The Faulkner act allows real people to run for office without the Machine telling us who our choices will be. I say keep it. And yes, I'm a registerd Republician.

Dave. real people do run for office only not all real people get elected. When a candidate takes a sizeable contribution from one of the parties then I think that they should disclose that so we all know where they are coming from. Republican or Democrat, the voters should know.

I couldn't disagree more with Ralph's statement "This country is run by party affiliation and the Faulkner Act does not."
Right now the "running" of our country is mired and stagnated because of party affiliation, not enabled by it.
Secondly, what does the "running" of Mahwah have to do with the country as a whole? These local positions are not forums for political power grabs or ways to enrich people. Board of Ed members are paid nothing; Town Council members are paid a small salary. These are positions of service whose purpose is to make our small town run as efficiently and responsibly as possible.
I served 10 years on the Board of Ed and can say with complete conviction that we would not have been nearly as effective if the board had been broken down by party affiliation. I also know John Roth and Bill Laforet personally and have found them both to be fine people.
Ken Olive (registered Republican who has voted democratic lately)

Hey Thanks Ken Olive for your 10 years of service on the Board of Education. Myself and my fellow Senior Citizens thank you every time we pay our quarterly taxes for the fine service you have provided to our schools. Once those payments are made, many of us have to visit the food bank to eat because we dont have any money to buy food anymore. Thanks for the continued yearly school tax increase. But your service was important and you did a wonderful job. And continue to vote democratic since our country is in such great shape right now.

Well said, Ken.

I too have ignored party affiliation as far as county and even state positions. Watching the constant, entirely unproductive, party-line fighting in other towns should serve as a warning.

And on the larger scale (Washington, Trenton - even Hackensack!) - the ever-increasing paralysis of government is the result of the two-party system where one side boycots necessary actions to appease its fringe-groups, and in hopes that it will somehow reflect on the other side at whichever next election cycle -- to the detriment of the country/state/county, and its people.

Having a third party would avoid this "monopoly of two" (effectively controlled by their extremists on either end of the spectrum) and force both major parties to actively seek solutions (or risk losing our to the 3rd) instead of playing the waiting game until whatever next election happens to be next.

*Thumb up*, Ken. I used to be Republican until the TP ruined the GOP.

he didn't close the door ... the secreatry did

maybe the A/C was on?

Hank, Hows this:
: John, I'm thinkimg of outsourcing the Town Council how do you feel?

How is the town running smoothly? We have the potential of being in two multi-million dollar lawsuits because people can't get together on a mall project, and the mayor is focused on saving a questionable amount of dollars over the next 10 years on recycling because he thinks it looks good. How about maximizing our revenue income and less on reducing minor expenses and the elimination of town jobs? Remember when the last mayor eliminated one garbage pickup a week to save $67,000? You have GOT to be kidding me. Seriously?! 67K? That's about the property taxes from 8 houses. Please, let's get real here. We need either a big bang cut or a big bang income increase to justify all this haggling.

Hmmmmmm?.. this one's like a bad game of Clue.

Attention Fact Checkers: does anyone know anything about these "two multi-million dollar lawsuits" mentioned by JP? Could this JP person be proposing that the hard earned knickels and dimes spent (on serious questions-of-legality) by the towns voulunteers from the CSMM are a multi-million dollar assault on Mahwah?

Take your pick my friend. We get sued if the mall gets built, and we get sued if the mall doesn't get built. Rock and hard place.

One of them works there - and one of them does not.

That's why Faulkner prescribes a certain rule of conduct to respect the division in power. It's like a member of congress walking into the white house and conducting meetings without knowledge of the President.

All that was necessary was to give the Mayor a heads-up so that the meeting was beyond suspicion.

Looks like someone was trying to provoke a predictable reaction just so that they could come whining to the press.

Then there would be no news, no Patch poll just sleepy Mahwah. The Mayor keeps shooting from the lip and keeps Mahwah interesting.

Run to the press Andy? What are you talking about? Roth spoke to Sinclair in his office. So what if the door was closed and so what if he is a councilman and the Falukner Act (which is foolish anyway) says he shouldnt do that. What was Laforet doing there anyway at the same time and place? Seems to me that this whole thing is a bunch of bull. Quite frankly,both parties need to grow up if they want to represent the taxpayers of Mahwah. Only Roth and Sinclair knows what they really spoke about and if it was political, it should have been done off hours and off site but really now, no big deal. And Laforet should have just pulled Roth aside and spoke to him professionally not issue a letter. If I were Roth I would have brought that up with the council to air things out anyway based on Laforet's actions.

Ralph, did you read it in the press? And who made sure it that it become a public matter?

Which part did I get wrong?

Ref,

>> No one said the Faulkner Act was a bad thing <<

So you read the various comments here and feel they are saying it's a GOOD thing?
>> the Faulkner Act, it should be changed in Mahwah <<
>> the Falukner Act (which is foolish <<

>> at one time had some respect for you <<
"Ref" - vying for respect from someone anonymous would be dangerous, since I don't know if the anonymous party is a left or right wing extremist who sympathises with violence against institutions, children, doctors, animals, minorities, immigrants, the environment, etc... What if the anonymous poster was part of organized crime or supporting gun violence - being respected by such a person would mean I'm likely on the wrong side of whatever argument!

So, Ref, hiding behind a pseudonym and the word "respect" are incompatible.

Respect is only deserved by (and valued from) the likes of Bob Ramo, Meg Winthrop, and various other people who have enough integrity to stand behind their opposing opinion with their good name.

Ref,

>> Who does the Mayor ask for permission when he goes to Police headquarters almost every day? <<

Because that's in his "written job description".
The township code, http://clerkshq.com/default.ashx?clientsite=Mahwah-nj, makes it THE day-to-day job of the mayor to "Supervise all of the departments of the Township government.".

Some departments are located in the same building as his office, other departments are off-site, including the police department. I'm not surprised that he'd sit down and find out what issues may have surfaced through the town during those 16 hours each day that police offers patrol the neighborhoods while much of the rest of the staff is "off".

The reason why council members are supposed to go through the mayor is simple: They are the ones ultimately deciding on employment, increases, contracts, etc. To prevent any possibility that council members might receive preferential treatment from township employess who feel they should appease them (or for residents to even have to worry that this might be taking place), the council members are supposed to address their issues through the mayor rather than directly.

It might seem silly as long as there are no issues - but erecting that "firewall" is the key to making SURE that there won't even be the HINT of a potential issue.

I'm not arguing Mr. Roth's contributions to this town.

But with this incident, you're not really standing up to anyone, when you are a council member and you are not following the process that's in place to prevent favoritism and collusion. Trying to "circument the system" that you are sworn to uphold isn't really that admirable.

After all, he's not some first-term rookie that just didn't think this through.
He's been on the council for 8? years, has been council president, and is very aware of who the declared candidates are in the upcoming election. If there was no intention to provoke publicity, then at minimum I would call this "being naive", to be polite. Neither are great attributes.

Hopefully, the boundaries will be clarified and adhered to - and then everyone can get back to work.

>> my question was would it have been an issue if Mr. Roth hadn't questioned the proposal? This alone speaks volumes <<

So it "speaks volumes" BEFORE you get the answer to your question?
What if the answer is that there is an established process that other council members are careful to follow to avoid conflicts? Would THAT speak volumes too?

Your question was touched upon by the council president who stated:
"...the practice in Mahwah is to ask Business Administrator Brian Campion before extended conversations with township employees. The [rule] is in place because there can only be one boss in town; it cuts down on confusion. I am always very careful, I always run it by Brian. And, he has never said, ‘no'.”

If someone obviously felt that the door should be closed, then it qualifies as an "extended" conversation?

Company car - covered by contract with Pilot. I asked the attendant at Pilot, but he was not familiar with Mr. Roth. Anything else?

I actually don't think anyone is "guilty" of anything - unless YOU do, based on your commentary thus far!

There was a mis-step, there was a reminder, there was a clarifying comment by the council president on how this is normally handled. The council will discuss this and hopefully provide guidance for the future.

>> motives do speak volumes <<

So you're accusing your mayor of supposed motives based solely on your mindreading capabilies, but you object that I refer to a spat that actually IS currently being reported, and me quoting factual statements by the council president that actually IS being reported, about actual procedures that DO apply to all council people, to avoid these kind of spats from occurring in the first place?

So mind-reading someone's motives is acceptable - but how dare I quoting printed reports?

John. Thanks. I agree, character is key. This seems like a lack of character. This is quite a shame, not only because he is our current elected mayor, but because he is a "leader" within MMA who is responsible for the Youth Leadership Academy. There was great pomp and circumstance last Friday night in graduating our children through this program that advocates "leading by example". Is this the example he has choosen to show us?

Seems to me that many of you are now seeing how dangerous it is to put someone in office who constantly says that he was elected by the people to do what he is doing. The fact is that he did not actually receive 100% of the votes in Mahwah. Because of a 3 way race, I dont believe that he even got 50% of the votes. I'm sure Mr.Andy Schmidt will now go back and look at the actual percentages and comment that I am wrong unless of course I am right. If each of you have issues with character and what is happening in the town, go to the council meetings and during the public portion, blast the Mayor for the job he is doing. The local papers and Patch also are there and i'm sure they will run with the story. This way, not only will the Patch readers know what is going on but others in the town will also and possible make a difference in November.

I don't believe the domain accusations unless you can show proof.

29%, 31%, 40%.
What percentage of Mrs. DiGiulio's 29% (who apparently preferred not to renew Mr. Da Puzzo's term) may have cast their vote Mr. Laforet as the only alternative in a two-way race is anyone's guess.
Even if they liked neither Mr. Da Puzzo or Mr. Laforet and not voted for either, then the split for those two candidates would have been 44% to 56%.
Hope that helps.

Ref, actually "someone who is very familiar with domain name registrations" would have shelled out an extra $9.99 per domain for "private registration" (where the WHOIS is non-public).

Andy, so now you can predict what supporters of other candidates would have voted if their candidate was not in the race. I didnt know you were that intellegent. Hey let me know the next Mega Millions numbers. The fact remains that he only received 40% of a very low voter turnout in Mahwah, That doesnt give him the right to continue to say that he is doing what the PEOPLE want. And how will you now comment on the domain names that YOUR mayor took back in March when he thought that Roth and Hermansen might be his opponet? Let me hear what you have to say about that.

Reading comprehension issues?

I said that it "is anyone's guess"!

The rest is simple arithmetic.

My apologies Andy. You did say it was anyones guess however he only received 40% of the vote and with my limited math skills even I know that it is not a majority. He really needs to stop telling people that when he makes a decision or a request to change something that is being done because the people elected him to do so.

Looks like he has some explaning to do and maybe he should do it tomorrow at the meeting. I hope someone brings it up to him in the public portion. I bet his crack team is drafting a response that he will say that someone else set him up in a political move to make him look bad. The truth is that he doesnt have a clue and others are really running this town. What a shame if we get 4 more years of this stuff. Voters wake up and smell the coffee in November. There is absolutely no transparency with this administration and by the way, it is funny that he borrowed the term (transparency) from another candidate last Fall but has no idea of the true meaning.