Democrats Provide January Update
In message, Democrats celebrate court victory and offer updates on governmental actions.
The following information comes courtesy of the Springfield Democrats.
--------------
Democrats Win Election Suit
The Hon. Lisa Chrystal ruled this week that the Springfield Republicans who filed suit in Union County Court to overturn November’s election results had not proven their claim and the election will stand as is. This decision settles the three month long dispute filed by the Fernandez Krauss campaign and solidifies Margaret Bandrowski’s place on the Township Committee.
“We are very pleased with the Judge’s ruling and that we can finally put this matter behind us. This is one less distraction for the members of the Township Committee. Now we can better focus our energy on the business of running the town,” said David Barnett, Chairman of the Democratic Party.
January Recap
January was a busy month as the new Township Committee took measures to improve our environment and restore the autonomous Board of Health. As discussed in our last newsletter, on January 8 the Mayor David Amlen, Deputy Mayor Richard Huber and Committee-people Margaret Bandrowski and David Barnett officially formed the Flood Mitigation Committee and introduced an Amended Recreation Board ordinance (Mr. Shehady did not attend the meeting).
Additionally, they approved the hiring of seasonal personnel in the recreation department for winter sports programs.
On the second legislative meeting that took place on January 22, the Committee, in a 4 – 0 vote passed the Autonomous Board of Health ordinance and swore in the new volunteer members (Mr. Shehady was not present at the meeting). Additionally the members of the Flood Mitigation Committee were named and a new commissioner to represent Springfield with the Rahway Valley Sewerage Authority (RVSA) was appointed.
The RVSA commissioner is an important position since the township pays more than two million dollars per year for this service. Our new commissioner brings years of experience in environmental issues and will represent our interests on this important board. Finally, officers for the First Aid Squad were sworn in.
bob groder
10:29 am on Thursday, February 7, 2013
Congrats to Margaret for her win finally she can rest easy and work for the TC for the next 3 years.
Curious
11:16 am on Thursday, February 7, 2013
By saying Mr. Shehady didn't attend the meeting for a vote, it implies he was skipping it on purpose. Perhaps he was ill?
Marc Krauss
12:24 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
Why are Democrats sending out mixed messages regarding town business and party business via party lines?
I get it that they wanted to announce the outcome of the lawsuit as reported earlier in the Patch and the party website. Fare enough. No argument there.
However, they are also disseminating information regarding township committee activity via the same medium. This message is nowhere to be found on the township website. Mayor Amlen could have saved it for his February Mayor’s Message.
They also used this to message to rebut Mr. Eisenberg’s Letter to the Editor regarding the RVSA. Really?
I suspect this what we can continue to expect. They are party centric and not Springfield centric and because of that Springfield suffers and will continue to suffer.
Curious
12:39 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
How are the residents suffering exactly?
BART FRAENKEL
1:19 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
Marc, I agree with you that this should have been sent to all of Springfield and not just the Democratic Party. However, this is no different then what Shehady did too, by sending it to the Republican Party and his email/newletter list. I disagreed with that too, but I don't remember you saying anything about it at that time.
Marc Krauss
1:50 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
The difference Mr. Frankel is that Mr. Shehady sends out a newsletter as an individual whether he is an elected official or private citizen. Nowhere on his newsletters does it say from Springfield Republican Committee. However, the Democrats sent an official press release to the Patch for publication. If one of the four Democrats would have submitted it individually then it would be a different story. However, they did not and that’s the difference
BART FRAENKEL
2:45 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
Sorry Marc, but as an elected official a person gives up their ability to separate themself from the position whenever they want. An elected official sending out a newsletter or information only to a select group is wrong, since it implies they are only concerned with that particular group. In fact, he once said to me that he thought it was wrong for the Democrats to do that while we served together but then he did it himself.
Marc Krauss
3:05 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
Sorry Bart, but Mr. Shehady's newsletter included everyone that wanted to subscribe to it and wasn't disseminated to just one group. I know, I was there while campaigning with him and when he was with Jerry and me. He asked residents if they wanted to subscirbe to his newsletter regardless of their party affiliation. The elected Democrats have failed to seperate the message for "all" residents from their party message. That is the difference and they are going about it wrong. A recap of of the month should be on the town website or in a message from the mayor. Information on the lawsuit is strictly party based.
BART FRAENKEL
6:43 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
We disagree. When you say he asked residents if they wanted to subscribe to his newsletter, my question is if he asked everyone? The answer is that he did not. He only asked the people he spoke with that agreed with what he was telling them. There were many people who I spoke with who said when they questioned something he was telling them, he just walked away. So you can try to spin this however you want, but his newsletter was not sent to everyone equally. An elected official should not use a private newsletter for the dissemination of official business or information. Nor should a political party only send it to their supporters.
BART FRAENKEL
12:59 pm on Sunday, February 10, 2013
One last thing Marc, was the newsletter sent out by Shehady signed with just his name or also his title of mayor, at that time? You and I know the answer and it's just another reason it was improper.
bob groder
11:24 am on Thursday, February 14, 2013
That statement is not 100% true Marc sorry to disagree with you. I was once a facebook friend with Ziad but the minute he saw I was for the other side he blocked me from seeing his postings and also his newsletter. His letters only go out to republicans whereas the democrat letters while they should be sent individually are sent out to everyone in town and not just 1 political party. I am sorry to disagree with you but I wanted to clear up this statement in part. You are right however about party politics when letters go out but Ziad did the same thing when he was the Mayor.
Neither party should be doing it.
oh please
8:15 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
There doesn't seem to be anything in this article that is not factual and the opinion of Mr. Barnett is in quotation marks. Perhaps the attempt is merely to get information about what has been done in the Township Committee meeting to as many residents as possible by using the Patch.
Clearly Mr. Krauss is already running for next November.
bob groder
11:27 am on Thursday, February 14, 2013
Bart is 100% correct and like I said Marc is only partly right but Its 100% true if you arent in agreement with the former mayor of 2012 you dont get his newsletter and he even blocks you from his facebook page which in 2012 he was posting official things as "the mayor of springfield". Therefore it should have been open to EVERY CITIZEN no matter which party affiliation you are with.
Shane Ronan
8:28 pm on Thursday, February 14, 2013
Bob, his newsletter and his personal facebook page are two different things. His newsletter was sent out via email based on a list of addresses of people who subscribed and was available for anyone in town or not.
Stan B
4:40 pm on Thursday, February 14, 2013
The problem is the former mayor never understood the difference between 'King', 'Mayor' and 'Chairman of the Township Committee'.
Sprinfield Resident tired of the bickering
8:50 pm on Thursday, February 14, 2013
You guys have got to move on from the partisanship. Unless you take off your Republican / Democratic glasses you can't see the truth. The truth is Ziad's newletter was open to anyone to sign up for and I believe available on his website. If you were that interested in it you probably could have found it. I don't agree with everything Ziad did and especially how he acted in some situation but don't make everything he did an issue. His newsletter was informative and did alert me to things happening in town. It was probably the most communication I saw from anyone on the TC in the over 15 years I've lived here. I think the TC needs to get over the partisanship and do what is best for the town. If they really wanted to do this they would have just written the article as an informative piece instead of the Democreatic slant. This is why we need people who are independent of parties running this town so this bickering can stop.
bob groder
10:24 am on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Sorry to disagree sir but i was signed up for Ziads newsletter and facebook to stay informed. The minute he found out I wasnt on his side he stopped me from getting the newsletter and facebook. Thats censorship at its best. I was subscribed to his newsletter and I find it odd that both the FB and newsletter stopped around the same time.
bob groder
10:28 am on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
To tired of bickering: Now that it has come out that the turf field is now turning into one huge mess with the land swap deal going wrong forget partisan politics what do we do as citizens in springfield to fix this mess? Our taxes will go up a lot more than promised which was exactly the problem many people spoke out about it when it was brought before the residents at TC meetings last year. Its over and done with but putting it on the ballot was the best way to do something of this magnitude. Now the land is contaminated that was supposed to go to the township the BOE is on the hook for 250k in cleanup costs alone and now it cant be developed which former members of the TC promised us it would be as much as one million dollars. That money will never come in now thanks to this being rushed last year before all the proper studies were done.