New Page 1

< Gossip in Union >

< Messages posted to thread: >

< From                                 Date        >

<                                      05-Jul-99 >

< FYI                                  09-Jul-99 >

< 911 from Ponder                      10-Jul-99 >

< Ray                                  11-Jul-99 >

< ponder                               11-Jul-99 >

< Ray                                  12-Jul-99 >

< Why?                                 15-Jul-99 >

< Informer                             15-Jul-99 >

< Wondering                            15-Jul-99 >

< taxpayer2                            15-Jul-99 >

< Shadows.                             16-Jul-99 >

<                                      16-Jul-99 >

< Rebuttal                             16-Jul-99 >

< Shadows                              17-Jul-99 >

< To Ray                               17-Jul-99 >

< hal                                  17-Jul-99 >

< hal                                  17-Jul-99 >

< Reminder                             17-Jul-99 >

< To Reminder                          18-Jul-99 >

< Ray                                  18-Jul-99 >

< FYI                                  18-Jul-99 >

< FYI-continued                        18-Jul-99 >

< Yeah, but                            18-Jul-99 >

< Attention to definitions             18-Jul-99 >

< To Ray                               19-Jul-99 >

< To Yeah,but                          20-Jul-99 >

< Yeah, but                            20-Jul-99 >

< And, also                            20-Jul-99 >

< Wondering                            20-Jul-99 >

< Yeah, but                            20-Jul-99 >

< Prediction                           20-Jul-99 >

< Yeah, but                            20-Jul-99 >

< FYI                                  21-Jul-99 >

< Yeah, but                            21-Jul-99 >

< Yeah, but                            23-Jul-99 >

< I wonder                             28-Jul-99 >

< I wonder                             28-Jul-99 >

< Not a kid anymore                    30-Jul-99 >

< to not a kid                         30-Jul-99 >

< Daily Planet                         31-Jul-99 >

< One Who Knows                        31-Jul-99 >

< To Informer:                         02-Aug-99 >

< not a kid anymore                    02-Aug-99 >

< not a kid anymore                    02-Aug-99 >

< not a kid anymore                    02-Aug-99 >

< Informer                             03-Aug-99 >

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >
< Date: 05-Jul-99 >

WHAT IS SCANLON'S ADDRESS. THANKS FOR THE INVITE.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >FYI
< Date: 09-Jul-99 >

Would you like to look up info on NJ laws? Try the NJ Legislature Home Page.

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/

(Sorry-this is not a clickable link. You must write it down and type it into your browser address bar manually)

At this site you will find the same up to date statutes, as can be found in our Library reference room, in the green hard cover books called NJSA. For example the "State Municipal Land Use Law" 40:55D-1 (et seq) can be found there, using the site search engine.

Enjoy.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >911 from Ponder
< Date: 10-Jul-99 >

I just posted to the "Is Union Changing" thread, because I am tired of all the Union bashing. It was editted instantly by ??????? WHY???????? I was referring to myself in the sentence. Post date is 7-10-99

I immediately posted a follow up to that thread to alert readers and posters alike. I will attempt to cut/paste that warning here, into this thread. The message follows:

"I don't believe it. I just sent a post and used the word W*h*I*t*e* (and just in case it disappears again, the word refers to a person who is not a person of color)and it is was deleted or editted without my knowledge. This happened to me once before. Someone said this is occuring at this Localsource Chat page, and I took it that it was a technical flaw in my software or my internet connection.

This is horrendous and uncalled for.

What ever happened to freedom of speech and the rights of citizens to express themselves. Is this an open forum or not. Hey RAY- You better address this, both on this thread, and with the muckity mucks who CONTROL IT!

Maybe we need some investigation by the FCC or some other body with authority.

I am totally disgusted."

NOW, BACK TO THE "GOSSIP" THREAD>

I hope all readers to this thread are alerted to this subversive activity by whomever is responsible. Is it possible that "REVERSE DISCRIMINATION IS PRACTICED HERE"? I have reviewed this submittal prior to clicking send. I only hope that it transmits uneditted. I'll never be sure again.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Ray
< Date: 11-Jul-99 >

To the last poster:

I understand your reaction, but there are special circumstances regarding the use of that word. In HTML, the mark-up language read by browsers to display web pages, one can insert a phrase, or "tag", to change the color of text read on this page. As the background is w-h-i-t-e, w-h-i-t-e text is rendered invisible.

Localsource was experiencing problems for quite a while, particularly on its Bloomfield threads, of pest posters who would change the text color to w-h-i-t-e to disrupt conversation. As this became a persistent problem, Localsource responded by changing the page's script to ignore that combination of letters. The side effect is that the word, when written out in all lower case, is omitted from posts.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >ponder
< Date: 11-Jul-99 >

Thank you for the explanation. I read the RULES when I first entered, and review them every now and then to see if anything is updated. I also reread the rules before posting my advisory, when I saw the deletion, to see if I was at fault. When I type into the Reply to Thread box, I only see a font format that looks like basic ascii text, similar to that found in Windows Notepad. As a casual user of computers, I have no knowledge of HTML or it's inherent weaknesses or other programming processes. If Localsource has a valid reason for inserting filters into the transmission process, then this information should be posted on the Rules page, along with any targeted key words that we should be aware of. I saw no such notice. Are there any other technical rules or limitations we should be minful of?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Ray
< Date: 12-Jul-99 >

I can't think of any other special phrases off the top of my head. As I said, this was a unique circumstance where a few jerks were just persistently trying to shut down conversations in Bloomfield by changing the text color. It's a relatively easy thing to do (you can still change text to red, blue, and green for example) and there isn't any obvious way to disable that function except by doing exactly what was done.

You make a good point about the rules page, which should be updated to reflect this limitation. The page does specify that localsource reserves the right to edit posts as it sees fit, though that's not exactly what's happening here.

In any case, if you do have a problem here that needs solving, I'd recommend you e-mail Worrall Community Newspapers at WCN22@localsource.com. I don't really get a chance to speak to anyone there much, anymore, so addressing this to me generally wouldn't help you as much as e-mailing your concerns directly to them.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Why?
< Date: 15-Jul-99 >

Why is the format of this thread differnt from the others? It does not wrap to the screen and I must scroll left to right to read each line. Anyone else having that problem?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Informer
< Date: 15-Jul-99 >

Word is that twp cannot meet its financial obligations to school board. Is way behind in payments and has been for a year. Millions involved. Breaking the law. Why? No money or hoarding it? Tax bills have not been mailed yet. Taxes due 8/1. Town will have to borrow money to pay school board and we will pay the interest on the loan. Isn't 1 party government great? Wake up out there.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Wondering
< Date: 15-Jul-99 >

Can the Informer above confirm the so-called information that he has posted--information not general knowledge? If the town has to borrow money, will the action have to be taken at a regular township committee meeting so all the world will know the amount and the reason for the action?

How reliable is the Informer's information?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >taxpayer2
< Date: 15-Jul-99 >

The County has not yet certified the tax levy. That is why the tax bills have not gone out. Of course, the town could do an estimated tax bill but if they know that the county will come through shortly it could be cheaper to do a tax anticipation note.(That is if they even need it.)

Don't know about the school payments. I don't recall any borrowing on the agenda recently so I would have to conclude that the "informer" is a Republican or a Russocrat. The school district has a surplus it can use. No one has gone without a paycheck in this district so I guess they know how to cope. Unlike "informer" there are reasonable people whom the voters have elected as well as responsible town employees that are looking out for our best interests.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Shadows.
< Date: 16-Jul-99 >

On the editorial page of today's Union Leader (7/15), we find two editorials. The first is a comment about the ongoing/re-occuring questionable placement of municipal Legal Notices outside of the township. One sentence reads: "In case the legalese in the previous editorial was difficult for some officials to follow ...." The second editorial is about considering a change in the form of local government. One sentence reads: "While the men and women currently sitting on the dais of the Township Committee are capable and qualified ....." .

First, I don't think we can have it both ways.

Second, this nonsense of placing Legal Notices outside the community, just goes to show you how little regard the powers that be have for the citizens, property owners, and taxpayers of this township. Most significant is anything to do with Bonds, Budgets, and Ordinances, and all of a class of items before the Planning and Zoning Boards. It is far to easy to miss a Legal Notice in those other papers, whereas in the Union Leader, all we need do is flip through the pages once a week. Of course there is always the minor problem of "48 Hour" Notices, but that is outside of this issue.

Third, the same powers that be, now in control, came into control during the Fusion years, after several years of in fighting in both political parties. Whether these people benefitted directly from the poison pen antic's of the poison pen duo, and the hack and slash writing in that vile periodical that circulated in this town during that era, is subject to opinion. Of note was the fact that at the time, that pseudo "news" magazine then benefitted, by a favorable interpretation/opinion by a township attorney, on it's eligibility and qualifications to print Legals.

Is this the same attorney who who gave the legal opinion referred to in the Memo, that paved the way for our Legals to be sent out of town as reported?

Fourth, a reference is made to the Star Ledger, an Essex County newspaper, and the Home News Tribune, a Middlesex County newspaper. Do the names Cryan and Lesniak mean anything to anybody? Is there a connection?

Five - While I can't verify how our municipal web site is set up (while I am writing these comments), and I also can not say that State law would be satisfied by doing so; if for example, the concern for publication of notices outside of the township is to attract the largest numbers of competitive bidders, Legal Notice publication could be supplemented by posting competitive bid requests at the municipal web site. Any contractor or professional service provider looking to participate, would soon learn to review the municipal web site. This way, people who don't have computers could rely on the local newspaper and the bulletin board outside of the Township Clerks office, and contractors and professionals who do have computers would also be better served, in that they most certainly wouldn't miss any posting for "request of recept for bids" in an out of township/county newspaper. Should the Township Committee support amending the state law to reflect modern technologies and so notify our state representatives?

Six - Lets not forget how the last Charter Study was defeated. First and foremost, upon submission of the majority and minority report of the Commissioners of the Charter Study (four to one), the public voted against the proposed changes. The timeline went something like this. First the citizens group was well on the road, with nearly sufficient signatures, to have the item placed on the ballot. Second, seeing that this was a probable surety, the then "Fusion" Township Committee intervened, sidetracking the grassroots effort, by calling for a formal Charter Study. Third, the poison pen duo spewed forth it's usual vile dialog throughout the process. While the final version submitted may not have had the perfect balance that would have assured it's passage, and as such was better defeated, the backroom effort put into misdirecting opinion as to the feasibility of a change in the form of government, was most certainly obvious to anyone who made the effort to see just what was going on.

The Union Leader has presented timely comment for all to consider.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >
< Date: 16-Jul-99 >

The Union Leader is turning into another Union Post, (has Lenny moved back into town)maybe that is why the town has stopped publishing it's legals there. Nega

tivity and yellow journalism is all they print lately!

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Rebuttal
< Date: 16-Jul-99 >

The previous post is outrageous.Don't know how anyone can put the Union Leader in the same category as the demised Union Post which was noted for printing unsubstantiated rumor, venemous character assassination and other garbage which was as distant from the truth as we are from the moon.

Anybody who finds inaccuracies in the Union Leader is free to request a retraction or correction. It is the standard newspaper policy. We have not seen any of those complaining about the Leader taking advantage of that opportunity.

The paper is just trying to cover the town. If negative things happen, it will appear in the press which has no obligation to cover up events we would prefer to keep quiet.

Be fair. More often there are positive reports about happenings we like to hear about. The Leader doesn't shape the news--it just tries to record and disseminate it.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Shadows
< Date: 17-Jul-99 >

I for one agree with "Rebuttal", except if anything, I have always felt that the Union Leader is far to polite in it's operation as an investigative news source.

On one hand, I understand and appreciate that they conduct themselves as professionals and don't needlessly subject the town to quasi reporting as did that vile rag that was fronted by LW and contributed to by his pal TK (the poison pen duo), but manys the time I wish they would take off the kid gloves and treat municpal and educational news with a little more grit.

A recent front page story reported that a federal oversight group is reviewing Union Schools Gifted and Talented program for it's admittance policy. It was an interesting article. I saw no reason to jump on the issue, as we must let the system work through the review process. However, the one thing that hit me immediately when I read that story was, "What was the THING that triggered the review and made the feds look at us?" This was missing from the story. Who, What, Where, Why and When.

The Union Leader, and we the readers, do have to deal with the Leaders revolving door of young reporters. Historically, local newspapers are a training ground for the young journalist. This does affect the continuity and consistency with which news is reported. I don't think I'd be wrong if I suggested that over the last 15 years, the Union Leader has had about 10 different reporters on assignment in this town. Some have been very good, and picked up on who's who, and what's what. Others have not gotten up to speed. Part of being able to report the present, is knowing more of the past history of the town scene, and not just what the current crop of politicians would have you believe. This seems to be lacking in some of these young reporters. We don't need to dwell on it, but there should be evidence that the reporters are aware of it.

The Union Leader is an important member of our community, for all the services it provides. The Star Ledger most certainly doesn't put much effort into covering any suburban community. Based on the comments by the blank poster of 7/16, I assume he/she is connected to the current crop of political power brokers. You know the old saying, "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen". I'll just add, don't think that your effort to discredit the Union Leader or your blatant attempt to misinform readers of this thread, or to misdirect opinion, will confuse any of us who actually know what's going on in this town. Just ain't gunna happen.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >To Ray
< Date: 17-Jul-99 >

You keep referring to the same innuendos about Petti. Well, what would you call the issue with the apartments? I call that a new issue, and I don't recall hearing your opinion on that.

In case you aren't aware of the issue, Petti got variances to build second apartment buildings on two existing apartment lots. Our zoning board has never before given out variances to construct two apartment buildings on one lot. Only someone with Petti's clout behind the scenes could get variances like that.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >hal
< Date: 17-Jul-99 >

only a minority of people wanted a change of goverment.with or without the so called poison pen the losers still would have lost.their next try will also be defeated by the voters.look at all the trouble hillside is in from their change of goverment,their town seems to be out of control

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >hal
< Date: 17-Jul-99 >

im not taking issue with the union leader but common sense tells you that the leader sells 6500 papers to 50000 people in union once a week.on the other hand the ledger sells 25000 papers a day in union so where would you most likely see a add.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Reminder
< Date: 17-Jul-99 >

hal forgets that the law designates where legal advertising must go. If the Union Leader is correct, and the requirement is to use a newspaper published in the same county as the municipality, then I believe we have no choice but to use the Leader.

All round, it's cheaper to comply than to get involved, possibly, in yet another law suit.

Transferring the legals out of county comes across as an expensive act of political back lash. Not smart politics.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >To Reminder
< Date: 18-Jul-99 >

I agree completely. I still remember the politicians trying to exert influence over the Leader by yanking the legals and giving them to Loathable Lenny whenever they were displeased with a Union Leader news story. Lenny could always be depended upon to support whoever had power and would support Lenny's ravenous gambling habits, etc.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Ray
< Date: 18-Jul-99 >

First of all, the law requires only that it be commonly distributed in the municipality, not that it be published in the same county. Were that the case, then counties like Cape May, where there are no daily newspapers published, would never be in compliance.

As to the zoning issue, I made my position on that clear. The problem, as I see it, is not that Petti was granted a variance, but that anyone would ever be denied one for using their property as they see fit. No one has any claim on the utility of a property of another save for those externalities, such as parking, utilities and groundwater, whose essential ownership has been transferred to communal, rather than private, interests.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >FYI
< Date: 18-Jul-99 >

Ray does not quote the law accurately with regard to the printing of legal notices. Where does he find the citation that the newspaper need only be "commonly distributed in the municipality?"

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >FYI-continued
< Date: 18-Jul-99 >

The law on legal notices states that a municipality may publish its legal advertising outside the county IF there is no qualifying newspaper serving that municipality which is published in the town itself or in the county.

So if Cape May has no qualifying newspaper in its own county, it has no alternative but to go beyond it own borders.

Check it out!

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Yeah, but
< Date: 18-Jul-99 >

The Star-Ledger is deemed to be distributed in Union county, as well as in the township.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Attention to definitions
< Date: 18-Jul-99 >

"Distributed" and "Published" have two very different meanings. The law says "Published."

Check it out.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >To Ray
< Date: 19-Jul-99 >

I'm surprised at your statement that any property owner may do as he sees fit, in justifying putting a second apartment building behind existing buildings on his property on Chestnut Street. The fire department likely cannot reach the second building if there's a fire in the first (closer to the street). Those zoning laws are there for a purpose!

Using your argument, why doesn't every homeowner in Union build a second house on his lot, behind the first house and right on the property line? That is equal to what Petti just did, courtesy of his pals on the zoning board.

Never mind that we'd double the population density of our town, number of cars on the street, kids in school, etc. Ray, there is a reasonable basis for a lot of zoning laws.

Unfortunately, what we often have with the Union Zoning Board of Adjustment is a perversion of the laws. Those with political power can flaunt the zoning laws, while the average Joe Blow is lucky to get a small variance that doesn't affect anyone else without paying $20,000 in attorney and expert witness fees.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >To Yeah,but
< Date: 20-Jul-99 >

Since you persist in doubting that the township is in violation of law in withholding legal ads from Union Leader, you might want to check Title 40:53-2 of the state law which states clearly that these ads "shall be published in at least one newspaper published and circulating in the municipality, and if there be no such newspaper, then in at least one newspaper published in the county in which the municipality is located and circulating in the municipality."

Are you going to be happy to foot the bill for a losing law suit when the Leader goes to court?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Yeah, but
< Date: 20-Jul-99 >

What does the word "published" mean? Does it have to be printed in the municipality? Is the UL printed in Union? Written in the municipality? Are all the stories written in Union? Wadda ya mean "published"? Does publised mean the main address of the newspaper?

It may be that if the Union Leader were to win such a contest, it would find that the other Worrell newspapers are not considered "published" in any town, other than Union. Isn't the purpose of the law to get the word out? The Union Leader is a weekly. Does that make a difference?

If the Union Leader sues the town, how many of the public would look kindly on that?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >And, also
< Date: 20-Jul-99 >

Take a look at 35:1-2.2 to see more. The law is old and a court case may not be the slam dunk that the Union Leader would hope.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Wondering
< Date: 20-Jul-99 >

Are we headed into a discussion of what the meaning of "is" is?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Yeah, but
< Date: 20-Jul-99 >

I don't think so. The question revolves around what the word "publish" means in the law. As it turns out, the acts which make up "publishing" are many. It isn't as simple as some would have us bleieve, or would like to believe themselves.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Prediction
< Date: 20-Jul-99 >

Court of law will have no trouble with the word "published." Those Worrall newspapers covering other Union County towns are still in compliance with the law if there are no newspapers published within the municipality. As for the law being old--well, so is the Constitution.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Yeah, but
< Date: 20-Jul-99 >

What does the word "published" mean?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >FYI
< Date: 21-Jul-99 >

"Publish" is what the Worralls do at 1291 Stuyvesant Avenue, Union, N.J.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Yeah, but
< Date: 21-Jul-99 >

Does that mean they don't do it anywhere else? Or are there some elements of "publishing" that they do in other towns that would permit them to argue that they publish in those towns, too?

Seems to me that if the Worrells can say they publish papers in other towns, then the Star-Ledger can argue that it publishes in every town in the state.

Just what are the specific activities that the Worralls do at 1291 Stuyvesant Avenue that constitutes "publishing"?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Yeah, but
< Date: 23-Jul-99 >

Well, just what is it that the Worralls do?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >I wonder
< Date: 28-Jul-99 >

Why was any inference to Worrall and/or publishing the local papers (Union Leader, e.g.)? Could the Webmaster be prejudicial? Yet other threads remain virtually untouched! Ray..........what can you tell us about this?

Did someone hit the nail on the head?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >I wonder
< Date: 28-Jul-99 >

Mr. Webmaster.........I wish to insert the word removed in my last message! Amazingly.........all the others appeared magically???????

I still wonder!

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Not a kid anymore
< Date: 30-Jul-99 >

What's the story about a trip to Atlantic City for the politicians and their use of the Senior Citizen bus. This was not how the bus was intended to be used but leave it to the politicians to find a way to entertain themselves at the expense of the public. I wonder if the insurance covering accidents involving this bus is covered for this type of use. I'D LIKE T KNOW WHO AUTHORIZED USING THE SENIOR CITIZEN BUS FOR A TRIP LIKE THIS.

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >to not a kid
< Date: 30-Jul-99 >

any proof? When was the trip?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Daily Planet
< Date: 31-Jul-99 >

Dog Herpes Scare

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >One Who Knows
< Date: 31-Jul-99 >

Did anyone here hear that Carol Segal may run for Mayor of Union. If that is true, that would drive Cryan and Petti absolutely insane!

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >To Informer:
< Date: 02-Aug-99 >

Whats the latest on the township paying the school system. Have they caught up yet?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >not a kid anymore
< Date: 02-Aug-99 >

The trip was a few weeks ago on a Friday night. The group of municipal employees were hosted by Phyllis M, the Supervisor of Senior activities. They went to AC or the track. A memo on Township letterhead invited employees on this outing. Nice use of municipal vehicles!! Who's watching the store!?

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >not a kid anymore
< Date: 02-Aug-99 >

< Subject: RE: Gossip in Union >
< From: >Informer
< Date: 03-Aug-99 >

Caught up? Have the tax bills gone out yet? Noooo. The twp won't be caught up with paying the schools for months . They've already been in arrears for over a year costing the town and/or boe mucho in interest. It's that great one-party government that everyone wanted. No checks and balances. Look at the bus issue mentioned above. Same thing. They do what they want when they want.