Two multi-purpose, artificial turf fields are almost completed at Camp Dawson. A new roller hockey facility on Changebridge Road has been approved. Improvements to Reilly Park and Manchester Park have also been authorized. Additionally, the Township has acquired a site on River Road to serve as the future home of the DPW and Water and Sewer crews and equipment.
Montville Township's website could probably use a bit of help. Information is out of date and new features should be added. The Township Committee is studying sites belonging to Montclair and, hopefully, Randolph as models for the future.
What features should Montville's new site include?
How about a site that has a chat forum that is unbiased and not controlled by someone with a political axe to grind?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 10, 2007 7:35 PM
Sounds good but I would make it so anonymous posters could not contribute.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 10, 2007 9:45 PM
Put the recylcling calendar there!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 10, 2007 11:10 PM
Put the Montville Messenger on the Town website and save a whole lot of trees!
Mail it only to those who request it.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 10, 2007 11:13 PM
Bloggers are supposed to be biased. That's how they get you to write.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 11, 2007 9:37 AM
You should be able to pay your real estate taxes, get a dog license, or anything else the town collects money for, all online.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 11, 2007 9:49 PM
In my opinion, we shouldn't have blogging on the Town's website. We should have a suggestion box for new features on the website though. We should also have the ability to pay taxes, licenses, etc, as well as downloadable forms and applications. The website should reduce our need to go to town hall. It should also reduce the town's reliance on the postal system. The website should have information such as the water reports, Montville Messenger, etc. on it. Beyond that, it should have updates from the department heads and the township administrator. Important information, such as the town's budget and the administrator's yearly report should be readily available.
The key to having a good website is that it be updated regularly. Unfortunately, ours has not been updated in YEARS. The last facelife our website had was in February of 2004 I think.
The recycling calendar is there in pdf format. See the Press Release dated Jan 4. It's also included in the Calendars section at the bottom right of the home page.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 13, 2007 6:30 PM
Robert - you know that the TC was going forward with updating the website when you used your expertise to come up with a lower cost alternative proposal, which we then took the time to evaluate. Thank you for the good ideas, but it's a little disingenuous to now cast stones on timing. We are working on it and should have the new website up in a few months. I agree with most of the postings about features to better serve our citizens. Thanx for the input. On another point - the TC meeting minutes are posted after they have been transcribed and approved at a subsequent TC mtg. That entire process usually takes 4-8 weeks.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 14, 2007 7:58 PM
Robert, Steve Moscone is still shown as mayor on this page, along with several people (myself included) who are no longer Open Space members. Also, Maritza Byrne has been chair of the committee since last year, but is not listed.
Jim, please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't minutes voted on to be accepted at the following Township Committee meeting? If so, why should it take up to 8 weeks for them to be posted on the Town website?
I see lots of agendas on this page, but don't see any minutes, even going back to January.
I first became aware of the township's direction with regard to the website at the February 27th meeting. Within 36 hours, I had identified a better approach for the town, and identified a local town using that approach. I sent all of that information to the town immediately, knowing that you'd already been moving on a solution.
At the next township meeting, two weeks later, I learned that none of the information that I'd sent had been reviewed, so I sent it to the administrator. After a month had passed from then, I learned that the contractor that had been selected (after no bid process) was now proposing the approach that I had suggested, but for $6,800. Frustrated, I sent out a request for bids on the internet for a site like the one we needed. Within 7 days, I had 5 bids, all for less than $800. My personal choice was a company that actually built the website that I requested, and hosted it on their servers. Their bid was $450, and included installation and some training. I reported this at the TC meeting on 4/24.
It has been 7 weeks since the town has had that information. What exactly needs to be investigated in order to move forward? Based on the information that I found out about the vendor that had previously been chosen by the town (which I forwarded to township officials and will not repeat here), we don't really investigate our vendors thoroughly. As I've said to the TC publicly, putting this website up should take a day or two, not months.
As for the minutes from the TC meetings: Jim, I think that you don't understand the complaint. The problem is not that it takes 6 or 8 weeks for the minutes to be posted, it is that the minutes have stopped being posted. The most recent TC minutes that are available are from 5/23/06. That's over a year old!
Ron - no, the minutes are not approved at the next meeting. At the last meeting (6/12) we approved minutes from March. Sounds like we can improve on the timeliness. I was told the latest approved 2007 minutes were posted, but I can't find them either - so I will investigate. I agree that the website could and should be enhanced - it's a matter of prioritization of TC and the Administrator 'to do' lists. One or a few citizen's priorities does not necessarily equate to the TC's priority list. We get input from a number of sources. That said, an updated web site is one of the new Administrator's goals for 2007. Robert - I appreciate your input, but you mistakenly presume that a recommendation from staff is an action taken. Per your post - "After a month had passed from then, I learned that the contractor that had been selected (after no bid process)". NO Contractor had been selected by the TC! This was a recommendation from staff to the TC. The TC and Administrator select the vendor, yet you incorrectly imply that the decision was made - IT WAS NOT! And a bid process is not required for that level of spending, yet you imply that there should have been one. Please be more careful in your posts. As you well know, there is a big difference between proposals/recommendations and a final decision via a public vote. Otherwise, your recommendations would have been too late. Finally, unfortunately the wheels of government do not turn as fast as any of us would like!
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 15, 2007 11:03 PM
Jim,
Thanks for responding. I understand you've had higher priorities and I support them fully; you've all done a fantastic job of getting our finances in order and addressing the root causes of the massive tax increases of the past.
However, you've got to admit that delivering timely information to Montville's citizens isn't just a priority of a few citizens. It was, in fact, part of the platform on which you ran. Montville lived too long with decisions that affected us all being made in the dark. The vast majority of us didn't learn about the horrible waste along with grotesquely over budget capital projects of past administrations unless they were reported in the newspaper or on a weblog.
And you agreed that those dark days should be in the past.
Posting minutes of Township Committee (and virtually all other township business) is vitally important to demonstrating good and transparent government. 4 weeks is too long, 8 weeks is atrocious, and one year is beyond description.
I'm sure you also agree that distributing information electronically - on the township website - is the fastest and most economical means of doing so. So why take a minute longer?
My suggestion is to get a proposal from the companies who did the Montclair and Randolph municipal sites and put together a citizens committee to evaluate them along with our town administrator.
You and the other Township Committee members have done a great job. You've got a great story to tell. Now you've just got to get a great town website on which to tell it.
Ron - I agree improvements are needed and have taken too long, but all citizens would not visit the website, particularly seniors. Therefore my (and the TC's) first communication priority was to get the printed format improved. Can we multi-task? Yes, but there was/is a lot to do. But, now it's on to the website. I will take your suggestion for a "Horrible Waste' feature so we can advise all citizens where we weren't wise with their money - just as the prior TC's would have done if there was a good website! (That was a joke!!!)
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 16, 2007 4:52 PM
Jim -
I think that your recollection of the night that the website was discussed is in err. As I recall - and I'm certain that the audio tapes would bear me out - the township website was on the agenda as a discussion item. The TC had a proposal from the town's IT guy for a $6,800 project. The TC asked him one or two questions, and then there was a pause, followed by a TC member suggesting that they call a vote on the issue. Nobody had asked any questions up to that point that could possibly indicate that they would not vote favorably on the issue. At that time, I spoke from the audience and requested to speak on the matter. Had I not done so, the vote would have been taken, and if anyone was going to vote against it, then they certainly had not brought up their concerns to their fellow TC members for discussion. Wouldn't that be irresponsible of the doubting TC member?
I'm not saying that there should have been a bid process for this project. I'm also, not saying that the TC should have known better. The TC's job is to ensure that the right people are in place, and then to trust them. It's not the TC's job to do the township personel's jobs for them. However, if we've got someone making a selection in a vacuum, and they're choosing a vendor that is 1500% higher than I found after doing minimal investigation, then we have the wrong person making that selection. In addition, as you know, Jim, my own cursory investigation of the that vendor revealed some highly suspect information about them.
Ron -
After I spoke with the township administrator, the township did contact the town of Montclair, and received a proposal from their consultant. The proposed price was ridiculously high. I met with the township administator, our IT guy, and the mayor, and suggested that they were better off going with one of the parties that had responded to my request for bids. I provided names of five companies, along with my personal assessments of them, but nobody has followed up with me to get specific contact information for any of these companies. Perhaps they've found them through another route, but that certainly seems to be taking the difficult path to get the information.
A Chat Forum the REQUIRES one to register and USE their REAL name, hard to take one seriously when one launches BOMBS and hides behind their keyboard and monitor.
Posted by
chris schlomann
on
June 18, 2007 7:42 AM
Robert - we appreciate your input about the Town's website - you obviously have expertise in this area that many of us do not. That said, your postings imply things that aren't true. You stated 'I learned that the contractor that had been selected (after no bid process)' but then you later state 'I'm not saying that there should have been a bid process for this project.' Your first comment certainly draws one to conclude that you think there should have been a bid process! And as already stated, no one had been 'selected' at that point. You also state 'Had I not done so, the vote would have been taken'. Please try to not read the minds of TC members (probably dull & boring or just plain confusing anyway!). There are many times when I want more info on a subject but do not sharply question the particular individual in attendance for any number of reasons, including that I try not to put Township employees 'on the spot' in a public forum - I prefer to follow up/ hold them accountable later. And I have made many motions to table the discussion until more info is available. And I can tell you that was where I was in my thought process that night! So to imply that a vote would have definitely occurred is misleading on your part.
I am open to suggestions from citizens and appreciate your input at meetings. But that method or a 1 on 1 conversation is much more effective with me than a blog posting that isn't necessarily clear and accurate. And you don't win friends and influence people with posting/implying: 1. Jim, I think that you don't understand the complaint... 2. I think that your recollection of the night that the website was discussed is in err... 3. Wouldn't that be irresponsible of the doubting TC member? But that's me...
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 18, 2007 8:47 PM
Jim-
The minutes are still one YEAR behind.
What exactly does the web administrator do all day? Do you think that this person is doing their job properly?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 19, 2007 5:14 PM
First, somehow TC minutes were provided but not posted to the website. I have raised that as a problem and it should get fixed shortly. Next, we will try to get the transcribing & approval of TC minutes accelerated so that they are posted on a reasonable basis. As to the direct ? - We don't have a full time web administrator. It is a small part of one person's job description. The Township Administrator is responsible for evaluating an employee's performance - not TC members. We don't fully know what other responsibilities/priorities an employee was given. I know a lot of other improvements were made in the Township's technology. And the TC did not, until recently, make upgrading the website a high priority. I do know that we made upgrading pc and other technology a priority so that employees could be more efficient. To us at the time, that was a bigger priority. I also believe we suffered from not having an Administrator for 6+ months, but I believe in the long run we'll be much better off with Mr. Bastone at the helm of Town Hall. There has been a lot to get done and the TC has tried to prioritize the best we could into the foreseeable future. We know somethings have yet to be done, but we hope our citizens recognize what has been done and will be a little patient in waiting for some of the other improvements that are on the way.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 19, 2007 8:22 PM
Jim, It's public information. What are we paying this guy?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 19, 2007 11:38 PM
Has anybody noticed that there is now a sign on the township's website that says that they are redesigning the website, and that it will be upgraded over the next few months?
That seems like an awfully long time to be putting in an upgrade (an upgrade that a vendor replied to me with a sample of overnight that would cost us $400). Jim, can you provide us with a plan and a timeline (which I'd imagine any large endeavor to be stretched out over months would have) for this work? Is the work being done internally or by a vendor? If done by a vendor, then how much are we paying? If done internally, then has anyone calculated the cost in internal effort of doing so?
why not give the township website to mike karlen as well, after all remember those anonymous websites the past few elections in town...wonder who put them up and hosted them.... reward him again
Jim, I will answer the question you posed about power and control and abuse in some later post. As you know Soussa is suing me personally so I don't want to connect the dots at this point but I will, you can count on it. He and some members of your organization have brought some of the worst and most vindictive politics to Montville Township that I have seen in the thirty-five years I have been involved and I do want to stress that it is only a handfull of people not your entire Republican Club and certainly not rank and file Republicans, many of whom have quietly voted and supported me over the years. I have been gratefull for that support and hope it will continue.
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
June 25, 2007 3:21 PM
Dan - You switched the topic to something on an old post just to keep your name in 'lights'? You make an accusation and then don't present facts when questioned? All I can say is that when I ran the mudslinging, misfacts & innuendos started and flowed heavily from the Republican (yes, Republican) primary candidate that you (yes, you a Dem) supported! YOU even came out with an ad against Deb & I in the Rep Primary - please tell us all what that was all about? Sorry that you lost your real running mate in the Primary (yes folks, Dan & Marie had run together successfully for their 3 prior elections). So now, either put your facts where your mouth is or... I hate to give you 'air' time, but your perception of reality needs to be corrected, at least for the readers here.
As to other posts, Mike Karlan took over when the prior publisher of the Mont. Magazine, which had more ads than info, wanted to raise the cost significantly. We approached Mike about doing it, altho recognizing that a start up would not generate as much revenue initially. So a budget was required (at about half of the proposed cost from the old publisher). In 2006 we did not generate as much revenue as expected and we exceeded the budget, but still less than the proposal from the old publisher. In 2007 we have secured more ad revenue and should fall within the $12K budget and, excluding our July 4th promo, ads were a much smaller proportion (1/3) of total pages than the old Mont. Mag. Now we use an unaddressed bulk mail process for reduced postage rates. An addressed mailing will cost significantly more per piece, but we plan to do a 'breakeven analysis', so that we know the number to surpass for e-mail delivery so that a combo of addressed mail & e-mail delivery comes to a lower cost overall.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 27, 2007 9:13 PM
Jim, Why don't you send out a post card (cheap) offering the MM via email or regular mail. (check a box) Then you can run some REAL numbers.
Dan, As the election gets closer, please tell us what are YOUR 3 biggest accomplishments as a Township Committee member. (Yours, not the Committtee's)
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 27, 2007 9:59 PM
Jim – I wanted to respond to your June 18th post by posting the excerpt from the township meeting that we were discussing. Unfortunately, the town has lost that portion of the audio tape from the April 10th Township Committee meeting. With that option unavailable, let me address your statements from that post: I had stated that the vendor had been selected without a bid process, yet had also said that a bid process was not necessary. The statements are not contradictory. My complaint is not that there should have been a bid process for the town website, but rather that there should have been a bid process for a project that we had no clue as to what was a fair price. To use an analogy, I would not say that it is necessary to collect bids when buying a ream of paper. However, if one of my employees came to me and said that they just bought a ream for $100, I’d say that they should have educated themselves by comparing prices. We got a bid for $6800 and were ready to go with it. When I requested bids for a similar project, not one of my potential vendors came in over $800. On top of that, this April recommendation was to go with a vendor who had been offering hosting services since February. Should we be placing our website – the interface between the town and the world – in the hands of someone with a whopping two months of experience?
You are correct that the TC had not actually selected the vendor when I interrupted. Had the tape of that meeting been available, you’d have heard that a vote was called, and I interrupted prior to it being seconded. Nobody had expressed any reservations with the recommendation. In fact, after I presented my information, the mayor said (in a section of the meeting that we do have the tape for) that the town’s technical expert would look into the alternatives, and that he should come back to the next meeting with a recommendation and he {the mayor} would probably endorse whichever one he {the town’s technical expert} recommends. You’re only recommendation was that we make sure that we had a contract with the vendor so that he could not raise his prices too much after the first year. If you wanted more information, then you didn’t indicate so in the meeting. If you had other reservations, then you didn’t state them. Had anyone else on the TC seconded the motion, then you would have only had a choice to vote yes or no. You can’t vote to table the issue one the motion is made, and you can’t have discussion at that time either.
As for your other statements, I said that you didn’t understand the complaint about meeting minute, because people were complaining about a lack of information on the website, and your defense was that it sometimes takes weeks to get posted. The complaint was that it NEVER gets posted.
Whether or not your recollection is in err can only be resolved by an audio tape that was lost. Clearly, one of us is not recalling events accurately. What a shame that we’re not broadcasting the TC meetings.
And finally, it is my position that it would be irresponsible for any member of any organization to let their colleagues vote on an issue if they had reservations that they had not stated.
I'm confused by your last post. You stated that "we plan to do a 'breakeven analysis', so that we know the number to surpass for e-mail delivery ..."
Who is "we"? I've spoken to the township administrator numerous times about the Messenger (as recently as last night), and he hasn't mentioned this. The Montville Messenger was discussed at a recent TC meeting, but this analysis was never suggested. When was it suggested?
It says a roller hockey faclity has been approved. where?? and when??
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 28, 2007 11:42 AM
Jim, I know it is not in your makeup to give the benefit of the doubt but I actually moved my post to this site because the other had 100 responses on it. I will ultimately connect the dots that I see but it will be in a larger forum than this one and not run by someone that is suing me. I ran in two elections against Marie and if by "her being my real running mate" you mean that I ran clean campaigns and didn't attack a woman that has been a backbone of the great Township that we have then I plead guilty but make no mistake about the fact that in one of those elections my running mate was my Long Time Friend and dedicated citizen Rosalee Keech. She and I worked very hard in that election and while Rosalee didn't make it we were a team in every sense of the word. As a matter of fact I came in at the top of that election so it wasn't even a case of me needing anyone's coat tails. As for any campaign ad that Mike and I ran, they were for the benefit of our positions but I will say that as a citizen and not a partisan I would have been happy to face Marie in the fall election and I am sure, knowing her it would have been a better campaign for all the citizens of Montville Township. I have always found Marie to be an honorable and honest person, so whatever squabbles you guys in the Republican Party had with her are outside of anything I could do anything about.
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
June 28, 2007 1:46 PM
Doesn't Dan get tired of playing the fool?
http://www.nj.com/forums/morris/
Posted by
Anonymous
on
June 28, 2007 7:14 PM
Robert - Per your post, if the motion isn't yet made, how can it be tabled? Under Robert's Rules of Order a motion to table is always in order and, therefore, can be made at any time a motion is before the body, period. The proper sequence is motion, second, discussion, motion to table. Which by the way, once a motion to table is made, discussion on the original motion stops until the vote on the motion to table is completed. (no fee for the lesson on Parliamentary procedure. I might note that I used to lead seminars on it). Once again you continue to be negative and continue to presume to know how I would act, what I would say or what action I would take and that I would be 'irresponsible'. I can tell your opinion is wrong! I knew that at least one other TC member within my earshot but not yours had reservations and, I believe, would have supported a motion to table. Did you know that? Let's keep the discussion to facts and not hearsay or YOUR speculations.
FYI, the TC did discuss using e-mail for delivery of the Messenger. I pointed out that there is a break-even point where e-mail delivery would eliminate enough of the higher addressed postage cost so that it could be cheaper than the bulk mailing. I stated that once we determined how many people wanted e-mail delivery I could calculate that break-even number. Just because you spoke with our Administrator and he didn't mention it doesn't prove your point. Stick with absolute, clear, irrefutable facts. Thanx.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 28, 2007 10:27 PM
Dan - No, I did not mean you ran clean campaigns - far from it! Why would you take out an ad trashing Deb & I with baseless statements right before the Republican Primary? Why not put out a positive ad about Dan & Mike? Why not - because you knew you had a better chance of winning in Nov. with Marie and her Republican friends than against new independent voices! Facts speak for themselves. Every running mate that Marie & You ran with in the last 3 Gen'l Elections lost such that she & you were the winners. In 3 separate elections weren't either one of you strong enough to carry their running mate? In fact, one of Marie's running mates pulled out after the Primary when she refused to run on a ticket with him, Marie instead announcing that Dan is unbeatable! And why would 'get out the vote' calls made from an office in town supposedly being made for Marie & her running mate actually be made in support of Marie & Dan? Is it just a coincidence that once Marie lost in the Primary you couldn't win in the General Election without the support of your so-called Republicans friends (of Marie)? Now you are running a re-tread campaign again with Mike. This time, try to keep the discussion to accurate facts and not your baseless perspectives. Voters understand the difference between those that make offensive, baseless statements and those that counter strongly in defense of their integrity - at least that's how many of us interpreted your last defeat. Refering to a prior successful but baseless 'connect the dots' scheme already points to your negative tactics. Run a good, clean, fact based campaign this time - Montville voters deserve it!
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 28, 2007 10:57 PM
It's good to see that page about the Open Space Committee members (and mayor) has been updated.
I understand that some sort of hockey facility has been discussed for the "Metro" property behind Joe's Pizza.
Jim, Easy guy, "not being strong enough to carry your running mate".
Does that mean that Deb was strong enough to carry you to victory? Congratulations to Deb. I hope you thanked her. She, by the way, is turning out to be a fairly independent Township Committee person and that is good for the Township. I know of no calls that were made for Marie and I and John Petrozzino dropped out for health related issues as far as I know and did have some serious surgery after that. The fact that Marie and I both won two elections, one of which Doc Purnell (at the time a 23 year incumbant) lost has much more to do with the voters wanting bi- partisanship than any conspiracy you imagine happened. As far as my so-called Republican supporters, I would be carefull about insulting people who put their votes over party. Party isn't everything on the local level. Many people vote for the person inspite of party. In any event every election stands on it's own and I don't look back and make excuses. Win or Lose I am always thankful for those people who approach me and say "even though I am a Republican I voted for you." After all in the end it is always about Montville Township.
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
June 29, 2007 2:12 PM
Jim -
I certainly never would have guessed that you were an authority on Robert's Rules of Order. I can only go by what I’ve seen at the TC meetings. Remember the reorganization meeting? Do you remember that nobody knew the proper way to nominate someone and had to try calling the town’s attorney for advice? Do you remember that nobody knew how to proceed when there was a tie for deputy mayor?
Regarding the break-even analysis that you’ve mentioned, I don’t recall that or finding out how many people would want the magazine mailed to them being mentioned at the meeting where the Messenger was on the agenda. When did this discussion take place?
Robert - why when corrected on a point that you made do you quickly point to another situation? I knew the proper procedure and even made a suggestion, but since my name was in the hat for a position it wouldn't have been viewed as an 'independent' answer by the other person, now would it? I did discuss the Messenger breakeven analysis. I am tired of this bickering - if you want to deal with a valid topic that affects our citizens I am happy to discuss. But not your recall of what happened at a TC mtg nor the performance of any individual TC member - irresponsible as you may think we are.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 29, 2007 11:18 PM
Dan - Deb and I worked as a team and helped carry each other. I had more votes in the Primary and she had more votes in the General Election, if you want to count votes. We were just satisfied that the voters saw through the baseless accusations made and put their confidence in us. I will convey your endorsement of Deb to her. Maybe someday I will earn such an endorsement from you!?! JP dropped out because Marie would not run on a ticket with him, period. None of your spin is correct. His health issues, as unfortunate as they were, came later. How could Doc, who served for 21 years be a 23 year incumbant at the time of a prior election? Bad facts, again! And I did not insult people who put their vote before party - that's your spin, again. In fact, 50 Dems converted to Reps to be able to vote for Deb & I in the Primary because we asked them to and they had faith in us. So I certainly value those voters that put faith in a candidate's integrity and intelligence before party. I merely pointed out that Republicans who supported Marie were courted by her team to support you when she had a Republican running mate and you had a Dem running mate. That is not how my definition of teamwork reads... But enough of this for now. Art/Tim & Mike/you will cover a lot of this in the upcoming campaign. Back to the topic -- There were a few good ideas for the website previously posted. Are there more out there?
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
June 29, 2007 11:38 PM
On topic: Why do a bunch of bloggers have to bring these faults to the attention of our Township leaders in order to get people to do their jobs? If this oversight is lacking on the website then what else isn't getting done?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
July 1, 2007 8:28 PM
That's a great question. It seems like the township runs in a reactive mode instead of a proactive one.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
July 3, 2007 4:32 PM
Jim -
You said on June 19th that the situation with the TC minutes not being posted would be rectified shortly. They have still not been posted, despite other recent updates to the website.
Also, you haven't responded to my questions from June 21st. You did say that you'd respond to non-anonymous questions. Since those questions were right on the topic of this thread, I think that we'd all like to see the answers.
Regarding your post from June 29th, I apologize for the delayed response, as I was out of town. I don't recall being corrected on something. You brought up Robert's rules of order, so I responded to it. Do I think that it would have been viewed as inappropriate for you to point out the correct procedure to follow even though you were in the running for a position? Since you had a copy of the handbook with you that night, I don't think that your pointing to the appropriate section would have been viewed as anything other than expediting the inevitable. If, as you said here, you had suggested it that night, then please produce the tape. I will be the first to admit that I was incorrect. Otherwise, it's just a claim that you're not willing to back up.
Meanwhile, I'll go get the tape from the meeting where the Montville Messenger was discussed, and look for the section where you mentioned doing the break-even analysis.
Robert - First, I don't micro-manage the Township Administrator. He was charged with updating the website among his other numerous priorities. We will evaluate his overall performance in his annual review. We ran without an Administrator for about 7 months and certainly some things did suffer. That said, you know as well as I that the tech person on the Township staff has been in the hospital, yet you can't help but try to drive home one of your points instead of having a little compassion for the man. Second, you twisted my words - I stated I would not reply to anonymous posts, but I didn't say I would respond to all non-anonymous posts. In fact, I even stated that freedom of speech allows one the freedom to chose when & when not to speak. Next, You want to nit pick on minute points instead of focus on the larger issue. I will not get into a he said/he said discussion. I don't need to go to a video tape - I know what I said. Finally, I choose to put my efforts into positive ways to better our Township; I try to avoid the negativity of publicly criticizing & pointing fingers, especially of Township employees. I try to appreciate what was done rather than what wasn't. Are there a lot of things that need improvement - sure. And we are addressing them on a priority basis. (Was it more important to get the website updated or a traffic study for a dangerous intersection to avoid future injuries? We picked safety). We realize there's more items to do and we're getting to them while addressing the top priorities and holding down spending increases. Your individual priority, as well as my own priority, does not always translate into what the collective TC views as the priority for the entire populace.
Posted by
Jim Sandham
on
July 5, 2007 10:43 PM
Jim -
It might have been micro-managing the situation for you to have promised to have the TC minutes posted 'shortly'. Now, seeing that it is done, is just good follow up.
You speak of compassion, but you're the one avoiding making a response by hiding behind an individual who was in the hospital. The individual in question went into the hospital on June 23/24th. I asked my question about the schedule prior to that, on June 21st. Four days later, the TC had a schedule presented to them by the Administrator (June 26th). You have it. What is the big secret?
I'll go get the audio tape. Of course, if you want to claim that you made statements that are not on the audio tape, that raises some interesting legal questions.
I'm becoming more and more aware of just why we aren't broadcasting our TC meetings.
What other recourse does a citizen have when an elected official uses his bully pulpit to disseminate false information - which he knows to be false - in a cowardly effort to discredit a political opponent?
I might have preferred to settle things with the execrable Dan Grant in a parking lot, but a libel and defamation case was my only legal recourse. 12:39 PM, June 02, 2007
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
July 6, 2007 6:09 PM
Why would we need to choose between doing a traffic study and the website? Does the same guy do both jobs?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
July 7, 2007 9:18 AM
Robert, You need to move on and focus your energy on something productive. You seem obsessed with this issue. Can you imagine if every resident complained about the issue that bothered them most. Why would anyone want to live in a town like that?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
July 8, 2007 7:25 AM
Every resident should do something about the issue that bothers them most.
And Robert not only complains, he volunteers to improve the situation.
Robert, Don't pay any attention to anonymous July 8th 6:25 am. Keep up the good work. Our town needs more people like you who are willing to challenge the politicians and the status quo. Thanks for all your hard work!!!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
July 8, 2007 3:53 PM
Ron -
Thanks for the kind words.
FYI... The individual responsible for upgrading the website is going to be out for an extended period of time. This past week I spoke to the Township Administrator and volunteered to build the website for the town, free of charge. The Adminsistrator is considering my offer, and I hope to be of service to the town.
I'll keep everyone up to date with any developments on this front.
This page is also out of date: Planning Board Members
James Glick, Chairman (Former consultant and manager with Union Carbide. Previous served on Board of Education, Montville Utilities Authority and Zoning Board)
I’ve reviewed the Township Committee meeting from May 8th when the Montville Messenger was discussed. The following are the highlights (in my opinion): o The Montville Chamber of Commerce submitted a letter to the town expressing concern over the price of advertising in The Messenger. o May 1st there was an internal meeting including the Township Administrator, Deputy Mayor Neilson, and Mike Karlin, publisher of The Messenger to discuss the future of the magazine. Mike agreed to look into the publishing costs to see if there were any areas where costs could be reduced. o The Administrator had 2 recommendations from the May 1st meeting: 1) Organizations that publish articles in the messenger should be apprised of the amount of space that they will be allocated. Apparently, they consistently want more space than they are allotted. 2) The town should establish a per-page charge for additional pages for organizations to purchase. The TC endorsed those recommendations. o The Spring edition cost approximately the price of postage. o Apparently, at one point in time, the magazine was published as a not-for-profit entity, which was cheaper. The Mayor suggested that someone investigate partnering with not-for-profit organization so that the magazine could be mailed at not-for-profit postage rates. This would be a partnership in name only, and would not cost the partner anything. o Committeeman Sandham praised the group that met on May 1st for getting the cost of publishing down to $2600 per issue. He also suggested investigating whether the town should be paying the same commission on renewal ads as for new ads.
During the open mic. section of the meeting, Tim Braden suggested allowing residents to subscribe to The Messenger via email. The Mayor said that option is on the town’s radar, and should be pursued down the road.
Notably, despite the fact that credit has been taken in this forum for suggesting that a break-even analysis be performed to determine the benefits of e-mailing The Messenger to some portion of residents, no mention of that was made, nor did anyone offer to perform that analysis.
Ron, would you be interested in hosting the audio of that discussion?
On Friday, I received notification from the Township Administrator that the individual responsible for updating the website had experienced a medical setback. In response, the administrator has instructed all township employees not to contact the individual until he has a clean bill of health. The implication here is that the town cannot move on my offer to build the website for them.
Doesn't this guy work FOR the township administrator? Why does the administrator need his permission? Will we ever get the website updated?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
July 23, 2007 11:52 AM
Am I missing something -- someone offered to build a new website for the town at no charge and the town has turned it down? I know that the politicians frequent this site -- can anyone explain?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
July 23, 2007 5:06 PM
Not only does that old adage "You get what you pay for" come to mind but you should ask Mendham Boro and Long Hill Township what happened when they accepted offers for a municipal web site at no charge.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
July 26, 2007 11:47 AM
Actually, the Mayor and Township Administrator offered to pay me for my services, but I told them that the task was so trivial that it wasn't worth getting into a financial transaction.
It was only when the town's internal person who was going to do this took ill that I offered to do it. As far as what the cost should be, I received bids of less than $500 to build this site. One vendor went so far as to build a sample.
I will ask your question though: What happened in Mendham Boro and Long Hill Township when they accepted offers for a free website?
Yeah, we certainly wouldn't want a site like Long Hill Township. They have recent minutes there from their township committee, zoning bd., bd. of adjustment. We, in Montville, prefer to be kept in the dark. We don't need easy access to township forms or applications like they do. And clearly, why would anyone need to look up their local ordinances on the website. If this is what they got for free, then we're much better off having our website with the 'under maintenance' sign.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
July 30, 2007 9:39 AM
How about a police/fire/first aid website as well, so us tax paying citizens of montville twp. can know what is really happening in the community. After all we do have the right to know. I'm sure we can benefit from all the things that happen on daily basis from those regards. Because we sure do not recieve enough info from the newspapers.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
August 3, 2007 12:19 AM
For what it's worth, at the TC meeting last night it was mentioned that the township's technology person is back from his leave and the new release date for the township's website is December 1st.
How many months does it take to develop a website? My son is a freshmen in high school, and he could put up a site in a day.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
August 18, 2007 5:32 PM
AMEN. Website STINKS. Are YOU listening? These people must be from the stone(d) ages. OR maybe they just don't want us to know what's going on!!!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
August 18, 2007 10:25 PM
Just make this the official town website and save all the money!!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
August 19, 2007 5:48 PM
In all fairness to Ron, this website isn't broad enough to serve as the township's website. I put together a map of what I think the town's website should contain back when I offered to do it for them, and it needed to cover a bunch of ground.
Having said that, I agree that this is something that can be put together rather quickly. In my opinion, having done this sort of thing before, this should take 1 day to decide on the sitemap (which identifies the type of material to include on the site and the navigation of the site) and 1 day to put it all together. At that point, you'd be ready for township officials to fill the site with the information. Porting over information from the existing site could give that effort a jumpstart, and would also take a day.
Robert is typically very accurate with his comments on these blogs. I do wish to clarify one small point. The township employee responsible for the new web site was not “on leave” unless that means two trips to the hospital in an ambulance which he is usually in as a volunteer first aider two nights a week.
If any of you recall the Township committee made the web site a strategic goal for our administrator to complete this year. The Township Committee just reviewed those goals last month and all are on track with the exception of the web site. Again what Robert states regarding the initial set up of the site is correct however the Township will be leaving much of the material content to the department heads. The learning process for that aspect of the web site will take some time. The current schedule as Robert reported is Dec 1.
I realize there is much talk about using other resources and re-tasking this project. However this project is staying with that same dedicated township employee.
Please be patient with us and I’m certain we will produce a great site that STAYS current.
Regards Art Daughtry
Posted by
Art Daughtry
on
August 20, 2007 11:03 PM
In response to Art's comment that all of the TC committee goals are on track except the web site:
I referr everyone to the 1/23/2007 meeting minutes which are now on the website (FYI: the website is finally current on the minutes -- Yeah!!). I am not going to debate whether they have made strides towards meeting all of the other objectives, but I will point out that the objective that Art refers to specifically states that a part of the goal is "broadcasting township meetings".
In what way have they made any strides towards that? I have read all of the minutes that are now online and it appears that the township committee has no intention of broadcasting the township meetings. According to the June 26th minutes (page 5), the TC is spending money to replace what appears to be the internal audio system -- rather than a video system (which it seems would solve both issues). While it is nice to be able to read the minutes, they are not transcriptions and it would be a much more OPEN government if the meetings were broadcast. Not all of us can get babysitters to come out on weeknights -- but many of us are interested in what our elected officials are doing.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
August 21, 2007 11:25 AM
Art, There are plug and play website templates available all over the web. You guys are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Robert is correct. This is a task which can be accomplished in less than a day. Why do you need eleven months? Take a look at any other town's website. We are in the stone age. We have volunteers build our playgrounds, clean our roads, drive our ambulances, put out our fires... You guys ran on a platform of better communication. Take Robert up on his offer and get the job done!
Posted by
Anonymous
on
August 21, 2007 8:19 PM
When ever government wants to complicate something it is because they really don't want to do it. You can watch East Hanover, Morristown and a few other Towns and Board of Eds on cable. With the internet it ought to be even easier to have a visual and audio record of the meetings. I wanted a taping of Montville meetings but some of the Committee members didn't want it so there were never 3 votes to just authorize it. Minutes are a reflection of what was said but nothing is as complete as what is actually said and the way in which it is said.
Posted by
Dan Grant
on
August 22, 2007 12:10 PM
Perkins is the wrong person for the job. How many township websites has he ever set up before?
Art is going to be really sorry he stuck his neck out for this him.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
August 22, 2007 8:20 PM
Dan, who were the ones who did not want the meetings broadcast?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
August 22, 2007 8:22 PM
A few clarifications:
1. My mention of the township employee being on extended leave rather than saying he was in the hospital, was out of respect for his privacy. He is a township employee, not a public official. His private business should remain as private as he wants. If other people want to identify him, that's their business, but I've respected his privacy and will continue to do so.
2. You can't use a plug and play template for the kind of site we need. I put together a sitemap for what I would have built, and although it was never reviewed by the town, I envisioned sections that would allow users to submit applications for permits, pay their taxes, handle traffic tickets, etc. The templates that exist support mostly static pages that provide text/pictures and simple navigation. Our current site already does that.
3. Updating the website's look and feel and keeping the information on the website up to date are two different things. Our current website has suffered from a lack of information updates for quite some time. While a new site could allow the department heads to more easily update their own sections, I would be cautious about expecting them to do so just because they have the ability.
4. On the subject of broadcasting the meetings: We now have the votes. In fact, I believe that a vote was taken late last year or early this year that approved videotaping the meetings. Now we're stuck funding it. I calculated a cost of under $1,000 dollars for doing this earlier in the year. At budget time, this had somehow blossomed into a $5,000 estimate for a system that would not work - I provided a written explanation for why it would not work to the town. The $5,000 line item was cut from the budget. It appears that we did have a line item for audio recording equipment that exceeded the $1,000 required for video, but my requests for specific information on this from the town remain unanswered. The question for the TC is why would we spend money on an item that does one thing, when we can spend less money on an item that can do that thing plus more? I've attended most of the TC meetings this year. It seems to me that when the TC wants to do something, they spend the money on it. When they don't want to do it, they either say that the money isn't available or say that it needs to be investigated.
To be clear, I'm not advocating that the TC spend money freely - I think that we already do to much of that. We should seek to cut spending - not just maintain the current levels.
5. The individual doing the website is just doing his job. He is not a public figure. From my brief conversations with him, I think that he is qualified to do a website - I just don't know that he has the time to do so, or if that is the most effective use of his time. Quite frankly, we had an estimate of $400 for this work that is cheaper than the cost of his time. Please refrain from criticizing someone about work that they haven't even done yet.
So when are we going to see this new website? Is there a date?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
November 26, 2007 1:46 PM
Hi
Should be sometime next week. The TC has been given access for evaluation and comment.
Regards, Art
Posted by
Art Daughtry
on
November 29, 2007 9:11 AM
Art, On Nov 29th you stated that the new website was about one week away. Now we are past that time - what is the new date? Do you have a release date for the website? If not, please tell us why.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
December 10, 2007 2:01 PM
I was informed by email that it should be available to the public on Tuesday, 12/11.
That makes sense since this was a major objective for our administrator for 2007 and we have a TC meeting that same evening.
That night is my last night as your mayor and I am preparing the end of year report on our administrators 2007 goals and accomplishments for introduction as well.
I found some errors last week and I trust you will find some so please reply to the webmaster with issues as per the instructions within the website.
Thanks, Art
Posted by
Art Daughtry
on
December 11, 2007 12:36 AM
Art -
Will that year-end report be posted on the website?
As I stated at the last Township Committee meeting, I'd like to see all of the documents that are being presented at the various town meetings available on the website. That'll save trees and disseminate more information.
To my knowledge, the only town board that has actually stated that they won't provide their information (minutes, etc.) on the web is the board of health. Hopefully, other boards will have a more progressive, open policy.
I am unimpressed with the new website. It looks prettier, but there is no additional information than the previous one had. It is still difficult to find what you are looking for, i.e. what few forms they have are listed under "forms" not under the dept they are related to. Sure seem like alot of time was spent and nothing accomplished.
