Ah yes - please do continue to educate us as to the benefits of a mall. We have so much to learn.

Yes Angelo, I agree, traffic, crime and flooding, please tell us how these things will benifit Mahwah. O thats right, after the mall is built, the developer leaves Mahwah and we are stuck with all the problems. Yes, rush the application in, no one heard from the developer before Mahwah had a vote, give me a break, the developer has $150,000 spent already since March 31st, let me see I bet the developer has 150,000 reasons to show Mahwah residents how great a mall will be. Mahwah will see you in court Mr, Developer. It is going to be a long fight, but a fight we are wiling ot take on.

don't be so smug "yes" got 48% did not spend a dime,did not put up 1 sign,took out no ads, no petition,
. You were give legitimacy by the media as the "stop the mall movement"
You were given a free pass to make any claim you wanted unchallenged
And you even had a lone sign, all by itself, on the lawn of the senior center voting center on election day( pretty tacky btw,not 1 other political sign except yours)
All that work and you won by a nose

We still won and it is not over yet.

well its not a win really
it just shows how many want the mall and how many don't
so now we know its 48/52

Pete you are incorrect when you state that the developer "did not spend a dime, did not put up 1 sign, took out no ads." There was a web site they created, ads ran in the Suburban news, and a "vote yes" flier was mailed to every home in Mahwah, which is a fairly expensive proposition.

That 52% "NO" vote... equates to about 10% of the town population. Not so sure that's a "big" win.

YOU WIN!!!
again you think I'm stoopit.
there is only 1 referendem.
the people have spoken!
do you expect the town to spend money
on any kind of lawsuit
when almost half the town wants the mall anyway
geeze

We are still a democracy and need keep our word and do what is right. The town passed the referendum and agreed to abide by it. We all can make the situation better- it isn’t black and white. It isn’t just a Mall- it’s all the baggage that is wrapped up in this plan. Let’s see if integrity is restored with a new Mayor. This whole issue has several remedies the town agreed to once the referrendum was passed that can possibly avoid both of the lawsuits.

this is not a issue of yes vrs no voters its what better for the town. mahwah is a great place with no center of town if you want to call the post office a center of town , that does not and should not represent who we are. we also need a place for families to go and be proud of. worried about the fire department handling a mall. we have one of the biggest colleges in northern new jersey and it has not burned down. how nice would it be to have a place were we can call downtown mahwah that lowers taxes creates jobs and looks beautiful then a towering hotel in an open field used to have one VFW event a year.

"We are confident that the results show that much of the Mahwah community supports the Crossroads development, and as we are able to educate more people about its benefits, we feel that the support in the community will only grow."

Hmmm... maybe the developer should have said, ""We are confident that the results show that much of the Mahwah community buys into our propoganda about the Crossroads development, and as we are able to fool more people with our slick adds, and the sugar-coated name "Lifestyle Center" about its made-up benefits, (actually there are none, but we don't want to tell the residents that as we ruin their town!) we feel that the support in the community will only grow."

The stopthemall shot themselves in the foot. If they just kept pressure on council etc by showing up to meetings 400 strong. The council would think that the vast majority of residents were against the mall. But for some reason known only to them, they pushed for a referendum. The referendum shows without a doubt that almost half the voters are for the mall. So now you can show up 1000 strong and it means nothing because you lost all your clout....gone. You only represent half the voters no matter what you have to say And there is no way to change that view. The voting is over. You could have fooled them but someone gave you bad advice.

I am curious as to what folks thought a non-binding referendum AFTER THE FACT was intended to accomplish? I could understand if this non-binding referendum was put to voters BEFORE the past leadership of our town made decisions. In that case, it might have served as a useful barometer in the consideration of the zoning application.

In the case at hand, the town has already acted (and did so in a schizophrenic way). The result is that we are left with very complex litigation that could have been avoided. I fail to see how the results of this referendum impact in any material way on the specific litigation that is underway.

Don't get me wrong. I am all for conducting proper due diligence and having empirical data in one's hands before folks make decisions. I just do not see the tangible benefit of this non-binding referendum. Seems to me that it was more of an emotional/political action.

Jonathan, the reason for the non binding referendum was because the Stop Mahwah Mall Group asked to have a vote on the matter. DaPuzzo who caused this whole mess and 4 councilmen refused 3 times to have a vote. The Stop Mahwah Mall Group took it upon themselves to have signatures on petitions 2020 to be exact to have that question on the ballet. It means a lot, the town does not want a mall, it was proven by the vote. There are 2 lawsuits at this time, one from Suffern and one from the Stop Mahwah Mall Group. Mahwah needs to hear back from the judge on the developer rushing in it’s application, if the judge decides the application was rushed in by the developer then the planning board can reject the developers application. There would only be one law suit at that time, just from the developer, Suffern and the Stop Mahwah Mall Group would drop their suits as Mahwah would just be dealing with the developer. The people have spoken, they do not want to mall. I agree with Jonathan, DaPuzzo and the 4 councilmen should of allowed Mahwah residents a vote on the mall, there never would have been a Stop Mahwah Mall Group in the first place, no lawsuits, but DaPuzzo and the 4 councilmen had a pretty good feeling how the town would vote, and they were right, Mahwah does not want a mall, so they pushed it through, tried shoving the mall down our throats, but look where it got DaPuzzo, no mayor, not on the planning board, but he can vote like the rest of us.

This is for all the Mahwah residents complaining about how the mall vote was not a landslide, the vote was close, who cares about that, the fact is more Mahwah residents do not want the mall then do. That is what a vote is all about. It does not matter if it is only 1 vote more that is the reason for a vote. There is no reason to keep saying how close it was. Would you be saying this if the mayor won by 1 vote, of course not, that is the reason for a vote, it is fair and the American way. Just be glad Mahwah residents were able to vote on the matter and lets get on with our lives and make sure this mall does not get built, no matter what it costs, Mahwah has spoken, more Mahwah residents do not want the mall, then the Mahwah residents that do. I did not vote for the new mayor, but that is how a vote goes, I have to live with the new mayor just like all the Mahwah residents that wanted the mall, you will just have to live with the fact that more Mahwah residents do not want the mall then do, it was a fair vote and that is all that matters.

Ace1, there is a nice little town called Paramus, there are a few malls there. You can drive there in 10 minutes, or if you like you can move there so you can say you have a place to bring your family. I moved to Mahwah 22 years ago, I worked in Hackensack for 21 of those years, Paramus is closer to Hackensack, I did not want to deal with all the problems a mall brings to a town, that is why I choose to live in Mahwah. Not to have Paramus in Mahwah. If you want a mall, then move to a town that has a mall or like I said, take a 10 minute ride and you can have all the malls you want.

Pete, you keep forgetting, the only reason you voted is because of the Stop Mahwah Mall Group efforts, somehow you keep over looking that fact. Another fact is, the Stop Mahwah Mall Group really did not win, it just allowd the Mahwah voters to have a say, and that say is more Mahwah residents do not want a mall then do, even if it is just by a nose as you stated. Why is everyone having such a problem with this vote, I did not vote for the new mayor, but it is what it is, and the fact is more of Mahwah residents do not want a mall then do. Pete remember it is not a win or lose, it is what the people want, and the people do not want a mall.

but my point is that if it was 75/25 the council etc would almost have to defend a lawsuit to avoid political suicide
48/52 means to me that 48% wants a mall just as bad as you don't want a mall. They really have to think about spending money to defend against a developer attack now. . Since half the voters want a mall anyway, why waste money fighting a lawsuit.

So what does this NON-BINDING referendum do for purposes of the current litigation our past leadership brought upon us? Am I missing the evidentiary value? Was this referendum supposed to be assisting the township in its defense? If not, then I am wondering what its tangible value is?

love how the news covered this: "Mahwah voters have voted down potential development..." That is far from what happened here. Had this referendum be carried out BEFORE our past leadership made decisions, maybe we could have avoided the litigation we find ourselves in and the waste of taxpayer money it is going to entail.

While it is great to know that 14% of Mahwah residents who are eligible to vote do not support the re-zoning and 13% do, what does that do in the big picture?

hopefully it will mean I won't have to go to Spring Valley Costco for meat.

Time will tell, it all depends on how the judge reviews the developer rushing in the application. I for don't feel the developer should get off easy, the developer is Capitalizing on a Mayor (DaPuzzu) who did not listen to 400 plus Mahwah residents. I for one feel we should fight this to the end, let the developer use his money to defend himself. It is all up to how the judge feels, Mahwah should not have to deal with a mall and all it's problems because of 24 hours. That is all it amounts to 24 hours earlier the developer submitted his application before the zoning was put back to hotel and commercial use. I am sorry you don't see this Pete, but I for one would rather drive to BJ's in Paramus or Rutherford then deal with a mall. No matter how you look at it, more people don't want a mall then do, that was the whole point of the vote.

By the way Pete, I checked out prices at Coscto, the meat is cheaper at BJ's. Not by much but every penny counts these days.

The problem is Charlie
I look at the plan and see Costco and a Wegmans
You see Palisades Center

Costco has different cuts of meat than BJ,s
also better quality
BJ's Riverdale best of all. Very nice people. If you bump into someone, you both say "excuse me" Best Target, Home Depot and Lowes also.Walmart not so good.

I was personally at the town council meeting when the president, Mr. Roth stated, "I will be against the mall when I see 51% of voters against it.". So Mr Roth, this township will expect YOUR support in not allowing the land to be rezoned for retail!

but you have no clout anymore
before the referendum council etc had no idea how many people were" for"
the mall
the referendum made you show your hand
48/52 means you can't use votes as leverage
they cancel out

I don’t usually respond to comments, but you are looking for information in your question: is " there is a tangible motive behind the push for a referendum after the fact ?” In a nutshell- The town planning board has already changed the zoning back to its’ former zoning and it is no longer zoned retail, conforming to the towns Master Plan. The Township and the Stop Mahwah Mall group mutually agreed they would abide by the vote of the people on the referendum. The SMM group agreed to drop efforts, including litigation, to prevent the mall if the majority voted, they wanted a mall. The fact the developer rushed his site plan in the day before the repealing ordinance took effect, against the publicly known good will of the township, provides cause to reject his application. The Planning Board went into closed session and then voted to seek a Declarative judgment from the Superior Court to see if the "time of application law" applies to the Crossroads application and according to Planning Board attorney. As a result to the vote the Township and the SMM will seek to uphold the will of the people. For detailed information, see www.stopmahwahmall.com

Q. Amen. I agree with you 110%. I would have moved to Paramus if I wanted to be near a mall. JP should move to Paramus where there are alot of malls for him to choose from.

Can someone explain to me why they think a giant mall will be built here?
There is enough space for sure.
But there is no demand.
And I have yet to hear anyone take on the argument
The mall you fearis made up in your head there is no demand for it.

Imagine you are an investor and I came to you with Mahwah Mega Mall
look at a map connect Riverdale,Paramus,Palisades,Harriman
Mahwah is in the center and cut of by malls in all directions approx 15 mile radius

3 BJ's
2 Sears
3 Best buy
5 Home depot
3Lowes
5 Targets
4 Bed and Bath's
3 Walmarts
5 Staples
2 Toys r Us
inside the 15 miles circle there is not a large population either
at 15 miles and cut off 4 ways it would seem the draw to the mega mall would be 7 1/2 miles.
Would you lend the money?

Pete, how do you figure you can't use votes as leveratge, you are right 48% wanted the mall, 52% does not want the mall, that is 4% more Mahwah residents want the mall then don't. The fight for the mall not too be built now is stronger then ever, the vote showed everyone more don't want the mall then do. The mall has to be stopped at all costs, the people that voted for no mall must and will be heard, that was the whole point of putting the mall on the ballet.

48/52 means you can't use votes as leverage
they cancel out

but charlie after the vote, I still want the mall
if "yes" won you would still be against the mall
Now if I were a councilman I know for sure that no matter how many antimall people show up and make noise. There are 2,500 people home watching TV who are for the mall.Something I did not know before the referendum.
So now me as councilman Pete (sounds good)can make a decision favoring the mall even though I indicated I was against the mall. You say "we will vote you out next election" I think" well I made 2,700 voters mad at me but I also made 2,500 voters happy". So i'll risk it for 200 voters. Thus the cancelling out. You had them by the youknowwhat before the referendum.They had no idea how many people you represented. You guys made it look like the whole town was against the mall.Which was a good strategy. No longer true.

Pete what you say about the 200 votes is true, I understand this. But the town already put the zoning back to where it was before the March 31st. DaPuzzo would have had a much better chance of winning if not for being in the spotlight. Trust me, DaPuzzo did not want the mall to be any part of his campaign for running for mayor. So the new Mayor most likely will not want to be under a microscope as DaPuzzo was.

The real issue is going to be how the judge determines the developer rushing in the application. That is going to be a big factor. Once that information is in, the Stop Mahwah Mall Group will be watching the new Mayor very closely to see how he handles the mall issue.

Either way it is going to be very interesting to see how everything develops from this point forward.

I had to change my name.

In case anyone is interested, I decided to do a post-election numbers analysis. I posted the results on my Board. With regard to the Crossroads referendum, here is the breakdown:

The below analysis is based upon the 2010 Census Data reported by Mahwah Patch on February 3, 2011, and the unofficial 2011 election results reported by Mahwah Patch on November 8, 2011. The unofficial election results did not include absentee ballots.
CROSSROADS:
A total of 5,678 residents responded to the referendum. This means that 715 residents who came out to vote decided not to answer the referendum question. In other words, 1% of the total residents who came out to vote decided not to answer the referendum question. Only 36.9% of the registered voters in Mahwah responded to the referendum question, which means that only 27% of the residents 18 or older in Mahwah responded to the referendum question. Of the residents who responded to the referendum question, 52% voted against the retail zoning and 48% voted for the retail zoning. This means that in looking at the total number of registered voters in Mahwah, 19.2% voted against the retail zoning and 17.7% voted for it. In looking at the total number of residents 18 or older in Mahwah, 14% voted against the retail zoning and 13% voted for it.

Thus, 63.1% of registered voters in Mahwah were not heard from in this referendum. This means that 73% of Mahwah residents 18 or older have not been heard from on the issue.

Jonathan - thanks for the numbers crunch. Very enlightening.

Bottom line is that among Mahwah residents eligible to weigh in on this issue, the difference between those in favor and those opposed is minuscule. It's very telling that the largest majority of residents didn't even care enough either way to voice an opinion, i.e., vote.

So, people, please stop saying that 52% of Mahwah residents oppose the mall. It's more like 14% -- only 1% more than those who favor it.

Its a non-binding referendum that likely means little to nothing but I don't see a 52/48 vote split as a victory for "Stop the Mall" indeed the fact that the voter turnout was low tells me that the majority of voters in Mahwah don't care which I would interpret as more in favor of the development than against.

ButchP, lets put it this way, for anyone who did not vote on the Mayor or the mall, has no right what so ever to voice an opinion on what the Mayor does or what happens with the mall. So for those that voted that is what the vote was about. 48% wants it and 52% does not want it, so 4% more of the town that voted does not want the mall.

In sports Butch, if a member of a team does not play and the team wins by 1 point does that count as a win or does the other team say it does not count because one player from the other team was not playing. There I rest my case, “Mahwah does not want a mall. The vote was based on who voted, not on who didn't.

Butch I agree, please stop saying Mahwah wants a mall, the vote came back saying more Mahwah voters do not want a mall. Lets put the vote to a rest and concentrate on ensuring this Mall does not get built as more Mahwah residents that voted proved Mahwah does not want a mall.

Karen, the non binding referendum means more then you might think. A judge is looking at weather the developer rushed in the application 24 hours before the council changed the zoning back to where it was before the March 31st meeting. In the event the judge rules that the developer did indeed rush the application to beat the clock then there is a case against the developer.

There is no other way to look at it other then a victory for the Stop Mahwah Mall Group, if not for that group no Mahwah resident would have been able to vote on the mall matter at all. DaPuzzo and 4 councilmen had no intention of allowing the Mahwah residents a vote, and you an see where that got DaPuzzo (no mayor and off the planning board) if not for the for the Stop Mahwah Mall Group the zoning would not be changed back to where it was prior to March 31st.

Karen as I said to ButchP, anyone who did not vote on the Mayor or the mall, has no right what so ever to voice an opinion on what the Mayor does or what happens with the mall. I would interpret as anyone who did not vote will have to deal with what happens good or bad without saying a word. They had their chance to voice how they feel; they blew it if they did not vote.

Karen a vote is based on how many voted not how many didn’t, weather it is close or not. The only way it can be looked at is the outcome of the vote, why is this so hard for everyone to get. The Mahwah residents that voted stated that they do not want a mall. Weather the difference is 1 vote, 200 votes or 10000 votes, the majority wins the vote. There is not one word mentioned about the Mahwah voters that did not vote on the new Mayor, no one is saying there is a chance he may not be mayor if all the Mahwah voters voted. My point is a vote is a vote, regardless how many voted.

there are always a few people who are unhappy that a vote didnt go their way. It would be good to accept reality and put efforts into something positive. Maybe run for council, join suppport a charity, or start your own small business enterprise.

JP, if you feel Mahwah will lose out because of not getting a mall, then I guess you have to move to Paramus where they are doing so much better with a few malls in their town. If you feel you want to be in town that is doing better then Mahwah Paramus is your town.

As far as a lawsuit goes, you can thank DaPuzzo for that. DaPuzzo had his chance to prove leadership on March 31st, well he blew that one didn’t he. That is why he is not mayor or on the planning board. DaPuzzo after hearing 400 plus residents voicing their concerns on why they didn’t want a mall signed it right away without putting the mall up to a vote by Mahwah residents. Had DaPuzzo put the mall up for a vote a law suit would have been avoided, but DaPuzzo figured nothing will happen, the 400 plus residents are mad now, it will blow right over, well you can see how that decision worked out for DaPuzzo.

I am aware we are in a recession JP, if you like approach Upper Saddle River, Saddle River and Franklin Lakes and see if you can convince their mayors to build a mall in those towns, good luck I think you already know the answer to that one.

JP, build on the land what it is zoned for, commercial and hotel, if you are so concerned about creating new jobs.

JP, you don’t have to be a genus to see there will be more traffic on rt 17 and all the side roads, how could there not be. I worked in Hackensack for 21 years, I could of very easily moved into Paramus and have been closer to Hackensack, but I for one did not want to live by a mall, that is why I choose Mahwah and as the vote showed a lot of Mahwah residents feel the same way.

JP, I can’t understand what everyone is so up in arms about this, the Stop Mahwah Mall Group only wanted to have Mahwah residents vote on weather they want the mall or not. In the event the vote came back in favor of Mahwah residents wanting the mall the Stop Mahwah Mall Group would have dropped everything if the majority of Mahwah residents that voted wanted the mall. Even if by 10 votes. The fact of the matter is more Mahwah residents that pay taxes in Mahwah that voted do not want the mall.

JP, as far as control, DaPuzzo again showed his thirst for control and power, forcing a mall down Mahwah resident throats. The Stop Mahwah Mall Group only informed what DaPuzzo was planning and did not want to allow Mahwah residents a vote on the matter. Who the hell is DaPuzzo for attempting to change the way Mahwah is, the reason why we moved to Mahwah, JP, if you have a bone to pick talk to DaPuzzo, he is your real problem. JP, Mahwah spoke, it is not only the members of the Stop Mahwah Mall Group that does not want the mall, the majority of Mahwah voters that voted do not want the mall as well. Now it is up to the new mayor and council to wait and see how the judge rules on the developer rushing in the application and take it from there. As far as I am concerned the vote came back on how Mahwah feels about having a mall. It is up to the new mayor and council to ensure the mall does not get built no matter how costly the lawsuit is.

JP, were you at the March 31st meeting when 400 plus residents spoke against the mall? If you were then you would understand what started this whole mall issue in the first place. There was not one person that spoke out for the mall on March 31st.

JP, you seem to understand DaPuzzo pretty well, you might know why did DaPuzzo keep refusing to put the mall issue up to the town for a vote, it was up to Mahwah residents to get that done, or there would not of been a question to vote on regarding the mall.

To mr J Marcus Esquire (after laboring thru 50 redundant e-mails), you seem to keep asking the same question over and over about the value of a "non-binding" referendum. To use your own query: Isn't 'emoting' and 'acting politically' of value??
Also, if anyone suggested to you that the CSMM traded in their lawsuit for a decorative referendum vote, then they told you a preposterous lie... And in case you're wondering if we are all thoroughly stupid, i say to you "we are not", though i could be wrong.

Gottatdo: Thanks for the response. Having a referendum for political purposes or to address emotions is certainly of value if that was the purpose. I was just trying to find someone associated with the referendum in order to understand if those were indeed the purposes. As you noted, I had asked the question a few times but could not seem to get a response on point.

I am not sure why you would think that I believe folks might be stupid. As I have evidenced in other comments to other articles, I detest when fellow residents come on Patch and start belittling their fellow residents.

Gottardo: No need to apologize. My intial thoughts were that this referendum was for political and emotional issues. However, I had not had the opportunity to speak with anyone directly involved in the push for the referendum so I was curious if there were other motives behind it. As an attorney, I was wondering if anyone thought that the referendum would be of any evidentiary value in the town's defense of the current litigations it is facing.

Thus, I was asking the question a few different times in hopes that someone directly involved in the process might be able to offer some "insider perspective" on the issue beyond what was obvious from the outside looking in.

Question: Who is funding the SMM group's lawsuit?

Or I should say, who WAS funding their lawsuit, since according to Charlie, when the result came back "no" the lawsuit by SMM was supposed to be dropped. I'm not getting that vibe that it was, was it.

JP, I have not checked through all my comments, but I may of made a mistake, if I did say no "meaning no mall" then it was suppose to be yes "meaning yes to the mall". The lawsuit would of been dropped if the vote came back saying more Mahwah residents that voted wanted the mall.