DEAR MONTCLAIRVOYANT,
Residents continue to pick up packets to possibly run in this May’s election for mayor and other Township Council seats. Thoughts as we approach the February 29 deadline to submit petitions?
Sincerely,
Candid Candidates
I’m pleased those residents considering a run include people who’ve rightly criticized the mayor and several other current councilors. That’s “Common Sense” — like Thomas Paine’s 1776 pamphlet about the Montclair School District calling a snow day this past Tuesday.
DEAR MONTCLAIRVOYANT,
Speaking of the school district, the Montclair High baseball field controversy is still brewing, right?
Sincerely,
Not Like Coffee
Right. Continuing to brew the same month as the Super Bowl, whose 25-22 score was quite high for a baseball game.
DEAR MONTCLAIRVOYANT,
Just because the father of quarterback Patrick Mahomes was a Major League pitcher doesn’t make the Super Bowl a baseball game. Anyway, what’s new with the baseball field controversy?
Sincerely,
Diamond Aren’t Forever
Work on that renovation at Woodman Field was stopped again after those doing the work reportedly tapped into a water line without permission. Also, the Zoning Board reportedly still needs to weigh in on the renovation. Reportedly, I used the word “reportedly” more than once in this answer.
DEAR MONTCLAIRVOYANT,
And?
Sincerely,
Winner of Short Question Award
There continues to be talk about the old field having been unsafe, the high cost of the new field, the recent felling of vintage trees, possible environmental problems in the recent construction process and in the new field’s planned artificial turf, the recent destruction of an historic ticket booth, the school district’s recent lawsuit against the township over the field, and a columnist confusing baseball with football.
DEAR MONTCLAIRVOYANT,
Recently, you used the word “recent” more than once in that answer. While Woodman neighbors and others have concerns about the field renovation, a number of Montclair High baseball players and their parents spoke at Tuesday’s Council meeting to plead that the work stoppage be lifted so the field can be ready for this spring’s season. What was the response?
Sincerely,
A. Luminum-Batz
The mayor, other councilors, and the interim township manager said it wasn’t the Council’s decision to stop work and it isn’t the Council’s decision to resume it, but hoped the situation would be resolved faster than a Nolan Ryan fastball.
DEAR MONTCLAIRVOYANT,
Nolan Ryan in his pitching prime or Nolan Ryan at his current age of 77? Also at the meeting, the Council made two interesting 3-1 decisions — but why did only four rather than seven members vote?
Sincerely,
Four Lorn
David Cummings, William Hurlock, and Robin Schlager were not in attendance. Also absent was Wile E. Coyote, but that cartoon character left the Council; he’s now a Cedar Grove elected official.
DEAR MONTCLAIRVOYANT,
In one 3-1 vote, Mayor Sean Spiller, Lori Price Abrams, and Roger Terry opted to continue ties with The Aubrey Group for grant writing despite questions about that company’s past performance and whether it had contributed to Spiller’s campaign fund. Who cast the welcome “no” vote?
Sincerely,
Possible Pay-to-Play Foray
Robert Russo, although he acknowledged that the Aubrey cost had dropped to (a still relatively high) $38,000 after a $50,000 renewal was nixed January 30 in a 3-3-1 vote. After hearing about that split decision, Wile E. Coyote raced up and down Bradford Avenue.
DEAR MONTCLAIRVOYANT,
Then the Council voted 3-1 on Tuesday to continue its hefty funding of Morristown law firm Riker Danzig, with Russo again a welcome “no.” Why?
Sincerely,
“No” Is Part of Nova Scotia
He said the Council is using too much taxpayer money on outside counsel when it has an interim township attorney and an assistant township attorney in-house. Not that the Municipal Building is a house…
Dave Astor, author, is the MontClairVoyant. His opinions about politics and local events are strictly his own and do not represent or reflect the views of Montclair Local.
“…possible environmental problems…”
I’m puzzled by your use of possible. I feel obliged to explain why and ask you if you want to clarify your characterization.
The Woodman Field site 2023 testing for just lead significantly fails to meet 3 different lead standards: for direct contact, remediation and ground water contamination. OK, the concern over lead probably is exaggerated in our society. It is naturally occurring. It doesn’t seem to have impacted too much generations before us.
But, there is that drinking water testing of our school facilities. Totally different test method and metric. Apples & oranges. Why do we bother? OK, of the 364 point sources for consumption in school buildings, the district did disable or cover 159. We probably have too many anyway and maintaining them is another cost that could be going to teacher’s payroll. And the State says the 42 other point sources that did test for lead didn’t require any corrective action. More good news – there is a safe level of lead consumption. And the measly 10 point sources that they found were problematic (ok, yes, I admit it: failed) could have impacted only an extremely small portion of the school population. I mean, what is the tenure of any one student in any one school? An acceptable deviation? Consequences that may not present until they are after they have move on?
No worries. If I were a parent I would be more concerned with the chemicals used as flame retardants required of children’s sleepwear. But, don’t ask me if they may contain PFAS. I’m absolutely no expert on all of the above. I would suggest you ask the Federal CPSC if concerned.
Thank you for the thoughts and information, Frank. I used the word “possible” because I’ve read stories and comments in which some say there are health/environmental issues involved with the digging up of the field (and with the artificial turf that would be installed) but I’m no expert in this area and some others say the project would be safe. If there’s a written report somewhere for the 2023 Woodman Field lead test you mentioned, I haven’t read it.
Yes. The State of NJ sent him a copy the week before he told the neighborhood, as quoted in the Mtc Local last October, his high prioritization of environmental safety. The exact quote is in the article. I am shocked, shocked I tell you that he didn’t share report the findings with the neighbors…or since with the stakeholders.
But, we all know from the Township Manger’s telling that he is a busy man and I can only imagine the reams of paper that crosses his desk. He & the BoE oversee an operation that is $40MM dollars bigger with $100MM more debt than the Mayor & Council. And the parents choose to pick on the latter over what steps he is taking to fix the lead drinking water lines. The kids must be so confused. But, then again, they have a keen nose for parental hypocrisy.
The school district, with the support of our elected BoE, is following what I call a null testing protocol for the presence of PFAS. A null protocol is when there is no value reported that can change the decision. In short, we’re not going to test because we made our final decision. Some highly evolved leadership. Watch how the Township handles the environmental stuff for the universal access playground project and compare it to how the BoE/Dr Ponds are handling Woodman. I suspect the Township will treat the State’s Green Acre standards as seriously lax and therefore irrelevant to Montclair’s purposes.
I think any parent that was truly concerned about environmental contaminates impact on their child’s health would choose to live in Montclair. An artificial turf field is the least of Montclair’s environmental problems.
Thanks for the follow-up comment, Frank. As all this continues, I feel bad for the Montclair High baseball team players.
Thank you for the comment, flipside. You’re right that Montclair (like many towns) has more than one environmental issue.
Yes, we should all feely badly for the baseball players and their fans. On the bright side, it should be a packed house when the players present this case study to their CGI peers! I hope the SJI will have the grace to let CGI have their day in the sun.
Frank, does CGI refer to a pitcher who’s a Complete Game Impresario? 🤔
Frank, re your 5:51 pm comment on February 15, I hear you about “null testing protocol.” Sometimes, people or institutions don’t want to let “facts get in the way.”
Oops, I meant to I “don’t think they would choose Montclair.”
Most of NJ for that matter.
@ Dave
My favorite is the empty set reporting protocol. Crude. Inherently biased. Can be misused, e.g. managing OPRA requests.
@flipside
I thought the original phrasing was better.I can’t think of a better place to settle down with my yard signs. If I moved with my signs to parts of Morris County, I worry about the “if a tree fall in the woods” question.
I knew what you meant, flipside. 🙂 But thanks for the clarification!
Ah, OPRA requests, Frank. I wonder whether or not they’re being responded to any better these days?
Dave,
You did not mentioned the Council meeting discussion initiated by the Township Manager starting at the 54:30 mark. It arose when he was giving his list of upcoming items for the Feb 27 Council meeting…and he added a resolution just distributed by the Clerk involving BDP Holdings, the intended Redeveloper of Record for Lackawanna Plaza.
I thought it problematic for two reasons. First, it was not on the agenda. People like those rambunctious Residents For Responsible Development wouldn’t know to come and give public comment. It precluded the public from making public comment in the first, earlier, ‘agenda items only’ comment period.
Second, as it was a last minute add, Councilor Russo was caught unprepared. The Township Manager and the Township Attorney confirmed this item was introduced to begin the Council discussions on this Lackawanna resolution. I can understand Councilor Russo’s oversight for not thinking immediately to recuse himself from the discussion. Do I need to remind anyone he admitted last year to a conflict of interest involving BDP’s principal? I will chastise the Township Manager (an attorney), the Township Attorney, and the Mayor, as Chair of the meeting for allowing Councilor Russo to be put in this position. I worry if there is any animosity towards Russo from any of the 3, did it cloud their good judgement?
This event is the opening of what I think will be new chapter of a Council conflict issue that is brewing with BDP Holdings. Just a heads-up to keep yourself on the lookout for this developing story.
My other smaller issue is the Township’s cross-platform sharing of residents’ personal information. The Township accessed this information with the intent of serving the public over the snow event. But it was wrong. The Township readily & rightly redacts all kinds of personal information in fulfilling OPRA requests. Maybe the Township has a policy in its new Employee Handbook and not all are up to speed. Maybe there is no policy. Maybe the Township should use this as a learning event.
Are you asking me about ORPA requests to the Township or the Montclair Public Schools?
Frank, I was asking about OPRA requests to the township (since the time a few months ago when the clerk basically got tenure). Sorry I wasn’t more specific.
Re your other recent comments, Frank, I pick and choose what I say about Township Council meeting stuff to keep the column from getting too long. But, yes, this Council has a habit of occasionally bringing up things in a last-minute “surprise” fashion.
Re recusals, there are definitely times when councilors should recuse themselves from voting. But the mayor is not exactly setting a good example when, for instance, he doesn’t recuse himself from voting to give township business to companies that may have donated to his campaign fund. And, yes, there appears to be some animosity toward Robert Russo because he says what he thinks and seems conscious of leadership ethics.
No worries. The Next Request platform to manage OPRA request indicates a high level of compliance. And creates a gigantic advance is transparency. Ira Karasick’s request for the township’s Bay St Train Station lease with NJT was a real eye-opener for me.
Mr Lapolla has added another praiseworthy accomplishment in his short tenure. I would love to see the Montclair Public School District adopt this platform. Maybe the BoE can find time in their schedule to discuss and make this happen. They seem to have a bigger OPRA problem (but more excuses) than then Township had. And what a little transparency would do to polish their images!
Yes, Frank, a more technologically advanced OPRA process was put in place. Glad to hear, from your perspective, that it seems to be improving things at least somewhat. Like many others, I was bothered by the way the township manager process played out in 2022 and 2023 — as Montclair bounced from a disgraced manager to an acting manager to a manager who died, but the interim manager who finally landed in that spot appears to be competent.
Dave,
Thank you for your 11:04 reply. I realize you are constrained and there is so much you could speak to. This is why I was giving you a heads-up to consider for future columns. I apologize if it came across as you being remiss in any way.
Thank you, Frank, for your 3:01 pm Feb. 16 comment and the heads up in your 10:14 am Feb. 16 comment — which came across fine. 🙂