Naming names

Unable to get any satisfaction from Bergen County Prosecutor John Molinelli, who has ended his investigation of alleged transgressions of campaign laws during the 2006 Council race without bringing charges, Teaneck's disaffected opposition appears to be taking a new tack.

This week's Suburbanite contains a letter from outspoken Council critic Naomi Cramer questioning the motives behind the decision to halt the investigation, and comments by a number of individuals at Tuesday night's raucous Council meeting showed that many are still committed to keeping this issue alive.

What's new, however, is the announcement by a local political organization that it will hold a meeting during which a report that "gives names of those who allegedly had a part in the production and dissemination of the campaign literature" will be presented to the public. The agent of this vigilante justice? The Teaneck Democratic Municipal Organization, who is no doubt holding the event only because of its high regard for the rule of law and a clean and transparent political process, and not because of any affinities with the Teaneck New Beginnings slate, in keeping with the non-partisan nature of Teaneck local politics.

Whether this story still has any traction with the wider public more than a year after the defeat of the majority of the Teaneck New Beginnings slate by a sizable margin is an open question. What is clear, however, is that the hardcore support for TNB, which has also constituted the most vocal opposition to the current Council majority, is determined to attempt to delegitimize current elected officials rather than engage them in policy debate. This desperate effort to regain some influence is perhaps the clearest admission that the TNB fringe, once very much part of the establishment, is increasingly out of step with public opinion in Teaneck.

The nanny municipality

Among the issues commanding the attention of the Council recently has been the question of Teaneck's response to the alarming uptick in gang activity in town. Last night's Council meeting featured an impassioned discussion about a resolution ratifying a costly proposal to add police officers to help combat the gang problem in town. Ultimately, with some apparent reluctance, a majority of the Council agreed to back the plan in response to the gang threat. As one of the voices calling for serious consideration of the issue in consultation with the Teaneck Police Department command, I am pleased to see that Township officials have taken the issue seriously, despite the unwelcome financial burdens associated with the proposed solution. Hopefully, the recommendations of our law enforcement officials will prove effective enough to put an end to gang activity in town.

What did not please me were the comments of a number of residents and officials who spoke at the meeting. It seemed that several speakers were subtly assigning blame to the Township for the gang problem. As they rattled on about the need to demonstrate to the youth of Teaneck that the community is behind them through expanded programming and handouts of public funds to local non-profit organizations, it became clear that certain individuals simply cannot pass up an opportunity to advocate for additional services, more government spending, and a greater role for public institutions in community life, all at taxpayer expense.

One might argue that the root cause of gang membership and violent criminal activity is poor parenting, low self-esteem, boredom, or whatever other excuse one might offer and that attempts to stamp out such anti-social behavior that do not address these root causes are doomed to failure. It does not then follow that it is the responsibility of every Teaneck taxpayer to furnish entertainment options for local teens. It would be terrific if we had the resources to prevent every young person in town from getting mixed up with gangs and falling into a life of criminal behavior. We do not. In fact, Teaneck does not even have the resources to pay for the additional police officers needed to contain the existing problem, though we have little choice but to do so. The best we can do at this stage is take steps to protect the innocent from the pernicious side effects of gang activity in town. There is no way we can protect the criminally inclined from themselves, too.

It's time to look away from government and towards ourselves as individuals if we want Teaneck's children to turn out better. What kind of parents, grandparents, or siblings are we? Are we volunteering our time with local organizations as mentors, coaches, tutors, or the like? Are we giving what we can afford to give financially to the causes that matter to us, or are we just putting our hands out to others, hoping to compel them to make up the difference?

The Township of Teaneck handles public safety and law enforcement, and for that reason, the Council has just agreed to saddle our community with a significant ongoing expense to protect public order. The people of Teaneck as family members, neighbors, and friends are responsible for steering our youth down the right path. It is time for us to individually assume an equal responsibility for achieving the outcomes we hope for.

Poison arrows

Oh my! Pandemonium in the Council Chambers. A telling scene at approximately 11:30 pm on a Tuesday night: in the foreground, Councilman Gussen gets a tongue lashing from a resident for his public castigation of former Planning Board member Barbara Ley Toffler. In the background, Councilman Rudolph and Councilwoman Honis can be seen arguing and gesticulating after Honis took Rudolph to task publicly for what she perceived to be impolite behavior during the meeting as part of a longer tirade filled with innuendo.

Is this the end of civil discourse in Teaneck? Has the "Comments" section of the local blogosphere spilled into the real world? Stay tuned. There's probably more to come after the time out called by Mayor Katz.

Candor and its consequences

Four months after its appearance in the Metro section of the New York Times, Peter Applebome's article about diversity and Teaneck is making waves on the local scene. At the time of its appearance, I surmised that the very public airing of dirty laundry in Applebome's piece had the potential to "shake up the Teaneck landscape." Surprisingly, the inital fallout from the article, which depicted growing alarm and resentment towards Orthodox Jews, "the most conspicuous and fastest-growing group in town," seemed limited. Until now.

Among those residents who spoke on the record about views of the Orthodox community was Barbara Ley Toffler, a member of the Planning Board. "People worry that there's a group that wants this to become an Orthodox community like some of the ones in Rockland County," she told the Times. "This has always been an incredibly diverse community, and from my perspective, I don't want it to become any one thing."

While this statement may be open to some interpretation (the first part suggested that it was "people," and not necessarily Toffler herself, who held that view), it upset Councilman Kevie Feit enough that he joined a majority in blocking Toffler's reappointment to the Planning Board. In widely circulated correspondance, Feit outlines some of the reasons why he felt he could not support Toffler's reappointment. Feit characterizes Toffler's statements as "insensitive, at best, and highly offensive, at worst." "Either way," he continues, "[they are] inappropriate for a member of the Planning Board to state publicly."

By Feit's own admission, his rationale for opposing Toffler is that she has conducted herself in a manner not befitting a member of the Planning Board and called her impartiality into question rather than any qualm he had with her actual performance as a member of that body. It is the quotation itself, and apparently some subsequent follow up comments that were circulated over e-mail that were at issue here. So here we do indeed have some tangible fallout from the Applebome piece. What will be the next shoe to drop?

Thanks for calling attention to it

As it prepares to send the Class of 2007 out into the world, Teaneck High School has a wide range of things to be proud of, from team and individual athletic successes to an impressive array of college acceptances. The school's recent ranking among the top five percent of public high schools in the Unites States by Newsweek magazine, however, should not necessarily be a point of pride. While Teaneck Superintendent of Schools John F. Czeterko told the Suburbanite that officials are "very pleased with [their] recognition by Newsweek" and the "validation" it provides, the Newsweek ranking, when placed in context, is actually a manifestation of what many in Teaneck say is wrong with the schools.

A quick glance at the methodology employed by Newsweek demonstrates how this is so. The magazine ranks schools by the total number of Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate, and Cambridge exams taken by the student body each year and divides that number by the number of graduating seniors. There are, of course, many reasons why such a statistic is not a valid way of drawing conclusions about the quality of a school. In Teaneck High's case, the particular fallacy is that while the total number of exams taken in the school may exceed the number of graduating seniors and therefore place the school in elite company, those tests are being taken by a subset of the population of 11th and 12th graders, many of whom sit for multiple examinations across a number of subjects. More than three quarters of the student body takes no Advanced Placement examinations or AP level courses whatsoever. And with an average SAT score that hovers below the mean for New Jersey and a pass rate on proficiency examinations that lags the state averages as well, it is clear that a large proportion of the student body is not doing anything near college-level work. Given this mixed bag of performance indicators (none of which tells the whole story), school rankings such as these are basically worthless. Worse, in this case, by awarding the school such a high ranking on the basis of its ratio of AP exams to graduating seniors, Newsweek is actually highlighting the extreme disparities in achievement among students at Teaneck High School.

To be sure, if there is going to be a wide achievement gap in the Teaneck, it is certainly better that it arise due of the presence of a cohort of fine students taking challenging courses whose experience stands apart from that of a large portion of the student body. Still, given the emphasis placed on remedying the yawning chasm separating the best from the rest during the most recent Board of Education campaign, one would think this kind of publicity would be somewhat unwelcome- for now. Hopefully, we can look forward to a day when rankings such as these will come alongside better overall performance figures and broader participation in Teaneck High's most advanced academic offerings. That's the kind of "validation" Superintendent Czeterko and company should be seeking.

Top ranking unwelcome

In the course of a report about one "bright spot in the state's otherwise sluggish commercial real estate sector," regional business news website NJBiz.com cites a troubling statistic that ought to be incorporated in any discussion over future development in Teaneck. Statewide, the vacancy rate in commercial property is approximately 18 percent versus a national vacancy rate of about 13.5 percent in the office market, according to estimates from the National Association of Realtors. The Teaneck/Ridgefield market, however, is experiencing an eye-popping 40.43% vacancy rate, the highest in the area, according to the article.

The article does not contain any analysis of the reasons behind the apparent glut of office space in our area. Any number of factors might explain the phenomenon. It could be a temporary aberration, or evidence that existing space is unsuitable for the current market and needs to be renovated or improved. But it would take a lot of spinning to conclude that the time is right to create additional capacity in our area, even if there are developers out there willing to take on the risks.

You have got to be kidding

Last week, the Bergen County Board of Elections gained a new member. The body charged by tallying votes, staffing the polls, and certifying elections now counts Hackensack Police Chief Ken Zisa as one of its four members. Look him up if you are not familiar with his past exploits. Suffice it to say that this will do little to inspire confidence in the integrity of our democratic process.

The timing of the cushy appointment by Governor Corzine suggests that it came in fulfillment of a condition attached to the "amicable" resolution of the Democratic Party's primary battle that pitted State Sen. Loretta Weinberg and Assembly members Gordon Johnson and Valerie Vainieri Huttle against Party boss Joseph Ferriero's slate earlier this year. Ferriero's man is now comfortably ensconced in another publicly funded position, which should make up for whatever disappointment he may feel at being compelled to abandon a hopeless campaign for state office. Loyalty has its rewards.

At this point, it is going to take a bit more than the occasional complimentary breakfast with a county official to win the trust of this Teaneck resident. The more I see of county politics, the less I understand why we put up with it. To me, Bergen County means blue laws, political patronage, and paying an extra layer of taxes for the privilege. Not exactly a compelling value proposition. Looks like Todd Caliguire had it right after all...

Dog bites man

If something takes place every week, is it still news? The Suburbanite seems to think so. Howard Prosnitz reports week in and week out about protests, vigils, and other gatherings held by Teaneck's very active anti-war movement near the Teaneck Armory. Granted, Teaneck may not have all that much going on in a given week, but the relentless focus on the activities and opinions of one local group risks blurring the line between reporting about them and promoting them.

This week's Suburbanite dishes out the anti-war news in two portions: a cover article about Teaneck Police Department ticketing of motorists for honking to show solidarity with protesters followed by another article inside the paper about a Memorial Day vigil. The first of these actually makes for an interesting story, though it may be overlooked by the many readers whose patience for the constant reports on the protests has been exhausted. Should the Teaneck Police deliberately overlook repeated violations of state statutes at the behest of a citizens group that wants to make as much noise as it can? Or alternatively, are the Teaneck Police selectively enforcing an obscure law to harass lawful protesters who are looking to rally public support?

These interesting issues might get a better hearing if the Suburbanite were a little more selective with its news coverage.

Fixing what is broken

At what point do seemingly isolated incidents involving the endangerment of students in the Teaneck public school system become a cause for community concern about the system itself? With three troubling high profile stories alleging wrongdoing and negligence by adults entrusted with the care of Teaneck's youth swirling in the media in recent weeks, it may be time to stop viewing these three unfortunate episodes as misfortunes that have befallen Teaneck and start asking what is being done by officials to fix a school system that is developing a very poor reputation for protecting the welfare of youngsters.

The three events in question are, of course, the ongoing criminal proceedings against former Teaneck High School Principal Joseph White, the tragic story of the death of a local teenager on an allegedly poorly supervised THS-sponsored trip to Africa this spring, and the shocking charges that an acclaimed middle school teacher repeatedly engaged in sexual activity with a student for several years, on school grounds and elsewhere. While a presumption of innocence certainly applies, this is quite a lot for a district of only about 4,000 students to be dealing with at one time. Is it mere coincidence, or is there a systemic problem?

On Friday, Bergen County prosecutor John L. Molinelli was quoted in The Record in conjunction with a story about the various charges filed against teacher James Darden. While his ominous comments may have been directed only at the circumstances surrounding this particular case, they apply nearly as well for the others.

"I have to wonder about security in the building and how something like this can take place as frequently as it did over such a long period of time the way it did," Molinelli said at a news conference. "It concerns me, and I hope tonight it concerns some school board members in Teaneck -- at least I hope so."

Any district can be victimized by a lone sicko or a freak mishap on a trip. What does it say about those in charge when the Teaneck schools is suffering through three very public investigations into such incidents at once? Are we just extremely unlucky, or is nobody watching over the employees in the Teaneck public schools?

The apparent complacency voiced by Superintendent John Czeterko in response to the Darden case does not provide much reassurance that officials feel they have anything when it comes to ensuring student safety, or even any indication that the district may be failing in its responsibilities to students and parents alike.

"We value teachers who stay after school," Czeterko told The Record about Darden. "He was a valued and trusted employee. If he violated that trust, we're stunned."

There are many reasons underlying the dented confidence in the public school system. Some are demographic, and are almost completely beyond the control of the district. Others are financial, for which the district can bear no more than partial responsibility. Still others are created by the proliferation of incidents such as these. The question is, can anything be done to reassure the community that the schools remain a safe place for our children, and if so, will those things be done?

Update: See this piece from Tuesday's Record detailing some new measures to be put in place in response to the Darden case.

Update #2: There is more on the district's efforts to calm the community in Wednesday's Record, including an account of a meeting for middle school parents.