http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/state_policeman_former_sparta.html
State policeman, formerly Sparta mayor, indicted on charges he abused office
February 17, 2012
By Susan K. Livio/Statehouse
BureauThe Star-Ledger
TRENTON — A grand jury today indicted a suspended state Human Services police captain on charges he faked time sheets, used a state vehicle for personal trips, and ordered officers to misuse state databases, the Attorney General's Office announced.
Brian Brady, 50, of Sparta, “allegedly falsified timesheets in order to collect pay as if on duty for days when he was away on vacation or traveling for personal business,” Stephen J. Taylor, director of the Division of Criminal Justice, said in a prepared statement. “On top of that, he allegedly used a police vehicle and state-funded gas for those personal trips. We will not tolerate that type of abuse of public office.”
Brady was the third-highest ranking official in the Human Services police force, which is responsible for patrolling and investigating incidents at psychiatric hospitals and facilities for the developmentally disabled, and accompanying Division of Youth and Family Service workers on high-risk home visits.
The nine-count indictment said Brady ordered a Human Services police officer to conduct background checks on members of a minor league baseball team using a restricted police database. He also ordered officers to use the police database to run background checks on a home health care worker he was considering hiring and a vehicle he wanted to buy, according to the indictment handed up to Superior Court Judge Linda R. Feinberg in Mercer County.
count of a pattern of official misconduct, one count of theft by deception, two counts of tampering with public records, and two counts of computer theft, according to a statement from the state Attorney General's office. If convicted, he would face a sentence of at least five years to 10 years.
Brady's attorney, Mario Iavicoli of Haddonfield, could not immediately be reached for comment. When Brady was arrested in May, Iavicoli called the charges "bogus,'' and suggested that the charges against Brady were retaliation by superiors seeking to replace him.
Brady only had his state vehicle with him because he was constantly on call, Iavicoli said.
The attorney also said the background checks were conducted simply to help smooth the baseball team's trip to Canada, ensuring that it wouldn't be tripped up at the border. He denied allegations that Brady used a state database to looked up a vehicle he wanted to buy, and that he falsified firearms qualifications.
Brady is a former councilman and mayor of Sparta.
Showing posts with label Y) Star Ledger Articles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Y) Star Ledger Articles. Show all posts
20110517
N.J. human services police captain is charged with falsifying time sheets
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/05/nj_human_services_police_capta.html
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
By Chris Megerian/Statehouse Bureau The Star-Ledger
Trenton - — A high-ranking official with the Department of Human Services police force was arrested today and charged with faking time sheets and misusing police databases, state authorities announced.
Capt. Brian Brady claimed to be working when he was away on personal trips, where he used his state vehicle and state-issued E-Z Pass transponder, authorities said.
They also said he used a police database to run background checks on every member of a minor league baseball team to help out the team's manager. He also scoped out a vehicle he was interested in buying.
“This police captain allegedly abused his office by falsifying and misusing official records to serve his own purposes,” Attorney General Paula Dow said in a statement. “There is no room for dishonest conduct on the part of a sworn law enforcement officer.”
Authorities said Brady, 49, of Sparta is the third-highest ranking official in the Human Services police force, which is responsible for psychiatric hospitals and facilities for the developmentally disabled.
He was previously a councilman and the mayor in Sparta in Sussex County.
He is charged with three counts of official misconduct and one count of a pattern of official misconduct.
The charges carry a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison.
Authorities said the case is part of an ongoing investigation being conducted by the Division of Criminal Justice and the Department of Human Services.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
By Chris Megerian/Statehouse Bureau The Star-Ledger
Trenton - — A high-ranking official with the Department of Human Services police force was arrested today and charged with faking time sheets and misusing police databases, state authorities announced.
Capt. Brian Brady claimed to be working when he was away on personal trips, where he used his state vehicle and state-issued E-Z Pass transponder, authorities said.
They also said he used a police database to run background checks on every member of a minor league baseball team to help out the team's manager. He also scoped out a vehicle he was interested in buying.
“This police captain allegedly abused his office by falsifying and misusing official records to serve his own purposes,” Attorney General Paula Dow said in a statement. “There is no room for dishonest conduct on the part of a sworn law enforcement officer.”
Authorities said Brady, 49, of Sparta is the third-highest ranking official in the Human Services police force, which is responsible for psychiatric hospitals and facilities for the developmentally disabled.
He was previously a councilman and the mayor in Sparta in Sussex County.
He is charged with three counts of official misconduct and one count of a pattern of official misconduct.
The charges carry a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison.
Authorities said the case is part of an ongoing investigation being conducted by the Division of Criminal Justice and the Department of Human Services.
20100630
Sparta official accidentally releases hundreds of Social Security numbers in public records request
Published: Wednesday, June 30, 2010
SPARTA — When Jesse Wolosky filed an Open Public Records Act request attempting to find out how the Sparta School District spent its $62 million annual budget, he just wanted access to the master vendor list.
The list would break down the individuals and companies the school district cut checks to throughout 2009.
The OPRA became too transparent last Thursday, however, when Wolosky obtained the information he wanted and much, much more. Wolosky received "hundreds upon hundreds" of Social Security numbers and federal employee identification numbers of school district vendors.
"This is extremely careless," said Wolosky, a Sparta resident. "Normally they redact the Social Security numbers and telephone numbers. It’s one click on an Excel spreadsheet. This is negligent and someone needs to hold them accountable."
Sparta business administrator Warren Ceurvels, who sent Wolosky the documents in an e-mail, said today the information was released "inadvertently" and that "it was an unfortunate mistake."
Ceurvels said the Sparta Board of Education is aware of the situation. The school district will send letters to people mentioned in the document given to Wolosky to alert them of the mistake and potential risk.
Wolosky, a self-proclaimed concerned citizen and public activist, said he plans to do nothing with the Social Security numbers. Ceurvels said he expects Wolosky to return the information as soon as possible.
Catherine Starghill, the executive director of the New Jersey Government Records Council, said OPRA, which was enacted in 2002, exempts Social Security numbers from being released in OPRA requests. There is no formal policy or statute to penalize custodians who disclose this information, said Stargill.
Ceurvels and Starghill said they were not aware of the document with the private information being given to anyone else.
Ceurvels said the Sparta Board of Education is aware of the situation. The school district will send letters to people mentioned in the document given to Wolosky to alert them of the mistake and potential risk.
Wolosky, a self-proclaimed concerned citizen and public activist, said he plans to do nothing with the Social Security numbers. Ceurvels said he expects Wolosky to return the information as soon as possible.
Catherine Starghill, the executive director of the New Jersey Government Records Council, said OPRA, which was enacted in 2002, exempts Social Security numbers from being released in OPRA requests. There is no formal policy or statute to penalize custodians who disclose this information, said Starghill.
Ceurvels and Starghill said they were not aware of the document with the private information being given to anyone else.
20081231
Movement to recall 2 Frankford officials hits another snag
December 31, 2008
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Star-Ledger Staff
Frankford residents thought they were going by the book when they started their most-recent effort to recall township Mayor Bob McDowell and Committeeman Paul Sutphen.
The residents got the recall-petition form right off the state Division of Elections website and submitted it to municipal clerk Louanne Cular, who on Dec. 18 approved the form. That was the first of various legal steps required in the lengthy recall process.
However, an eagle-eyed recall activist, Jesse Wolosky of Sparta, who has been helping the Frankford petitioners, spotted a problem with the state's three-page form: It stated each page containing signatures must be notarized, but only provided a notarization line on the final page.
The petitioners had been down this road before. A prior recall petition against McDowell was rejected in August by Cular because not all pages were sequentially numbered. In that case, the petitioners sued, but a judge last month dismissed the petition, ruling that it had been submitted too late to get on the Nov. 4, 2008 ballot.
This time, the petitioners alerted Cular about the apparent technicality, and she contacted the township attorney. He agreed that the state forms seemed flawed and probably would not hold up in court if challenged, Cular said.
"It appears the state form does not comply with the state statute," Cular said. "The state came up with a new recall form and that's what they (petitioners) submitted to me, so I approved it. But this form would be challenged in court, so we said, 'Let's start all over.'"
The petitioners and town officials agreed that a notarization line should be added and the petition forms resubmitted to Cular for approval, which was done yesterday, said petitioner Gary Larson.
"It's no different than last time, when we got blown out on a technicality. Luckily, it was spotted before we got started" collecting the 1,030 signatures needed per petition to force recall elections. "We're just trying to make sure we cover every base."
The state's form was indeed incorrect, and it was removed yesterday from the website after the division learned of it, said state Division of Elections director Bob Giles.
"They are correct. The notaries should be on every signature page," Giles said. "This was a draft version. It shouldn't have been out there."
Giles also noted that the state website usually contains a disclaimer that its forms are for informational purposes, and residents should obtain their own legal advice.
Larson said the recall process should be readily understandable to laymen and simpler to implement, and should not be prone to technicalities or require an attorney.
"A page that you print off from a state website -- that should be a done deal," Larson said.
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Star-Ledger Staff
Frankford residents thought they were going by the book when they started their most-recent effort to recall township Mayor Bob McDowell and Committeeman Paul Sutphen.
The residents got the recall-petition form right off the state Division of Elections website and submitted it to municipal clerk Louanne Cular, who on Dec. 18 approved the form. That was the first of various legal steps required in the lengthy recall process.
However, an eagle-eyed recall activist, Jesse Wolosky of Sparta, who has been helping the Frankford petitioners, spotted a problem with the state's three-page form: It stated each page containing signatures must be notarized, but only provided a notarization line on the final page.
The petitioners had been down this road before. A prior recall petition against McDowell was rejected in August by Cular because not all pages were sequentially numbered. In that case, the petitioners sued, but a judge last month dismissed the petition, ruling that it had been submitted too late to get on the Nov. 4, 2008 ballot.
This time, the petitioners alerted Cular about the apparent technicality, and she contacted the township attorney. He agreed that the state forms seemed flawed and probably would not hold up in court if challenged, Cular said.
"It appears the state form does not comply with the state statute," Cular said. "The state came up with a new recall form and that's what they (petitioners) submitted to me, so I approved it. But this form would be challenged in court, so we said, 'Let's start all over.'"
The petitioners and town officials agreed that a notarization line should be added and the petition forms resubmitted to Cular for approval, which was done yesterday, said petitioner Gary Larson.
"It's no different than last time, when we got blown out on a technicality. Luckily, it was spotted before we got started" collecting the 1,030 signatures needed per petition to force recall elections. "We're just trying to make sure we cover every base."
The state's form was indeed incorrect, and it was removed yesterday from the website after the division learned of it, said state Division of Elections director Bob Giles.
"They are correct. The notaries should be on every signature page," Giles said. "This was a draft version. It shouldn't have been out there."
Giles also noted that the state website usually contains a disclaimer that its forms are for informational purposes, and residents should obtain their own legal advice.
Larson said the recall process should be readily understandable to laymen and simpler to implement, and should not be prone to technicalities or require an attorney.
"A page that you print off from a state website -- that should be a done deal," Larson said.
20081225
Frankford residents seeking recall of mayor face tight window
December 22, 2008
by Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger
Notices of intent by some citizens to try to recall Frankford Mayor Bob McDowell -- as well as his political ally, township committeeman Paul Sutphen -- were approved in form Thursday by the municipal clerk.
McDowell was the subject of an unsuccessful recall petition earlier this year. Petitioners decided to try again, and try to recall Sutphen, too, and getting the petition forms approved was the first of various legal steps required in the lengthy recall process.
"Merry Christmas," McDowell said, tongue-in-cheek. "I guess the Grinch will be working over the holidays
However, it already may be too late for a recall of McDowell in 2009, due to restrictions of when recalls can be held and deadlines involved in each step of the process, said municipal clerk Louanne Cular.
An official can't be recalled within six months of the end of his term, and McDowell's term ends Dec. 31, 2009. That eliminates July to December for a recall vote. Special recalls also are not allowed within 28 days of any other election, so that eliminates April, May and June, due to the April school elections and June primary.
That would leave March 17 as the only possible day for a special recall election of McDowell, Cular said. Other timelines involved in the process, such as windows to review and challenge petitions, means that recall petitions against McDowell would have to be submitted by today for an election to be held on March 17, Cular said.
Because Sutphen's term does not end until Dec. 31, 2010, the petitioners have much more leeway in time in trying to recall him, Cular said.
However, there has been talk in the state Legislature about moving school elections next year from April to November. If that were to happen, then a McDowell recall election theoretically could still be held in 2009, in May, Cular said.
As a result, petitioners decided to start the McDowell recall process and get everything in order, in case school elections do end up moved.
"This is making a statement," said Sam Castimore, one of the petition organizers. "Just have a recall election -- that's all we're asking for."
If school elections are not moved and a McDowell recall becomes moot, "Then we'll only have one person (Sutphen) to recall in a special election. We're well aware of those possibilities," Castimore said.
McDowell questions why opponents would bother trying to recall him in the same year that he'll be up for re-election. They could run against him, if he decides to run again.
"The recall seems a little redundant," McDowell said. "It's sort of a sour grapes thing."
Petitioners would need to garner 1,030 signatures of registered voters per petition to force a special recall election. Such an election also would cost the town around $15,500.
McDowell was first targeted for recall this year after the township committee restricted some commercial development along part of Route 206. That petition was rejected in August by Cular due to a technicality that all pages were not sequentially numbered. Petitioners sued, but a judge last month dismissed the petition, ruling that it was submitted too late in the summer to get on the Nov. 4, 2008, general election ballot.
by Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger
Notices of intent by some citizens to try to recall Frankford Mayor Bob McDowell -- as well as his political ally, township committeeman Paul Sutphen -- were approved in form Thursday by the municipal clerk.
McDowell was the subject of an unsuccessful recall petition earlier this year. Petitioners decided to try again, and try to recall Sutphen, too, and getting the petition forms approved was the first of various legal steps required in the lengthy recall process.
"Merry Christmas," McDowell said, tongue-in-cheek. "I guess the Grinch will be working over the holidays
However, it already may be too late for a recall of McDowell in 2009, due to restrictions of when recalls can be held and deadlines involved in each step of the process, said municipal clerk Louanne Cular.
An official can't be recalled within six months of the end of his term, and McDowell's term ends Dec. 31, 2009. That eliminates July to December for a recall vote. Special recalls also are not allowed within 28 days of any other election, so that eliminates April, May and June, due to the April school elections and June primary.
That would leave March 17 as the only possible day for a special recall election of McDowell, Cular said. Other timelines involved in the process, such as windows to review and challenge petitions, means that recall petitions against McDowell would have to be submitted by today for an election to be held on March 17, Cular said.
Because Sutphen's term does not end until Dec. 31, 2010, the petitioners have much more leeway in time in trying to recall him, Cular said.
However, there has been talk in the state Legislature about moving school elections next year from April to November. If that were to happen, then a McDowell recall election theoretically could still be held in 2009, in May, Cular said.
As a result, petitioners decided to start the McDowell recall process and get everything in order, in case school elections do end up moved.
"This is making a statement," said Sam Castimore, one of the petition organizers. "Just have a recall election -- that's all we're asking for."
If school elections are not moved and a McDowell recall becomes moot, "Then we'll only have one person (Sutphen) to recall in a special election. We're well aware of those possibilities," Castimore said.
McDowell questions why opponents would bother trying to recall him in the same year that he'll be up for re-election. They could run against him, if he decides to run again.
"The recall seems a little redundant," McDowell said. "It's sort of a sour grapes thing."
Petitioners would need to garner 1,030 signatures of registered voters per petition to force a special recall election. Such an election also would cost the town around $15,500.
McDowell was first targeted for recall this year after the township committee restricted some commercial development along part of Route 206. That petition was rejected in August by Cular due to a technicality that all pages were not sequentially numbered. Petitioners sued, but a judge last month dismissed the petition, ruling that it was submitted too late in the summer to get on the Nov. 4, 2008, general election ballot.
20081019
Sparta residents win one and loss one on petitions
October 18, 2008
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Star-Ledger Staff
It was a split decision for a group of Sparta residents who sued the township clerk for rejecting two petitions -- one for a referendum on a salary ordinance and one seeking to let residents opt out of curb side garbage collection.
Superior Court Judge Theodore Bozonelis, sitting in Morristown yesterday, upheld the rejection of the trash petition, but reinstated the petition on the salary ordinance.
Municipal clerk Miriam Tower rejected the trash petition in March because it was vague and not in the proper form. It did not provide the text of the original ordinance creating curbside collection and did not spell out opt-out costs or how that would work. Bozonelis agreed and upheld her rejection, but also laid out a framework for how a future petition should be structured to pass muster.
"It was properly rejected. The clerk has no choice but to reject it," Bozonelis said. "It doesn't mean you can't go out and do it again. It simply must be more specific."
Regarding salary-ordinance petition, residents argued that Tower wrongly rejected it in May. They submitted 638 signatures, but she found they needed 650. When they then submitted 30 more signatures a few days later, which was still within the deadline, Tower determined the petition could not simply be supplemented with extra signatures but would have to be started over from scratch.
Bozonelis disagreed and validated the salary-ordinance petition, because the extra signatures were submitted before the deadline expired. "The clerk rejected it on a strict reading of the statute, (leaving it) for the court to decide," he said.
Now, the salary petition goes back to Tower to verify the signatures. If there are enough valid sig natures, the salary ordinance would be put up for a referendum in the 2009 general election.
The ordinance provides a range of salary raises for some 11 non- union employees, including the town manager and his secretary, four department heads and the five elected township council members.
Sparta Township attorney Thomas Ryan said he was pleased with the rulings. "The issue of solid waste has been addressed with the community (who approved curb side collection in a referendum). With the salary ordinance, I believe the township handled that properly as well."
The residents, Jesse Wolosky, Philip Lid, Aileen Shane, Anne Simkatis and Myron Leski, who represented themselves in court, said they were happy the salary petition was upheld. But they were disappointed that the trash petition was denied, but pleased with the judge's spelling out how to correctly redo an opt-out petition.
"We're going to do another (opt-out) petition," Wolosky said. "We're going to get better at it so that we don't make a mistake."
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Star-Ledger Staff
It was a split decision for a group of Sparta residents who sued the township clerk for rejecting two petitions -- one for a referendum on a salary ordinance and one seeking to let residents opt out of curb side garbage collection.
Superior Court Judge Theodore Bozonelis, sitting in Morristown yesterday, upheld the rejection of the trash petition, but reinstated the petition on the salary ordinance.
Municipal clerk Miriam Tower rejected the trash petition in March because it was vague and not in the proper form. It did not provide the text of the original ordinance creating curbside collection and did not spell out opt-out costs or how that would work. Bozonelis agreed and upheld her rejection, but also laid out a framework for how a future petition should be structured to pass muster.
"It was properly rejected. The clerk has no choice but to reject it," Bozonelis said. "It doesn't mean you can't go out and do it again. It simply must be more specific."
Regarding salary-ordinance petition, residents argued that Tower wrongly rejected it in May. They submitted 638 signatures, but she found they needed 650. When they then submitted 30 more signatures a few days later, which was still within the deadline, Tower determined the petition could not simply be supplemented with extra signatures but would have to be started over from scratch.
Bozonelis disagreed and validated the salary-ordinance petition, because the extra signatures were submitted before the deadline expired. "The clerk rejected it on a strict reading of the statute, (leaving it) for the court to decide," he said.
Now, the salary petition goes back to Tower to verify the signatures. If there are enough valid sig natures, the salary ordinance would be put up for a referendum in the 2009 general election.
The ordinance provides a range of salary raises for some 11 non- union employees, including the town manager and his secretary, four department heads and the five elected township council members.
Sparta Township attorney Thomas Ryan said he was pleased with the rulings. "The issue of solid waste has been addressed with the community (who approved curb side collection in a referendum). With the salary ordinance, I believe the township handled that properly as well."
The residents, Jesse Wolosky, Philip Lid, Aileen Shane, Anne Simkatis and Myron Leski, who represented themselves in court, said they were happy the salary petition was upheld. But they were disappointed that the trash petition was denied, but pleased with the judge's spelling out how to correctly redo an opt-out petition.
"We're going to do another (opt-out) petition," Wolosky said. "We're going to get better at it so that we don't make a mistake."
20080926
Frankford mayoral recall won't be on Nov. 4 ballot
September 25, 2008
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Star-Ledger Staff
A judge yesterday refused to immediately order a recall election of Frankford Mayor Robert McDowell for the Nov. 4 general election because there must first be a full airing of the matter in court.
But Superior Court Judge Theodore Bozonelis, sitting in Morristown, also decided to continue hearing the case by residents arguing that their recall petition was improperly rejected by the township clerk due to a technicality.
That means the petition still might end up going before voters as a special recall election possibly by the end of the year or early next year, if Bozonelis rules in favor of the petitioners.
"I'm not going to order the clerk to put it on the Nov. 4 ballot," Bozonelis said in issuing his ruling, because there would not be enough time for hearings and to give McDowell a chance to raise objections to the petition.
The petition was declared null and void on Aug. 27 by municipal clerk Louanne Cular due to a technical error on the paperwork. Under law, each recall petition section containing signatures is supposed to be numbered sequentially. However, only one of the 51 separate sections was numbered, and as a result, law mandates that the petition be voided, township attorney Kevin Benbrook argued.
Petitioners needed 947 signatures for a recall election but garnered 1,200, and each person signing the petition had to check a box saying they saw the cover page. Their attorney, Edward Buzak, argued that the petition did not have to be squashed over a technicality.
But Bozonelis said, "It's not going to be up to the clerk to make these kinds of determinations. It's going to be up to the court, based on hearings." The issue will be whether the technicality was so minor that a special election should be ordered, or whether the petitioners would have to start all over again from scratch collecting signatures if they choose to, the judge said.
A similar situation occurred in Mount Olive in 2006, in which Bozonelis upheld a petition against former Mount Olive Mayor Richard De La Roche, who ended up getting recalled. In Mount Olive, De La Roche objected to the petition because all the pages were missing certifications from petition collectors. That was a greater defect than Frankford's case of pages not being numbered sequentially, said Buzak, adding that the state Appellate Division also upheld Bozonelis's decision in Mount Olive.
"Hopefully, we'll have the opportunity to go forward with a special election," Buzak said after the hearing.
McDowell did not attend the hearing. His attorney, Richard Fornaro, said after court that he was glad the recall wasn't approved yesterday.
Benbrook said, "My clerk has been vindicated. If it goes any further from here, it's the judge's bailiwick and that's what we said from Day One."
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Star-Ledger Staff
A judge yesterday refused to immediately order a recall election of Frankford Mayor Robert McDowell for the Nov. 4 general election because there must first be a full airing of the matter in court.
But Superior Court Judge Theodore Bozonelis, sitting in Morristown, also decided to continue hearing the case by residents arguing that their recall petition was improperly rejected by the township clerk due to a technicality.
That means the petition still might end up going before voters as a special recall election possibly by the end of the year or early next year, if Bozonelis rules in favor of the petitioners.
"I'm not going to order the clerk to put it on the Nov. 4 ballot," Bozonelis said in issuing his ruling, because there would not be enough time for hearings and to give McDowell a chance to raise objections to the petition.
The petition was declared null and void on Aug. 27 by municipal clerk Louanne Cular due to a technical error on the paperwork. Under law, each recall petition section containing signatures is supposed to be numbered sequentially. However, only one of the 51 separate sections was numbered, and as a result, law mandates that the petition be voided, township attorney Kevin Benbrook argued.
Petitioners needed 947 signatures for a recall election but garnered 1,200, and each person signing the petition had to check a box saying they saw the cover page. Their attorney, Edward Buzak, argued that the petition did not have to be squashed over a technicality.
But Bozonelis said, "It's not going to be up to the clerk to make these kinds of determinations. It's going to be up to the court, based on hearings." The issue will be whether the technicality was so minor that a special election should be ordered, or whether the petitioners would have to start all over again from scratch collecting signatures if they choose to, the judge said.
A similar situation occurred in Mount Olive in 2006, in which Bozonelis upheld a petition against former Mount Olive Mayor Richard De La Roche, who ended up getting recalled. In Mount Olive, De La Roche objected to the petition because all the pages were missing certifications from petition collectors. That was a greater defect than Frankford's case of pages not being numbered sequentially, said Buzak, adding that the state Appellate Division also upheld Bozonelis's decision in Mount Olive.
"Hopefully, we'll have the opportunity to go forward with a special election," Buzak said after the hearing.
McDowell did not attend the hearing. His attorney, Richard Fornaro, said after court that he was glad the recall wasn't approved yesterday.
Benbrook said, "My clerk has been vindicated. If it goes any further from here, it's the judge's bailiwick and that's what we said from Day One."
20080912
Trial date set for Sparta petitions
August 21, 2008
by Margaret McHugh
A group of residents suing Sparta and its clerk for rejecting a petition for a referendum on a salary ordinance and another that seeks to let residents opt out of curbside garbage collection will be going to trial on Oct. 17.
Superior Court Judge Theodore Bozonelis set the trial date during a hearing in Morristown on Thursday.
Residents Jesse Wolosky, Philip Lid, Aileen Shane, Anne Simkatis and Myron Leski argued in court that township clerk Miriam Tower wrongly determined in May that the 638 signatures they collected for a referendum to repeal a salary ordinance weren't enough.
They collected another 30 signatures, but Tower wouldn't let them supplement the petition.
"All we are seeking is a say in how they are spending our money," Leski said.
At the October trial, Bozonelis also will decide whether Tower wrongly rejected a petition to let residents opt out of curbside garbage collection. The residents are going to trial without an attorney representing them.
by Margaret McHugh
A group of residents suing Sparta and its clerk for rejecting a petition for a referendum on a salary ordinance and another that seeks to let residents opt out of curbside garbage collection will be going to trial on Oct. 17.
Superior Court Judge Theodore Bozonelis set the trial date during a hearing in Morristown on Thursday.
Residents Jesse Wolosky, Philip Lid, Aileen Shane, Anne Simkatis and Myron Leski argued in court that township clerk Miriam Tower wrongly determined in May that the 638 signatures they collected for a referendum to repeal a salary ordinance weren't enough.
They collected another 30 signatures, but Tower wouldn't let them supplement the petition.
"All we are seeking is a say in how they are spending our money," Leski said.
At the October trial, Bozonelis also will decide whether Tower wrongly rejected a petition to let residents opt out of curbside garbage collection. The residents are going to trial without an attorney representing them.
20080831
Morristown voters will consider pay-to-play ordinance
June 29, 2008
by Robert E. Williams III/The Star-Ledger
A petition to ask voters whether Morristown should have a pay-to-play ordinance has been certified.
In a letter dated Thursday, town clerk Matthew Stechauner informed the petition committee that it collected 416 valid signatures, enough to place a question on the ballot asking voters to consider the pay-to-play ordinance.
If passed, the measure, known as the Public Contracting Reform ordinance, would ban town officials from doing business with professionals who have donated more than $300 to the campaigns of the mayor or council members. The Morristown Parking Authority has a similar ordinance.
The petition committee submitted 431 signatures. It had needed 296, or 10 percent of the turnout from last November's election.
The measure will first go before the town council, likely to take place July 15. Should the council not pass the measure, voters will decide in November.
by Robert E. Williams III/The Star-Ledger
A petition to ask voters whether Morristown should have a pay-to-play ordinance has been certified.
In a letter dated Thursday, town clerk Matthew Stechauner informed the petition committee that it collected 416 valid signatures, enough to place a question on the ballot asking voters to consider the pay-to-play ordinance.
If passed, the measure, known as the Public Contracting Reform ordinance, would ban town officials from doing business with professionals who have donated more than $300 to the campaigns of the mayor or council members. The Morristown Parking Authority has a similar ordinance.
The petition committee submitted 431 signatures. It had needed 296, or 10 percent of the turnout from last November's election.
The measure will first go before the town council, likely to take place July 15. Should the council not pass the measure, voters will decide in November.
Morristown clerk certifies petition
January 17, 2008
by Star-Ledger staff
A petition to have voters decide on Mayor Donald Cresitello's raise has been certified by the town clerk's office, enabling the issue to be presented to voters in November.
Town clerk Matt Stechauner said yesterday his office mailed letters to members of the five-person committee, certifying the group gathered enough signatures to place the issue of Mayor Donald Cresitello's raise as a question on the November ballot.
The committee submitted 769 signatures as part of a petition it circulated last month in reaction to the council's approval of an ordinance increasing the mayor's raise by up to 23 percent, or $6,000.
The petition is the third organized in the past two years circulated in protest of ordinances increasing the mayor's pay. Residents voted against raising the mayor's annual salary of $26,042 two years ago, and a second ordinance passed last year was later ruled invalid, and was not put to vote nor enacted.
by Star-Ledger staff
A petition to have voters decide on Mayor Donald Cresitello's raise has been certified by the town clerk's office, enabling the issue to be presented to voters in November.
Town clerk Matt Stechauner said yesterday his office mailed letters to members of the five-person committee, certifying the group gathered enough signatures to place the issue of Mayor Donald Cresitello's raise as a question on the November ballot.
The committee submitted 769 signatures as part of a petition it circulated last month in reaction to the council's approval of an ordinance increasing the mayor's raise by up to 23 percent, or $6,000.
The petition is the third organized in the past two years circulated in protest of ordinances increasing the mayor's pay. Residents voted against raising the mayor's annual salary of $26,042 two years ago, and a second ordinance passed last year was later ruled invalid, and was not put to vote nor enacted.
20080830
Technical error voids petition to recall Frankford mayor
August 27, 2008
by Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger
A petition to recall Frankford Mayor Robert McDowell was declared null and void today by the municipal clerk due to a technical error on the paperwork.
That means there will be no recall election of McDowell on the Nov. 4 general election ballot, township officials said.
Under law, each recall petition section containing signatures is supposed to be numbered sequentially. However, in the petition submitted earlier this month, only one of the 51 sections was so numbered. State law mandates that the petition be voided as a result of this error, township clerk Louanne Cular and township attorney Kevin Benbrook said.
Petition organizers Sam Castimore, Rose Tanis and Richard Wingle have 10 days to challenge the decision. Castimore said his group would pursue the challenges, and if turned down, would mount another recall-petition drive against McDowell.
McDowell could not be reached for comment.
The Frankford recall was one of three under way recently in Sussex County. Recall petitions in Sparta against a trio of councilmen failed earlier this month to garner enough signatures to get recall elections on the Nov. 4 ballot.
In Stillwater, an effort to recall township committeeman Al Fuoco became moot when Fuoco resigned Tuesday.
by Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger
A petition to recall Frankford Mayor Robert McDowell was declared null and void today by the municipal clerk due to a technical error on the paperwork.
That means there will be no recall election of McDowell on the Nov. 4 general election ballot, township officials said.
Under law, each recall petition section containing signatures is supposed to be numbered sequentially. However, in the petition submitted earlier this month, only one of the 51 sections was so numbered. State law mandates that the petition be voided as a result of this error, township clerk Louanne Cular and township attorney Kevin Benbrook said.
Petition organizers Sam Castimore, Rose Tanis and Richard Wingle have 10 days to challenge the decision. Castimore said his group would pursue the challenges, and if turned down, would mount another recall-petition drive against McDowell.
McDowell could not be reached for comment.
The Frankford recall was one of three under way recently in Sussex County. Recall petitions in Sparta against a trio of councilmen failed earlier this month to garner enough signatures to get recall elections on the Nov. 4 ballot.
In Stillwater, an effort to recall township committeeman Al Fuoco became moot when Fuoco resigned Tuesday.
20080828
Under threat of recall, Stillwater committeeman resigns
August 26, 2008
by Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger
Stillwater Township Committeeman Al Fuoco submitted his letter of resignation today in advance of a planned recall vote in the Nov. 4 general election.
Fuoco's resignation will take effect Wednesday, which also happens to be his 65th birthday. Fuoco already had been planning to step down for an eventual out-of-state move, but the recall effort hastened his departure from the committee, he said.
"It's just not worth it," Fuoco said. "It's not something I choose to fight for anymore. Life is too short."
One of the recall-petition organizers, Marion Gross, read a statement saying she and the other two members of the petition committee, Carol Fredericks and Dania Bodensieck, are "pleased Mr. Fuoco chose to resign."
"The success of this campaign should remind other public officials that they do need to be accountable to the public that elected them," Gross stated.
Fuoco's departure will create a vacancy on the five-member township committee. The empty seat may now be temporarily filled by the local Republican municipal committee and township committee. Candidates seeking to fill the rest of Fuoco's term, which expires Dec. 31, 2009, also may independently petition to run in the Nov. 4 election.
The selected candidate will be sworn in immediately after the election, said Sussex County Clerk Erma Gormley.
Stillwater's recall effort was one of three under way in Sussex County in recent months. Petitions in Sparta against a trio of township council members failed earlier this month to garner enough signatures to get a recall on the Nov. 4 ballot.
But a recall petition in Frankford against Mayor Robert McDowell was submitted Aug. 13 with more than enough signatures needed. The signatures are still being verified, but it seems likely Frankford voters will have the choice of recalling McDowell on Nov. 4
by Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger
Stillwater Township Committeeman Al Fuoco submitted his letter of resignation today in advance of a planned recall vote in the Nov. 4 general election.
Fuoco's resignation will take effect Wednesday, which also happens to be his 65th birthday. Fuoco already had been planning to step down for an eventual out-of-state move, but the recall effort hastened his departure from the committee, he said.
"It's just not worth it," Fuoco said. "It's not something I choose to fight for anymore. Life is too short."
One of the recall-petition organizers, Marion Gross, read a statement saying she and the other two members of the petition committee, Carol Fredericks and Dania Bodensieck, are "pleased Mr. Fuoco chose to resign."
"The success of this campaign should remind other public officials that they do need to be accountable to the public that elected them," Gross stated.
Fuoco's departure will create a vacancy on the five-member township committee. The empty seat may now be temporarily filled by the local Republican municipal committee and township committee. Candidates seeking to fill the rest of Fuoco's term, which expires Dec. 31, 2009, also may independently petition to run in the Nov. 4 election.
The selected candidate will be sworn in immediately after the election, said Sussex County Clerk Erma Gormley.
Stillwater's recall effort was one of three under way in Sussex County in recent months. Petitions in Sparta against a trio of township council members failed earlier this month to garner enough signatures to get a recall on the Nov. 4 ballot.
But a recall petition in Frankford against Mayor Robert McDowell was submitted Aug. 13 with more than enough signatures needed. The signatures are still being verified, but it seems likely Frankford voters will have the choice of recalling McDowell on Nov. 4
20080810
Politicians ponder 'recall without cause'
August 10, 2008
Holding officials accountable, residents sign petitions for their removal
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Star-Ledger Staff
You might be able to fight city hall after all -- by trying to recall an elected official.
But is that necessarily a good thing, or sour grapes from a disgruntled citizenry?
Such sentiments and questions are being raised in three towns in Sussex County -- Sparta, Frankford and Stillwater -- where recall petitions against municipal officials have been under way.
It's too early to know for sure, but it looks like Stillwater and Frankford may have recall elections on the Nov. 4 ballot, but Sparta won't.
In Sparta, recall petitions against Mayor Brian Brady and councilmen Michael Spekhardt and Manny Goldberg are falling short of garnering the 3,125 signatures needed per petition, said Jesse Wolosky, the recall organizer there. The deadlines for petitions to be submitted in Sparta are Tuesday for the one against Spekhardt, and Aug. 19 for the ones against Brady and Goldberg.
"We will not be submitting a petition on the 12th or the 19th. We did not make our numbers," said Wolosky, who would not disclose how far short they fell.
Wolosky, who earlier this year engineered three other petitions against ordinances in Sparta and helped Stillwater and Frankford petitioners, cited "petition fatigue" as one reason for the recall failures in his town. He said his group has had no trouble obtaining several-hundred signatures needed to oppose ordinances, but a recall requires a much-higher threshold of 25 percent of registered voters.
"I don't think it's petition-fatigue at all," Brady said. "I stand by the fact that the council keeps the entire township in mind and we do what we think is right."
Recalls are allowed under a 1995 law that only recently has begun to be employed as a grassroots political tool throughout the state. Recall petitions are the most difficult petitions to achieve, as petitions need signatures from at least 25 percent of a town's registered voters. There also are limits on who can be recalled; officials in their first year or six months away from the end of a term can't be recalled. Residents also simultaneously choose a replacement if a recall passes, and the recall target can also be a replacement candidate.
Earlier this year, Hardyston had the first recall in Sussex County, in the April 15 school election, when former school board president Marbeth Boffa was recalled and replaced.
In Stillwater, petitions to recall Township Committeeman Al Fuoco needed 707 signatures and were submitted on Aug. 1 with 855 signatures. Last week, the municipal clerk determined there are enough valid signatures, and Fuoco now has until Aug. 19 to challenge any of them. If there still are enough after that, a recall election would occur on Nov. 4.
"This is a ruse for a political vendetta," Fuoco said. "There's a lot of personal animosity going back four or five years."
Carol Fredericks, one of the Stillwater recall organizers, disagreed and cited Fuoco's vote against gypsy-moth spraying as a catalyst for the recall drive.
"The will of the people wasn't done. We decided enough is enough," Fredericks said. "It's not a personal vendetta. Politicians have to be accountable."
Frankford residents targeted Mayor Robert McDowell for recall after the township committee restricted some commercial development along part of Route 206. They need 947 signatures for a recall election, and petitions have not yet been submitted.
Rich Wingle, one of the recall organizers in Frankford, said of McDowell: "He's against business and doesn't listen to residents. It's a pretty strong (recall) movement in town. I've been here 35 years and never seen anything like it."
McDowell, who said he's "hearing a lot of strong support against the recall," said he's not anti-business, but rather following state procedures to gain Trenton's approval for a town center. "You have to do certain things, pass ordinances. We did that and now we're getting a little backlash over it."
While acknowledging that recall organizers are exercising their rights, the officials each expressed concern with how laws do not require petitions to contain any reasons for a recall. They feel recalls should be reserved for corruption or malfeasance, and not over political feuds or disagreements about decisions.
"I believe what they're doing (in Stillwater) is an abuse of the recall process," Fuoco said. "There's no basis for a recall, no malfeasance. It's the way people who are angry and can't get their way at the ballot box go about it now."
McDowell said, "I'm really concerned about where this recall thing (in Frankford) is going to go. If this is the nature of what recalls are about, why would people run for office in the future?"
Brady, who plans to fight for a change in the law to require a reason stated on a recall petition, said, "I feel for anybody who becomes subject of a recall without cause, for doing nothing more than what you were put in office to do."
Petition organizers note they adhered to the recall law, and also set up web sites or issued letters, mailers or word-of-mouth information stating various reasons for recalls.
"We live in a democracy," Fredericks said. "You can't fight city hall? I think that's changing."
Holding officials accountable, residents sign petitions for their removal
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Star-Ledger Staff
You might be able to fight city hall after all -- by trying to recall an elected official.
But is that necessarily a good thing, or sour grapes from a disgruntled citizenry?
Such sentiments and questions are being raised in three towns in Sussex County -- Sparta, Frankford and Stillwater -- where recall petitions against municipal officials have been under way.
It's too early to know for sure, but it looks like Stillwater and Frankford may have recall elections on the Nov. 4 ballot, but Sparta won't.
In Sparta, recall petitions against Mayor Brian Brady and councilmen Michael Spekhardt and Manny Goldberg are falling short of garnering the 3,125 signatures needed per petition, said Jesse Wolosky, the recall organizer there. The deadlines for petitions to be submitted in Sparta are Tuesday for the one against Spekhardt, and Aug. 19 for the ones against Brady and Goldberg.
"We will not be submitting a petition on the 12th or the 19th. We did not make our numbers," said Wolosky, who would not disclose how far short they fell.
Wolosky, who earlier this year engineered three other petitions against ordinances in Sparta and helped Stillwater and Frankford petitioners, cited "petition fatigue" as one reason for the recall failures in his town. He said his group has had no trouble obtaining several-hundred signatures needed to oppose ordinances, but a recall requires a much-higher threshold of 25 percent of registered voters.
"I don't think it's petition-fatigue at all," Brady said. "I stand by the fact that the council keeps the entire township in mind and we do what we think is right."
Recalls are allowed under a 1995 law that only recently has begun to be employed as a grassroots political tool throughout the state. Recall petitions are the most difficult petitions to achieve, as petitions need signatures from at least 25 percent of a town's registered voters. There also are limits on who can be recalled; officials in their first year or six months away from the end of a term can't be recalled. Residents also simultaneously choose a replacement if a recall passes, and the recall target can also be a replacement candidate.
Earlier this year, Hardyston had the first recall in Sussex County, in the April 15 school election, when former school board president Marbeth Boffa was recalled and replaced.
In Stillwater, petitions to recall Township Committeeman Al Fuoco needed 707 signatures and were submitted on Aug. 1 with 855 signatures. Last week, the municipal clerk determined there are enough valid signatures, and Fuoco now has until Aug. 19 to challenge any of them. If there still are enough after that, a recall election would occur on Nov. 4.
"This is a ruse for a political vendetta," Fuoco said. "There's a lot of personal animosity going back four or five years."
Carol Fredericks, one of the Stillwater recall organizers, disagreed and cited Fuoco's vote against gypsy-moth spraying as a catalyst for the recall drive.
"The will of the people wasn't done. We decided enough is enough," Fredericks said. "It's not a personal vendetta. Politicians have to be accountable."
Frankford residents targeted Mayor Robert McDowell for recall after the township committee restricted some commercial development along part of Route 206. They need 947 signatures for a recall election, and petitions have not yet been submitted.
Rich Wingle, one of the recall organizers in Frankford, said of McDowell: "He's against business and doesn't listen to residents. It's a pretty strong (recall) movement in town. I've been here 35 years and never seen anything like it."
McDowell, who said he's "hearing a lot of strong support against the recall," said he's not anti-business, but rather following state procedures to gain Trenton's approval for a town center. "You have to do certain things, pass ordinances. We did that and now we're getting a little backlash over it."
While acknowledging that recall organizers are exercising their rights, the officials each expressed concern with how laws do not require petitions to contain any reasons for a recall. They feel recalls should be reserved for corruption or malfeasance, and not over political feuds or disagreements about decisions.
"I believe what they're doing (in Stillwater) is an abuse of the recall process," Fuoco said. "There's no basis for a recall, no malfeasance. It's the way people who are angry and can't get their way at the ballot box go about it now."
McDowell said, "I'm really concerned about where this recall thing (in Frankford) is going to go. If this is the nature of what recalls are about, why would people run for office in the future?"
Brady, who plans to fight for a change in the law to require a reason stated on a recall petition, said, "I feel for anybody who becomes subject of a recall without cause, for doing nothing more than what you were put in office to do."
Petition organizers note they adhered to the recall law, and also set up web sites or issued letters, mailers or word-of-mouth information stating various reasons for recalls.
"We live in a democracy," Fredericks said. "You can't fight city hall? I think that's changing."
20080610
Five sue Sparta over petition rejection
June 10, 2008
Five sue Sparta over petition rejection
Local activists sought to repeal salary ordinance for municipal workers
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Five civic activists are suing Sparta and its township clerk, claiming the clerk improperly rejected their petition to repeal a municipal-employee salary ordinance.
In a civil complaint filed last week in Superior Court in Newton and made public yesterday, plaintiffs Jesse Wolosky, Philip Lid, Aileen Shane, Anne Simkatis and Myron Leski name as defendants Sparta Township and its municipal clerk, Miriam Tower.
The lawsuit appeals Tower's May 9 rejection of the plaintiffs' May 7 petition to repeal a salary ordinance for non-union employees. The petition had 638 signatures, or more than the required threshold of 625 signatures, derived from 5 percent of registered voters in the last Assembly election, the lawsuit claims.
However, Tower rejected the petition because she determined it required 650 signatures. Furthermore, Tower found that the Faulkner Act does not apply to salary ordinances and protests against salary ordinances are limited to elected officials and managerial, executive or confidential employees.
The lawsuit claims Tower misapplied the 5 percent rule and the rejection was arbitrary and unreasonable. On May 10, the plaintiffs submitted 30 more signatures to correct the alleged deficiency and put the petition over the 650-threshold, but Tower determined the entire petition would have had to be resubmitted and more signatures could not just be tacked on, according to the lawsuit.
The suit seeks a reversal of Tower's rejection and a court order compelling her to accept the petition to begin the process of repealing the ordinance.
Tower could not be reached for comment. Township Attorney Thomas Ryan was not aware of the lawsuit but said, "I am confident that the municipal clerk's analysis and response to the issues pertaining to Mr. Wolosky's petitions are accurate and reliable."
The lawsuit is similar to a pending complaint that Wolosky, Lid, Shane and Simkatis filed in April against the township and Tower, claiming she improperly rejected their petition to allow residents to "opt out" of a new curbside trash collection that the petitioners opposed.
Wolosky also is leading a pending petition drive to recall three council members who voted for the trash plan.
Five sue Sparta over petition rejection
Local activists sought to repeal salary ordinance for municipal workers
BY JIM LOCKWOOD
Five civic activists are suing Sparta and its township clerk, claiming the clerk improperly rejected their petition to repeal a municipal-employee salary ordinance.
In a civil complaint filed last week in Superior Court in Newton and made public yesterday, plaintiffs Jesse Wolosky, Philip Lid, Aileen Shane, Anne Simkatis and Myron Leski name as defendants Sparta Township and its municipal clerk, Miriam Tower.
The lawsuit appeals Tower's May 9 rejection of the plaintiffs' May 7 petition to repeal a salary ordinance for non-union employees. The petition had 638 signatures, or more than the required threshold of 625 signatures, derived from 5 percent of registered voters in the last Assembly election, the lawsuit claims.
However, Tower rejected the petition because she determined it required 650 signatures. Furthermore, Tower found that the Faulkner Act does not apply to salary ordinances and protests against salary ordinances are limited to elected officials and managerial, executive or confidential employees.
The lawsuit claims Tower misapplied the 5 percent rule and the rejection was arbitrary and unreasonable. On May 10, the plaintiffs submitted 30 more signatures to correct the alleged deficiency and put the petition over the 650-threshold, but Tower determined the entire petition would have had to be resubmitted and more signatures could not just be tacked on, according to the lawsuit.
The suit seeks a reversal of Tower's rejection and a court order compelling her to accept the petition to begin the process of repealing the ordinance.
Tower could not be reached for comment. Township Attorney Thomas Ryan was not aware of the lawsuit but said, "I am confident that the municipal clerk's analysis and response to the issues pertaining to Mr. Wolosky's petitions are accurate and reliable."
The lawsuit is similar to a pending complaint that Wolosky, Lid, Shane and Simkatis filed in April against the township and Tower, claiming she improperly rejected their petition to allow residents to "opt out" of a new curbside trash collection that the petitioners opposed.
Wolosky also is leading a pending petition drive to recall three council members who voted for the trash plan.
20080323
Sparta council approves town wide trash pick-up
By Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger
Saturday December 01, 2007, 2:40 PM
Sparta's Township Council approved a controversial plan today to start a town wide garbage collection service, capping hours of raucous hearings crowded with residents who want to take their own trash to the dump.
For years, Sparta's 6,500 households have hired private haulers or carted the trash themselves to the Sussex County landfill. The measure approved today creates a garbage utility that will pick up regular refuse twice a week and bulk trash monthly. Officials say the service will save most - but not all - residents about $120 a year.
"We need to have vision," said Mayor Michael Spekhardt, who joined councilmen Manny Goldberg and Brian Brady in supporting the measure, which passed 3-2.
The vote came after more than seven hours of public hearings that were punctuated with catcalls from residents who take their own garbage to the landfill. They contend the township's plan will cost them about $130 more per year.
"The economic advantage gained by some should not come at the expense of others," said Councilman Jerry Murphy, who joined Councilman Scott Seelagy in opposing the vote. Both face re-election next year.
Sparta is one of about half of Sussex County's 24 towns that do not have a municipal trash collection.
The township's twice-a-week service will cost households $230 a year. That's about $120 less than what private haulers charge for one-a-week pick-ups.
But about 25 percent of Sparta households don't use private haulers. Opponents of today's measure said they don't want to be forced into a system that will cost them more money and want to be able to "opt out" of any town wide collection.
The council, however, decided not to include an opt-out provision.
Saturday December 01, 2007, 2:40 PM
Sparta's Township Council approved a controversial plan today to start a town wide garbage collection service, capping hours of raucous hearings crowded with residents who want to take their own trash to the dump.
For years, Sparta's 6,500 households have hired private haulers or carted the trash themselves to the Sussex County landfill. The measure approved today creates a garbage utility that will pick up regular refuse twice a week and bulk trash monthly. Officials say the service will save most - but not all - residents about $120 a year.
"We need to have vision," said Mayor Michael Spekhardt, who joined councilmen Manny Goldberg and Brian Brady in supporting the measure, which passed 3-2.
The vote came after more than seven hours of public hearings that were punctuated with catcalls from residents who take their own garbage to the landfill. They contend the township's plan will cost them about $130 more per year.
"The economic advantage gained by some should not come at the expense of others," said Councilman Jerry Murphy, who joined Councilman Scott Seelagy in opposing the vote. Both face re-election next year.
Sparta is one of about half of Sussex County's 24 towns that do not have a municipal trash collection.
The township's twice-a-week service will cost households $230 a year. That's about $120 less than what private haulers charge for one-a-week pick-ups.
But about 25 percent of Sparta households don't use private haulers. Opponents of today's measure said they don't want to be forced into a system that will cost them more money and want to be able to "opt out" of any town wide collection.
The council, however, decided not to include an opt-out provision.
Denville recall election heats up
McCloskey tries to stay on council
Friday, March 07, 2008
BY PAULA SAHA
Star-Ledger Staff
The campaign signs have been popping up all over Denville's 2nd Ward and, after months of build- up, Jim McCloskey will know next Tuesday night whether he'll be keeping the council seat he's occupied for 13 years.
McCloskey, facing recall, is fending off a challenge by Gerard "Jerry" LaMonte, a 54-year-old systems engineer for Saint Clare's Hospital.
Both candidates say they have been campaigning vigorously -- knocking on every door in the ward, distributing fliers and posting signs in dozens of yards.
Both say their campaign signs -- each put out about 100 over the last few weeks -- had been torn down and covered up by each others' supporters.
But that is about all they have in common.
McCloskey, the 50-year-old president of a Parsippany electrical contracting company, maintains that the recall effort is "nothing but sour grapes" over a controversial sewer project that some in the ward did not want to go forward.
He says he made the right decision in voting for the project, calling it a public health issue that needed addressing. He said most voters can see that.
"They think (the recall supporters) is a small group of ... pretty vengeful people," he said.
LaMonte says the sewers -- which are now under construction in his neighborhood -- should have gone to a public vote, as should have the new, $7.6 million municipal building that McCloskey supported.
The recall is not just about the sewer, he said. About 78 percent of those who signed the petition supporting the recall don't live in the sewer area.
"The thrust of this entire campaign has been one of representation, or lack of representation on Mr. McCloskey's part," he said. "My goal, if elected, is to remain open and objective and not align with anyone but be an independent thinker."
McCloskey, a Republican, won his current term without opposition in 2005 with 745 votes.
The effort to oust him started last June, when the Committee to Recall James McCloskey filed a notice of intent with the township clerk's office.
The group collected 772 valid signatures on their recall petition, Clerk Donna Costello determined in November. Costello has estimated the special election will cost the township about $6,000.
The recall ballot is actually comprised of two questions. The first asks voters whether McCloskey should be recalled. The second one asks voters in the event he is recalled, which candidate should replace him. Polls will be open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.
BREAKING NEWS: McCloskey ousted by 56 votes in Denville recall
LaMonte selected to fill Second Ward seat
Published: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 9:14 PM EDT
DENVILLE TWP. – Councilman James McCloskey was removed from office in a recall election today by Second Ward voters who then voted to replace him with Gerard “Jerry” LaMonte.Voters voted 466-410 to recall McCloskey and then selected LaMonte over McCloskey in a second question to decide who should replace him if he was recalled in a 476-403 vote.
The vote includes absentee ballots, but not provisional ballots, which are generally just a handful of votes. Turnout was with 32 percent of the ward’s 2,738 registered voters casting ballots.
McCloskey maintained the organizers of the petition drive to hold the recall election were people who were opposed to the Openaki-Kitchell sewer project. He could not be reached for comment tonight. Polls closed at 8 p.m.
LaMonte, 56, of Beaverbrook Lane, is married with two children, and has lived in the township more than 20 years. He is a systems engineer at Saint Clare’s Hospital in Denville and an active volunteer. In addition to serving five years on the Municipal Alliance Committee, which he is now chairing, he has coached many sports in town and has been a troop leader for Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts.
LaMonte said in an interview the week before the election he will be better at communicating with residents.
He said people he met as he campaigned felt they were not heard by township officials, not just McCloskey, and he said he has had people tell him stories about presenting a concern or asking a question or offering an idea to someone in municipal government and, in some cases, not even getting any reply at all.
McCloskey, 50, of Ivy Crest Lane, is married with four children and is a lifelong resident of the township. He is an electrical contractor with E.J. Stewart of Parsippany. He is Republican, as are all members of the Township Council, and he is half-way through his third four-year term.
“I don’t want to be the only official in Denville to be recalled,” McCloskey said last week. “I don’t think I deserve that.” He said he believed officials should be targeted for recall for real wrongdoing in office.
Friday, March 07, 2008
BY PAULA SAHA
Star-Ledger Staff
The campaign signs have been popping up all over Denville's 2nd Ward and, after months of build- up, Jim McCloskey will know next Tuesday night whether he'll be keeping the council seat he's occupied for 13 years.
McCloskey, facing recall, is fending off a challenge by Gerard "Jerry" LaMonte, a 54-year-old systems engineer for Saint Clare's Hospital.
Both candidates say they have been campaigning vigorously -- knocking on every door in the ward, distributing fliers and posting signs in dozens of yards.
Both say their campaign signs -- each put out about 100 over the last few weeks -- had been torn down and covered up by each others' supporters.
But that is about all they have in common.
McCloskey, the 50-year-old president of a Parsippany electrical contracting company, maintains that the recall effort is "nothing but sour grapes" over a controversial sewer project that some in the ward did not want to go forward.
He says he made the right decision in voting for the project, calling it a public health issue that needed addressing. He said most voters can see that.
"They think (the recall supporters) is a small group of ... pretty vengeful people," he said.
LaMonte says the sewers -- which are now under construction in his neighborhood -- should have gone to a public vote, as should have the new, $7.6 million municipal building that McCloskey supported.
The recall is not just about the sewer, he said. About 78 percent of those who signed the petition supporting the recall don't live in the sewer area.
"The thrust of this entire campaign has been one of representation, or lack of representation on Mr. McCloskey's part," he said. "My goal, if elected, is to remain open and objective and not align with anyone but be an independent thinker."
McCloskey, a Republican, won his current term without opposition in 2005 with 745 votes.
The effort to oust him started last June, when the Committee to Recall James McCloskey filed a notice of intent with the township clerk's office.
The group collected 772 valid signatures on their recall petition, Clerk Donna Costello determined in November. Costello has estimated the special election will cost the township about $6,000.
The recall ballot is actually comprised of two questions. The first asks voters whether McCloskey should be recalled. The second one asks voters in the event he is recalled, which candidate should replace him. Polls will be open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.
BREAKING NEWS: McCloskey ousted by 56 votes in Denville recall
LaMonte selected to fill Second Ward seat
Published: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 9:14 PM EDT
DENVILLE TWP. – Councilman James McCloskey was removed from office in a recall election today by Second Ward voters who then voted to replace him with Gerard “Jerry” LaMonte.Voters voted 466-410 to recall McCloskey and then selected LaMonte over McCloskey in a second question to decide who should replace him if he was recalled in a 476-403 vote.
The vote includes absentee ballots, but not provisional ballots, which are generally just a handful of votes. Turnout was with 32 percent of the ward’s 2,738 registered voters casting ballots.
McCloskey maintained the organizers of the petition drive to hold the recall election were people who were opposed to the Openaki-Kitchell sewer project. He could not be reached for comment tonight. Polls closed at 8 p.m.
LaMonte, 56, of Beaverbrook Lane, is married with two children, and has lived in the township more than 20 years. He is a systems engineer at Saint Clare’s Hospital in Denville and an active volunteer. In addition to serving five years on the Municipal Alliance Committee, which he is now chairing, he has coached many sports in town and has been a troop leader for Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts.
LaMonte said in an interview the week before the election he will be better at communicating with residents.
He said people he met as he campaigned felt they were not heard by township officials, not just McCloskey, and he said he has had people tell him stories about presenting a concern or asking a question or offering an idea to someone in municipal government and, in some cases, not even getting any reply at all.
McCloskey, 50, of Ivy Crest Lane, is married with four children and is a lifelong resident of the township. He is an electrical contractor with E.J. Stewart of Parsippany. He is Republican, as are all members of the Township Council, and he is half-way through his third four-year term.
“I don’t want to be the only official in Denville to be recalled,” McCloskey said last week. “I don’t think I deserve that.” He said he believed officials should be targeted for recall for real wrongdoing in office.
20080318
Petition drive aims to scuttle trash plan Residents fear higher costs for collection
December 6, 2007
By JIM LOCKWOOD
STAR-LEDGER STAFF
Sparta residents opposed to a town wide trash-collection system the township council has approved are starting a petition drive to scrap the plan.
A pair of 3-2 council votes Saturday to create a garbage utility and award a hauling contract capped raucous public hearings that were dominated by residents speaking out against the proposal.
Under
The public notice was published yesterday. A petition drive would need to collect signatures from 578 registered voters. That threshold, set by law, is derived from 15 percent of the votes cast in town during the most recent Assembly election. That election was in November, when 3,850 votes were cast in
"This is a battle," said petition organizer Jesse Wolosky, who spoke against the trash plan at both public hearings and secured 90 names by carrying a clipboard around and taking contact information from concerned residents.
Opposition came mainly from residents, many of whom are seniors, who prefer to take their trash to the county landfill to save money. They don't want to be forced into a "one-size-fits-all" system that will cost them more money, and they want to be able to opt out of any town wide collection. But the council plan does not provide that option.
Wolosky, a tax lien investor, believes residents do not fully understand an unpaid utility bill could lead to a lien being placed on a delinquent payer's property.
"The council is not thinking of what's good for homeowners. They're forcing us to put our house as collateral to pay a garbage bill," Wolosky said.
Under the current system, about 6,500 households either arrange for garbage to be picked up by private haulers or take their trash themselves to the landfill in
With a switch to town wide collection, all households would be billed $230 a year for a twice-weekly trash pickup and a monthly bulk collection. This would save each home using a hauler about $120 a year and provide more pickups, but it would cost landfill users about $130 more a year.
A council majority of Mayor Michael Spekhardt, Brian Brady and Manny Goldberg voted for the plan because most residents would benefit. Councilmen Jerry Murphy and Scott Seelagy voted against the plan.
Spekhardt said of the petition drive, "It's part of the process. People have the right to assembly peacefully, they have a right to speak and do whatever they want."
"We'll take it as it comes," the mayor said. "If they rescind the utility, you might be looking at doing it tax wise," in which garbage collection perhaps would be included in tax bills. "If anyone signing a petition is thinking it would go back to the way it is, they may want to think again."
Such a petition drive, believed to be a first in
Sparta officials: Garbage contract is here to stay
By JIM LOCKWOOD
STAR-LEDGER STAFF
Even if a petition drive now under way against the town wide pickup plan is successful, it can affect only how the hauler is paid.
A petition drive that has started against a controversial new town wide garbage collection system in
The three-year contract awarded to Blue Diamond Disposal of Mount Arlington can't be nullified by the petition, township attorney Thomas Ryan said. The petition would affect only how the hauler would be paid, Ryan said.
The two planks of the plan approved by the township council in a pair of 3-2 votes included an ordinance creating the garbage utility to charge households about $230 each for curbside collection, and the awarding of a three-year, $3 million contract to a hauler.
"You're not getting rid of that contract," Ryan said. "The contract is not contingent on the ordinance. The utility was just a mechanism to create a budget funded by separate charges to homeowners to pay the hauler."
Under
Opponents said they would continue with the petition drive because they don't believe everyone should be required to be part of the new system. They said there should be an opt-out choice, but the plan does not have one.
Despite warnings from the town that their petition would not kill the new trash plan, they intend to continue.
"I believe that's scare tactics and propaganda," said petition organizer Jesse Wolosky.
Another petition committee member, Jim Behan, added, "This even makes it more bizarre and more suspect, that they would engage in a contract without an escape clause, especially because Sparta government is under the Faulkner Act that allows citizenry to overturn an ordinance by the council within 20 days."
Mayor Michael Spekhardt said that if the petition succeeds, the township has two options: It could hold a referendum to restore the garbage utility or rescind the ordinance.
But even if the ordinance were repealed, the contract would not be affected. Only the payment system would change. Instead of households paying a flat fee, the hauler's payment would have to come out of the municipal budget, he said.
"That's what we were trying to avoid. If we don't create a utility, it will have to come out of taxes," Spekhardt said. "We felt the creation of a utility made it equitable for all households. I don't think the petition organizers realize the contract is not going away and they can take a very equitable situation and make it not very equitable."
Holding a special referendum would also cost the town about $15,000.
Under the current trash system, most of 6,500 households pay about $350 to have trash picked up by private haulers. But an estimated 300 to 500 residents bring their garbage to the county landfill in
The town wide plan calls for a utility to bill all households the same amount each year for a twice-weekly trash pickup and a monthly bulk collection. This would save each home using a hauler about $120 a year and provide more pickups, but would cost landfill users about $130 more a year.
Spekhardt also noted that landfill disposal rates rose on Dec. 1, making it a bit more expensive for folks who want to continue taking their own trash there. Overall, the town wide system would save residents $1 million a year for three years, he said. Having a utility also would better position the town to have more control in the long term, he said.
"Saving $1 million a year each year is nothing to sneeze at," Spekhardt said. "So, $3 million is going back into the pockets of the people of
20080316
Sparta voters OK town wide garbage collection plan
March 12, 2008
by Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger
Sparta voters today approved a plan for town wide garbage collection.
In a special election held in the Sussex County town, residents voted 2,879-2,463 in favor of implementing the trash collection.
The plan became controversial during the past three months and generated strident opposition, and led to a successful petition resulting in today's referendum.
The 416-vote margin was viewed by proponents as a sizable gap and a convincing victory.
The 42 percent voter turnout also was unusually high, officials said.
"Obviously the majority of the town saw the benefit of program. The people of Sparta have spoken," Mayor Michael Spekhardt said.
A town wide collection would cost each household $240 a year, and would represent a savings to residents of $3 million over three years - while providing more service, Spekhardt said. The average trash hauling bill is about $350 a year, but some residents pay upward of $400 or $500 a year, the mayor said.
Opponents had argued that they would prefer to take their trash themselves to the nearby county landfill, where they pay much less than they'll pay under the new plan.
The tentative starting date for town wide collection is April 1, the mayor said.
by Jim Lockwood/The Star-Ledger
Sparta voters today approved a plan for town wide garbage collection.
In a special election held in the Sussex County town, residents voted 2,879-2,463 in favor of implementing the trash collection.
The plan became controversial during the past three months and generated strident opposition, and led to a successful petition resulting in today's referendum.
The 416-vote margin was viewed by proponents as a sizable gap and a convincing victory.
The 42 percent voter turnout also was unusually high, officials said.
"Obviously the majority of the town saw the benefit of program. The people of Sparta have spoken," Mayor Michael Spekhardt said.
A town wide collection would cost each household $240 a year, and would represent a savings to residents of $3 million over three years - while providing more service, Spekhardt said. The average trash hauling bill is about $350 a year, but some residents pay upward of $400 or $500 a year, the mayor said.
Opponents had argued that they would prefer to take their trash themselves to the nearby county landfill, where they pay much less than they'll pay under the new plan.
The tentative starting date for town wide collection is April 1, the mayor said.
20080312
Residents seek vote on ballfield bonds: Petition drive in Vernon aims to repeal ordinances
(The Star-Ledger Archive)
Date: 2002/05/08
By JIM LOCKWOOD
STAR-LEDGER STAFF
In a rare move, some
But the council is asking residents not to sign either of two petitions being circulated, saying they would only delay much-needed ballfields by a year.
The controversy, which has been brewing for a month, is the latest surrounding council plans to build a recreational complex on 180 acres of town-owned land on
That tract includes the 40-acre "Black Creek" Native American site that on April 1 was designated historic by state Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Bradley Campbell.
On April 8, the council approved an $8 million bond ordinance for several capital expenses, including $4.7 million for the first phase of
However, because some residents said they would petition to withdraw that bond, the council rescinded it April 10, and split it into three separate bond ordinances that were adopted April 29, including:
$1.4 million for football fields and parking on the 40-acre historic section.
$3.3 million for some 10 other fields on the remaining 140 acres, for soccer, lacrosse, football and baseball, as well as an outdoor roller hockey rink, a bocce ball court, a snack bar/pavilion, parking and restrooms.
$3.7 million for various non-controversial capital and equipment items that are not targeted by the petition drive.
Two separate petitions aimed at withdrawing both park bonds were launched last week by Jessica Paladini, Dennis Miranda, Chris Fuehrer, Carol Gunn-Kadish and former mayor Jim Kilby.
On Friday, Mayor John Logan, Councilman Neil Desmond and Freeholder Howard Burrell, who live in
"I feel it is just a mean-spirited attempt to inject politics into what should be a positive event,"
Paladini disagreed, saying the park project has become larger and more expensive than originally envisioned. She also cited voters' defeat of the
"We're not opposed to ballfields or a park. We're for a referendum. This park has taken on a life of its own. The cost has now skyrocketed," Paladini said.
The annual tax impact from the park bonds would range from $8 to $39 for a homeowner with a $150,000 property tax assessment, depending on how much revenue could be raised,
He questioned why proponents of preserving the Black Creek Native American site would circulate a petition that deals with the rest of the property, and why there was no outcry for a referendum when the 180-acre tract was purchased by the council two years ago.
"It's all the people we beat in the last election and their supporters,"
But Paladini called the council's approval of a bond ordinance for fields on the historic section "arrogant," because construction there cannot readily take place without first going through state review and approval.
"How irresponsible is this to borrow money for land that can't be developed?" Paladini said.
Each petition needs about 865 signatures of registered voters to be valid. If the petitions are successful, the council would have to rescind the bonds or put them before voters in a referendum, probably in November.
Municipal ordinances are enacted after a series of actions are taken over several weeks, including a first vote for introduction, a public hearing and second vote for adoption. An ordinance then takes effect 20 days after it is officially published, unless there is a petition to recall it within that time frame.
Such post-adoption petitions are not unheard of, but they are rare, according to the New Jersey League of Municipalities.
The Star-Ledger Archive
COPYRIGHT © The Star-Ledger 2002
Date: 2002/05/31 Friday Page: 039 Section:
Local News Briefs
Petitions to withdraw a pair of bond ordinances totaling $4.7 million for a recreational park in
Now, the township council has to rescind the bond ordinances or put them before voters in a public referendum, Ragno said.
The council also could rescind the ordinances and adopt substantially similar ones or rescind them and place its own park referendum question before voters, he said.
The petitions submitted May 21 contained about 1,756 signatures - nearly double the 864 signatures needed - and stemmed from council plans to build a recreational complex on 180 acres on
That tract includes the 40-acre Black Creek Native American site that was designated historic on April 1.
The bond ordinances, which were adopted April 29, include $1.4 million for football fields and parking on the 40-acre historic section and $3.3 million for some 10 other various fields on the remaining 140 acres, an outdoor rink, bocce ball court, a snack bar/pavilion, parking and restrooms.
The petitions want to place the bonds before voters in a referendum.
The Star-Ledger Archive
COPYRIGHT © The Star-Ledger 2002
Date: 2002/06/12 Wednesday Page: 023 Section: MORRIS Edition: MORRIS Size: 406 words
Petition drive leads council to reconsider
By JIM LOCKWOOD
STAR-LEDGER STAFF
The Vernon Township Council, in response to a petition drive, is planning to rescind a pair of bond ordinances totaling $4.7 million for a park, officials said yesterday.
The petitions, submitted last month, contained about 1,756 signatures - nearly double the 864 needed - and stemmed from council plans to build a recreation complex on 180 acres on
After being deemed valid, the petitions left the council with several options: withdraw the bond ordinances; place them before voters in a public referendum; rescind the ordinances and adopt substantially similar ones; or rescind them and place the council's own park referendum question before voters, Township Attorney Joseph Ragno said.
On Monday, the council introduced an ordinance to rescind the two park bond ordinances, and a public hearing on the withdrawal measure will be held June 24.
"We will unveil on the 24th a plan that addresses the concerns by all those who signed the petitions," Vernon Mayor John Logan said. He would not be more specific.
The Maple Grange tract includes the 40-acre Black Creek Native American site that was designated historic on April 1.
The bond ordinances, which were adopted April 29, include $1.4 million for football fields and parking on the 40-acre historic section and $3.3 million for some 10 other various fields on the remaining 140 acres, an outdoor rink, a bocce ball court, a snack bar/pavilion, parking and restrooms.
Ragno said there likely would not be a referendum on the rescinded bonds, and he and the town's bond counsel and engineer are working on a new proposal.
"A plan has to be made for the ultimate development of
One of the petition organizers, Jessica Paladini, said, "Should the council insult the residents by rescinding the original park bonds and replacing them with slightly lower dollar amounts, we will circulate a petition for an initiative (to) once and for all put a park question on the ballot for voter approval.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)