As you scroll down the page just mouse over some empty space where the menu was, and it will pop back into view.
|
|
6/19/2006
Mendham:
Town Stuff:
The Next Council Meeting:
6/19/2006
     By . . on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 10:43 pm: |
"public comment" question for the June 19th meeting.
The council has repeatedly refused to publicly explain the judgment it will apply in composing and approving the PUBLIC law it will impose relevant to its production of a cable television "public access" channel. United States Code 47 section 531 is the federal law regulating franchise agreements, and it explicitly defines "obscenity, indecency and nudity" as the only grounds for censoring, or prohibiting, otherwise qualified non-commercial content. The current policies of Mendham Township regarding the formation of a secret committee with authorization to apply standards beyond what federal law permits, are illegal and unconstitutional. It appears to be the clear intent of the Borough Council to formally, and illegally, allied itself with that illegal conduct, and if draft legislation remains unchanged, add further illegal provisions that violate the fundamental First Amendment rights the federal law intends to protect.
With that "specific" context, I again ask THE MEMBERS of the town council to explain their understanding--acquired through whatever research, consultations, and guidance-- of federal law relevant to the regulation of cable television and franchise agreements. |
| By 20... . on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 8:02 am: |
| Gerry why don't you run for town council and I am being very serious about this |
| By 2....... . on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 10:14 pm: |
The fact that you have to say "I am being very serious about this" is just one of the many good reasons not to run. Realistically I would have no chance of winning even if I got every Democratic vote... and I certainly wouldn't run as a member of George Bush's party. When you consider how few people know what they're voting for, or why an alternative candidate would be a wise choice, just about all hope is lost.
I certainly wouldn't mind getting elected to the council, but doing useful service would be complicated by my anxiety disorder and probable inability to attend meetings... and argue with the other elected jerks in person. There might be some send-a-message-value in running just for the hell of it... but realistically people can write in a protest vote without the need for a protest candidate to formally be on the ballot... in the past I have advocated that, and frankly, the response was humongously underwhelming. This November I will be voting (write in) for myself, and this website, and as in the past I will probably be the only one doing so.
I've added this other question for the council:
At the last meeting of the town council a member of the public requested an itemized outline of the budget. The administrator replied that it would be no problem to provide that. Apparently, for whatever reason, no documentation was provided beyond display access to the 45 page Budget document that is available for review by the public at the Phoenix House. It is absolute fact, that the document can be published on the Internet at no cost to the Borough. It is absolute fact no law requires the Borough to charge the excessive fee of over $20 for a copy of the document, or requires the Borough to to force a person requesting a copy to fill out silly bureaucratic forms. These absolute facts, make the conclusion that YOU are deliberately obstructing access to the document absolutely reasonable... Do you have any argument to make defending this circumstance? |
| By 2....... . on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 12:52 pm: |
I sent this third question, with the others, to be asked at Monday's meeting.
3) I've heard some rumors implying something inappropriate regarding the absence of town markings on the DPW superintendents truck. Can the council provide any information defining the actual circumstance, and its appropriateness? |
| By 77... . . on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 9:20 am: |
| Ask this question, how can the town let the employees use the garage,water,electricity,and supplies after hours on personel vehicles is the towns insurance carrier aware of this.Is this situation, theft of services being they are wasteing tax payer money for personnal gain.Working on your personnal vehicle is not for the better of the town. |
| By 2....... . on Thursday, June 22, 2006 - 1:05 pm: |
[mayor] ...I will read the question or statement whatever you would like to describe them as.
quote:1) The council has repeatedly refused to publicly explain the judgment it will apply in composing and approving the PUBLIC law it will impose relevant to its production of a cable television "public access" channel. United States Code 47, section 531, is the federal law regulating franchise agreements, and it explicitly defines "obscenity, indecency and nudity" as the only grounds for censoring, or prohibiting, otherwise qualified non-commercial content. The current policies of Mendham Township regarding the formation of a secret committee ([mayor] which is his opinion) with authorization to apply standards beyond what federal law permits, are illegal and unconstitutional. ([mayor] again his opinion). It appears to be the clear intent of the Borough Council to formally, and illegally, allied itself with that illegal conduct, and if draft legislation remains unchanged, add further illegal provisions that violate the fundamental First Amendment rights the federal law intends to protect.
With that "specific" context, I again ask THE MEMBERS of the town council to explain their understanding--acquired through whatever research, consultations, and guidance-- of federal law relevant to the regulation of cable television and franchise agreements?
[mayor] And I will answer it... because I think we have answered it two times already and we will say it again.... the answer has not changed... Mendham Borough will comply with the law as written, we have no intention of doing anything else, and if there's a specific situation before us decisions will be made working with our attorney or attorneys in full compliance with that law.
quote:2) At the last meeting of the town council and member of the public requested an itemized outline of the budget. The administrator replied that it would be no problem to provide that. Apparently, for whatever reason, no documentation was provided beyond display access to the 45 page Budget document that is available for review by the public at the Phoenix House. It is absolute fact,([mayor] again his opinion) that the document can be published on the Internet at no cost to the Borough. It is absolute fact ([mayor] again his opinion) no law requires the Borough to charge the excessive fee of over $20 for a copy of the document, or to force a person requesting a copy to fill out silly bureaucratic forms. These absolute facts, make the conclusion that you are deliberately obstructing access to the document absolutely reasonable... Do you have any argument to make defending this circumstance?
[mayor] The fees charged for the Mendham documents is in compliance with the laws of the state of New Jersey... Mendham charges, and will continue to charge, based on the published ordinance in place covering fees.
quote:3) I've heard some rumors implying something inappropriate regarding the absence of town markings on the DPW superintendents truck. Can the council provide any information defining the actual circumstance, and its appropriateness?
[mayor] As to the question of trucks, markings, and use of vehicles... Mendham like many businesses provides vehicles for certain management employees as part of their negotiated compensation package. Those vehicles provide with the full knowledge that they will use for personal use. those vehicles are provided to employees as part of their compensation and are not marked as Borough vehicles, this is true for anyone who gets a vehicle. the employee can drive these vehicles to and from work as well as use them or allow other Borough employees to use them during the course of the day for a day's work in the Borough.
[mayor] I have my own comment to the writer,
As a comment to this writer just because you believe something... you believe something, does not make it fact, or make it true. Each person is entitled to his or her opinions.... I respect yours, but you do not respect ours. and refuse to acknowledge that you could possibly be wrong. You criticize, our attorneys, and our staff without total knowledge of their work and the challenges they face each day addressing the multitude of issues, and public demands, as well as trying to manage the business of a town that never goes away. As the old saying goes to you, try walking in their shoes before being so highly critical. Mendham Borough Council members and the mayor, are not highly compensated, as you often imply. We get no income other than the small annual stipend... $2,400 for Councilman, and $3,200 for the mayor. Each member makes phone calls at their own expense, Travel to and from meetings, in and out of town in their personal vehicles at their own expense. We frequently take time from our full-time occupation, at the risk of jeopardizing in those occupations, that pay for all these expenses. If you took the time to think this through, you would come to realize we are not making any money in this effort, there is no expense account beyond the annual stipend for any of us to tap into. Unlike neighboring towns where committee members actually accept municipally funded health benefits, no Mendham council member or the mayor, accepts any benefit from the town beyond... beyond our annual stipend. None of us have even applied for the pension benefits, which we could, as politicians in other towns have done. we will continue to acknowledge and answer your questions, but given the history of your criticisms so far, you will never believe what we tell you, and continue on your path of your way, or no way. It is sad that your life is so narrowly focused, and you are unable to see beyond your own world, and make no effort to understand anyone else's point of view, in your mind you are the ultimate judge, the jury, the law interpreter, and no one else could possibly be right. applause.
__________________________
I am going to take some time considering the implications of what the mayor has done. Clearly, he has used his office, and a public council meeting... to deliberately malign my character. Even if the mayor had a legitimate provocation for this personal attack, a fair and decent thing to do, would have been to give me prior notice that such a diatribe would be the consequence, or the price, I would have to pay, for exercising a small amount of First Amendment liberty. Considering the litany of offenses, including the threat to condemn my house, I am frankly surprised the mayor would throw such a stupid rock. Politicians have given themselves legal immunity from what qualifies in-our-world as slander... but that immunity is not absolute, and I think certainly can be challenged when remarks are pre-written and premeditated. Of the falsehoods in the Mayor's statement... the accusation that I have "often" implied that council members are highly paid, is so preposterously ludicrous its origin defies rational explanation.
Just for For starters: Can anyone site one single instance where I have said, or implied, council members are highly paid? |
| By 2....... . . . on Friday, June 23, 2006 - 8:20 am: |
I have my own comment to the writer.
Well clearly this is not a comment to the writer... It is a public statement, intended for the public's consumption.
As a comment to this writer just because you believe something... you believe something, does not make it fact, or make it true.
First off... what "I believe" is none of your frigging business... What I say, or imply, in a public forum is fairly open to your scrutiny, and even your criticism, if you properly respect the facts and the truth. Your statement implies that I not only believe, but have stated a falsehood, yet you haven't the integrity, or reverence for the truth, to substantiate that assassination of my character with any evidence whatsoever. For example, you could have easily provided a "for example" were you demonstrate a recklessly stated belief of mine shown to have been in error.
Each person is entitled to his or her opinions....
And that is why "I" provide perhaps the most free-speech "local town relevant" message board in the state of New Jersey. You on the other hand obliged your volunteer web master to destroy a similar public resource, even though there had been no incident that could be fairly described as inappropriate use.
I respect yours,
...and I suppose you believe this written speech, publicly maligning me--without even the offer to in the same form decisively refute every one of your reckless implications and accusations-- to be a demonstration of respect?
but you do not respect ours.
As demonstrated, in your answers to my questions, you are unwilling to provide your opinion when it is solicited... On other occasions, it has been the opinion of council members that I do not pay property taxes (a legally recognized falsehood) and that I am therefore not entitled to First Amendment rights to speak during the public comment portion of a council meeting in the town in which I reside (a flatly unAmerican opinion). Another council member has publicly opined that my "damn house should be condemned" ...apparently as punishment for the opinions you say you respect.
and refuse to acknowledge that you could possibly be wrong.
Whether I could be wrong is irrelevant... but I certainly don't mind acknowledging the possibility. What I will not do, is believe, or concede, that I am wrong without being provided rational/logical cause to do so. I will prove what you have said, or implied, in this statement to be "wrong" by demonstrating that the "evidence" does not support your accusations, or the conclusions upon which they are founded. Unfortunately, your faith in your own infallible piety, apparently frees you from the burdens of logic, and evidentiary proof, the rational must rely on, and understand their duty to.
You criticize, our attorneys,
From a soap box I pay for and not as official council business. Why don't you fairly point out what criticism has been unfair, or undeserved. When your $150 an hour lying lawyers, lied for you in court, which lie wasn't worth criticism. The lie that you did not did not sit in my living room, and shake my hand, stipulating to the fact of my disabling anxiety disorder? or was it the lie that you did not agree to pay me $230.00 for expenses incurred and flatly welshed on that agreement.... or was it the lie that I did not competently provide the services I CONTRACTED WITH YOU to provide. or how about the lie that I made any objectionable content realistically available to Borough residents while I was official Web Master. etc etc etc.
A further question worth asking is: Did one of your idiot lying lawyers approve your stupid statement? You are being sued for violating fundamental constitutional rights, both in state court, and now in federal court. You have had council members make completely outrageous recorded statements that substantially prove malicious intent... and yet, your stupid lawyer, isn't smart enough to advise you that it would be unwise to risk such a statement, with so little to gain. What have you accomplished beyond proving your reckless disregard for the truth, and giving me more evidence to cite?
and our staff without total knowledge of their work
Unlike you, I haven't abused a offical government platform to sling any unfair criticism. As you well know, I have substantially more "knowledge" of their work than any average private citizen. In fact, this website is a pretty good example of why their work deserves criticism and ridicule. The official town website is still advertising, on the home page, a celebration that took place over 30 days ago. Up to just a couple of years ago your highly paid "public servants" couldn't figure out how to efficiently copy a cassette recording... or use a common computer accessory like a document scanner. Your incompetent employees apparently can't produce a copy a document for less than 1000% more than the commercial rate.... than of course we have all those "public service" lies they have told. The people you have employed, are my opinion, criminals, and if I ever get a fair day in court, I won't just think it, or say it on a soapbox I pay for, I will prove it!
and the challenges they face each day addressing the multitude of issues, and public demands, as well as trying to manage the business of a town that never goes away.
The only thing I have seen them "manage" to do, is make the simple complicated and best efficiency impossible.
As the old saying goes to you, try walking in their shoes before being so highly critical.
I will not walk, the lying fascist scumbag road, in anyone's shoes... and as this website demonstrates I have done my share of "their" job.
Mendham Borough Council members and the mayor, are not highly compensated, as you often imply.
Never happened once... using the word "often" just proves it a malicious lie.
We get no income other than the small annual stipend... $2,400 for Councilman, and $3,200 for the mayor.
I think you know I know that... I have read and published salary resolutions.
Each member makes phone calls at their own expense, Travel to and from meetings, in and out of town in their personal vehicles at their own expense. We frequently take time from our full-time occupation, at the risk of jeopardizing in those occupations, that pay for all these expenses.
I think I can tell a sadder story outlining the cost of doing public-service... at the high price imposed by elected and paid public servants.
If you took the time to think this through, you would come to realize we are not making any money in this effort
Benedick Arnold didn't do it for money either... and I doubt even he thieved $230 from the poorest man in town.
there is no expense account beyond the annual stipend for any of us to tap into.
Well you do have that discretionary account for funding portraits of each other and such. And there is the occasional catered council meeting.
Unlike neighboring towns where committee members actually accept municipally funded health benefits, no Mendham council member or the mayor, accepts any benefit from the town beyond... beyond our annual stipend.
About as meaningful as the millionaire congressmen who proves what a wonderful guy he is by giving back some $2 perks of his office.
None of us have even applied for the pension benefits, which we could, as politicians in other towns have done.
Why don't you pass a resolution locally banning double-dipping? How many pensions will the local municipal judge you just hired be collecting at the public servant pig trough. |
| By 2....... . on Friday, June 23, 2006 - 8:20 am: |
we will continue to acknowledge and answer your questions,
Close to 90 percent of your "answers" are unresponsive and obviously deliberately evasive. Then there are all the interruptions used in the desperate effort to take all the teeth out of the questions bite.
but given the history of your criticisms so far, you will never believe what we tell you
As the old saying goes "I have not yet begun to criticize"... unlike you I will not use lies and deception to win my war against the tyranny of your fascist policies. How about citing one truth I have not believed.
and continue on your path of your way, or no way.
The evidence record decisively proves I always attempted to honestly negotiate a fair resolution of our disputes and that you, and your troopers have been unwilling to yield to any reasonable compromise. You are the jerks charging 75¢ a page for copies of public information ... what the law describes as "the not to exceed maximum" and you have the gall to imply that I am unwilling to yield to reason!
It is sad that your life is so narrowly focused,
At least my focus isn't to unwrite the American Constitution
and you are unable to see beyond your own world
Your world vision is so bad you can't even see the swastika on your shoulder.
and make no effort to understand anyone else's point of view
I certainly understand the selfish psychology of unAmerican "control freaks"... I mean someone only has the look under any old slimy rock to see the world from your point of view.
in your mind you are the ultimate judge, the jury, the law interpreter,
In my mind "due process" and "equal application of the law" are the cornerstones of civilization... it is you who is afraid of accountability before an honest judge of the facts.
and no one else could possibly be right.
Thomas Jefferson was certainly right in seeing the need to protect Americans from ugly "Americans" like you.
applause.
They also did a lot of applauding in 1930's Germany |
| By 20... . on Friday, June 23, 2006 - 10:10 am: |
gerry I find what you have to say very disturbing
I think its time you show up at town meetings and say what you have to say. Or stop the bull shit it sounds to me like you have no life and you need to get one but that is only my opinion |
| By 2....... . on Friday, June 23, 2006 - 12:18 pm: |
Well as the old saying goes "fuck-you"...you show up with your capital letters demanding that others account for what they have said and then you commit exactly the same trespass of posting unaccountable, unreferenced, unsubstantiated bull shit. What exact sentence or sentences "disturb" you? In other words, prove one rational flaw or one slander of the truth, or take your meaningless mush opinion someplace less "disturbed" by the truth.
quote:"I think its time you show up at town meetings and say what you have to say. Or stop the bull shit it"
My life story, including the 30 history of my anxiety disorder is published among the pages on this website. Anonymous cowards who choose to ridicule my personal circumstances, but are unwilling to allow reciprocal public examination of their life, have been warned to tread carefully on this subject.
quote:"sounds to me like you have no life and you need to get one but that is only my opinion"
Your anonymous inarticulate opinion of what my life "sounds" like should mean what to me? Personally, I only find facts and logic to have persuasive credibility. As you can't provide any of that, I would suggest you move along. |
|