Happy All Hallows Eve!
Monday, October 31, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Arctic Life
If memory serves, we still had snow on the ground in April.
That means we'll have had four snow-free months this year.
Bring on the polar bears!
Friday, October 21, 2011
It's on
The Pieman informs us that there will be a debate among the four Town Council Candidates on Friday, November 4th, 7:30 PM in the auditorium of the Central Valley Elementary School.
He mentions that it's sponsored by OCEAN and the Woodbury Chamber of Commerce.
He says nothing about putting together a mud-wrestling match between the two candidates for Highway Superintendent.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Monday, October 10, 2011
Elsewhere On The Menu
I seem to recall that one or two opinions of the upcoming contest for Highway Superintendent have already been posted.
So let us now turn our attention to the rest of the ballot.
The powers that be (Ralph and John perhaps) have decided that we shouldn't trouble our pretty little heads worrying about Town Supervisor.
So, for the moment, lets focus on the councilmanic (or is it manic council?) elections.
Incumbents Carlton Levine and Bo Haviland will be facing off against Tim Arone and Marilyn Prestia.
So, what say you?
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
That Was So Much Fun, Let's Do It Again!
OK, so the results are in, and the winner is...US! 'Cause we get to do it all over again in November.
Rob won the Republican line 253 to 129 (with 5 write-ins, presumeably for the Uncle). He also won the Ind line (That runs to Coney Island, doesn't it?) 12 to 9. Pete won the Conservative line with 21 (there were 6 write-ins, possibly Rick Parry, with an "A").
So, Pete's and Rob's people get to bash each other for another two months.
Who says there's no fun in the 'burbs?
And pay attention Pieman, you Democrats get to vote this time.
Be Sure To Vote (or Not)
Today you get to vote (or not). If you are a Republican or an Ind (Independence? Independents? Indiana? Indubitable?) Party member you can vote for either Pete or Rob. If you are a Conservative Party member you can vote for Pete or whomever. If you are a Democrat, Green, Right To Life, Right To Death, Working Families, Vegetarians For Dolphin Safe Veal or any other Party member, don't forget to stay home.
Polls are open 6 AM 'til 9 PM.
By the way the Board of Elections web site says :"Election Inspectors Needed – Pay $200 for Election Day!"
Who knew you had to pay to do that job?
Friday, September 02, 2011
Cui Bono
Howdy, the Uncle has returned from his wanderings and (YAY) so have Woodbury dirty politics.
As mentioned somewhere below, someone has created a "Do Not Elect Rob Weyant" website.
Gee, wonder whom it could be.
Whomever it is is so proud of his work that he paid Go Daddy extra in order to hide his identity. That way you can be certain that whatever he writes absolutely, positively must be true.
I guess Caruso has graduated from taping stuff to garbage cans and gone right to electronic garbage.
More fun facts about the web site:
If you want to post a comment you have to register (that way they'll know who you are, while making sure you can't see who they are).
And, of course, say the wrong thing about the wrong candidate and your comment will be eveaporated into the ether (where is the ether anyway? I'd love a hit).
More fun stuff to come before election day.
Count on it!
As mentioned somewhere below, someone has created a "Do Not Elect Rob Weyant" website.
Gee, wonder whom it could be.
Whomever it is is so proud of his work that he paid Go Daddy extra in order to hide his identity. That way you can be certain that whatever he writes absolutely, positively must be true.
I guess Caruso has graduated from taping stuff to garbage cans and gone right to electronic garbage.
More fun facts about the web site:
If you want to post a comment you have to register (that way they'll know who you are, while making sure you can't see who they are).
And, of course, say the wrong thing about the wrong candidate and your comment will be eveaporated into the ether (where is the ether anyway? I'd love a hit).
More fun stuff to come before election day.
Count on it!
Sunday, June 19, 2011
'f Only
Federal case could dissolve Kiryas Joel
Lawsuit claims village violates Constitution
By Chris Mckenna
Times Herald-Record
Published: 2:00 AM - 06/19/11
Kiryas Joel dissidents rolled the ultimate grenade into their enemies' tent last week with a federal lawsuit questioning the very existence of the village that the Satmar Hasidic community created 34 years ago.
Their argument — laid out by civil-rights attorney Michael Sussman and sharply disputed by village leaders and their supporters — is that the village discriminates against them because of religious differences, and that public and religious authority are so entwined in Kiryas Joel that it violates the constitutional separation of church and state.
But even if the plaintiffs prove they've been thwarted and unfairly treated as they allege, a big question is whether a judge would ever order the drastic remedy they proposed: dismantling the Village of Kiryas Joel.
The answer depends on whom you ask.
Ralph Stein, a Pace Law School professor who teaches constitutional law, sees no chance of that happening, based on what he read in the court complaint.
"As far as I'm concerned, it's a political polemic," Stein said. "It doesn't provide a legal basis for which the relief can be provided."
If the allegations are true, Stein said, what the dissidents are complaining about amounts to political corruption no different than Tammany Hall-style tactics, even if cloaked in religious garb. And corruption, he said, is no reason to dismantle a municipality.
If it were, Stein said, "I can't imagine how many times places like Boston, New York and Chicago would have been dissolved."
But Nomi Stolzenberg, a University of Southern California law professor who's co-writing a book on Kiryas Joel, argues that a political in-group abusing power for non-religious reasons is different under constitutional law than a "religious in-group that uses political power to suppress religious dissenters."
"Whether that in fact is what's going on in Kiryas Joel remains to be proved," she said. "But the idea that a religious group could capture political power and abuse its power by discriminating against groups that don't adhere to the beliefs of the dominant group — that is a very specific danger that the religion clauses were designed to combat."
Stolzenberg contends the case could hinge on which of two constitutional readings the judge uses.
The prevailing approach would likely find that the institutions of church and state are separate in Kiryas Joel, and therefore, permissible, she said. But a competing doctrine — she calls it the "get real" approach — might take a less lenient view.
"It's actually hard to predict how the federal judges are going to react to this," she said.
The dissidents' lawsuit tries to show unequal treatment in law enforcement, tax exemptions, elections and other areas through a series of examples. Village leaders say the claims have no merit, and insist they provide services to all residents without discrimination.
Joseph Waldman, a plaintiff in the case and a longtime thorn in the side of the village's leadership, brought a similar case in 1997 to try to get the village dissolved. A federal judge and then an appeals-court panel rejected his demand — but strictly because most of his allegations had just been tried in two previous lawsuits.
The appeals-court judges wrote that Waldman's claims didn't "establish the sort of pervasive and otherwise irremediable entanglement between church and state that would justify a drastic remedy like the dissolution of the village."
But they added: "All this is not to say that a series of future actions evincing an enduring and all-encompassing domination of the Village government by the Congregation could not at some point suffice to create a new cause of action for the dissolution of the village."
cmckenna@th-record.com
city of rajneeshpuram
One of the few precedents for the constitutional challenge Kiryas Joel dissidents have brought against their village is a 1983 case involving Rajneeshpuram, a religious enclave incorporated as a city in Oregon the previous year.
The community started in 1981, when followers of a spiritual leader named Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh bought a huge ranch in Wasco County. Within only three years, their commune grew into a city of 7,000 with its own police and fire departments, businesses and bus system.
By that time, the state had sued Rajneeshpuram in federal court, arguing that it had no obligation to recognize the municipal status of a city controlled by a religious organization.
A federal judge ruled in favor of Oregon in 1985. But the decision had little impact on Rajneeshpuram, because state and federal court battles had so depleted the group's resources that the city was soon bankrupt and empty.
Lawsuit claims village violates Constitution
By Chris Mckenna
Times Herald-Record
Published: 2:00 AM - 06/19/11
Kiryas Joel dissidents rolled the ultimate grenade into their enemies' tent last week with a federal lawsuit questioning the very existence of the village that the Satmar Hasidic community created 34 years ago.
Their argument — laid out by civil-rights attorney Michael Sussman and sharply disputed by village leaders and their supporters — is that the village discriminates against them because of religious differences, and that public and religious authority are so entwined in Kiryas Joel that it violates the constitutional separation of church and state.
But even if the plaintiffs prove they've been thwarted and unfairly treated as they allege, a big question is whether a judge would ever order the drastic remedy they proposed: dismantling the Village of Kiryas Joel.
The answer depends on whom you ask.
Ralph Stein, a Pace Law School professor who teaches constitutional law, sees no chance of that happening, based on what he read in the court complaint.
"As far as I'm concerned, it's a political polemic," Stein said. "It doesn't provide a legal basis for which the relief can be provided."
If the allegations are true, Stein said, what the dissidents are complaining about amounts to political corruption no different than Tammany Hall-style tactics, even if cloaked in religious garb. And corruption, he said, is no reason to dismantle a municipality.
If it were, Stein said, "I can't imagine how many times places like Boston, New York and Chicago would have been dissolved."
But Nomi Stolzenberg, a University of Southern California law professor who's co-writing a book on Kiryas Joel, argues that a political in-group abusing power for non-religious reasons is different under constitutional law than a "religious in-group that uses political power to suppress religious dissenters."
"Whether that in fact is what's going on in Kiryas Joel remains to be proved," she said. "But the idea that a religious group could capture political power and abuse its power by discriminating against groups that don't adhere to the beliefs of the dominant group — that is a very specific danger that the religion clauses were designed to combat."
Stolzenberg contends the case could hinge on which of two constitutional readings the judge uses.
The prevailing approach would likely find that the institutions of church and state are separate in Kiryas Joel, and therefore, permissible, she said. But a competing doctrine — she calls it the "get real" approach — might take a less lenient view.
"It's actually hard to predict how the federal judges are going to react to this," she said.
The dissidents' lawsuit tries to show unequal treatment in law enforcement, tax exemptions, elections and other areas through a series of examples. Village leaders say the claims have no merit, and insist they provide services to all residents without discrimination.
Joseph Waldman, a plaintiff in the case and a longtime thorn in the side of the village's leadership, brought a similar case in 1997 to try to get the village dissolved. A federal judge and then an appeals-court panel rejected his demand — but strictly because most of his allegations had just been tried in two previous lawsuits.
The appeals-court judges wrote that Waldman's claims didn't "establish the sort of pervasive and otherwise irremediable entanglement between church and state that would justify a drastic remedy like the dissolution of the village."
But they added: "All this is not to say that a series of future actions evincing an enduring and all-encompassing domination of the Village government by the Congregation could not at some point suffice to create a new cause of action for the dissolution of the village."
cmckenna@th-record.com
city of rajneeshpuram
One of the few precedents for the constitutional challenge Kiryas Joel dissidents have brought against their village is a 1983 case involving Rajneeshpuram, a religious enclave incorporated as a city in Oregon the previous year.
The community started in 1981, when followers of a spiritual leader named Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh bought a huge ranch in Wasco County. Within only three years, their commune grew into a city of 7,000 with its own police and fire departments, businesses and bus system.
By that time, the state had sued Rajneeshpuram in federal court, arguing that it had no obligation to recognize the municipal status of a city controlled by a religious organization.
A federal judge ruled in favor of Oregon in 1985. But the decision had little impact on Rajneeshpuram, because state and federal court battles had so depleted the group's resources that the city was soon bankrupt and empty.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
A Fun Time Was Had By All
Monroe assessor, KJ condo owners discuss valuations
By Chris Mckenna
KIRYAS JOEL — Property owners whose tax assessments may soon go up streamed into the offices of the Kiryas Joel Community Council on Monday to learn about a change in condominium values that has had broad impact in Kiryas Joel.
For more than two hours, Monroe Assessor Steve Ruelke and his assistant sat with laptops at a kitchen table and chatted one-on-one with each visitor, scrolling through maps and property data as they compared information.
The bottom line, amid all the detailed discussions about condo sizes, rental prices and storage space, was reassuring.
"Our primary purpose here is to gather information," Ruelke clarified at one point. "And we'll make a correction."
The council had requested the informal meeting — the first of two scheduled in Kiryas Joel on Monday — because Ruelke recently altered how condominium values throughout the Town of Monroe are calculated. Instead of basing assessments on the cost of building the units, he's looking at the rental income condo owners earn.
That caused a blizzard of adjustments in Kiryas Joel, where most people live in condos. The owners of more than 1,000 units lucked out with lower values, but nearly 1,800 others wound up with higher assessments. The net result — excluding 110 new units that had no values in 2010 — was an 11 percent increase in condo assessments in the village, according to a spreadsheet Ruelke provided.
Solomon Leimzider was shocked to learn that the values of two rental units he owns had each increased by about 50 percent. He was one of the first owners to sit down with Ruelke on Monday, explaining afterward, "I wanted to understand the basis of his re-evaluation."
But he got even more: He corrected information about the size of his condos and expected lower assessments as a result.
"It looks like he's ready to look into it," he said.
Others faced only modest increases, but came anyway to plead their case and submit a grievance form — the usual method for contesting property-tax values. The Monroe assessment board will review grievances next week.
"It's worth 10, 15 minutes to come down and talk," said one man who gave only his first name, Joel.
Ruelke acknowledges having limited information about Kiryas Joel rents — properties there aren't marketed through the Multiple Listing Service — and promises to lower assessments across the board if shown that typical prices are lower than he assumed.
He said the purpose would be to benefit all condo owners, not just those who file grievances.
"I want there to be equity," Ruelke said. "If we don't do this fairly and equitably, then we have wasted our time."
By Chris Mckenna
KIRYAS JOEL — Property owners whose tax assessments may soon go up streamed into the offices of the Kiryas Joel Community Council on Monday to learn about a change in condominium values that has had broad impact in Kiryas Joel.
For more than two hours, Monroe Assessor Steve Ruelke and his assistant sat with laptops at a kitchen table and chatted one-on-one with each visitor, scrolling through maps and property data as they compared information.
The bottom line, amid all the detailed discussions about condo sizes, rental prices and storage space, was reassuring.
"Our primary purpose here is to gather information," Ruelke clarified at one point. "And we'll make a correction."
The council had requested the informal meeting — the first of two scheduled in Kiryas Joel on Monday — because Ruelke recently altered how condominium values throughout the Town of Monroe are calculated. Instead of basing assessments on the cost of building the units, he's looking at the rental income condo owners earn.
That caused a blizzard of adjustments in Kiryas Joel, where most people live in condos. The owners of more than 1,000 units lucked out with lower values, but nearly 1,800 others wound up with higher assessments. The net result — excluding 110 new units that had no values in 2010 — was an 11 percent increase in condo assessments in the village, according to a spreadsheet Ruelke provided.
Solomon Leimzider was shocked to learn that the values of two rental units he owns had each increased by about 50 percent. He was one of the first owners to sit down with Ruelke on Monday, explaining afterward, "I wanted to understand the basis of his re-evaluation."
But he got even more: He corrected information about the size of his condos and expected lower assessments as a result.
"It looks like he's ready to look into it," he said.
Others faced only modest increases, but came anyway to plead their case and submit a grievance form — the usual method for contesting property-tax values. The Monroe assessment board will review grievances next week.
"It's worth 10, 15 minutes to come down and talk," said one man who gave only his first name, Joel.
Ruelke acknowledges having limited information about Kiryas Joel rents — properties there aren't marketed through the Multiple Listing Service — and promises to lower assessments across the board if shown that typical prices are lower than he assumed.
He said the purpose would be to benefit all condo owners, not just those who file grievances.
"I want there to be equity," Ruelke said. "If we don't do this fairly and equitably, then we have wasted our time."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)