Sunday, July 18, 2010

Teaneck in The Jerusalem Post


Teaneck, for some odd reason, is the subject of an article in The Jerusalem Post.
Seems to me that this is just another of the slew of anti-orthodox articles that appear every so often, for no reason other than to rip the orthodox. Perfect timing on the eve of Tisha B'Av.
The author talks about Teaneck's "golden days" as a liberal progressive welcoming community and then takes a sharp turn to take pot shots at the very people who moved to her so-called "welcoming" community.
Here's the article, in its entirety.

A town that touts its diversity
By MARILYN HENRY
It is neither easy (nor wise) to write about the town in which you live, especially if it is a small town; especially if it is a small town that is deeply invested in its delusions. I live in Teaneck, a New Jersey township a few miles across the Hudson from Manhattan. Lovely place with a storied history as a progressive community.
There was some happy news earlier this month when the town’s seven-member council selected its Muslim member, Mohammed Hameeduddin, as mayor. An Orthodox Jew, Adam Gussen, was selected as deputy mayor. The local county newspaper, The Record, said: “It’s stated so often that it’s almost a local cliché: Teaneck’s greatest strength is its diversity.” It is easy to get mistyeyed about a town that likes to tout its diversity. The council comprises two black women, four Jews (three of whom are Orthodox) and a Muslim.
However, diversity also means multiple, distinctive interests that may collide with each other. With nearly 40,000 residents, Teaneck is diverse, but it is not integrated.
For the Jews, who are about 40 percent of the population, it is a golden ghetto, where the main street caters to the religiously traditional Orthodox and Conservative communities. The politics, Jewish and local, are nasty.
In the May council election, an Orthodox candidate, Joseph Steinberg, lost support after he was attacked by a right-wing Jewish monthly paper that is published in the neighboring town of Englewood. Steinberg, who has a record of civic service in Teaneck, was assailed, in part, for failing to condemn Barbara Ley Toffler, a Jewish council member who is not Orthodox. Toffler had antagonized part of the observant community in February 2007 with a comment in The New York Times.
In a column called “Proudly Diverse Teaneck Is Forced to Re-examine Its Assumptions,” she was quoted as saying: “People worry that there’s a group that wants this to become an Orthodox community like some of the ones in Rockland County [New York]. This has always been an incredibly diverse community, and from my perspective, I don’t want it to become any one thing.”
Apart from how people feel about Toffler, it seems cruel and childish to penalize Steinberg over someone else’s comments three years earlier. Days before his defeat, Steinberg said in an “open letter” that because of “the smear campaign, a terrible hillul hashem [desecration of God’s name] has now spread both within and beyond the Jewish community.”
IN 1949, the US government considered Teaneck a model town, at least for American propaganda purposes. The government made a traveling photo exhibition of civic life in Teaneck, then led by town manager Paul Volcker Sr., to be used in democracy “reeducation” programs in occupied Eastern Europe and Japan. A generation later, in 1965, Teaneck was thought to be the first township in the US to voluntarily racially integrate its schools.
The Orthodox presence here began to grow some three decades ago when Rabbi Macy Gordon helped bring a small group to the town because the upper Manhattan area around Yeshiva University was not suited for young families who wanted a suburban lifestyle. What was a convivial environment for the fledgling Orthodox community was also attractive to the Muslim community, which grew with two mosques and an Islamic school in Teaneck.
Now, within Teaneck’s six square miles, there are 14 Orthodox synagogues (with more on the horizon), a new mikve and every conceivable type of kosher establishment.
It’s a very cozy place for the frum. The question is whether other residents – blacks, Muslims, Asians and Reform Jews – are comfortably at liberty to express concerns or grievances about the Jewish presence without being branded as bigots.
“BRANDING” HERE in Teaneck, which also has been called “dati-neck,” is not limited to religious and racial questions, although those are the cruelest and most sensitive.
“Politics by its very nature is divisive. People need to disagree without being disagreeable,” Hameeduddin told the local Jewish newspaper, the Jewish Standard. “If you can’t compromise, then there is no democracy.”
The new mayor has the advantage of a long-term friendship with the new deputy mayor, Gussen. They know how to talk to each other. They have been doing it for decades. They were students together at Teaneck public schools; their relationship began with sports. “That would be the first thing everybody did, ” Hameeduddin told the Standard.
The selection of Hameeduddin was a marvelous bit of symbolism that put the town and its nonpartisan council in the news. The post of Teaneck mayor is largely ceremonial, but it gives Hameeduddin quite a pulpit. Perhaps he can use this opportunity to remind us that “diversity” is a vague term that conveys nothing about the quality of civic life. We are diverse, yes, but no longer the liberal town that resisted the rampant racial segregation of the 1960s and that made Teaneck such a welcoming community for an Orthodox flock.
Hameeduddin and Gussen would not have been likely to become friends if they were young students today, instead of fathers with professional careers. Most Jewish children in Teaneck attend Jewish day schools, yeshivot or private schools. They don’t meet other children in the classrooms or on the sports fields. The Jewish community needs to determine if it wants to live exclusively in the segregated golden ghetto or if it is willing to find a realistic way to recreate the progressive town that made friends of two boys named Mohammed and Adam.

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!

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.

VOTE LINES

2 – STERN

3 – GUSSEN

8 – KATZ


Signed by:

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