ARCHIVES
 




 		  
Saturday, June 2, 2007
It's Primary Time
Posted by Ron Soussa at 12:28 PM
 
Political signs are sprouting like mushrooms in a wet cow pasture, so we know Tuesday's primary is rapidly approaching.

Interesting is the large number of John Pinto's professional looking signs, which may have taken the Daughtry/Braden team by surprise.


100 Comments    |    Post a comment
Home
 


 
100 Comments:

I always vote for the guy with the professional looking signs. What's your point?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 2, 2007 6:03 PM
 
 
If some of the signs don't end up on supporters lawns, its the same as junk mail. It is too late to surge.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 2, 2007 6:42 PM
 
 
John Pinto wasn't expected to make much of an effort and was reported to have even mentioned dropping out. He didn't appear at the Republican Club debate.

So my point is that he has decided to work and must have some help.
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on June 3, 2007 5:49 PM
 
 
Just like a book, don't judge it by it's cover. It should be known since the Township had taken the Pinto Property on River Road a few years back under a much differnt TC, plus the incident when the DPW placed a sign at the "new" location, was run over by a large vehicle leaving tire tracks that resulted in a Police investigation taking plaster castings of the tire tracks. What is Mr. Pinto's motivation to get on the TC? Is it personal?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 4, 2007 7:04 AM
 
 
Pinto put up a sign saying a jail was coming to Montville. He paid a fine for it.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 4, 2007 11:53 AM
 
 
Signs r nice looking. first rate. Its only one portion of an election. Does he have a platform? What r a candidates views, the voters should know. Not exactly sure what Bradens platform is either but hey at least his mug was in the paper. Not sure who Pinto is, what he does, background, all of the things that go into an informed decision at the polls.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 4, 2007 3:44 PM
 
 
the Pinto signs are every where, very professional. Reminds me of a mannequin, perfect advertising but hollow and empty on the inside
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 4, 2007 5:10 PM
 
 
Who is putting up all those Pinto signs?

Are they using marked or unmarked police cars?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 4, 2007 5:16 PM
 
 
What is Pinto's platform besides big raises for the police?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 4, 2007 5:17 PM
 
 
Based on the conversation I had with Mr. Pinto it simply appears he is looking out for the better of the town. He speaks about keeping the property taxes in check but keeping all the fun township functions going. He wants this town to live up to the quote on all the Montville signs, "Where living gets better." He speaks highly of this town being a life long resident. He has my vote!
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 12:40 AM
 
 
to anon poster above: its great Pinto has all these ideas. Lots of people have ideas. If he cannot communicate to public, send out literature, show up at Republican Club meetings, or talk to the press, (he does not return phone calls) his ideas are of NO USE - actions speak louder than words. He actually might have had a chance but he blew it.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 7:26 AM
 
 
So what has Daughtery done in 3 years except force out a Principle who was sick of the false alarms?

Daughtery is all hat and no cattle.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 8:58 AM
 
 
So, what i gather is that if you are not a member of the "Club" in montville, and if u have personal friends who you grew up with on the police department...then you cannot run in the Republican Primary? sounds like a closed clique to me. Mr. Pinto was probably be smart not to go the the Republican Club, why get harrassed by small minded people as the previous postings have shown
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 9:05 AM
 
 
So what does Pinto stand for except giving big $$ to his friends on the police force?

He stayed away because someone might ask what he plans for act 2.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 10:30 AM
 
 
What about Jay Weber and Larry Casha for Freeloader? Weber has no ideas besides sliming Larry.

Go Casha!
Posted by Anonymous Vote for Casha on June 5, 2007 11:00 AM
 
 
See John Murphy gets involved at Daily Record.
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on June 5, 2007 11:27 AM
 
 
I was thinking Mr. Pinto was told to stay home or the powerful people in charge would ban him from doing business in town. What a shame.
GO PINTO!!!
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 12:23 PM
 
 
I don't know what Pinto stands for, but then again does anyone know what Braden is for?

It is curious to note that three years ago, Daughtry stood for not having running mates in the primary. I believe that he said that it stifles the competition, by intimidating the odd man out from running. Then again, that was when he was the odd man out. This year, he and Braden jumped the gun by announcing that they were running mates at the beginning of the campaign season. I'm told that there were quite a few Republicans who were interested in running this year, but that the Republican Club wanted to have a single unified front. How open minded.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 1:43 PM
 
 
The Republican Club has a horrible reputation and what ever happens Pinto was wise to stay away. Rumor has it that others like Rich Moore wanted to run but the club discouraged them. Democracy in action. Pinto took them by suprize by putting in his petition.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 2:19 PM
 
 
They way I look at it, We should Elect Pinto. It appears he is in no ones pocket. We know Art and Tim don't want him(the "CLUB"). He can't be in the others pocket, they took his building from him. Let's elect the independent person. I wish he only campaigned more.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 2:32 PM
 
 
Anonymous said...
They way I look at it, We should Elect Pinto. It appears he is in no ones pocket. We know Art and Tim don't want him(the "CLUB"). He can't be in the others pocket, they took his building from him. Let's elect the independent person. I wish he only campaigned more. June 5, 2007 1:32 PM

Question to Anon

Who is they? If you are implying the current TC, your wrong. The property on River Road was taken prior to Art, Deb and Jim being elected to office.
Posted by Anonymous Chris Schlomann on June 5, 2007 2:44 PM
 
 
Sticking only to the facts, Chris is right. The Pinto property was taken before the current Township Committee came aboard although Art was there to vote on much of the renovation work and the purchase of a parcel next to that building. I don't have a dog in this fight so I won't comment on any of the rest of it. Good luck to all who participated.
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on June 5, 2007 3:08 PM
 
 
Is Dan Grant trying to tell Republicans how to vote again?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 3:10 PM
 
 
To add to Chris's and Dan's comments

The prior group of TC members condemned John's building for about 800K and then spent about 600K on improvements. I was around to approve the change orders which brought the costs up to about 2 mill. Then came the law suit against the town that then brought our costs to about 3 mill.

After all of that there was really not enough space to operate so as part of the settlement we negotiated the purchase of some additional property the Pinto's owned adjacent to the piece the Township condemned.

At the end of the day that facility cost the taxpayers roughly 3 mill when the public was lead to believe it would be 1.5 mill.

Sound Familiar?

Regards,
Art Daughtry
Posted by Blogger Art Daughtry on June 5, 2007 3:21 PM
 
 
I think I made myself clear that I "don't have a dog in this fight" and I do believe in the voters having a choice and always have. I simply said that from a factual basis Chris was right.I don't remember how Art voted on those change orders and settlement he writes about so I guess that will be a future discussion. Good luck today Art.
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on June 5, 2007 3:41 PM
 
 
Art -

I think that you should make it clear that there's nothing wrong with a local resident suing the township. After all, you did it.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 3:59 PM
 
 
Funny, how come Art did not address the statement of Mr. Pinto being told to stay home?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 5, 2007 4:40 PM
 
 
Dan – Thanks for your good wishes. We all (you and I) voted to approve the change orders because we had to. They were necessary to occupy the building such as HVAC upgrades. Of course why weren’t these items picked up earlier????

Of course there is nothing wrong with suing. I won one and lost one and John won his, which brings me to an even more amazing point. Since I took office WE (the current TC) have reduced the number of lawsuits from 3 pages (yes pages) to less than one page. The only real surplus from last year’s budget was LEGAL FEES! That speaks volumes to the way this TC is approaching the oversight of Montville Township.

Dan – Are you teaching folks how to spin? These two posts are pretty funny:

Anonymous said...
I was thinking Mr. Pinto was told to stay home or the powerful people in charge would ban him from doing business in town. What a shame.
GO PINTO!!!
June 5, 2007 11:23 AM

Then 4 hours later:

Anonymous said...
Funny, how come Art did not address the statement of Mr. Pinto being told to stay home?
June 5, 2007 3:40 PM
So this blogger said he was “thinking” and then uses “told” well this is why most folks don’t answer questions by anonymous posters.

John Pinto and I are friends and he told me over 2 years ago he was thinking of running. Kudos to him for a good showing. However I hope in the future he volunteers to serve on a committee so he understands what this process is all about. I asked him to submit his resume so we (the TC) can consider him for appointments on a committee next year. If he is serious about serving that would be good a first step.

Of most importance now is to pick up all the signs around town.

Regards,
Art Daughtry
Posted by Blogger Art Daughtry on June 6, 2007 12:57 PM
 
 
Art, Congratulations to you and Tim.

"We all (you and I) voted to approve the change orders because we had to. They were necessary to occupy the building such as HVAC upgrades. Of course why weren’t these items picked up earlier????"

I agree with you on this statement. Now you see what I had to deal with for all those years with the four Republicans. I was always trying to bail them out of their mistakes.

I'm just asking but is your definition of "spin" anything I say that you don't agree with or are there real issues to debate and differances in the approach to local government. Just for the record I try to put my name on every posting.

Again congrats to you and Tim and I will see you guys in the fall. ( or maybe sooner).

Dan
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on June 6, 2007 2:35 PM
 
 
Art and Tim,
Congratulations on the victory!! Don't forget to get the sign on Dan's lawn (just kidding Dan)

George Drexl
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 6, 2007 2:50 PM
 
 
Dan,

Did you vote to condemn the Pinto building?
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on June 6, 2007 4:26 PM
 
 
Art,

Once you get elected to the TC, is there a position you can give Dan to keep him busy so he won't tie up every blog on the internet?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 6, 2007 7:50 PM
 
 
How about Township Web master? (Only kidding)

Dan – You a Democrat?
Are you sure?
Didn’t you run JR’s write in campaign and send out literature supporting him?

Dan you do use your name most of the time and no those anon posts were not yours however I thought you were entering the teaching field and running classes on “spin”.

Now that most recent post where you claim you were saving the public from the Republicans:

“ I agree with you on this statement. Now you see what I had to deal with for all those years with the four Republicans. I was always trying to bail them out of their mistakes”

That is your trademark and the Maytag spin cycle you are infamous for!

Looking forward to debating you in the fall.

All kidding aside have a great summer and if you win the 50/50 at the 4th of July celebration again this year I’m going to claim you and Frank W. have it rigged. Of course I’ve watched you at least one year give either half or all of it back. Enjoy the summer!

Regards,
Art
Posted by Blogger Art Daughtry on June 7, 2007 7:51 AM
 
 
Speaking of township webmaster, why does our website suck so much? I hate to be harsh, but our website is woefully inadequate. This weekend, I went to the website to find out about the town garage sale, and instead of being able to download the map, it told me where to go to pick one up. How easy is it to create a PDF these days? Answer: it's simple.

Our homepage is pretty much the same today as it was 2 years ago. We can't download permits, forms, etc. We can't look at the local ordinances. The township committee's meeting agenda is placed on the site 1 day before the meeting. Why not have it there a week before? If the agenda changes, then change it on the website?

Other towns allow you to pay your taxes on-line. Why don't we?

I remember that years ago we were promised that meeting minutes would be placed on the website. The latest minutes are almost a year old - and they're not even from the township committee meetings! Ourmontville.com had some of the meetings videotaped on their website. Why didn't the town itself?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 7, 2007 11:12 AM
 
 
I tried for years to get the Township Committee to tape their meeting. In fact Cablevision said they would give us a time slot for broadcast years ago. Unfortunately some on the Committee objected. Under the present law anyone can tape the meetings although I understand the Township Committee objects to it.

Art speaking of spinning "crushed the Opposition"? Pinto actually did quite well for a first time out and only spending a couple of Hundred Dollars on signs. His percentage of vote was actually much higher than Steve Cohen got last year when you were running his campaign.

Actually I am a pretty bi-partisan guy for a Democrat and have voted for hundreds of Republicans for Boards and Committees over the years. Of course I always tried to get a qualified Democrat appointed but the Republicans in the "Club" would always go ballistic and try to blackball them. I don't think they have the high reguard for Democracy I have.
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on June 7, 2007 1:07 PM
 
 
Dan, How much would it coost to televise the meetings?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 7, 2007 9:11 PM
 
 
Dan – Please post where I said, “crushed the opposition” because that is what you are implying. Absolutely post where you got that from and explain to the bloggers. You are spinning AGAIN.

To Annon June 7 10:12 you couldn’t be more correct. Our website is a mess and I had anticipated we would have had the new site up by now. However we are fortunate a local citizen that is very knowledgeable with web site hosting and management volunteered his time to work with our employees. This same citizen was the one that, as a courtesy volunteered to video tape the two meetings, which were posted on Our Montville.

What is now happening is the funding and architecture of the new web site was approved by the TC last month and the Township Dept. Heads are “putting their respective pieces together”. The Dept heads will manage their own front pages of the new website so info can get to the public faster and eliminate the additional costs associated with having a website that requires many hours a week of oversight. As part of the new site our intention was to purchase the cameras, controllers, and DVR so we can broadcast our meetings but not have recurring expenses associated with hiring someone to work the cameras. The controller would be mounted at one of the positions up on the dais and can be controlled by whoever sits in that chair.

The Board of Ed pays about $5,000 a year to have their meetings videotaped.

I hope to get the funds in next years budget (they were cut this year) for the equipment so all of our meetings will be available and linked to the new web site.

Some of the other ideas/comments by anon regarding downloading permits, garage sale maps etc. are all possible however they will be a few months out before they will be considered and then hopefully added.

This will be my last post regarding this topic but I do trust Dan will post where I said anything about “crushing the opposition”. I also know he will now say oh you didn’t etc. etc. but you bloggers can now see why at times Dan needs to be held accountable for his comments or implied comments.

Also there were not 4 Republicans on the TC during the Pinto building saga their were 3. Least you forget Jean Bader.

Regards,
Art Daughtry
Posted by Blogger Art Daughtry on June 8, 2007 7:06 AM
 
 
Randolph has a good web site.

http://randolphnj.org/
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on June 8, 2007 7:39 AM
 
 
How exactly did Maytag Dan "bail out" anyone when he voted to condemn the Pinto building too?
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on June 8, 2007 10:39 AM
 
 
Art, I didn't say that you said "Crushed the opposition" and however I think the exact headline was

"Mayor Art Daughtry and running mate Tim Braden trounced newcomer John Pinto in the Republican race for the two nominations for township committee."

That was the Daily Record comment but I mearly pointed to it as a spin coming from your camp and one which I don't believe is accurate. Spin comes in many forms
and having been around for a long time I know that that was not original to the Record but it is all perception anyway. By the way congrats on your cooking adventure and that is no spin.
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on June 8, 2007 10:42 AM
 
 
Ron, I won't answer you on anything but I am happy to converse with members of the real public. I think the fact that you are suing me would require me not to answer you.
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on June 8, 2007 10:44 AM
 
 
You don't need to answer me Dan. Your 14 year record of incompetence is a matter of public record.

And for someone who has sued (and lost) Montville residents for defamation (Changebridge condos), you certainly are sensitive when held to be responsible for your untruthful statements.
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on June 8, 2007 11:41 AM
 
 
Then stop asking me direct questions and don't threaten me with "rather meeting me in a parking lot". Keep the discusion general and don't let it degenerate into what it was before. You stick to the issues and keep personal invective out of it and I will to.
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on June 8, 2007 12:06 PM
 
 
You don't think asking (June 6, 2007 3:26 PM) if you voted to condemn the Pinto building is 'sticking to the issues'?

You can try to run from yours, but a candidate's record is a legitmate issue.
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on June 8, 2007 12:48 PM
 
 
As the local citizen who has helped (or rather offered my advice) with the website and also did that videotaping, let me give my perspective.

First of all, the idea of videotaping, while supported publicly by every member of the TC, was not welcomed with open arms. It was initially put off for the following year 2007 when I introduced it, and only then would it be explored by a committee. I attend many of the TC meetings, and see thousands of $'s of off-budget items approved on the spot without going to a committee and some without any oversight. Rather than wait, I put together a detailed proposal for the TC, including all options available and the legal and technical ramifications. In order to prove how cheaply this could be done, I began taping the meetings with my own equipment. After three attempts, I settled on a decent solution. The one-time cost for the equipment was approximately $700, + the cost of mounting it to the wall. How much could that be? Note that there were no additional fees - ever. At budget time, this item was cut from the budget. The cost that was in the budget proposal was $5,000, and included features such as a joystick to control the camera, etc. Not only was it an overblown solution, but it wouldn't have worked. The leader of the meeting should be participating in the meeting, not zooming in on who is speaking. This would have required hiring someone to control the camera, rather than just turning it on. This would have been an ongoing cost for each meeting. Perhaps the final product would have been better in quality than my approach, but at that price, it certainly should have been. For the record, the school board pays $175/meeting. I think that they pay around $3,000/year. By the way, all of my recordings were sent to the town so that they could include them on the town website, but I was told that it would have to wait until the new website was in place.

The new website has been an idea on the block for months. I first heard about it in late 2006. When I heard that it was being budgeted at $10,000, I put together a proposal for doing it for less than $1,000. Just for the record, none of my proposals involved any payments to me, and when offered that business, I turned it down because it was too trivial. I identified a firm that would do the work for $375, but to date nobody has asked me for their contact information. It occurs to me that if "...as part of the new site our intention was to purchase the cameras..." then the surplus from the $10,000 that was budgeted for the website could be used to purchase the video equipment. I don't expect that will happen.

I have said before at TC meetings that updating the technology of the website will not solve issue of its information not being up to date. Annon brought up an excellent point with the Town's garage sale. All someone needed to do was scan a document or print it as a PDF and it would have been far more valuable than telling people where to pick it up. It doesn't seem to be a priority to get the right information on the site. It is a one or two day job to get it the website updated – why has it taken months with no end in sight?

I'm a Republican. I believe in smaller, more efficient government. It seems that at every turn we opt to choose the more expensive option - even when presented with less costly alternatives. I offered to evaluate the Montville Messenger over a month ago. I feel that I can cut costs by 50%, and improve on the service to the residents and the advertisers (again, I am offering this at no cost to the town and do not expect, nor would I accept, any payment and I have no financial interest other than as a taxpayer). I requested specific information from the town for this, but have not received it. Do we want to save money?
Posted by Blogger Robert on June 8, 2007 6:14 PM
 
 
Robert, why would they take the messenger away from one of their political supporters, the more important question is what has that supporter billed the township for services related to the messenger.
As far as the web page goes, didn't our assistant administrator update that before she was fired
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 9, 2007 11:32 AM
 
 
Question for the TC. Who does the messenger and are they paid for it? If they, are how much are they paid?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 9, 2007 1:40 PM
 
 
to 10:32 on June 6 poster above: the town is looking to hire a new assistant administrator. I am not sure if anyone has been selected. The previous one, Jasmine Lim left because she was offered the job of administrator in Parsippany. She received a substantial pay increase and was not fired by any means. I hope you check facts and refrain from (untrue)innuendo.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 9, 2007 4:53 PM
 
 
Here's what I know and what I don't know about The Messenger:

It is published by Mike Carlin. I assume that means that in that role, he does desktop publishing of the magazine. I don't know if that includes editing at all.

The town pays $150/page for a 24/page magazine. I don't know what happens for issues that exceed 24 pages.

The budget for the Messenger was $12K, but that this year the budget was requested to be increased to $25K. That increase was rejected. I assume that a budget of $12K means that it loses $12K/year.

On top of that, I've been told that The Messenger often comes in above budget. On the other hand, there was great emphasis in a recent TC meeting that the magazine had actually paid for itself in the last issue. If that's the case, then why was there a request for a budget increase?

I also know that the magazine used to be published 6 times a year but is now published 4 times a year.

At a recent TC meeting, it was mentioned that advertizers complain that the magazine is more expensive than other magazines to advertize in. Also, local groups that contribute articles complain that they are not given enough space.

If anyone knows any additional information, please let us know.

Also, does anyone actually read this magazine?
Posted by Blogger Robert Lefkowitz on June 9, 2007 10:19 PM
 
 
What a waste of money! Put it on the township website and save the landfills!
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 10, 2007 11:12 PM
 
 
Correction to my earlier post:
The last issue of the Montville Messenger lost approximately $3,000.
Posted by Blogger Robert Lefkowitz on June 13, 2007 8:32 AM
 
 
I have seen Sandham and Daughtry answer other questions on this site so I know they read it. Just answer these questions. Does Mike Karlan do the Montville Mag and what does he get paid to do it? It seems like a simple question to me.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 14, 2007 4:33 PM
 
 
Hey Anonymous. Stop hiding and come out of the closet. Identify yourself and I'll be happy to answer any and all your questions and challenges.
Taking pot shots from behind your anonymity is the way of a coward.
On another note, your buddy Mr. Lefkowitz, appears to have appointed himself as a (self proclaimed) watchdog. What, I wonder, is his real agenda?
Posted by Anonymous Mike Karlan on June 15, 2007 9:59 AM
 
 
who cares who he is.

Does Mike Karlan do the Montville Mag and what does he get paid to do it?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 15, 2007 10:36 AM
 
 
I guess anonymous doesn't want
the facts or the truth so he can be set free.
Posted by Anonymous Mike Karlan on June 15, 2007 10:58 AM
 
 
Mr. Karlin: Doesn't matter if Lefkowitz has an agenda, there is nothing wrong with being a watchdog. I for one appreciate his efforts and urge him to continue. As for what you may or may not be paid, it seems like someone has struck a nerve.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 15, 2007 12:50 PM
 
 
Yes anon may have struck a nerve. Mike K and his wife have long supported Montville projects and have done so for decades without fanfare. I am told he gets a modest stipend for his services. From working with him on other activities he does far more than needed or asked. Perhaps he is insulted.
He does not need aggravation or money. Retired and golfing, grandkids and family are true loves. Muni gov is public record, check out the facts. Ok to inquire, just be civil. Just because you do not have all the facts, do not assume foul play. I hate to see decent people getting trashed here or elsewhere.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 15, 2007 1:22 PM
 
 
Easy Michael, it is a legitimate question even if it is asked anonymously. The best way to deal with it, is a straight forward answer. It certainly is not uncommon for political supporters to be rewarded with money making opportunities. It is called patronage. All that matters is that you give a fair price and can do the job. It certainly doesn't make you a bad person. If no one, including yourself, wants to answer and if anonymous wants to know that badly, they can go to the administrator and ask.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 15, 2007 3:07 PM
 
 
Mr. Karlin (Can I call you Mike? You can call me Robert.) I think that I've made my agenda clear: I want to save the town money whereever I can. Why? Because that saves me money in taxes. Fortunately for you, it saves you money too. The topics that I've addressed were placed on the TC's agenda by the TC for public discussion. When I heard discussions that I felt I could contribute to in a positive manner, I offered my services and the town agreed to listen. I learned the facts and presented various options for the town to consider.

FYI: When the town offered to pay me for my services, I declined. I am not interested in being a vendor for the town. I am just a concerned citizen, doing what we all should be doing: helping out where I can.

I should make another thing clear: I have not said anything negative about you, and have not cast any aspersions other than mistakenly misspelling your name. I have gotten some information about what you do for the town from township officials, but don't have all the information yet. It is my opinion that a businessman should charge as much as possible for his services - that's the capitalist way. If your rate is higher than a comparable vendor, then my problem isn't with you (the seller), it's with the township for not doing the appropriate due dillegence before spending my money.

Since I have your ear, perhaps you could answer a few questions that I've not yet posed to the town.
1) What was the proposed change to the magazine that was going to require the increased budget from $12,000 to $25,000 for this year?
2) Two years ago, it was announced that the Montville Messenger would be printed in black and white to save money. After one or two issues, it went back to full color. Do you know why?
3) When you took over publishing the magazine, we stopped using the printer in Fairfield that had been printing for us. Did you participate in that decision, and how was the current printer selected?
Posted by Blogger Robert Lefkowitz on June 15, 2007 10:08 PM
 
 
Robert - let me help -
1. We are now realizing increased ad revenues than the original Messenger budget - therefore the budget requirement decreased.
We also cut spending in numerous places within the total Township budget.
2. The difference in cost was minimal and color was important to attract advertisers.
3. Quality, cost, timeliness of delivery.

While I have been a big proponent of getting the Messenger to be cost neutral ($0 budget), our change in the management of it (and related ad revenue generation)is still in it's infancy.
I work for a commercial print co. and I can tell you that Mike's minimal stipend does not even come close to what it would cost from someone that wasn't partly volunteering their time. Are there other alternatives? Maybe. But at least we are getting out a publication that has twice as much info as ads (unlike the prior Montville Magazine).
As you can probably tell, I prefer to see the glass as half full...
Posted by Anonymous Jim Sandham on June 15, 2007 11:21 PM
 
 
Lots of words and no answers. How much does Mr. Karlin get paid to do the messenger and how much? It is a simple question about public money. Are we losing on it or making on it? What is the budget for it? Are advertizers complaining about the cost of ads and is there a cheaper way to do it?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 16, 2007 10:29 AM
 
 
Mike Karlan doesn't deserve anything but our gratitude.

He stepped up when issues arose with the previous vendor and brought our entire commmunity a better product than ever before at less cost.

If it weren't for Mike we'd still be relying on the town website that appears to be frozen in time.
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on June 16, 2007 2:33 PM
 
 
So why is it such an issue that he is paid and how much? Why is it that you and Sandham have both commented but while you may not know the particulars certainly the Township Committee members that go on this site do. So again a simple straight forward answer would end it.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 16, 2007 3:18 PM
 
 
Because the question wasn't asked by somebody willing to be straightforward in public by posting their name.
It's public record info, so it's easy to find.
On the other hand, if someone is willing to post their name to a question, I try to answer with facts and figures. Some may not like my 'policy', but isn't America great - freedom of speech includes the freedom to chose when and if to speak!
Posted by Anonymous Jim Sandham on June 16, 2007 5:09 PM
 
 
Jim -

You've said that you'll respond to questions from people who post with their name, and I've done that. I'm not concerned with how much Mike is paid, because I am getting that information through the proper channels. I believe that the $150/page that I posted above is correct, but I'm also under the impression that the figure may be a bit of a generalization. I'll report back with specifics when I get them. However, if you have any information on how the current printer was selected, I'd appreciate that information. It seems that we must pay between $30,000 and $40,000 to this company each year, so it certainly is a valid question.

Also, you said that we're seeing increased ad revenues, so we didn't need the increase from $12K to $25K. However, the increase was proposed for the budget that was just passed. Why would we have needed additional funds for future issues if we were already seeing increased ad revenues? It was reported at the TC meeting that the latest issue lost $3K. Where are the increased revenues if the cost is the same as it has been historically? What was the additional $13K slated for?

Ron mentioned that our cost went down when we moved to Mike as the publisher. That's great. Wouldn't it be great to lower our costs further? I'm not suggesting that the solution is to get a new publisher - I don't have enough information to do that. When I have the information from the town, I'll turn it around into a solid proposal in a week or so. Right now I'm just waiting on the info.

By the way, who was the previous publisher of the Messenger?

Happy Fathers' Day to all!
Posted by Blogger Robert Lefkowitz on June 17, 2007 12:19 AM
 
 
Previously Robert said...

"When I have the information from the town, I'll turn it around into a solid proposal in a week or so."

So this is your true motivation - you want to publish the paper?
You and your wife have a beef with Karlin that dates back to the Charter Commission publishing. You both have an axe to grind, as you have with many issues, including the Jewish cemetery and local synagogue.

If you have background in advertising & publishing the town will review your proposal. Include list of similar work. Since public record, anyone can go to town hall and see how you measure up.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 17, 2007 7:49 AM
 
 
Anonymous –

Let me apologize in advance for my FACTs contradicting any of your baseless conclusions.

I said that I’d give the town a proposal, not a bid. I’m not proposing any solution where I’m a vendor to the town. I’m not in the publishing business and don’t want to be. I’ve already been offered business from the town associated with the website, and turned it down on the spot. In fact, I’ve gone on the record at TC meetings offering my services for free.

I have no beef with Mike Karlin. My wife was a member of the charter study commission and the author of the minority report. My wife’s issue with the charter study commission using him to put together the majority report was that they were paying thousands of dollars to a vendor to do work that they were elected to do themselves. In fact, at the time that the charter study commission was soliciting Mike to do that work, my wife solicited him to do work for her own business. In an email sent to him on 7/12/06, she stated “I would not begin any work on it prior to completion of the charter study work, as I would want to avoid any possible appearance of impropriety.”

I have no beef whatsoever with the local synagogue. I was a member in good standing there for several years. When the temple was unable to meet my daughter’s educational needs, my wife and I met with the Rabbi, who suggested that a different temple might be better suited for us. We resigned from the temple according to the procedures outlined in their constitution and are in good standing with them. Both the Rabbi (who subsequently left) and the Cantor have said that we’re welcome to return to the temple as members or guests at any time. Even after resigning from the local temple, I had the Cantor perform religious services for my family – why would I do that if I had a beef with the temple?

The Jewish Cemetery is my neighbor. I have twice gone to the town to ensure that the cemetery complies with the law. On neither occasion did the town indicate that my concerns were frivolous (that’s not to say that the town decided in my favor, though). The cemetery is a ‘resident’ in this town just like the rest of us. Should they be exempt from the laws that are supposed to apply to them? Of course not (although they may be subject to special laws as a religious organization).

FACTS speak for themselves.
Posted by Blogger Robert Lefkowitz on June 17, 2007 11:15 AM
 
 
Robert, You need to focus your energy on something productive.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 18, 2007 7:27 AM
 
 
This is exactly what is not needed on these posts. Art can straighten this out with the answer to what Mike Karlin is being paid and attacking and trying to denigrate someone simply for asking questions and making suggestions simply takes us back to the bad old days of Republican Control. The simple truth is that Mike is a Republican Club member and has done a number of political sites for candidates and political causes. Giving paybacks is what happens so it is legitmate to ask what he makes. It is not legitimate to attack a citizen on a variety of personal issues that have nothing to do with the question at hand. Mr. Lefkowitz is just trying to offer a service to the Township and doesn't deserve the kind of responses he has been getting here. Having the control of the township government is one thing but abusing a citizen is something quite different.
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on June 18, 2007 10:43 AM
 
 
Ron,
Perhaps you should consider ending this abusive nonsense and MAKE everyone posting here log in with their name. I'm sure there is a way to verify via email address or something because this has gone way beyond acceptable. Either that or shut this blog down until you can, there is absolutely no reason that anybody deserves the poison that is used on here for ANY reason.

George Drexl
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on June 18, 2007 1:50 PM
 
 
George,

You are absolutely correct. I was away from my computer yesterday and saw that cowardly message about Rob Lefkowitz and his family just a little while ago. I considered deleting it, but it had already been responded to.

You might recall that when I ran the other website we required a real name and email address. I've been wanting to do so here as well, but the Daily Record is apparently very close to changing their blogging software and wanted to give it a chance before making any unilateral changes.

If the new software is not running in the next couple of weeks I will take it on myself to require real names and email addresses and will delete anonymous messages.

I agree with you, Chris Schlomann, Terry Cavanaugh, Jim Sandham, and many others who have said that those who post anonymously do not merit a response. I will go further and say that shortly they will no longer be permitted here.

Regards,

Ron
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on June 18, 2007 2:16 PM
 
 
As one who has posted anonymously, but never venomously, I disagree with what you plan to do. I understand why you intend to do so, but still disagree. Too bad that others can't be respectful in their anonymous posts.
Posted by Anonymous