1. High Taxes 2. Over Development 3. Too Many Large, Expensive Mansions 4. Not enough "Affordable" places to live for the hard working families of Middle/Lower Middle Class ($40,000-$75,000 total incomes) 5. Too Political which causes Dishonesty, Greed and Unhappieness.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 2, 2007 4:15 PM
I have previously supported the Board of Education in the past but I'm done. They plan to hire a 62 year old principal from Bordentown for our High School. The last thing Bordentown is know for is their academic excellence. This gentleman, currently making somewhere around $115K will come to Montville, put in his 3 years at $140K or so and qualify for his pension (based on the last 3 years of employment). You can bet your bottom dollar that this is a 3 year gig and he will be gone south. Is this the BEST that our new superintendent can bring to our Town? Is this looking to the future? We deserve better! Any Board of Ed member that goes along with this rediculous scam should be held accountable. Not at the next election but the next time you see them on the street. I urge everyone to petition the Board and tell them that our kids deserve better for our $65 million dollars. This isn't the bottom of the barrel, we've broken through to the dirt underneath!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 2, 2007 8:29 PM
Maybe you should ask why the people ahead of him on the list turned the job down and they did. It isn't because of a Superintendent that is here for less than a year. The "brain drain" has been leaving as the political climate has gotten worse. The best available don't want to work here anymore.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 3, 2007 6:41 AM
What's wrong with Laux? She seems to be getting the job done. The superintendent so much as said so last night at the forum.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 3, 2007 1:21 PM
Why the jealousy about McMansions? We love Montville and choose to live in a nice house in a nice town.
What's the problem?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 3, 2007 9:14 PM
If the super is worth his salt, he would have the forsight to bring in or promote a professional who could fill in and add to his legacy. Lets hope the legacy he walks away from in three years is better then what he left his last three districts.!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 3, 2007 9:27 PM
We would like to have more shopping in town. We both work and would like to have a good supermarket or specialty grocery store in town.
For a town that has grown so much in population there doesn't seem to be close to matching growth in retail opportunities.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 3, 2007 9:36 PM
The highlands law and township master plan would limit and restrict the potential for a supermarket. The butcher by the 7-11 closed up shop.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 3, 2007 10:09 PM
There is nothing wrong with the McMansions - they are very nice. Just seems that any new homes being built are McMansions - where are the smaller more affordable homes for those people and families who make under $100,000 a year total income?
I know they still build homes on a more affordable scale. It just seems to be that McMansions are the only new homes being built.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 4, 2007 9:28 AM
To Anon 5/13 8:14pm: The problem with McMansions and continued building is that Montville was once a nice quite town with good schools and services and reasonable taxes, that's all changed with the overbuilding. You took a nice rural area and created a mini Parsippany - high taxes, diminished services and congested streets. Not jealousy by any stretch of the imagination, quite frankly, most of the mcmansions are pretty ugly.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 4, 2007 9:39 AM
May 4, 2007 8:28 AM
It's just simple economics. There are very few buildable lots in Montville and they are very expensive. There have been sales of building lots alone (just the land!) at over $1 million.
Unfortunately you can't build an affordable home on very expensive land.
I just wonder how all these expensive McMansions will hold out when (I did say when) the recession is fully upon this country... Will there be McMansions in foreclosure and empty to sit there since very few will be able to afford one?
I really do not think everyone owns their homes and are more than likely in debt up to their eyeballs here.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 4, 2007 2:36 PM
Spoken like a true Democrat "when the recession is fully upon us?" Are you kidding me??? The economic climate of this country is better than it has been than any other time. Stop watching CNN. Stop praying for doom. What happened to all the mansions after Clinton was President and the dotcom industry went bust? Oh that's right, just like America, the people of this great country (and Montville) are resilient and bounce back. What you hate about Montville, is what you hate about America, and that is called progress. People make more money, and ultimately want and buy bigger and better. If you don't like progress, move out West or to a third world country and you will see the real meaning of poor, recession, and depression.
For every one family that lives in those "evil" mansions, they employ on average 20 to 30 families who live in "affordable" housing, so stop dumping on them and hate the people who run and mismanage the state and this town!
This talk of McMansions and dividing the Township is just plain wrong and never lets us get to any solution we need. The Tax Problems we face have very little to do with local control and it is a fact that along with the tax increases have come tremendous increases in value. The growth of the township came in the eighties when zoning and Mt Laurel had a tremendous effect on the development of the Township. 3000 residential units were planned and zoned for in that time period. Mt. Laurel added 2700 units alone. Most of which were built out in the 90's. That is where we have been. The question is where do we go from here. DMarino, your broad brush attacks on Democrats fly in the face of the fact that this township has been under Republican control since 1962. In the last 10 years we have added 2000 students to the school system at about $11,000 per student. Those are simply the facts. Housing values are up over 10 times in the past 25 years. Right now we have a particular problem in that short term political gain is taking the place of the long term good of all the Township. The Governing Body and the School Board are spending their time attacking the past instead of looking to the future and ought to be joining with other municipalities in fighting for real property tax reform. Instead they are now fighting with each other in an effort to fix blame for some of the mistakes made because of the pursuit of political power, such as it is.
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
May 6, 2007 10:49 AM
Dan--my generalization of the Democrats was in response to the gentleman who believes recession and depression are all around us, and will soon hit us like a tsunami.
The fact that I will criticize those in local office (Republicans) shows that I am obejective when it comes to partisan nonsense.
However, as you stated "The Tax Problems we face have very little to do with local control." Therefore, the Republicans who have controlled Montville (since 1962) have very little to do with that.
That being said, in my opinion, Montville's real estate value is brought mostly by its natural seclusion from main streets and adjoining towns. Argue that point all you want (I refuse to believe it is the dog park or the basketball bubble, etc). Add a great school system and bigger and better homes throughout the years, and it becomes extremely desirable.
What I hate about Montville is that I have to move away from it. As a moderate business owner, I needed to get the most for my money. I will be moving to Cedar Knolls to a very nice neighborhood and just a few miles from downtown Morristown (which I wished Montville had), and my money bought me a 4000 sq ft home with taxes at $7K per year that would have been $1 million and almost $18K in taxes in Montville.
Why is Cedar Knolls who also has a very good school district so much more for the money with a better tax rate? The best I can say is that it does not make any sense. Maybe like you said: people trying something different and stop looking at the past will work.
I cannot wait to smile when I read the paper and see all the financial waste going on in Montville (school and town), because I will not be a resident anymore!
I am making a change (if Montville cannot) and will trust Cedar Knolls with my money, call me when Montvill figures it out.
Now, how to figure out how to prevent those Dems in Trenton from continually redistributing all my state taxes and keeping this great state billions in debt. Pennsylvania here I come!!
Dan, Your $11,000 per student includes transportation and special education costs. To be fair, you should extract these costs from the "cost per pupil".
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 6, 2007 10:28 PM
Politics are fast becoming a BORE!
Some of the residents here are not remotely interested in this side vs that side....We are people who vote for the candidate that "seems" to present the favorable and logical approach to future endeavors.
Life is plain Common Sense!
Anonymous May 2 3:15 has a point with #5.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 7, 2007 10:40 AM
Personally, I think Montville is a great place and getting better! A wise proverb states that 'if you are not part of the solution, you are part on the problem!' To all those that would cast stones, I encourage you to use that time & effort positively and productively to make our town even better! There are plenty of people (children, disabled, seniors, etc.) that could use some help -volunteer opportunities abound.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
May 7, 2007 9:52 PM
It would be nice if it was all one town instead of 3 zip codes. That way we would All be Montville!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 8, 2007 9:11 AM
I agree with you Jim! Montville Township is a very nice town. I love living here and being a part of a fine community.
Yes, it has it's problems (all towns across this great nation do) but the fact is, the residents can do their part to make it more and more appealing and wonderful.
Get out and Volunteer Montville Township Residents! You will not regret it! I never did!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 8, 2007 1:53 PM
Nice words, it you don't want to say who you are, would you kindly say what you have done!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 9, 2007 12:14 AM
How people come here and post without their name, regardless of the point of view, kind of hard to take people serious if they hide behind the keyboard and monitor.
Posted by
Chris Schlomann
on
May 9, 2007 10:52 AM
Why question positive comments? Why have an option to be Anonymous at all? Is it only for those who have negative things to say?
Seems that many people choose the Anonymous (hiding behind keyboard and monitor) and for their own personal reasons. I read them all and learn from them whether or not they are Anonymous or not. That is not the point.
I have been a volunteer with the soccer/little league/school events ie chaperon at all my children's activities as well as help clean litter from the township roads and give blood at each blood drive. It is a good feeling and nice to share moments with others in our nice town.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 9, 2007 4:30 PM
Hello all, I have also volunteered continously thru out the years. I also have my son involved. I feel giving to a community and being a part of same is very important. It gives one a sense of goodness to raise money for other people in need, clean the streets with the Rotary, and always know no matter where you come from everyone needs to give something and be a part. Its a great feeling and please excuse my spelling.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 11, 2007 10:06 AM
What I don't like is how quicly taxes have gone up here. We've lived here for 10 years and are very upset over how much and how fast the taxes have gone up.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 11, 2007 11:13 PM
When you look at Montville Townships taxes in comparison to other Morris County Towns you find that we are in the lower half of the 39 towns on a rate per $100.00 basis. That doesn't make it right for anyone or even ok but it does tell us where the problem really lies. The system of how we pay for education in NJ puts that burden on the backs of property tax payers alone. Until we get to the point that the Municipalities can band together in a meaningful tax reform effort and force the Legislature to change the system we are left with falling prey to local politicians promises falling short while taxes still go up at an alarming rate. That doesn't mean that local government doesn't have a responsibility to spend wisely but when you take a look at the postings on the question of "What do you like about montville" consider that nothing that people have commented on was here 15 years ago and neither were about 7000 people including 2000 school children.
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
May 12, 2007 12:38 PM
If there are 7,000 new people in 15 years how come there has been no new shopping?
Aside from all of the housing Montville looks like it is in a time warp.
Why does Parsippany and Boonton get stores and we get nothing?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 13, 2007 2:13 PM
And when the new shopping comes in, you'll be the first person complaining about the traffic!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 14, 2007 8:23 AM
I see two problems with the current town government:
1. A willingness to exclude the voters and do 'backroom deals' - witness the town's bonding of the Board of Ed building (vs., say, air conditioning for the William Mason School); and
2. The lack of will in pursuing an impact fee for development in the community (i.e., via a transportation district). The legal environment must be changed. Henry Hill has been gone for over a year, yet towns are still leery of challenging developers legally about their build-and-run philosophy of saddling existing residents with the cost of new residents' infrastructure and services needs while keeping all the profits for themselves. For anyone interested in a primer on the topic , see http://www-agecon.ag.ohio-state.edu/Programs/Swank/pdfs/dif.pdf for a twelve-page overview that includes mention of New Jersey's exisitng statute.
Jared - First, we are not excluding voters. 86 River Rd is Township property, not BoE property. Therefore, the BoE can NOT bond for it! Whatever is done with it is solely the Township Committee's responsibility. So I choose to create a multiple win scenario - where we remove an unutilized eyesore, replace it with a new viable property and save the taxpayers money compared to current BoE rents! Next, how is a situation that has had numerous public meeting discussions over the course of the last 15 months a 'backroom' deal? We have had it on our Township Committee agenda several times for public comment. I encourage good public discussion with accurate fact for any issue; I disdain mischaracterizations made with bad facts.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
May 16, 2007 9:52 PM
Taxes- What makes the tax increases over the past 10 years hard to take is they correspond directly with the non stop development since sewer lines were installed. Prior to that, tax increases were almost non existent. I'm very sorry now that I supported the sewer installation. I bought into the notion it was done to help the existing residents with septic problems.I now realize the main beneficiaries (and probably the driving force) were the developers and builders who needed the sewers to build on the remaining properties which could not support septic systems. We the taxpayers, not only paid for that system, but as someone else said, are left holding the bag for the cost of services for the increase in population, while those who make money on the development take the money and run.
Shopping- We are less than a 15 minute drive from any type of shopping imaginable. What sense does it make to add to our congestion for something so readily available?
Our elected officials need to take heed from the defeat of the School Budget. People are tired of yearly tax increases with seemingly little regard for doing so by our elected officials. For years now it's been easier to say yes to special interests and pass the costs along to the taxpayers. Enough with the standard election time lip service to controlling costs and development, it's time to "just say no" and bring some stability back to our property taxes.
My gripe with Montville is not the taxes. I agree that taxes are high everywhere in New Jersey. But we are a good town with good schools. You don't usually have that reputation with low home prices and low taxes. I agree with the person who would like a nice grocery store in town, on the level of a Kings or Whole Foods. As for the traffic it may bring? Traffic is part of living in New Jersey. If I was so uptight about a little traffic I would move to Sussex county. But I live here where I love being near highways and malls and other conveniences. Let's bring an little upscale shopping to our nice town. I am very excited about he Bonefish Grill going in on Rt 46. Great start~~
I've read both the sections on what is so great about Montville and what's not so great. The fact remains: every town has both good and bad.
For the most part, Montville is a great place to live and raise a family. I would however, like to see the development of Towaco Village. I find that we have to drive everywhere to do any shopping.We can support high end stores and specialty shops, and it would make things much more convenient.
In addition the convenience, I think it's embarassing that we live in a affluent town, yet our only shopping area is the dump across from the RR station. That needs to be leveled and turned into something attractive, convenient, and full of shops that will make our lives easier. Check out Summit, Morristown, or even Denville for a glimpse of towns that can support a town center.
I haven't heard much about this initiative and wonder what is happening with the development of Towaco Village.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 18, 2007 9:46 PM
the Towaco Village does not need to be further developed, but a little cleaning up would be great. Developement will ruin what the area is supposed to be -a quite little area for local residents. A few years ago there was talk of a Starbucks going in, just think of the mess that would create. And Nicole - traffic does not have to be part of living in NJ, but poor planning decisions have made it so.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 19, 2007 6:48 AM
What's nice about Montville is that it doesn't have the traffic clogging shopping areas other towns have. It's great that towns all around Montville provide us with every shopping opportunity imaginable, and deal with the problems associated with them. Let's leave it that way. What I find disturbing about this "Towaco Village Plan " is that at the planning board meeting a year or two ago, when the plan was voted on, all the residents who addressed the board opposed it, (and there were many) and not one board member voted in opposition. Who's running this town? It doesn't appear to be the taxpayers. Plans like these seem to be supported primarily by those who stand to make a buck from them. Frank Lechleiter
In my humble opinion one should be more interested in the long-term impact regarding the development of TVC shopping area and the environment. TVC sits in the Towaco Aquifer, Recharge Stream X resides right on this site, to date there has been no true environmental impact study done, the current infrastructure cannot support the additional traffic, Con-Rail will not fund a new Railroad Trestle ($10 million) in an effort to realign Route 202. As much as I can appreciate the development of retail business, this should be geared to a more centralized location in Montville Township and one not so environmentally sensitive.
Posted by
Chris Schlomann
on
May 21, 2007 10:10 AM
When I left my comment I was not talking about using the Towaco Village for development. There are plenty of falling down, "historical" homes that could be converted into nice retail instead of eyesores. Also- there is plenty of "unrented" office space and abandoned buildings as well. Again in a nice affluent town, such as ours this should make people upset. And now we have dont even have the butcher.....At least that was some convenience.......
To Frank, Speaking of no traffic jams. The corner where the New Montvillle Inn is has become a mini nightmare. Rush-hour waits of ten to fifteen minutes to comandeer the corner due to a new island and poor traffic planning is now an everyday event. When the Inn is opened it will be a full blown nightmare. What were they thinking when they went ahead on this project? They obviously have no concern for the citizens who pay the taxes. Mark my words the traffic and limited parking in this area will be disastorous. I suppose the town will assign a police officer to direct and try to alleviate problems. This must not come at the taxpayers expense. Rebuilding the Inn was a great idea but town planners really missed the boat on this. Or maybe their just loading their own boats.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 23, 2007 5:25 PM
That intersection was and is the responsibility of the County. We pressured them for many months after they installed the new design (which did address their #1 concern of rolling stops coming out of River Rd) to change it - we even had a public meeting with the County Roads Supervisor there to address our resident concerns. Finally they agreed to tailor it back. However, I do not know a date that they have committed to do it. We will follow up and get that for you. As to your planner comment - that boat doesn't float.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
May 23, 2007 9:39 PM
You are an old dog and not willing to learn a new trick. Yes the new intersection, while not perfect, has eliminated "roll through" traffic. I use this intersection every day at all hours. Your "ten to fifteen minute" number is totally ridiculous and the rest of your arguments are suspect given these time estimates. The bottom line is that this new intersection will save lives. Who gives a rat's butt about sitting there for an extra minute or two when yours, mine and our kid's lives are on the line. Grow up!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 24, 2007 11:10 PM
Well lets let time be the judge of this. More accidents and a new traffic light is next. And, yes the time estimate is correct at rush hour. Also if your letting your kids walk in that area you are an irresponsible parent. This is a done deal for special interests and the taxpayer will pay more than just in dollars. I noticed no one adressed the lack of parking when the Inn opens up and the congestion it will create.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 25, 2007 7:49 AM
Greed is good...
Gordon Gekko, Wall Street, 1987 (Gordon lived in Montville before he got REALLY rich)
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 25, 2007 12:06 PM
I happen to agree with the poster suggesting traffic problems when the Inn opens. Just glancing at the Inn, my immediate reaction to my wife was "where's the parking area"? I think a barbershop has similar parking space.
I dont know what kind of business this Inn will do, but assuming it's a bar and a nightlife spot of any caliber, I cant imagine where the heck cars are going to park and just how dangerous and congested traffic could become.
I wonder how such a small parking area for such a large Inn received approval. Can anyone clarify this?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 25, 2007 7:43 PM
FYI - the Planning Bd was responsible for approving the Montville Inn, which secured shared parking with the office bldg next door. The intersection changes have improved safety for traffic exiting River Rd but created other safety issues with traffic on Rte 202. Let's wait what it looks like after the County 'fixes' the problem. I realize it's not a good answer, but it's not in our control.
Posted by
Jim S
on
May 25, 2007 9:19 PM
Randy Frankel and TJ Nelligan owns to Montville Inn and the office building next door.
They gave lots of $$ to our former mayors.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 26, 2007 3:40 PM
They also supported Dan Grant's opponants and waited until Dan Grant was off the Planning Board to complete their application because they were afraid of how he would vote on the second floor addition.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 26, 2007 5:41 PM
Dan, How would you have voted?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 26, 2007 7:40 PM
Ron,
What is your position on Freeholder Douglas Cabana holding the position of prosecutor in eight different municipalities in Morris County?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 26, 2007 10:43 PM
The May 26 4:41 PM anonymous comment has the unmistakable odor of used car salesman.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 27, 2007 2:06 PM
It is not how I would have voted it is how I did vote. The plan I voted for included only the first floor with the second floor being only storage without a guarantee of addition parking. I didn't accept a temporary agreement with the adjoining property owner as a satisfactory answer. The application was ammended and held until after I was off the Planning Board by the time the application was finely approved. In that the anonymous poster was right although I am not sure why the anonymous post with the referance to the comment about used car salesman felt compelled to say that.
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
May 28, 2007 12:29 PM
Dan they wrote it because the lousy spelling and grammar was clearly your style.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 29, 2007 5:45 PM
As a follow up to prior post - the County is in the process of hiring a contractor to 'fix' the intersection of Rte 202 & River Rd. I would suspect it will be done in a couple of months, but think end of Summer so that we are pleasantly surprised. As a reminder, they are just tailoring back the protrusion coming out of River Rd.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
May 31, 2007 8:06 PM
Dan, In that the owner secured additional parking through the purchase of the adjacent property, would you now favor an application for use of the second floor?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
May 31, 2007 9:49 PM
The devil is in the details and hopefully the Planning Board tied the upstairs use to the ability to use the office parking lot. If that changes hands and is lost for additional parking then the upstairs use should go as well. With those guarentees in place, I would have voted for it.
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
June 1, 2007 1:34 PM
The details are called a DEED RESTRICTION which takes care of it.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 2, 2007 10:29 AM
the dangerous driving conditions on pine brook road, there is a ditch all along the egde of this road both sides,easy to have your tire go into the ditch edge,need curbing badly
You don't need curbing, you just need to slow down.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 3, 2007 3:48 PM
The new Montville Inn has a banner supporting Daughtry and Braden. You would think they won't get involved in politics but maybe this is how they get what they want out of the Town.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 4, 2007 11:24 AM
Gordon Gekko says:
"And you are all being royally screwed over by these, these bureaucrats, with their luncheons, their junkets, their pensions, nepotism, favoritism, no-bid contracts, cronies and golden parachutes... Montville Township has so many different departments, each costing tons of $$$ a year. Now, I have spent the last two months analyzing what all these guys do, and I still can't figure it out. One thing I do know is that our township keeps raising taxes, and I'll bet that half of that was spent in all the paperwork going back and forth between all these departments passing the buck..."
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 4, 2007 11:47 AM
Too many folks that have a "sour" attitude.
One is too many for this happy resident!
If you really do not like the Township, why not move? You will find that all places have some or all of these problems now. It is the times.
Is the grass greener over that fence? Really? Just remember why it could be!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 5, 2007 4:23 PM
If the River road 202 intersection is to be corrected and that is a good thing, will it be accomplished before or after the opening of theMontville Inn?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 6, 2007 7:23 AM
now that the primary elections are over, what is so damn annoying is the signs that were put up all over gods green earth and are still up as of today June 7th. I saw Mr Speciale put up the signs but not take them down. Do we have to look at them until the elections in November? It is the same every year. I would like to see a beautiful Montville Township that is not littered with signs.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 7, 2007 6:55 AM
What Wrorng With McMansions? How about:
1. Environentally unsound. Waste of heat and air conditioning. 2. Bombastic and pretentious - that crates the culture of Montville 3. Reflects the a shallowness and materialistic mindset that permeates the town 4. Blight on the landscape 5. etc, etc
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 7, 2007 10:01 AM
The Township should have a time frame from the end of any election that all signs need to be taken down by. I'd say a week is reasonable, any signs not removed by then should result in a heavy fine for the person named on the sign.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 7, 2007 11:57 AM
First of all, large homes, pay large taxes, if you can afford it..what's the problem. Just because you live in a large home (and that is an individual's defination) does not mean you are materialistic or shallow, just an assumption on your part. Yes there should be affordable places to live also...however...that is a problem in all of the northeast, not just Montville. The biggest problem Montville faces it seems is whinning, really Montville seems like a lovely town and I have been here for 33 years, raised two children and built two houses in town and while all is not perfect (where is it??) I can think of a lot worse than Montville. Remember folks, life is what you make of it, sour grapes or lemonade, its entirely up to you. We have access to all major highways and great shopping within a short distance without that extra traffic. We can be in New York City within 35 minutes, or the shore, or skiing in the mountains...all can be day trips. Our crime rate is low, schools have a good reputation and we have a diversified population. Think about it...if you are still bothered...move, but a smile and a thank you would go a lot further.
The very reason i have hesitated to post comments is the reason i post today : WHY does every comment, every positive or negative comment on just about anything in town wind up being a slur against Dan Grant??? and why are these nasty comments usually veiled with "anonymous". Even if these brave souls don't want to log on to Goggle, they can post to anonymous, but sign their names at the end. The remark about a "used car salesman " was too low to even comment on. Get a life, people. Do some good in our community. There are plenty of volunteer opportunities besides being your kids soccer coach. And by the way, if the people that are being denigrated were to talk and tell what they really know, WOW! terry cavanaugh
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 7, 2007 2:01 PM
Terry, Thanks for the support. Although it has been a long time since I have been "a used car salesman" I have been in the automobile business for 35 years. It has been listed on my backround in every election I have ever run in. Those types of comments come straight out of the Republican Club and they used to make phone calls before elections saying that to people. It played a role in the last election I was in as well. What they are really saying is that how a person earns their living might be grounds to exclude a person from public office. Although I could care less what they say about me, it does speak to a certain arrogance and elitism that you and I know they have expressed venomously over the years. In the end everyone has to try to earn a living and while I make no comparision history tells us that the Apostal Paul also earned a living selling carpets in the market place of course they didn't have cars then. I wonder if he ever said "this carpet is like new and only used on the Sabath."
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
June 7, 2007 2:49 PM
typically used car salesmen put a spin on everything. Have a reputation for saying, "Do I have a deal for you!" - and slant the truth about the history of a car, including mileage, to make the sale. They assess their "mark" or target, and will say whatever it takes to close the deal. I am not saying ALL used car salesmen are dishonest. Just that it makes for an interesting political comparison, don't you think? If the shoe fits.....
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 7, 2007 7:10 PM
From what I have seen in both worlds there is a lot more honor in my business than I have come across it politics. I have sold thousands of cars dealer to dealer always taken checks never been burned. The people I did business with thirty years ago are still my friends and business associates. Frequently we sell cars and give them up with money to be paid later and a persons word(yes there are women in the business) is their word. When there is a problem we work it out with adjustments. Rather than spin, straight shooting, keeping your word and honesty work much better and many of the people I come across on the political front lack any of those attributes, of course there are alway exceptions and that is the last time I will discuss my business on a blog. I will say however that some of the most professionally degreed people have gotten government in more trouble than you can imagine. Government isn't brain surgery. Government Finance isn't particularly complicated. For one thing you don't have two sets of books.
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
June 7, 2007 8:11 PM
Gordon Gekko says:
The richest one percent of this country owns half our country's wealth, five trillion dollars.
One third of that comes from hard work, two thirds comes from inheritance, interest on interest accumulating to widows and idiot sons and what I do, stock and real estate speculation. It's b.s.
You got ninety percent of the American public out there with little or no net worth.
I create nothing. I own.
We make the rules, pal. The news, war, peace, famine, upheaval, the price per paper clip.
We pick that rabbit out of the hat while everybody sits out there wondering how we did it. Now you're not naive enough to think we're living in a democracy, are you buddy? It's the free market. And you're a part of it. You've got to have that killer instinct.
Stick around pal(s), I've still got a lot to teach you.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 10, 2007 8:53 AM
Response to the way beginning of these remarks, regarding bringing in a principal from Bordentown. Kramer was brought in
