Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Finally, Some Fiscal Responsibility

I don't think $6.1 million was enough. The cuts should have gone way, way deeper.
But at least the council is finally doing what the electorate demands of it.

Friday, May 14, 2010

The Untouchable $2 Million

On Wednesday, the town's auditors presented their budget analysis to the council.
One part of the analysis was the cost of "Extra-Curricular Activities, Athletics and Transportation Costs."
The transportation costs were for field trips, athletics and "courtesy" busing from home to school.
The total cost of these items was just under $2 million.
The auditor estimates that 1,200 students are involved in these activities, and the costs could be offset with a "pay to play" fee. He assumes $100 per student would recoup a measly $120,000.
What he does not mention is the cost of these activities per student.
If 1,200 students are participating in these activities and it costs the town $2 million dollars, we are talking about almost $1,700 PER STUDENT. For that price we can just buy all the kids season tickets to the Yankees.
Why are we spending so much for non-educational purposes? The school budget was defeated by the voters, the board complains they are flat broke and taxes have to go way up, yet here is $2 million dollars that should be cut immediately.
Is it the taxpayer's responsibility to ensure that little Johnny gets to play varsity football, provide him with uniforms, equipment, a coaching staff and free transportation to games all over the state?
I think not.
End the school sports programs. Save two million dollars.
It's time to tell the Highwaymen to hit the road.

Sunday, May 9, 2010

Another Email: DON'T SPLIT THE VOTE.....3 and OUT!


With the 9 candidate running in this week’s Municipal Election, and the way votes can get spread amongst all the candidates, it’s important not to split our vote and LOSE EVERYTHING.

Lissette Parker's supporters are asking people to bullet vote for her and this will hurt Katz, Stern and Gussen, and they could lose.

Katz, Stern and Gussen have shown that they support the Public Schools and they understand the pain of the residents and taxpayers and refuse to rubber stamp this or any budget. They have chosen to work with the different interest groups, the concerned Board of Education parents, and both private and public school parents and students to carefully analyze this school budget for waste and better efficiencies and we support them because they are the only candidates that support the audit requested by the Board of Education PTO last year.

This is not a reflection on any other candidate, just noting the experience, leadership and positive work that Katz, Stern and Gussen have done.
We need Katz, Stern and Gussen back on the Council. Don't split your vote-- vote just for Katz, Stern, Gussen.
...please vote for 3 and out.




8 – KATZ

Signed by:

Ronnie Apfel
Joey Bodner
Keith Breiman
Gary Hoffman
David Lerer
Zahava Reinhart
Douglas Soclof
Shimmy Tennenbaum
Deena Wrubel

Friday, May 7, 2010

The Sad Truth About Joe Steinberg

Just after I posted the email I received throwing Joe Steinberg under the bus, I opened my mailbox to find the newest issue of my personal favorite monthly magazine, The Jewish Voice And Opinion. The editors make it perfectly clear why our community is shying away from endorsing Steinberg. Since only PDF copies of the magazine are available online, I'm posting the entire text of the article here so everyone can see that Joe Steinberg is actually a disciple of the evil Barbara Toffler, who could very well be an enemy of our community.



Promoting Classical Judaism

May 2010 Vol. 23 • No. 7 Iyar/Sivan 5770

Teaneck Council Elections: Four Seats Open, Nine Candidates, Four of Them Observant, One May Be Problematic

On May 11, residents of Teaneck will go to the polls to elect four members of its seven-seat Town Council. Of the nine candidates vying for the four open seats, four are members of the observant community. Three of the four have been active in Teaneck civic affairs and politics for years, building reputations of trust and respect in elect­ed positions. The fourth is a newcomer whose close ties to a controversial far-left lo­cal activist with a history of rhetoric castigating the obser­vant community and a series of ethical and other lapses, is raising eyebrows in many Teaneck circles.

The three candidates with solid reputations, not only in the Jewish community, but beyond it as well, are current Council­man and former Teaneck Mayor Elie Y Katz, current Council­man Adam Gussen, and for­mer Teaneck Deputy Mayor Yitz Stern.

Based on his behavior and the comments of some residents of Teaneck who are support­ing him, it has been suggested that the campaign and candi­dacy of Joseph Steinberg, the fourth member of the Orthodox community who is running for Council, have been supported and guided by Dr. Barbara Ley Toffler, a current Council member whose anti-observant animus, verging on outright antisemitism, was made public in the New York Times.

Dr. Toffler, whose term ex­pires in 2012, is not a candidate in this election, but a source close to the Town Council, who asked for anonymity, charged that Mr. Steinberg “is in effect Barbara Toffler’s surrogate.”

NY Times

In February 2007, Dr. Tof­fler, who refers to herself as an “ethicist’ and has boasted that she thinks of herself “as one of the most ethical people I know,” was cited by Times columnist Peter Applebome in a story about the growth of Teaneck’s observant-Jewish community.

In that article, Dr. Toffler, then a member of the Teaneck Planning Board, said, “People worry that there’s a group that wants [Teaneck] to become an Orthodox community like some of the ones in Rockland County. [Teaneck] has always been an in­credibly diverse community, and, from my perspective, I don’t want it to become any one thing.”

She has never apologized for her suggestion that obser­vant Jews were trying to take over Teaneck and turn it into “Monsey,” although she has ac­knowledged that her rhetoric has caused many residents, particu­larly in the Jewish community, to view her with suspicion.

Working Closely

Mr. Steinberg is evidently not one of them. At Town Coun­cil meetings,he and Dr. Toffler have had a close working re­lationship. Several of Dr. Tof­fler’s most ardent supporters in Teaneck—people who, for the most part, have been associated with anti-observant movements or sentiments—have endorsed Mr. Steinberg.

Dr. Toffler and the other candidates she is supporting were among those invited to Mr. Stein­berg’s campaign kick-off party. He invited other candidates, none from the observant community.

Stormy Relations

The relationship between Dr. Toffler and other members of the Council has been stormy.

In an email sent to Dr. Toffler, Mr. Katz accused Dr. Toffler of using her position on the Town Council “as a soap box to spew hate, act as an obstructionist to progress, and become the Council bully.”

Another Councilman, Mohammed Hameeduddin, a member of Teaneck’s Mus­lim community, agreed.

“I have worked with her for three years and still do not understand any legislative agenda she has except race baiting,” said Mr. Humeeduddin, accusing her of “repeatedly sending out and making disparaging remarks about me and many of our col­leagues on Council.”

Financial Advisory Board

The political relationship between Dr. Toffler and Mr. Steinberg reportedly developed while both served on Teaneck’s Financial Advisory Board. Dr. Toffler was the Council’s liaison to the advisory board; Mr. Stein­berg was appointed to the board and served as its chairman.

According to the source close to the Council, “not a single de­liverable or actionable item has been achieved on the Financial Advisory Board since Toffler became Council liaison and Steinberg became chair.”

“Under Toffler and Stein­berg, the Financial Advisory Board has been a total failure.

Not a single recommendation for the 2010 budget was submitted nor has it deliv­ered to the Council any of the compara­tive budget analysis it was tasked to do,” said the source, adding that this lack of accomplishment by Dr. Toffler and Mr. Steinberg “shows a failure in leadership, results, and competence, and has been a wasted opportunity to save money in these tough economic times.”

Ethical Lapses

But, said the source, Dr. Toffler’s problems on the Council have not been limited to issues of competency.

“There are ethical problems, too,” said the source, noting that Dr. Toffler has dubbed herself an “ethicist.”

The source recalled that Dr. Toffler had personally chosen the website vendor respon­sible for Teaneck’s site. After the town man­ager and attorney notified the Council that the vendor had violated the terms of his contract, Dr. Toffler publicly admitted meeting with the vendor in her home, said the source.

“A few weeks later, after the Coun­cil voted to terminate the agreement with the website vendor, Toffler insisted on using taxpayer money to pay the en­tire amount of the contract, even though many of the items were not completed,” said the source.

“Toffler’s Pawn?”

The source claimed there were other examples of her engaging in questionable ethical behavior as well.

“Like her back room meetings with vendors, she has involved herself in ques­tionable ethical practices that could open the town to litigation,” said the source.

Calling Mr. Steinberg “Toffler’s pawn,” the source said she had taken him “under her wings.”

“Is this the leadership we can expect with Toffler’s pawn on the Council? One Toffler is more than enough. Can Teaneck survive two?” the source said.

No Comment

Asked if he would, at the very least, denounce Dr. Toffler’s anti-observant statement, Mr. Steinberg had no comment. The other three observant candidates, as well as well as scores of others, Jews and non-Jews, residents and non-residents of Teaneck, have clearly—and publicly— denounced her rhetoric.

Mr. Steinberg also had no comment when asked if he would be similarly “ea­ger” to work with a person who had made anti-African-American or anti-gay state­ments that mirrored Dr. Toffler’s anti-observant quote.

“Would Steinberg work—or have any­thing to do—with a member of the Teaneck Council who said that she feared African- Americans could turn Teaneck into ‘Harlem’ or that gay Americans could turn Teaneck into ‘Greenwich Village?’ Would he accept the endorsements of her strongest support­ers? But when this Councilwoman tells the New York Times she fears Orthodox Jews could turn Teaneck into ‘Monsey,’ that’s okay with him?” said the source.

Repaying Kindness

After Mr. Applebome’s article appeared, even Dr. Toffler recognized that she might face political consequences. Fearing that her quote might prompt members of Council to consider her unfit to be reappointed to the Teaneck Planning Board, she reached out to Mr. Stern, one of the observant com­munity’s most respected leaders, and asked for his advice on how she might regain the trust of the people she had offended by the Times article.

Despite warnings from community members familiar with Dr. Toffler that dealing with her could prove disadvan­tageous, Mr. Stern responded to her re­quest, sending her an email with what he considered thoughtful and well-reasoned advice. He suggested she first apologize for her quote in the Applebome article and then educate herself on issues the observant-community considers im­portant, such as bringing ratables to the community-at-large.

His recommendations were not to Dr. Toffler’s liking, and she retaliated by read­ing his email out loud at a Teaneck Town Council meeting without explaining that it was she who initiated the conversation by asking for Mr. Stern’s advice,

“She tried to humiliate him, mak­ing it seem as though he had sent her his advice on his own initiative, out of the blue,” said the source.


When asked about the incident, Dr. Tof­fler defended herself, explaining that emails are not “private” and that, in her opinion, she had committed no ethical breach.

The source close to the Town Council agreed that Mr. Stern probably could not have won a legal case against Dr. Toffler, but the source had no doubt that she had committed a moral violation.

“Especially for someone who calls herself ‘the ethicist,’” said the source, making clear that “fair people in Tean­eck can endorse Katz, Gussen, and Stern, but not Steinberg,” because of the latter’s connection to Dr. Toffler.

“A vote for Steinberg could be a very dangerous choice for the Teaneck-Jewish community. As they say, ‘you are judged by the company you keep,’” said the source.

Teaneck Elections: Throwing Steinberg Under The Bus

Below is the complete text of an email we received from "votechange07666@gmail.com"
I think the reason they decided to throw Steinberg under the bus is because he is a public school parent, so his best interests are not the same as our best interests. Just a guess. Or maybe somebody on the current council wants to keep Parker on board because he owes her something. I know they don't want a repeat of the Hamedudin fiasco. Remember, they endorsed him together with Rudolph and got burned when Rudolph lost and Hamedudin got in. Pure speculation on my part, but it looks like they're playing it safe this time.

Dear Voters :

We write to urge you to vote in the town council elections for the three candidates who supported the audit of the proposed BOE budget and it's (sic) outrageous 10.2% tax increase, Yitz Stern, Adam Gussen and Elie Katz. They are the only 3 candidates running who by supporting the audit show a real concern for trimming the waste in the current BOE system. It is extremely important that you go out and vote for these three candidates and only these three candidates.

Many of you have asked us about Joseph Steinberg. While Mr. Steinberg talks about fiscal responsibility his actions lead to a different conclusion. Specifically, he made clear his rejection of the audit of the BOE budget, while offering no viable alternative for the town council who had to gather a better understanding of the situation in the limited time offered by law. Furthermore, we question Mr. Steinberg’s judgment in suggesting that the BOE president, under whose leadership the (rejected) budget was promulgated, would now become a ready and willing partner to work collaboratively with the town council in developing acceptable areas to cut.


Other candidates are asking people to “bullet vote”. This will hurt Stern, Gussen & Katz, and they could lose.

Don't split your vote --- vote just for Stern, Gussen and Katz (Lines 2, 3, and 8).