A puppet is commonly a wooden figure made to move by pulling on its strings. A puppeteer makes the puppet dance by manipulating the strings attached to the puppet via a wooden cross tee.
A truly good puppeteer makes the puppet move to do their bidding without jerky, spasmodic movements and of course without the puppets knowledge.
Puppets are led and can do wonderfully complicated tasks as long as the puppeteer is pulling the strings.
If puppets where left to their own devises, they would lay wherever left and never be seen or heard from again. Puppets are toys that are generally fun for a while and then boredom sets in or the puppeteer gets weary of the tangled strings and becomes angered by the simplicity of the puppet and the puppet is banished back to its box or worse, the garbage heap.
Moral of the story, it’s better to pull the strings and not be seen, than have the strings pulled for the use of someone else’s amusement.
Monday, June 12, 2006
Monday, May 29, 2006
The Dots Are Further Connected
Organizer defends PAC that pushed for Lenape school budget
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 05/28/06
BY LARRY HANOVER
GANNETT NEW JERSEY
Before the April school elections, an organizer of the political action committee that unsuccessfully worked for passage of the Lenape Regional School District budget described his group as broad-based and without apartisan tilt.
While bearing out organizer Stephen Madosky's description of the Coalition for Children's Education to an extent, the group's campaign contribution reports still have a flavor harkening back to the GOP-backed PAC that pushed for the 1997 Seneca High School referendum.
One large April contribution revealed the existence of a second Lenape PAC, dormant until recently but linked to its 1997 predecessor through acurrent school board member.
Its treasurer is the wife of board member John Jeffers, who has ties to J. Garfield DeMarco, the GOP power broker behind the successful PAC pushfor a $68.7 million referendum to build Seneca High in Tabernacle and expand Cherokee High in Evesham.
Also among the coalition's contributors are two key Burlington County GOP backers: the Haddonfield-based firm of Archer and Greiner, which has reaped massive fees as Lenape's attorneys, and Richard Alaimo Associates, a Mount Holly engineering firm.
Madosky, organizer of the Coalition for Children's Education, maintained last week that his PAC was exactly what he described, a broad-based group mainly from his hometown of Medford with the students' best interests in mind.
"They happen to be my friends," Madosky said of his contributors. "If I ask, they'd give it to me. You can try to make something out of it, but I assure you they're just friends.
"Through a spokesman, DeMarco said he has had no involvement with any Lenape PACs since the 1997 referendum. Madosky's PAC had 11 contributors as of its initial reports. They gave a total of $9,200 through April 15 and include some business owners livingin Medford, such as the owners of Cherry Hill's Coastline Restaurant and a Berlin construction company.
But then there's the $1,600 contribution from the here to fore unknown Committee for Lenape's Future, headed by Jill Jeffers, wife of the Lenape board member.
Although it's legal for a board member, let alone his wife, to push for passage of a bond referendum, the Republican couple from Mount Laurel did not publicly let on about their agenda.
John Jeffers is deputy executive director of the Burlington CountyBridge Commission, of which DeMarco is chairman.
John and Jill Jeffers did not return calls seeking comment.
The Burlington County GOP has denied any interest in the Lenape election.
Like DeMarco's 1997 PAC, the Jeffers' PAC was backed between 2000 and 2002 by firms that reaped contracts from the Seneca project, including Archer and Greiner.
The Committee for Lenape's Future, which contributed during that span to John Jeffers' board campaign and others, had been dormant for several years until recently giving money toward graduation parties for Lenape's four high schools.
Archer and Greiner anted up $1,000 for the Madosky PAC two months ago.
Archer and Greiner is Lenape's law firm and was paid at least $817,000 in fees related to the Seneca project from 1998 to 2001. It gave $8,875 to the Burlington County GOP in 2004.
Richard Alaimo Associates gave $500 to the Madosky PAC and is also a key Burlington GOP contributor, giving $25,000 in 2004.
John Maroccia, incoming Medford Democratic chairman, saw the firms'donations as confirmation of a GOP connection and efforts to bulk up their own bank accounts.
Officials from the two firms did not return calls seeking comment.
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 05/28/06
BY LARRY HANOVER
GANNETT NEW JERSEY
Before the April school elections, an organizer of the political action committee that unsuccessfully worked for passage of the Lenape Regional School District budget described his group as broad-based and without apartisan tilt.
While bearing out organizer Stephen Madosky's description of the Coalition for Children's Education to an extent, the group's campaign contribution reports still have a flavor harkening back to the GOP-backed PAC that pushed for the 1997 Seneca High School referendum.
One large April contribution revealed the existence of a second Lenape PAC, dormant until recently but linked to its 1997 predecessor through acurrent school board member.
Its treasurer is the wife of board member John Jeffers, who has ties to J. Garfield DeMarco, the GOP power broker behind the successful PAC pushfor a $68.7 million referendum to build Seneca High in Tabernacle and expand Cherokee High in Evesham.
Also among the coalition's contributors are two key Burlington County GOP backers: the Haddonfield-based firm of Archer and Greiner, which has reaped massive fees as Lenape's attorneys, and Richard Alaimo Associates, a Mount Holly engineering firm.
Madosky, organizer of the Coalition for Children's Education, maintained last week that his PAC was exactly what he described, a broad-based group mainly from his hometown of Medford with the students' best interests in mind.
"They happen to be my friends," Madosky said of his contributors. "If I ask, they'd give it to me. You can try to make something out of it, but I assure you they're just friends.
"Through a spokesman, DeMarco said he has had no involvement with any Lenape PACs since the 1997 referendum. Madosky's PAC had 11 contributors as of its initial reports. They gave a total of $9,200 through April 15 and include some business owners livingin Medford, such as the owners of Cherry Hill's Coastline Restaurant and a Berlin construction company.
But then there's the $1,600 contribution from the here to fore unknown Committee for Lenape's Future, headed by Jill Jeffers, wife of the Lenape board member.
Although it's legal for a board member, let alone his wife, to push for passage of a bond referendum, the Republican couple from Mount Laurel did not publicly let on about their agenda.
John Jeffers is deputy executive director of the Burlington CountyBridge Commission, of which DeMarco is chairman.
John and Jill Jeffers did not return calls seeking comment.
The Burlington County GOP has denied any interest in the Lenape election.
Like DeMarco's 1997 PAC, the Jeffers' PAC was backed between 2000 and 2002 by firms that reaped contracts from the Seneca project, including Archer and Greiner.
The Committee for Lenape's Future, which contributed during that span to John Jeffers' board campaign and others, had been dormant for several years until recently giving money toward graduation parties for Lenape's four high schools.
Archer and Greiner anted up $1,000 for the Madosky PAC two months ago.
Archer and Greiner is Lenape's law firm and was paid at least $817,000 in fees related to the Seneca project from 1998 to 2001. It gave $8,875 to the Burlington County GOP in 2004.
Richard Alaimo Associates gave $500 to the Madosky PAC and is also a key Burlington GOP contributor, giving $25,000 in 2004.
John Maroccia, incoming Medford Democratic chairman, saw the firms'donations as confirmation of a GOP connection and efforts to bulk up their own bank accounts.
Officials from the two firms did not return calls seeking comment.
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Understanding Low Income Housing
Low Income Housing does not necessarily mean "undesirables" are coming to Evesham. If the housing to be built is done via COAH (Council On Affordable Housing) & HUD guidelines the price line breaks down as such:
Income Guidelines 2006 (effective 3/8/2006)
LOW $25,500 MOD $40,400 one person
LOW $28,850 MOD $46,150 two people
LOW $32,450 MOD $51,950 three people
LOW $36,050 MOD $57,700 four people
MOD referring to moderate income
If we are talking about apartment rentals, the following is 2005's final for an efficiency to a 3 bedroom.
efficiency - $663.00 per month w/o utilities
1 bedroom - $761.00 per month w/o utilities
2 bedroom - $914.00 per month w/o utilities
3 bedroom - $1,095.00 per month w/o utilities
MISSION STATEMENT FROM COAH
To facilitate the production of sound, affordable housing for low and moderate income households by providing the most effective process to municipalities, housing providers, nonprofit and for profit developers to address a constitutional obligation within the framework of sound, comprehensive planning.
Interestingly enough, Mt. Laurel is in an uproar over Evesham putting low income on their border, yet it is because of Mt. Laurel these standards exist.
The Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) was created by the Fair Housing Act of 1985 as the State Legislature's response to a series of New Jersey Supreme Court cases known as the Mount Laurel decisions. The Supreme Court established a constitutional obligation for each of the 566 municipalities in the state to establish a realistic opportunity for the provision of fair share low and moderate income housing obligations, generally through land use and zoning powers. The legislature provided an administrative alternative to this constitutional obligation via the Fair Housing Act.
Evesham, as usual, never does the right thing, the Twp. Just came out of a judgment of Repose because they didn't do the lawful thing to begin with. Now we are stuck with building 233 units and purchasing land that supposedly will not exceed $2.5 million dollars. A very nice chunk of change to fulfill our obligation set by the court.
Make no mistake, the above figures are accurate, meaning that a working mother with a child could afford to live here, but if all units are not utilized, section 8 vouchers, by law must be accepted.
On a personal note, clustering low income housing is a very bad idea for all. The stigma attached to "projects" like what is proposed in Evesham will be very detrimental to the children living there and coming into our schools. Like it or not the reality of NIMBY (not in my back yard) is alive and well. While I abhor the government forcing this on us because of the impact to our schools in particular, the law is the law. We the tax payer will foot the bill for all of the children coming into our schools and because of the clustering and not spreading out the homes, the closest schools will feel the impact. Evesham has low income sites scattered throughout the Twp. Case in point, we have an elected official that lives in low income housing. The Mayor and Council need to do better and find more alternatives instead of pushing all the obligation on Mt. Laurel's border. The easy answer is not always the right answer.
I challenge the elected officials in this town to find alternatives rather than dumping their issues on Mt.Laurel's border, clogging our schools and generally pushing their problem where no one can see it. If the job is done right using scattered sites, which, by the way, is obviously more work at the drawing board (not an Evesham strong suit) the impact to all will be lessened and a neon sign will not be tattooed to the foreheads of the children who's parents are trying to provide a better life for them.
Monday, May 08, 2006
What Will They Do?
Tonight is the special council meeting for the defeated school budgets.
Will the Mayor and Council cut the school budget by more than $300,000? Will they cut at least a penny? Will they do the will of the voter or bow to the BOE?
Here's a bigger question, will the School Board threaten to cut school trips or activities if they don't get what they want. This wouldn't be the first time for these tactics.
Let's wait and see, just remember, it's for the children.
Will the Mayor and Council cut the school budget by more than $300,000? Will they cut at least a penny? Will they do the will of the voter or bow to the BOE?
Here's a bigger question, will the School Board threaten to cut school trips or activities if they don't get what they want. This wouldn't be the first time for these tactics.
Let's wait and see, just remember, it's for the children.
Saturday, April 29, 2006
Responsibility
Noun
1: the social force that binds you to your obligations and the courses of action demanded by that force; "we must instill a sense of duty in our children"; "every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty"- John D.Rockefeller Jr [syn: duty, obligation]
2: the proper sphere or extent of your activities; "it was his province to take care of himself" [syn: province] 3: a form of trustworthiness; the trait of being answerable to someone for something or being responsible for one's conduct; "he holds a position of great responsibility" [syn: responsibleness] [ant: irresponsibility]
It is the human condition to be a responsible person. All actions have reactions, either positive or negative.
Responsibilities of our elected officials from the President on down the line vary in magnitude, yet we all suffer the consequences or revel in the victories. It is our responsibility to hold those in power accountable for their actions or inactions. In order to indulge in this right, one must vote.
The recent school board elections in Evesham and all over the Tri-County area where held on April 18th. Incumbents where defeated, one retained the position and two new members will step up, I thank all that have served and are about to serve. For a non-paying position, the BOE is a very large budget and a heavy load to carry. All budgets where defeated in Evesham and now the budget cutting shall commence.
It is particularly annoying to me that defeated budgets, voted down by residents and taxpayers of this community still have the opportunity to stay whole and continue to choke the taxpayer. The defeated budget will now go to the Mayor & Council and if they are pandering to the schools they will give it a little trim and if they are pandering to a larger audience they will chop at least a penny. Next year is an election year in Evesham and it will be interesting to see the show. Who has the guts to step up and do the will of the people? It is the responsibility of the elected officials to abide by the will of those they serve. Too often elected officials forget they serve the taxpayer and residents of this town, not the other way around.
1: the social force that binds you to your obligations and the courses of action demanded by that force; "we must instill a sense of duty in our children"; "every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty"- John D.Rockefeller Jr [syn: duty, obligation]
2: the proper sphere or extent of your activities; "it was his province to take care of himself" [syn: province] 3: a form of trustworthiness; the trait of being answerable to someone for something or being responsible for one's conduct; "he holds a position of great responsibility" [syn: responsibleness] [ant: irresponsibility]
It is the human condition to be a responsible person. All actions have reactions, either positive or negative.
Responsibilities of our elected officials from the President on down the line vary in magnitude, yet we all suffer the consequences or revel in the victories. It is our responsibility to hold those in power accountable for their actions or inactions. In order to indulge in this right, one must vote.
The recent school board elections in Evesham and all over the Tri-County area where held on April 18th. Incumbents where defeated, one retained the position and two new members will step up, I thank all that have served and are about to serve. For a non-paying position, the BOE is a very large budget and a heavy load to carry. All budgets where defeated in Evesham and now the budget cutting shall commence.
It is particularly annoying to me that defeated budgets, voted down by residents and taxpayers of this community still have the opportunity to stay whole and continue to choke the taxpayer. The defeated budget will now go to the Mayor & Council and if they are pandering to the schools they will give it a little trim and if they are pandering to a larger audience they will chop at least a penny. Next year is an election year in Evesham and it will be interesting to see the show. Who has the guts to step up and do the will of the people? It is the responsibility of the elected officials to abide by the will of those they serve. Too often elected officials forget they serve the taxpayer and residents of this town, not the other way around.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Connect the Dots
The “Coalition for Children’s Education” sent out a very expensive glossy mailer, produced by the Traz Group, (Ed Traz is the paid consultant for the Burl. Co. GOP) to the eight sending districts in the Lenape Regional High School district and the mail list also included all K-8 households. There are two separate signs paid for by this same “coalition” everywhere and there has not yet been one 48 hour report (a report that must be filed when large sums of money are expended within 48 hours of the expense) filed by the “Coalition” to Election Law Enforcement (ELEC). Between the mailers and the signs I can easily estimate that this organization has spent well over $35,000.00. Yes, this is structured as a PAC (political action committee). By law, reports are filed by quarter. The “coalition” was formed 1/27/06, meaning, by ELEC standards the next report (aside from the missing 48 hour reports) are to be filed April 15th. The significance of this is that the voting public will not know where all this money comes from (a housewife & an insurance salesman) until ELEC receives the reports and they are viewable to the public on or about April 17th or 18th. They are already in violation of ELEC law; maybe they won’t file at all. The Chairperson registered with ELEC is Theresa Madosky, listed occupation housewife. The treasurer registered is Jason DeMarco, listed occupation insurance consultant, both are Medford residents. Now that I’ve given you a little ELEC lesson, let’s connect the dots.
The following information was taken directly from the ELEC web site, no embellishments needed. The rest of the information is verifiable.
Medford
Theresa Madosky married to Steve Madosky.
Steve Madosky an “organizer” for the “coalition” is also a board member of the MYAA (Medford Youth Athletic Association) . Is it coincidence that the all Republican council gave the MYAA this year 700,000 dollars?
Jason DeMarco the treasurer for the “coalition” is also the treasurer for the MYAA.
DeMarco was paid by the GOP $40.00, check #8989 for the get out to vote effort
DeMarco also contributed to Rudder, Brown & Myers campaign on 10/24/05 $240.00 cash, it was returned back to DeMarco from the campaign on 10/26/05, ck. # 107.
DeMarco was also reimbursed 11/6/05 $41.50, ck #183, for the Dunkin Donuts he purchased for the GOTV effort.
Theresa Madosky on 6/1/05 gave the Burlington County GOP a contribution in the amount of $2500 and listed her occupation as retired.
Theresa was also paid by the Burl. Co. GOP a $40.00 ck. #9000 for the Nov. GOTV efforts.
Majaq Logo Productions received a check from the Burl. Co. GOP in the amount of $6,482.55 on 11/15/05. Steve Madosky owns the company.
10/13/05 Steve Madosky pretends to be a “concerned citizen” in a press release produced by Sean Kennedy for PoliticsNJ.com.
Steve Madosky 5/15/06 contributed $500.00 to Friends of Jim Saxton for the 2006 Primary.
Sean Kennedy is a recent Medford resident.
Sean Kennedy is the ex GOP Executive Director and was let go after the November elections. He is presently being sued for slander, the case is still pending.
Kennedy now works for Maser Consulting Engineers and is lobbying to get contracts from the school districts for their 5.8 million dollar “turf fields” and Medford's fields.
Maser is apparently helping to fund this effort.
Evesham
The average home with children has received 4 recorded phone calls from the Regional District and at least 1 from the local K-8 reminding the parents how important it is to vote to keep up the quality of education.
Joseph Fisacaro, Jr. the local BOE member up for election was given a job at a Regional HS.
His father Joseph Sr. is a Regional District board member.
Joseph Howarth, also a local BOE member, was given a job in the Regional District.
For the GOTV (get out to vote) effort by the Burl. Co. GOP in November of 2005, Howarth was paid $50.00, ck. # 9029.
Fisacaro, Jr. and Howarth also interviewed with the local Republicans for the open council seat in November.
Barry Fitzgerald also a local BOE member was paid at the same time a $50.00 ck #9023 and so was his daughter, ck #9024 for the Nov. Burl. Co. GOTV effort.
The local BOE tax increase this year is one of the largest ever, 10 cents.
Bonnie Olt, ex president of the local BOE changed her party affiliation to Republican weeks before the November election and ran under the GOP banner her campaign was paid for by the Burl. Co. Republicans.
Bonnie is now a Council member in Evesham and was so confident of her election victory she spent election week in Florida with her family. The Mt. Holly GOP and high paid consultants like Sean Kennedy and Ed Traz ran her campaign.
Families for Olt, is still paying campaign debt from the Nov. election and in December the Burlington County Young Republicans donated $4000.00 to help clear up her campaign debt.
Dan Hicks, the Superintendent of the Regional District actually showed up to Evesham’s council meeting 4/11/06 endorsing school tax deferrals.
The Traz Group does all political mailings for the Burl. Co. GOP and also did Olt’s.
Ed Traz, the County GOP paid consultant, produced the mail piece that went to all 8 sending districts and parents with school age children.
Traz’s office is directly across the street from the local administration building.
Mt. Laurel
John Jeffers, Regional Board member is also (former Burl. Co. Republican Chairman) J. Garfield DeMarco’s God child and works for the Bridge Commission with DeMarco. Mr. Jeffers was paid $50.00, ck. #9027 and $10.00, ck. #9059, for the Burl. Co. GOTV effort in Nov.
Republican’s fighting to raise taxes, filling coffers with PAC money, hooking up donors, getting contracts and using our children to further their political and financial agendas. This has nothing to do with “the children” and everything to do with partisan party politics. Draw your own conclusion, I just connect the dots.
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
This is a joke, right?
Please, they must be kidding! The Lenape Regional High School Board of Education adopts a $128.5 million dollar budget and included in this are three ballot questions.
In addition to the $86.8 million general fund tax levy, voters will be asked to decide questions on hiring additional teachers, creating a district-sponsored varsity ice hockey program and building synthetic turf fields in each of the district's four high school stadiums: Lenape, Shawnee, Cherokee & Seneca.
The first question on the ballot seeks funding for an additional 21 mathematics and English teachers at a cost of $1.2 million. Is that a real question? Why ask, the Lenape Regional District prides itself on the “excellent education” it gives our children, why would hiring more teachers, to lower the class rate, actually be a question? If the Regional district is approaching 30 students per class when the state average is 19, this is not a question, this is about better education. I’ll pay the extra $8 to $13 the district is saying this will cost.
On ballot question two, they are asking taxpayers to fund a district sponsored hockey program. Ice hockey is an extremely expensive and time consuming sport, any parent that has a child that plays knows this. I love the game, but how many children this really affects is my question to the BOE. 25 at most, per school, for the low price of $340,000, that’s 100 children. Not worth my tax dollars and no where did the regional district say this is a one time hit.
The third ballot question is to fund synthetic turf fields’ at all four high schools. 5.8 million dollars, a one time expense, supposedly providing a long time savings on maintenance. To take it further, “for the children” studies show fewer injuries are sustained on artificial turf. Really, then why did every football team in the NFL hate Vet’s Stadium? Could it have been the artificial turf? How many careers where ended and knees where blown out because of it? I’m sure there are also studies that say injuries are more likely to occur on artificial turf. I think the regional football teams can survive and excel without the taxpayer shoveling out another $38 to $65 per, depending on which township you live in. (Evesham and Mt. Laurel always pay the most.)
Evesham’s tax rate would rise, if all passes, from 97.3 cents to $1.054 cents per $100 of assesses value. An average increase of $81.00 per property taxpayer, Mt. Laurel brings up the rear with an average increase of $57.00 per property taxpayer.
Just so I make this perfectly clear, the general fund (86.8 million dollars) must be approved for any of the ballot questions to pass. I will say it again, why would hiring more teachers to lower class sizes, when we already pay through the nose for education be a question? Frankly, it feels a little more like blackmail than a ballot question. Nice.
In addition to the $86.8 million general fund tax levy, voters will be asked to decide questions on hiring additional teachers, creating a district-sponsored varsity ice hockey program and building synthetic turf fields in each of the district's four high school stadiums: Lenape, Shawnee, Cherokee & Seneca.
The first question on the ballot seeks funding for an additional 21 mathematics and English teachers at a cost of $1.2 million. Is that a real question? Why ask, the Lenape Regional District prides itself on the “excellent education” it gives our children, why would hiring more teachers, to lower the class rate, actually be a question? If the Regional district is approaching 30 students per class when the state average is 19, this is not a question, this is about better education. I’ll pay the extra $8 to $13 the district is saying this will cost.
On ballot question two, they are asking taxpayers to fund a district sponsored hockey program. Ice hockey is an extremely expensive and time consuming sport, any parent that has a child that plays knows this. I love the game, but how many children this really affects is my question to the BOE. 25 at most, per school, for the low price of $340,000, that’s 100 children. Not worth my tax dollars and no where did the regional district say this is a one time hit.
The third ballot question is to fund synthetic turf fields’ at all four high schools. 5.8 million dollars, a one time expense, supposedly providing a long time savings on maintenance. To take it further, “for the children” studies show fewer injuries are sustained on artificial turf. Really, then why did every football team in the NFL hate Vet’s Stadium? Could it have been the artificial turf? How many careers where ended and knees where blown out because of it? I’m sure there are also studies that say injuries are more likely to occur on artificial turf. I think the regional football teams can survive and excel without the taxpayer shoveling out another $38 to $65 per, depending on which township you live in. (Evesham and Mt. Laurel always pay the most.)
Evesham’s tax rate would rise, if all passes, from 97.3 cents to $1.054 cents per $100 of assesses value. An average increase of $81.00 per property taxpayer, Mt. Laurel brings up the rear with an average increase of $57.00 per property taxpayer.
Just so I make this perfectly clear, the general fund (86.8 million dollars) must be approved for any of the ballot questions to pass. I will say it again, why would hiring more teachers to lower class sizes, when we already pay through the nose for education be a question? Frankly, it feels a little more like blackmail than a ballot question. Nice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)