SHARE:  

RE-ORG: IN 3 MINUTES

THE PATH OF TEANECK GOVERNANCE CHANGES



PUBLISHED BY TEANECK VOICES

1/08/2023

Contents


Re-org: In 3 Minutes the Path of Teaneck Governance Changes

Electing a Mayor

See How They Work: Council’s Standing Sub-committees

          & Advisory Board Liaisons

Making a New Development Policy: A Complex Challenge

Our Board of Education Smoothly & Efficiently Re-organizes

A Compelling Coincidence: We Need AED’s

        (Automated External Defibrillators)

This Week in Teaneck – 1/8/to15/2022 


Contacting Teaneck Voices

RE-ORG: IN 3 MINUTES

THE PATH OF TEANECK GOVERNANCE CHANGES


It was clear since the results of the November Council elections were finalized that Teaneck’s Council was going to be dramatically affected by the election win of 3 female members of the Rise for Teaneck slate. But the slim victory of Elie Y. Katz over that slate’s 4th candidate, Chondra Young, appeared to cement the continuing hold by the majority of the prior Council. Rumors flew throughout the Town for 2 months as to who the new Council would select – from its own members – as Mayor. So, after the swearing in and Athenian oath, came this astonishing 3-minutes:

The large assembled re-organization meeting crowd in the Rodda Center gym appeared to respond enthusiastically to this result. It did seem to implement into Council power relationships what the Township’s electorate had signaled. For the first time, we had a Latino mayor. But recriminations and accusations soon flew – as so often happens given the process of Mayoralty selection which flows from Teaneck’s version of the Faulkner Act. An example of how disconcerting for some was Council woman Orgen’s decision to request that the following statement be included in the draft minutes of this Council session. 


·       After the meeting, Councilwoman Orgen provided the attached note regarding the vote: "At our January 3rd reorganization I was shocked by the nomination of Michael Pagan for the position of Mayor. I was shaken by his voting for himself next to me after giving his support to Councilman Schwartz. I checked my own name on my ballot and only when you called the roll did I realize what I had done. At no point did I intend to vote for anyone other than Mark for Mayor, and while I can’t change my vote, I ask that this statement be included in the minutes."


Is this the best way to choose a Mayor and select the distribution of Council decision-making authority?



Teaneck Voices – in the next story in this edition (Electing a Mayor) asks its readers to suggest – and proposes - a better way!

ELECTING A MAYOR

In Teaneck’s Council-Manager form of government, the role of Mayor, is essentially an honorary position with NO special privileges. The Mayor presides over council meetings, prepares the meeting agendas with the Manager, signs contracts, is the Class 1 member on the Planning Board, and can perform marriages for a small fee.


The Mayor has no veto power, and her or his vote counts the same as every other councilmember’s.


The voters DO NOT elect the Mayor. The Mayor is elected by the 7-member Council every two years (even-numbered years) after the municipal election. So, all it takes to become the Mayor of Teaneck is the vote of 3 of your colleagues and yourself – for the privilege of being called “The Mayor.”


Yet at almost every celebratory Council Reorg Meeting, the election of the mayor is fraught with drama – anger, mistrust, suspicion playing across the faces of the seven elected residents who represent The People’s Choice. The January 3, 2023 Reorg was no exception. Former DM Mark Schwartz expected to be elected mayor; new mayor Michael Pagan received the decisive 4 votes.


Why does this happen?


Prior to 1988, the entire 7-member council was elected every four years, and the highest vote-getter was usually elected mayor by fellow councilmembers. This accepted procedure made great sense, particularly because it reflected the voters’ choice.


In 1988, the rule of election was changed to staggered seats elected every two years, with 3 and 4 members being elected in alternate elections. So a mayor had to be elected every 2 years.


Suddenly the rule of thumb – highest vote getter – couldn’t work. The recipient of the greatest number of votes in one election, was not a candidate in the following election. So every two years there was a different highest vote getter. So what to do?


There are about 6 weeks between the election and the Reorg meeting. During that time the newly elected members and the “old” members from the previous election, engage in ”negotiations.”

Those who would like to be mayor, let it be known and start lobbying their 6 colleagues. As might be expected old slights, special alliances, who supported who, and other personal concerns burst into bloom. Often the council breaks down into two opposing teams, and then the horse-trading begins: I’ll give you a Planning Board member if you vote for me for mayor; I won’t vote for you for mayor, but I’ll support your buddy if you support my development plans, etc.


The result is sometimes a surprise (as happened January 3) and sometimes it is predictable. But the overwhelming outcome is a council fraught with tension, whose differences have become magnified. The 7 councilmembers who should be cooperatively serving all the residents of Teaneck too often begin their collaboration with resentments and tension.


What are we doing to ourselves? Does this process make sense? Could we elect our mayor and deputy mayors differently?

Here’s one suggestion:

·       Publicly state that the mayor and deputy mayors positions have 2-year terms (since a mayor must be elected ever two years).

·       Elect the highest vote-getter of each election as mayor to serve for 2 years. The second and third highest will become the 1st and 2nd deputy mayors. No one will serve for more than 2 consecutive years as mayor or deputy mayor.


No longer would 6 weeks of horse trading damage the collegiality of the councilmembers. The people of Teaneck (hopefully) will get a fresh Council ready to work together with enthusiasm rather than nursing old resentments which will play out on the residents.


Readers, what do you think? Please send your ideas for how to elect a mayor and deputy mayors to teaneckvoices@gmail.com.

SEE HOW THEY WORK: COUNCIL'S

STANDING SUB-COMMITTEES& ADVISORY BOARD LIAISONS

Teaneck Voices celebrates the new council for emulating the Board of Education in establishing standing subcommittees for critical responsibilities of the governing body. The subcommittees and membership nominated at the January 3, 2023 – and to found in a resolution to be included in the 1/10/2023 Council consent agenda - are the following:

Budget:                       Gee, Goldberg, Schwartz        

Cannabis:                   Belcher, Goldberg, Pagan

Zoning:                        Goldberg, Pagan, Schwartz – Alternate: Belcher

Parking:                      Goldberg, Katz, Schwartz

Leaf Collection:         Goldberg, Katz, Orgen

Personnel:                  Gee, Katz, Pagan

Affordable Housing:  Belcher, Pagan, Schwartz

Leadership Teaneck: Gee, Goldberg, Katz


We now are waiting to hear the policy applied to these standing subcommittees:

·        What are the responsibilities and limits of the standing subcommittees?

·        How often will they meet?

·        Will they report all their meetings to the full council in a public meeting? If yes, how often? If no, why not?


The Council names a council liaison to every Advisory Board. Advisory Boards are referred to by Acronyms, making it difficult for many residents to know what boards exist, and on which they might like to apply to serve. Here are the Teaneck Advisory Boards with full names and council Liaison nominees to be approved if Res. 16-2023 is approved on 1/10/2023:


Advisory Board on Community Relations (ABCR )                     Gee

Hackensack River Greenway Advisory Board (HRGAB):          Pagan

Parks, Playgrounds, and Recreation Advisory Board (PPRAB)   Goldberg

Municipal Open Space Trust (MOST):                                              Goldberg

Patriotic Observance Advisory Board (POAB):                            Orgen

Pride Awareness Advisory Board (PAAB):                                    Pagan

Senior Citizens Advisory Board (SCAB):                                         Gee

Shade Tree Advisory Board (STAB):                                                 Pagan

Social Services Advisory Board (SSAB):                                          Gee

Stigma Free Advisory Board (SFAB):                                               Belcher

Municipal Alliance Against Substance Abuse (TMAASA):    Orgen

Youth Advisory Board (YAB):                                                             Katz

Board of Education (BOE):                                Gee, Alternate - Orgen

Cedar Lane Management Group (CLMG):                                     Belcher

Chamber of Commerce (Chamber):                                                Belcher

Environmental Commission (EC):                                                   Goldberg

Historic Preservation Committee (HPC):                                      Belcher

Library Board (LB):                                                                            Orgen

Planning Board (PB):     Schwartz                      

  

While in some contexts, like corporate or Not-for-profit organizations, Advisory Boards are composed of selected experts who provide expertise, current research and current practice to leadership and stakeholders of their organizations, Municipal Advisory Boards are composed of interested residents of the community who want to engage in productive discussion and brainstorming ideas in a particular area.


Likewise, the Council Liaisons to subcommittees are not experts, but essentially elected leaders who have interest in a particular area.


Liaisons are NOT members of the Advisory Board, they do not play any leadership role and do not participate in discussions. The liaisons job is to report to the Council in public session exactly what has taken place in the previous Advisory Board meeting.


Teaneck is missing one statutory advisory board allowed by the State (NJSA 40:55D-39f) & required by the Township Code (https://ecode360.com/13627846 )

i.e. : The Site Plan Review Board (related story on development in this edition of Voices)


MAKING A NEW DEVELOPMENT [POLICY:

A COMPLEX CHALLENGE

As resident after resident spoke in Good and Welfare to cheer the Town’s new leadership, a consistent commentary emerged: Seize the opportunity to stop the prior Council’s fiscal and societal lunacy of using Areas in Need of Redevelopment (AINRs) to implement Teaneck’s development. Those views were explicitly or implicitly mirrored in the comments of our 3 newly-elected Councilwomen.


But opening the path to that evolved development policy will not be simple. There are procedural roadblocks facing the new Council that are not broadly understood. Here are several:


·       Appointment of the 9 Planning Board (PB) members is a complex process. Suffice it to say that had new Mayor Pagan not on January 3rd selected C. Denise Belcher to take his Class I seat on the current PB, every single PB member and alternate for the next 6 months would have been a male!! 

The prior Council had not changed the term dates for PB members to reflect changes to the May to November election date – so no current PB term ends until 6/30/2023 and several extend for several additional years


·       To Voices knowledge, none of the current 11 PB members or alternates has professional or educational qualifications. While no qualifications for PB members are identified in law or code, there are specific qualification requirements for the Site Plan Review Advisory Board members (see below). Teaneck had not had a Site Plan Review Board since 2016.


For fully six months, the Council will have little capacity to alter the membership of a Planning Board that obediently accepts a development policy which has defined 9 separate areas of our town as blighted, and , has supported the previous Council as it has – UNDER THE COVER OF SECRECY - delivered a giveaway set of tax breaks to developers who then finally go to the current Planning Board to receive all important site plan approval.

 

How does that PB site plan approval process currently work? Let’s take a look at the Board’s most recent site plan approval.

·       The site plan approval was given for the 2nd giant rental residential building on Alfred Avenue to the same developer as the first AINR facility on Alfred Avenue. It was given non-competitively by Council. The Council had – before the PB met on 12/8 - already given the developer a 2nd PILOT (Payment In Lieu of Taxes) judged by Voices experts to be another huge giveaway. 


  • No information about the Town’s “review” approval process for that PILOT is even now currently obtainable via OPRA.


·       This PB meeting took place on December 8 – at the Rodda Center with no internet access and only an audio of its proceedings.


·       The agenda for the meeting had appeared on the website less than 36 hours prior to the meeting (see Teaneck Voices – Click Here.)

  • Even then, the actual order of business did NOT follow the website published agenda – but was changed (virtually inaudibly).

·       A total of two Town (non-Board) residents were in attendance for this meeting, only one of whom spoke.

·       The developer’s presentation went almost undiscussed/ unchallenged by the PB for 1 ½ hours. Several current PB board members finally did challenge the developer to explain the plan’s severe lack and poor arrangement of parking spaces (since there is no parking on Alfred Avenue). The developer himself spoke and refused to promise to set aside any spaces for visitor parking. At which point:


·       The Board did then vote unanimously to approve this seriously flawed site plan. Yep! Unanimously!


For residents with the tenacity to listen to the PB’s 2 hour “hearing” on this important Alfred Avenue site plan Click Here and move the cursor to 28min.  (Why not check the PB minutes since it has been a month since this 12/8/22 meeting? You must be jesting – no PB minutes on the website since October!)

What CAN be Done as we await development policy change? Several things:


·       Keeping Track of Upcoming Development Actions

OBVIOUSLY both the new Council and INVOLVED residents must be extremely attentive to the agendas of both the Council and the PB to be sure to be in attendance at meetings where elements of this AINR development regime are TO BE under consideration for specific areas or lots.


That means that Council must be VERY INSISTENT that the Township Clerk and Building Department get agenda information on the Town website in time for public pre-review of upcoming action. Teaneck Voices will continue to review the State’s public notice website – where notice requirements are somewhat better met than on the Town website. But all residents can also readily do so (Click Here for that website)


·       Assure that Council Immediately Empanel the Town Code-Required Site Plan Review Advisory Board (SPRAB). The Site Plan Review Advisory board is the ONLY Advisory Board that requires members who have knowledge, expertise, and experience in relevant fields like architecture and engineering.

 Voices has for 15 months asserted that both the quality and legality of site plan approvals – and the development process generally - would be dramatically improved if before the Planning Board site plan approval hearings took place, they had received the review from this SPRAB. Click Here and go to the article, Teaneck’s Land Use Decision -Making – Make it Competent, Make it Legal

Were this Board to be empaneled, the entire process of effectively showing site plan consistency with the Town’s Master Plan, obtaining input from the Environmental Commission and Historic Preservation Commission would ACTUALLY be done – smoothly and effectively. The empaneled Board would have to follow all of the Open Public Meeting Act (OPMA) rules that other Advisory Boards currently do not!


In fact, every single site plan approval application seen by the PB in recent years has an empty page – where the format for the missing SPRAB recommendations were to have appeared – but never do. The SPRAB does not even currently appear in the LIST of advisory boards on the Town website! Why?

Because this required Teaneck Advisory Board (Click Here for the Code discussion) has not functioned for 7 years – since 2016 - because the prior Councils simply did not empanel ANY of its 9-members or two alternates.

 

The Township Attorney was informally asked whether doing so was required and claimed it was not. Apparently, Attorney Shahdanian did not bother to produce a written opinion and provided no public explanation for his decision.

 

Council’s Empaneling this Advisory Board could begin immediately, although it would take several meetings to fill the seats with its required set of two architects and two engineers.

 

What hangs in the balance? Teaneck’s entire development as a contemporary suburban community competently charting a course of land use and open space planning consistent with what its electorate has just clearly decided in November! 

OUR TEANECK BOE SMOOTHLY & EFFICIENTLY RE-ORGANIZES

Just 24 hours after the Teaneck Council’s electrifying reorganization, the Teaneck Board of Education met on January 4 at Teaneck High School - and by zoom – to swear in its newly elected members, to select a President and Vice President of the Board for 2023, and to determine which of three applicants would replace – for 2023 – Danielle Gee who had just been sworn in to the new  Town Council.


Residents who follow the Board of Education may well want to watch the Board move through these processes with deliberate but smooth steps. 

And they can do so by watching the first 10 minutes meeting’s video Click Here where Interim Schools Business Administrator and Board Secretary, Dora Zeno, announced the results of the November BOE elections and oversaw the swearing in of the 5 newly elected members. 


She then (at 11 minutes of the video) conducted the process whereby Sebastian Rodriguez was again nominated and then unanimously elected as Board President for 2023 followed by the nomination and unanimous election of Victoria Fisher as Board Vice-President. 


At 47min/30sec of the video, newly selected Superintendent Dr. Andre Spencer gave a five-minute address describing his enthusiasm for the Teaneck schools and his selection to be its executive head.


After the conduct of various resolutions, the Board went into closed executive session seeking to select a new ninth member to complete in 2023 the term of Danielle Gee. The Board then returned at 1hr/26min/30sec of the meeting’s video to announce the selection of a Nina Hosein (active resident and Newark Schools teacher) for that final Board position. The result is the following image of the complete Board of Education  

A COMPELLING COINCIDENCE:

(AUTOMATED EXTERNAL DEFIBRILLATORS )

Just 3 weeks ago, December 19, 2022, Teaneck Voices published “A Special Moment in the Week That Was – Our Youth Advisory Board” about 5 members of the YAB presenting a plea to Council to have Automated External Defibrillators (AED’s) available on Teaneck’s athletic fields to resuscitate anyone going into cardiac arrest.


Just 1 week ago, Monday, January 2, 2023, a 24-year-old safety for the Buffalo Bills, Damar Hamlin, fell to the ground in cardiac arrest after a tackle in which the opposing player’s helmet struck his chest. The presence of an AED and a well-trained medical team literally brought Hamlin back to life by restarting his arrested heart.


The coincidence was stunning enough, but made more compelling this weekend when cardiologists explained that the likely cause of Hamlin’s condition was commotio cordis, a phenomenon that occurs as a result of a sudden blunt impact to the chest during a specific time of the heart’s rhythm cycle. Commotio Cordis used to be nearly always fatal but awareness has improved survival to about 60%.


Why does the diagnosis of commotio cordis make the Youth Advisory Board’s plea so very compelling?

It is because its most frequent victims are young athletes between the ages of 8 and 18.


   From the University of Connecticut, Korey Stringer Institute:

      Commotio Cordis is seen mostly in athletes between the ages of and 18 who are  partaking in sports with projectiles such as baseballs, hockey pucks, or lacrosse  balls. These projectiles can strike the athletes in the middle of the chest with a low  impact but enough to cause the heart to enter an arrhythmia. Martial arts is a sport in which a strike of a hand can also cause the heart to change its rhythm. Without immediate CPR and defibrillation the prognosis of commotio cordis is not very good. 


It is important to note, as well, that there are cardiac electrical disorders like Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome which can cause sudden death of young athletes on the field or court. Most college and professional athletes are now screened for such disorders, but elementary and high school athletes are not. The reason for that policy is a concern that false positives would keep too many young people from participating in sports.


Among the Institute’s recommendations for prevention of Commotio cordis and other electrical cardiac abnormalities are:


  • Educate coaches, parents, and athletes how to perform CPR and use an AED
  • Educate coaches, parents, and athletes of signs of commotio cordis
  • Have an AED accessible near playing fields at all times
  • Ensure coaches know where to locate the AED
  • Ensure there is an Emergency Action Plan in place

A key message in the Youth Advisory Board’s presentation was that each person should imagine that such a disaster could happen to them or someone they loved. It is likely that had Damar Hamlin heard that presentation 3 weeks ago, he would have said, “That could never happen to me!” But it could and it did.


So, Another Expense for the Teaneck Taxpayer?


AED’s cost about $1,500 to $3,000 each. Not really so much, but on top of Teaneck’s debt-laden budget, it feels painful. Can we find some budgetary “waste” that we can use to provide this critical preventative care to our young athletes?

As was suggested in the January 3rd Reorganization Meeting Good & Welfare, YES, WE CAN!


Teaneck Voices frequently has raised the issue of Councilmember Elie Y. Katz’s grandfathered receipt of $35,000 annual full family healthcare. This benefit was discontinued for all municipal councilmembers in 2010. Only councilmembers who remained on the council after 2010 were grandfathered under the new law, so C. Katz has received this benefit -- that no councilmember elected from 2010 on gets -- for (so far) 12 more years.


If C. Katz would graciously relinquish this inquitable benefit, or if 4 councilmembers would vote to end it (as has been done in Rockaway Township and other municipalities in New Jersey), Teaneck could purchase AED’s for every athletic field in town, as well as for all public buildings and spaces like the DPW yard, providing protection for employees and residents, as well as young athletes. That $35,000 also would enable the town to engage professional medical emergency trainers to prepare coaches and volunteers to act as did the saviors of Damar Hamlin.


And that’s only one year’s $35,000! AED’s have a life of about 10 years. So there would be that extra money annually to apply to Teaneck’s mounting debt. A reasonable solution?

THIS WEEK IN TEANECK - JANUARY 8 to 15, 2023

This Week in Teaneck –January 8 to 15, 2023

  

Social Services Advisory Board (SSAB) Monday 1/9/2023 at 11:30 am

 

·        Public access and opportunity for input limited by the Advisory Board ordinance (*See ordinance below)


Teaneck Council - Tuesday, 1/10/2023 at 8:00 pm (Hybrid) in Council Chambers or access by zoom, Click Here and type in passcode 418153 For Agenda, Click Here

 

·       Second meeting of new Council. Expect some discussion about appointment of a new set of Council sub-committees and Council liaisons. (see related story in this edition). Expect some discussions related to development policies and role of Areas in Need of Redevelopment policies. Introduction of 3 Ordinances – to be combined with introduction on 1-3-2023 - of three other ordinances. Who asked for these ordinances is not identified. Expect important Council discussion when C. Goldberg presents her Council-listed item on opening advisory board processes.

 

Cedar Lane Management Group - Wednesday 1/11/2023 at 6:30 pm, 555 Cedar Lane, Suite 4 – no other information available

 

Teaneck Board of Education Workshop – 1/11/2023 at 8:00 pm all virtual (Click Here) Agenda, TBD.

 

Planning Board – Thursday, 1/12/2023 at 8:00 pm. Rodda Center (likely 2nd Floor, MP-1) NO ZOOM access –


·        No agenda information available on website. NJ Newspaper notice lists only a hearing to modify the earlier approved renovation to include a canopy and ATM drive through for First Commerce Bank at Teaneck Road and Route 4 S.

…………………………….

*Quote from Ordinance 15-2020 on Advisory Boards adopted by Council on August 11, 2020:

 

“Council’s advisory Board meetings are closed to the public. The public can submit items for discussion to the Council’s advisory board chair and council liaison for review and potential for inclusion on their meeting agenda. If the item is placed on the agenda, the chair, with approval of their Council’s advisory board, may invite the member of the public to come and speak to them about the specific issue they want to have discussed”.


Contacting Teaneck Voices


By Email: teaneckvoices@gmail.com

By Phone: 201-214-4937

By USPS Mail: Teaneck Voices, PO Box 873. at 1673 Palisade Ave. 07666

Teaneck Voices' Website is www.teaneckvoices.com



Sign Up Now
Send a Comment
Submit an Article
Editorial Policies
LinkedIn Share This Email