of longtime Teaneck residents with a particular political bent is dismayed at the speed with which it has been swept aside and at the vigor and intensity with which the new Council majority has pursued its agenda to stimulate growth in Teaneck. One can sense the hurt contained in their remarks as they come to grips with the realization that the Council majority is determined to plow ahead, sometimes callously, without seeking the approval of some of those longtime insiders or following the same consensus building procedures used in the past.
----------
From this week's Suburbanite (actual quotations are in quotes, surrounding text is my own commentary):
"We have been kept in the dark. Our organization will have to watch out every step to see that the wishes of the community are followed." - Martin Cramer
Sandy Loft, whose motives need less explanation, as she understandably resents the way she has been treated by the Council, sounds a wistful note for how things were before and also makes explicit reference to her 37 year tenure in town stating that "many of us have worked too long and too hard for Teaneck not to fight to maintain a lifestyle we hope to enjoy for years to come," in her letter published this week.
Frequent Suburbanite contributor Seymour Rappaport questions whether Councilman Rudolph, who, for a number of reasons has become a lightning rod for much of the criticism of the Council majority, "really [knows] our land, our culture, and long time history."
"The current Council majority is saying to citizens who have a longer history in Teaneck and/or do not follow their agenda, particularly on development - you with your experience do not count anymore," writes Naomi Cramer.
"[There] are many advisory boards where infusing or expanding with 'new blood' would be welcome, without discarding people who have served this community for years and have the capacity to continue to do so," she continues.
Sandy Loft, whose motives need less explanation, as she understandably resents the way she has been treated by the Council, sounds a wistful note for how things were before and also makes explicit reference to her 37 year tenure in town stating that "many of us have worked too long and too hard for Teaneck not to fight to maintain a lifestyle we hope to enjoy for years to come," in her letter published this week.
Frequent Suburbanite contributor Seymour Rappaport questions whether Councilman Rudolph, who, for a number of reasons has become a lightning rod for much of the criticism of the Council majority, "really [knows] our land, our culture, and long time history."
"The current Council majority is saying to citizens who have a longer history in Teaneck and/or do not follow their agenda, particularly on development - you with your experience do not count anymore," writes Naomi Cramer.
"[There] are many advisory boards where infusing or expanding with 'new blood' would be welcome, without discarding people who have served this community for years and have the capacity to continue to do so," she continues.
----------
The interesting question for Teaneck is whether these folks truly speak for a broad constituency that is similarly upset at being disenfranchised, as they seem to think they do, or whether the Teaneck electorate really has moved on and reshuffled its priorities to match those of the new Council. We won't really new until an election cycle or two passes. In the meantime, might it help both the Council majority and its detractors to understand a bit better where the other side is coming from, or has mutual distrust grown so great that these relationships are irreparable?
posted by Teaneck Blog @ 12:08 PM
19 Comments:
While a core group of bitter opponents of the Council majority and its plans is widely cited as the source of these stirrings of discontent, given that, with the possible exception of a few details, the contents of the Master Plan are basically innocuous, it seems that something else must be motivating this knee-jerk response.
I do believe that there's a group that's bitter but it's safe to say they have a serious point that needs to be addressed. TCCP has gone through the Birdsall Master Plan and red lined and commented. It's safe to say that the contribution being made needs to be seriously considered. Here's a brief except from their review:
"The Birdsall Master Plan is flawed in many respects. Given the importance of the Master
Plan, the expectation is that a document of such magnitude be well-researched, tightly written,
visionary, and incorporate meaningful community input and consideration. Regrettably, the
Birdsall Master Plan is appears hastily prepared, anecdotal, biased, and not presented up to the
standard of public documents expected in Teaneck.
Download both documents off the TCCP website and decide for yourself: http://www.teaneckccp.org/
T Blog-
You have hit the matter on the head. The "core" is decaying fast and feel that time has passed them by. The torch has been passed to a new generation that looks forward rather than backward. In fact, the ones who rail away are close agewise to being the grandparents of the vigorous new generation manning the helm.
The TCCP is nothing more than a front for the same group of individuals that put this town in a tailspin in 1988. If nothing else, we should learn from our documented mistakes and do our best not to repeat them. The "elder statesmen/women" of this group have clearly hijacked its original organizers, who were likely well-intentioned. The position they have now taken is "my way or the highway" and they are not referring to Route 4. It is unfortunate that the core, founding group does not realize this. Hopefully, they will. Before it's too late.
The council is clearly focused on countering a certain "political bent", not pushing out older residents, and that's a good thing.
The people mentioned in this post by Teaneck Blog have supported some pretty off the wall concepts over the years. Here are a few that come top of mind:
Would you want a cloverleaf intersection at Rt 4 and Belle Avenue? Wouldn't this destroy two public parks, raize dozens of historic tudor homes, and clog a now-quiet neighborhood with traffic? Isn't it interesting the person who has suggested this also suggests closing a very busy entrance/exit on this highway that just so happens to be on the street he lives. What a coincidence!
How about looking at past elected candidates supported by some of the outspoken leaders of TCCP (who seem to be from the same bunch as the TPJC). Do you want to go back to the days where Teaneck's elected officials tie themselves to trees, lay in front of bulldozers, or deface the blacktop surface of basketball courts when things don't go their way? Isn't that a little embarrassing to explain to your friends who live in other towns?
Haven't people from this political bent cried wolf time and time again on various issues, just to create a reason for civil disobedience?
Don't let those who mimic true environmentalists and champions of human rights squash the process again, like 20 years ago.
Teaneck has a huge opportunity gift wrapped with its name right on top. Now is a chance to have everything: preserve quiet residential neighborhoods, build compact business districts full of vitality (maybe will rail service someday?), stabilize taxes, modernize infrastructure, and set a much needed positive optimistic tone for decades to come!
Sure some of the complaints are over the top. But the concerns many residents feel at the way the Council has been hijacked following one of the filthiest campaigns in Teanecks history are well justified. The Mayor has destroyed most of the good will he created in his year's in office as he finds some new miracle cure of the week (Sanzari parking lot, Riverfront development, ...) that he's for 100% and then denies he ever new it existed. His running mates haven't been much better.
Residents want change. But they were never told what change they were getting. With all the money spent by Rudolph and Gussen they bought a lot of ads, but couldn't buy a clue of what Teaneck wants or needs, made all the worse by the complete ignorance of anything about Teaneck.
We were sold a bill of goods and we bought it. Now we're paying the price. The bad will created by this council will come to haunt each one of them. Rudolph first.
WHEN WILL THE LOSERS PUT THE PAST BEHIND THEM AND CHANNEL THERE ENERGY TOWARD GOOD CAUSES.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH...GET A LIFE
I voted for change and I have no regrets. The bitter oponents might not feel like they are on the outside looking in if they could stop their bitter oposition for a while. They speak for themselves only. The rest of the community know who they are and are tired of their antics.
Move on or move out.
The Planning Board met Thursday night. A statement written by two attendees has been posted on the Teaneck Progress blog.
The gang problem in Teaneck, YES Teaneck is today what it was in L.A. 15 years ago. The master plan should be focused on this.
Gang graffiti on C.L. 498 and 404.
Wake up all!!!!
It IS here and getting worse.
enough of these recyled hippies...bring back Ostrow, Stern & Gallucci!
lets talk about lies- tccp and the letters that they wrote post meeting mentioned 300 people- i counted 180- the record counter 175
this represents .004 % of the town, as compared to the over 4000 people that voted for the mayor- now has the public spoken?
lets talk about diversity- most of the crowd represented 30+ year residents, white, over 50 years old. 1 Hispanic, several orthodox and several African American spoke and were in the audience all together, maybe a total of 10 combined (and for you anti-orthodox out there, 3 of the 4 yarmulke wearing speakers were anti the MP)
lets hear what community schedule this board sets up for the next few months and stop the conspiracy theories. at this rate Hoffa will be found under the municipal green.
He's under the big W.
:)
Hey Monica-
See today's Record. That's your neighborhood getting hit the hardest by the reval. Whatcha gonna do about taxes now? Still gonna be against any cuts?
Don't leave Jackie Kates out. She's against all cuts too.
Jackie, Monica and Taxes - perfect together! Not for Teaneck!
To anonymous 8:01-
What, exactly, did you mean by that statement?
I've been to those council meetings and don't take my word for it go and watch for yourself- as classy as Jackie tries to be she constantly attacks, attempts to embarress or tries to block any progress inititaves that are presented. Just the look of her facial expressions speak louder than words.
I've been to those council meetings and don't take my word for it go and watch for yourself- as classy as Jackie tries to be she constantly attacks, attempts to embarress or tries to block any progress inititaves that are presented. Just the look of her facial expressions speak louder than words.
Your credibility really takes a hit when you post the identical remark (similarly out of context) on three different blogs. You might do a better job influencing others by posting pertinent points that enhance the discussion rather than your personal attacks.
Post a Comment
<< Home