BOT Meeting recaps
  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    For the past year or so, I have been posting a brief recap of the BOT Meetings to my blog on Patch within a few days of the meeting. The most recent entry for Monday's meeting is posted at:
    http://southorange.patch.com/blog_posts/bot-meeting-recap-3-12-12

    I would appreciate hearing feedback from you on these posts. Do you read them? Are they clear and accurate? Are there any suggestions for making them more useful?
  • lizziecatlizziecat
    I read them, and I appreciate your posting them.
  • jgberkeleyjgberkeley
    I read them, they are useful. I thank you for taking the time as it saves me a ton of time by not attending or not having to watch the meetings on stream.

    Later,
    The UPS Store
    George
  • wnb
    I agree, these are helpful and informative.
  • RobB
    Hi Michael, I didn't know you posted these, but I'll read them going forward. I thought you guys were going to announce who won the recycling contract at this meeting?

  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    RobB said:

    Hi Michael, I didn't know you posted these, but I'll read them going forward. I thought you guys were going to announce who won the recycling contract at this meeting?


    Rob - We did discuss Single Stream Recycling and how it will work. However, the actual resolution to award a contract will be done at our next meeting (March 26).

  • sheena_collumsheena_collum
    I suppose I read them. But not more than once ; )
  • pixigirlpixigirl
    Michael Goldberg
    BOT Meeting recap 3-12-12
    Posted on March 13, 2012 at 11:51 am

    EOWC Litigation update - Village is awaiting appointment of a special master.  Village Administrator, Barry Lewis is working on getting the water quality test results posted to the website.

    michaelgoldberg said:

    From today's News Record:
    http://www.southorangenavigator.com/profiles/blogs/village-explores-changing-water-provider

    Also, from my recap on Patch of the update provided at the Feb 15, BOT Meeting:
    Update on EOWC - All parties have executed a consent order to appoint a special master to resolve issues that have arisen and to make a decision by August 1. Appointment of the special master will occur over the next 10 days.




    i do also read the BOT recaps and appreciate them. since you mentioned feedback....what happenend to the 10 day deadline?

  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    pixigirl said:


    i do also read the BOT recaps and appreciate them. since you mentioned feedback....what happenend to the 10 day deadline?



    It is my understanding it wasn't a "deadline", but rather an expected timeframe from Village Counsel for an appointment to be made. It is up to the judge to make the appointment and we are still awaiting for that to occur.
  • marylagomarylago
    Michael,

    I have not followed them, but I just read the 3/12/12 meeting recap. It's clear and objective.

    I will start reading them on a regular basis.

    ml
  • tommorristommorris
    I read the recaps and I am grateful for the info.
  • scottgreenstonescottgreenstone
    I dont need to read them - it seems certain MOL posters always know and post things here first :)

    Just kidding - very helpful and clear,e specially for those of us that cant make the meetings or watch the TV version
  • libraryladylibrarylady
    Thanks Michael, we really appreciate your work and your postings as well!
    Post edited by librarylady at 2012-03-16 11:54:03
  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    Thanks everyone for the comments. Glad to hear the updates provide some value to you. I welcome feedback or questions if the posts are not clear.
  • rbcole123
    I read the update today in fact. Very useful and concise.
  • pixigirlpixigirl
    michaelgoldberg said:

    pixigirl said:


    i do also read the BOT recaps and appreciate them. since you mentioned feedback....what happenend to the 10 day deadline?



    It is my understanding it wasn't a "deadline", but rather an expected timeframe from Village Counsel for an appointment to be made. It is up to the judge to make the appointment and we are still awaiting for that to occur.


    May I give additional feedback.. If an expected timeframe of 10 days is announced to the residents over a month ago and then not kept maybe the regular monthly water update can include more then two sentences on such an important topic and state who is responsible for a three times longer holdup. As per the village attorney who spoke in January it is ABSOLUTELY imperative for the town to have a water master in place. If it is the court who holds this up then please give a more detailed update on why as I am about to let the judge who is handling this case know how a large majority of residence feel about this. Maybe its time the residents make their wishes known. I cannot imagine that a judge who is truly aware of how many residents are actually very concerned about this situation would be so lax a daisy. It would be highly appreciated to go into more detail both at the meeting and therefor by default in your recaps.

    Thank you.
  • buddybak
    Michael it fun to read you recaps of the meetings of which I find delightful .
  • buddybak
    Michael: is the village president going to receive a four wheel drive vehicle; as the person in charge of the office of EOM, like John O. Gross did which was included in his title, also the jacket and other equipment that goes along with it.
    Post edited by buddybak at 2012-03-17 08:39:09
  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    buddybak said:

    Michael: is the village president going to receive a four wheel drive vehicle; as the person in charge of the office of EOM, like John O. Gross did which was included in his title, also the jacket and other equipment that goes along with it.



    buddy - Mr. Gross received use of an SUV for his job as Administrator as part of the contract that he was given by our predecessors. (Mr. Lewis has been provided a car allowance as part of his compensation, but there is no contract, and he uses his own car). After he left the job of Administrator, the car Mr. Gross used was passed on to the Fire Chief (who's car needed to be replaced anyway)

    Post edited by michaelgoldberg at 2012-03-17 08:48:37
  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    My latest recap of Monday's BOT Meeting is now posted to Patch at http://southorange.patch.com/blog_posts/bot-meeting-recap-3-26-12
  • strawberry
    michaelgoldberg said:

    My latest recap of Monday's BOT Meeting is now posted to Patch at http://southorange.patch.com/blog_posts/bot-meeting-recap-3-26-12



    Anyone throw a shoe, a chair, anything? :-S
  • metaphysicianmetaphysician
    So, Strawb, looking for tips on proper etiquette for when you're elected to the Maplewood TC?
    You could always consult with former SO Trustee Stacey Jennings...
    Post edited by metaphysician at 2012-03-29 07:56:28
  • RobB
    michaelgoldberg said:

    RobB said:

    Hi Michael, I didn't know you posted these, but I'll read them going forward. I thought you guys were going to announce who won the recycling contract at this meeting?


    Rob - We did discuss Single Stream Recycling and how it will work. However, the actual resolution to award a contract will be done at our next meeting (March 26).
    Hi Michael, which vendor was selected?

    Also, please no red light cameras. We're not going to see anywhere close to $600k/yr.
  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    RobB said:

    Hi Michael, which vendor was selected?



    " 14 resolutions were passed on Consent Agenda, 6-0, including the awarding of a contract to Giordano Company for Single Stream Recycling"



  • marylagomarylago
    Yay for single stream recycling!!!!!
  • RobB
    michaelgoldberg said:

    RobB said:

    Hi Michael, which vendor was selected?

    " 14 resolutions were passed on Consent Agenda, 6-0, including the awarding of a contract to Giordano Company for Single Stream Recycling"
    Thanks, I just read the part under "Public Works" where it says single stream was discussed.
  • scottgreenstonescottgreenstone
    So can I put everything out next week?

    eta: this is awesome news by the way
    Post edited by scottgreenstone at 2012-03-29 11:36:22
  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    scottgreenstone said:

    So can I put everything out next week?

    eta: this is awesome news by the way



    Scott - this will not take effect until July 1. Specific details of pickup dates, etc will be fothcoming over the next few months.

  • scottgreenstonescottgreenstone
    Thanks - cant wait - very exciting news.
  • Steve
    And it covers plastics numbered 1-7, I hope? What about tetra-paks?

    eta: Also very excited about this.
    Post edited by Steve at 2012-03-29 12:47:22
  • lifer
    Thank you, Michael!
  • metaphysicianmetaphysician
    Steve said:

    What about tetra-paks?


    Aren't those what Ironmen get, from all the workouts they do?
  • scottgreenstonescottgreenstone
    I never got any of those ;)
  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    Latest re-cap from the April 9 BOT Meeting is now posted at http://southorange.patch.com/blog_posts/bot-meeting-re-cap-4-9-12
  • scottgreenstonescottgreenstone
    Great report Michael thanks. Just one piece of clarification, you voted no on the budget, is that becuase they decided to include funding for nonprofits? And if so, what was the point of the arrangement from July 18, 2011 if they can just override those decisions?
  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    Thanks, Scott. Not sure if that was a rhetorical question or not, but that was really the crux of my argument last night. ;-)
    While TECHNICALLY, we don't "vote" at a Budget Workshop, we did make a deliberate decision last Summer that was fully expected to be formalized when we voted this year.
  • Dr_Robert_DobackDr_Robert_Doback
    The meeting last night was a display of patheticism. You, Mr. Goldberg, rule the roost. Congratulations. Your deliberate decision last summer was to burnish the CCR and elevate the political forte of the self absorbed. I would say the CCR has a far better public participation and interest in community development and recruitment than Main Street. Your arrogance with your voting cadre of imbeciles is disgusting.
  • jayjayp
    As I see it, the BOT went along with the budget which included a line item for a certain amount of funds. The line item did not specify for whom those funds are intended. It could be that no organization gets them. Levison made the point that the village can only contract for services that the government should provide. I see no services that the CCR provides that is the role of government. They are a political organization which has no business receiving government funds. So while the generic line item is there, the proof of the fortitude of the BOT will come when they actually have to vote yeah or nay on a contract for services with the CCR. If we ever see a contract, it will prove quite interesting.
  • msuewillis
    I was present at the April 9 BOT trustee meeting as a speaker in favor of paying nonprofits for certain services.
    South Orange, for example, has hired out to a nonprofit for part of its recycling.
    For fifteen years the town has been using the South Orange Maplewood Community Coalition on Race, a nationally recognized expert in delivering integration and inclusion, for integration services.
    Since integration in an older suburb like ours requires intentional activities (work with Realtors, community forums, celebrations, the marketing of our wonderful schools and community), it is clear to me that South Orange should continue to use the services of the Coalition.
    Notably, Village President Alex Torpey spoke eloquently of the value of these services, and Trustee Deborah Davis-Ford also supported continuing to pay for services of both the Coalition and Youthnet.
    -- Meredith Sue Willis
    P.S. It should be noted that some trustees did not remember the budget workshop last summer the same way Mr. Goldberg did. That is, whether funding for some, all, or one nonprofit would be taken out of the budget. It is particulaly unclear to me why the town can continue to contract for services from for-profits but only certain nonprofits. Village President Torpey and others said that it was important to clarify a protocol on this issue and make it clear how organizations of all kinds-- for profit, nonprofit, etc.-- could make their applications to SO to provide services.
    Post edited by msuewillis at 2012-04-11 11:02:40
  • susan1014
    Since Meredith Sue Willis did not say so explicitly, it is useful to note that she is a longtime member of the leadership of the CCR.

    Perhaps she assumes that all readers understand this.

    (Disclosure: I have mixed feelings on the CCR...historically, I think their work in the areas listed above has been very important, but recently I think they have expanded their scope in troubling ways, both in local political issues and school issues)
  • scottgreenstonescottgreenstone
    I dont have an issue with giving the money to non profits. What i have an issue with is when a decision that was made previously is just thrown to the wind without any further discussion or public feedback.
  • michaelgoldbergmichaelgoldberg
    msuewillis said:

    P.S. It should be noted that some trustees did not remember the budget workshop last summer the same way Mr. Goldberg did. That is, whether funding for some, all, or one nonprofit would be taken out of the budget. It is particulaly unclear to me why the town can continue to contract for services from for-profits but only certain nonprofits. Village President Torpey and others said that it was important to clarify a protocol on this issue and make it clear how organizations of all kinds-- for profit, nonprofit, etc.-- could make their applications to SO to provide services.



    The minutes from the July 18 Budget Workshop were ambiguous with respect to Youthnet, but crystal clear with respect to the CCR:

    http://southorange.gotdns.org/weblink7/DocView.aspx?id=95247
    Trustee Davis Ford urged the Board of Trustees to commit to 100% funding in the 2011
    budget and to transition to 50% funding in 2012 and then to 0% funding in 2013. CCR
    would be provided in-kind services of office space, telephone, fax and utilities as
    discussed.

    After much discussion, the Board of Trustees agreed to appropriate $22,500 in funding
    to the CCR in the 2011 budget, less the pro-rated value of office space offered by the
    Village as an in-kind contribution. The Board of Trustees further agreed that as of
    January 1, 2012, the Village would only be providing in-kind office space, plus
    telephone and utilities, with no monetary funding. The Village Administrator was asked
    to inform the CCR and Maplewood of the Village’s funding position.

  • scottgreenstonescottgreenstone
    Cant get much clearer than that Michael - thanks for posting. Not sure why the CCR has some much pull with my money. I think this story needs to get out to all the residents. I will tweet it and facebook it :)
  • mbaldwinmbaldwin
    msuewillis said:

    I was present at the April 9 BOT trustee meeting as a speaker in favor of paying nonprofits for certain services.
    South Orange, for example, has hired out to a nonprofit for part of its recycling.
    For fifteen years the town has been using the South Orange Maplewood Community Coalition on Race, a nationally recognized expert in delivering integration and inclusion, for integration services.
    Since integration in an older suburb like ours requires intentional activities (work with Realtors, community forums, celebrations, the marketing of our wonderful schools and community), it is clear to me that South Orange should continue to use the services of the Coalition.
    Notably, Village President Alex Torpey spoke eloquently of the value of these services, and Trustee Deborah Davis-Ford also supported continuing to pay for services of both the Coalition and Youthnet.
    -- Meredith Sue Willis
    P.S. It should be noted that some trustees did not remember the budget workshop last summer the same way Mr. Goldberg did. That is, whether funding for some, all, or one nonprofit would be taken out of the budget. It is particulaly unclear to me why the town can continue to contract for services from for-profits but only certain nonprofits. Village President Torpey and others said that it was important to clarify a protocol on this issue and make it clear how organizations of all kinds-- for profit, nonprofit, etc.-- could make their applications to SO to provide services.



    Ms. Willis --

    Can you get a little more specific on what the CCR does for South Orange? For instance, can you point me to a calendar of meetings, activities, events that were held in the last year or so? Just curious what how the CCR facilitates integration.

    M
  • metaphysicianmetaphysician
    msuewillis said:

    I was present at the April 9 BOT trustee meeting as a speaker in favor of paying nonprofits for certain services....
    -- Meredith Sue Willis


    susan1014 said:

    Since Meredith Sue Willis did not say so explicitly, it is useful to note that she is a longtime member of the leadership of the CCR.
    Perhaps she assumes that all readers understand this....


    It is disingenuous, at best, to state in your post that you spoke in favor of funding the CCR, without revealing that you are on the Board of Trustees of the organization. Not nice at all.
  • jayjayp
    Perhaps Ms. Willis will post the contract for services which she expects the village to sign onto, before they get a single cent from village coffers. If I as a resident had to choose between money to CCR or money to the Rescue Squad, its a no brainer.

    What was clear from the village attorney was that no money can be given to a non-profit organization unless it provides some services the government requires. That is why we can contract with a non-profit for recycling. I do not see a single service which the government requires that CCR provides. What I see is an organization which has in a partisan way inserted itself into political issues in South Orange and also has taken sides in the whole de-leveling issue with the schools. They deserve none of my money as a taxpayer, period.
    Post edited by jayjayp at 2012-04-11 13:00:44
  • scottgreenstonescottgreenstone
    ^^^^^^
    Agreed
  • susan1014
    metaphysician said:

    msuewillis said:

    I was present at the April 9 BOT trustee meeting as a speaker in favor of paying nonprofits for certain services....
    -- Meredith Sue Willis


    susan1014 said:

    Since Meredith Sue Willis did not say so explicitly, it is useful to note that she is a longtime member of the leadership of the CCR.
    Perhaps she assumes that all readers understand this....


    It is disingenuous, at best, to state in your post that you spoke in favor of funding the CCR, without revealing that you are on the Board of Trustees of the organization. Not nice at all.

    I will give her the benefit of the doubt, since she posts under her own name, and most of her previous postings have been CCR announcements.
  • jayjayp
    Hardly pulling the plug. They were given notice last year. If they can't raise money on their own, the way other organizations have to do, maybe they should re-think their existence.
  • scottgreenstonescottgreenstone
    Basically they are asking for us to give them money and free office space and free utilities. Sounds like a good deal for them.
  • metaphysicianmetaphysician
    susan1014 said:

    I will give her the benefit of the doubt, since she posts under her own name, and most of her previous postings have been CCR announcements.


    You're being generous, Susan, but if she has a vested interest, then she ought to state that upfront. It's a 501(c)3 and even though it's a volunteer board, to my mind that's a vested interest. She's not just a random citizen who wandered in off the street to insert her opinion. It's called transparency.
Add a Comment