Kaplan v. Teaneck BOE

An open email to the Teaneck Board of Education and District:

BER-L-000121-24 Keith Kaplan v. Teaneck Board of Education, et al.

The Teaneck Board of Education has problems.

There’s the Federal investigation into Civil Rights Violations by the Office of Civil Rights

There’s the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression Investigation and charges of Civil Rights Violations

(First Letter from FIRE) (Second Letter from FIRE)

And now, there’s a Superior Court action for multiple violations of the Open Public Meetings Act (NJ’s signature transparency law)

I called several of the OPMA violations out at meetings, including the failure to abide by the minimum requirements of transparency–sending notice to two newspapers.  The First Amendment organization FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression) has called them out for Civil Rights violations, not once, but TWICE.  And the Feds are investigating the District.

Sadly, there’s no sign that the illegal and improper activities that the Trustees of the Board of Education and the Administration in Teaneck have been engaged in, will be ending on their own.

So I have filed a Verified Complaint and an Order to Show Cause against the School District.  Today, the Order was granted by Judge Catuogno.

I do not take this step lightly.  However the law requires certain actions, and they have not been taken.  To wit: Continue reading “Kaplan v. Teaneck BOE”

Municipal Weather: Shady With Remote Chance of Sunshine

The last meeting of both the Municipal Council and the Board of Education has shown just how much transparency is a buzzword, without much meaning, to many elected to public office.

The Council

At the December 12th meeting of the Teaneck Council, Councilwoman Goldberg made a motion to appoint co-chairs of the PPRAB. In response, the following conversation appears to indicate that open session (public) items have not only been discussed in closed session but decisions were made in closed session for open session items, in violation of the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA):

Discussion from the December 12th Open session meeting:

You can watch the entire meeting here: https://youtu.be/uOHqH3unrQ8?t=4526

The conversation below starts at approximately 1:15:26

Deputy Mayor Gee: “Mr. Mayor, I’m doing all the personnel nominations, I’m not sure why she [Councilwoman Goldberg] did that.”

CW Belcher: “The discussion is, I thought in closed session, we said that Deputy Mayor Gee was going to put forth the nominations, so I don’t know why Councilwoman Goldberg is usurping that intent. That was clearly stated during closed session.” Continue reading “Municipal Weather: Shady With Remote Chance of Sunshine”

Teaneck BOE Violates OPRA to Keep Public in the Dark

What happens in a closed session of the Council or Board of Education stays in that closed session… but the minutes, with proper redactions, are still a public record.

But not according to the Teaneck Board of Education.  I have emailed the Board Secretary to provide these documents.  If they do not do so, suit shall be commenced.

I hope they do not waste taxpayer dollars trying to hide this public information.

Keith Kaplan
Teaneck Today Continue reading “Teaneck BOE Violates OPRA to Keep Public in the Dark”

When the Board of Education Violated My Civil Rights, I Chose to Fight Fisher with F.I.R.E.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (“FIRE”) calls on the Board to reform its policies and practices to comply with its constitutional obligations.

“When the Board of Education Violated My Civil Rights, I Chose to Fight Fisher with F.I.R.E.” – Keith Kaplan

The Board of Education is bound by the First Amendment

Lest anyone thinks that the standpoint the board based their vague and unequally applied rules has any standing, I’d urge you to read Justice Robert Jackson’s opinion in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)

In the opinion, the Court says:

“The Fourteenth Amendment, as now applied to the States, protects the citizen against the State itself and all of its creatures — Boards of Education not excepted.”

“Such Boards are numerous, and their territorial jurisdiction often small. But small and local authority may feel less sense of responsibility to the Constitution, and agencies of publicity may be less vigilant in calling it to account.”

“There are village tyrants, as well as village Hampdens, but none who acts under color of law is beyond reach of the Constitution.”

“The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”

and my favorite line from any opinion:

“If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.”


The Superintendent’s Letter:

On October 11, Teaneck School’s Superintendent Dr. Andre D. Spencer sent out a letter to parents in the wake of the most horrific attack on the Jewish people in a single day since the Holocaust.

In that letter, Dr. Spencer referred to the attacks perpetrated by Hamas as “the latest incidents in the cycle of violence in the Middle East” and “[t]he unfortunate situation in the Middle East”.

In the days following, I personally reached out to Dr. Spencer and we spoke via telephone for a while about the reasons the letter was so problematic to many residents, including those who had children in the district.  I even went as far as to prepare language that Dr. Spencer might be able to use1 to indicate that he understood the Jewish community’s anguish and was being responsive to those in his care.

Subsequently, parents in the township organized a Change.org petition, entitled: “Teaneck Public Schools: Revise Your Statement on Terrorism in Israel“, which urged the Superintendent to revisit his remarks.  The letter was signed by 3,071 individuals.

On October 17th, the Township Council unanimously passed Resolution 272-2023 “Denouncing the Terrorist Group Hamas and Supporting the State of Israel”.

Residents reach out to BOE and receive unequal treatment

The next day, residents came to address the Board of Education and Superintendent Spencer at the regular board meeting of October 18th [video link to meeting].

FIRE: The Teaneck Board of Education’s Restrictions on Public Comment Violate the First Amendment

At the 10/18 BOE meeting, Board Vice President Victoria Fisher regularly cut off speakers who mentioned atrocities committed by Hamas against Israel, but did not do so for those making comments in the opposite direction.  After seeing at least six of these incidents happen (watch e.g. at time indexes: 16:55, 50:16, 54:35 and 1:21:57), I went to the microphone and spoke.

Teaneck Board of Education Vice President Victoria Fisher (left) cuts off a person from speaking during the public comment period of the Oct. 18, 2023 meeting of the Teaneck Board of Education.

You can watch me speaking at time reference 1:49:57.

Several residents were cut off from speaking based on vague notions that dangerous actions, described in detail were too much for High School students in attendance, to hear.


The Court in Cohen v. CA dealt with the issue of using alternative words, stating:

“Additionally, we cannot overlook the fact, because it is well illustrated by the episode involved here, that much linguistic expression serves a dual communicative function: it conveys not only ideas capable of relatively precise, detached explication, but otherwise inexpressible emotions as well. In fact, words are often chosen as much for their emotive as their cognitive force. We cannot sanction the view that the Constitution, while solicitous of the cognitive content of individual speech, has little or no regard for that emotive function which, practically speaking, may often be the more important element of the overall message sought to be communicated. Indeed, as Mr. Justice Frankfurter has said,
“[o]ne of the prerogatives of American citizenship is the right to criticize public men and measures — and that means not only informed and responsible criticism, but the freedom to speak foolishly and without moderation.” Baumgartner v. United States, 322 U. S. 665, 322 U. S. 673-674 (1944).
Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971)

I was cut off from speaking no less than 3 times, due solely to the words I spoke to the board.  This was an egregious violation of the First Amendment, as well as State Law (N.J. STAT. § 10:4-12(a) — OPMA) and Board Policy.

“Several parents and community members used the public comment period to criticize Spencer for not explicitly and forcefully condemning the attack. But when they described Hamas’s actions to support that criticism, the board repeatedly shut them down. The board took particular exception to commenters’ “graphic” descriptions of the attack and repeatedly told speakers to keep in mind that children were in the audience.

Yet when other commenters used their time to emphasize the plight of Palestinians and used similarly “graphic” language, the board allowed them to continue.”

– Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

Watch the board selectively stop certain points of view:

“For example, when one speaker said it’s possible to unequivocally condemn Hamas’s actions without taking a side in the conflict “unless of course you’re trying to appease people who actually think that the raping and murdering and pillaging of the community is appropriate,” Board Vice President Victoria Fisher immediately cut him off. In contrast, the board remained silent when another commenter said, “These people talking about raping and piling bodies on top of each other, that happened in the Holocaust. And if they’re having PTSD for what they’re doing to the Muslim community in Palestine, that’s something they need to seek mental health counseling for.”

When a speaker rhetorically asked how others would feel if “Indigenous people in our country … pulled your kids out of their beds and then shot you in front of them,” Fisher disapprovingly interrupted. But the board allowed someone else to freely comment that Israel’s “dehumanizing and genocidal actions” and the “propaganda surrounding them have spread all the way to us, where kids are stabbed 26 times just for being Palestinian.”

The board also repeatedly warned speakers discussing the Hamas attack not to repeat details or facts already “on the record.” Yet several pro-Palestinian speakers repeated details mentioned by previous commenters without receiving such warnings or admonitions.”

– Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

Cease and Desist

At the next meeting, the Board voted in closed session to have the Counsel for the District send a letter to “Cease and Desist” regarding my “conduct” to the board.  In this revision of history, the attorneys stated:

“The Board takes no position with respect to the subject matter of your comments”

This is clearly belied by the facts, as anyone can see on the recorded Board meeting.

Luckily, there are groups such as the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), whose mission is “to defend and sustain the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty.”

FIRE lays out exactly where the Board VP, Victoria Fisher repeatedly violated the civil rights of parents and other members of our community.  The letter, which is posted in full below with links to all relative documents and cases, requests a response by December 11th.  I will update you whenever responses come through.

The response from FIRE to the Teaneck Board of Education can be read here:

2023-11-27_FIRE Letter to Teaneck Public Schools Board of Education, November 27, 2023

Due to a significant number of emails received by the Teaneck Board of Education, I also notified Board President Sebastian Rodriguez and Vice President Victoria Fisher separately, since they were cc’d on the communication to me.  I will post any further responses I receive below.


Response from Teaneck Board of Education Vice President Victoria Fisher:

Response from Teaneck Board of Education President Sebastian Rodriguez:

“Keith you sent the letter to the attorney Mr. Tabarkin, as such you must wait for his response by the due date on the letter (12/11/23).”

  1. The language I gave Dr. Spencer was based on a letter prepared by the President of Northwestern University.
    Sadly, Dr. Spencer did not send this and chose not to revise his communications.  You can find my suggested wording here (note these are NOT words created by Dr. Spencer):
    Last week, I sent out a letter outlining services our community can provide to our scholars, staff, and families. In that communication, some language has been seen by members of our community to suggest that I believe that the Teaneck Public School District as an entity does not condemn the atrocities that were committed. That cannot be further from the truth and I write again to share my thoughts about our values and our response to atrocities. There is no one who believes we should not be governed by a set of values… that everything is relative. Let me be very clear — we are absolutely guided by a set of shared values and principles. Among the values that we all share and embrace both individually and collectively are commitments to open discourse, diversity, equity, inclusion, and an abhorrence of antisemitism and racism. The abhorrent and horrific actions of Hamas last Saturday are clearly antithetical to Teaneck’s and our scholars’ values — as well as my own. Wherever one finds themselves on greater issues regarding the conflict, our shared humanity should lead us all to condemn these barbaric acts. One more value that I know we share in Teaneck is care and compassion for one another. Our scholars, our faculty, our staff, and our entire community are in tremendous pain. This is a moment for us to pull together, support one another, and seek common ground. I have been in communication with our leaders. We are coordinating our resources. No one should think we need to agree with each other about divisive issues like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But we must have empathy for each other and strive to build understanding. We condemn the terror visited on our community. We share our compassion and stand with all innocent people in Israel and Gaza at this time.

Councilwoman Requested Teaneck Today’s Press Credentials Be Rescinded

The request to bar particular media from equal access is a frontal assault on a core American value. It should interest the whole country.

  • 3/6/23: Hillary Goldberg is sued (in her individual capacity) for defamation [docket here].
  • 5/30/23: Teaneck Today reported that Goldberg’s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint was denied.
  • 6/1/23: Thirty-five hours after Teaneck Today posted the news about her case, Councilwoman Goldberg demanded Township ‘Press Releases’ stop flowing to Teaneck Today.

Was this an ‘official’ act of retaliation against unfavorable press?

On May 30th, 2023, Teaneck Today reported that Bergen County Superior Court Judge Anthony R. Suarez had denied a motion to dismiss the complaint brought by Wayne Puppies against Hillary Goldberg.

The news story contained the opinion by Judge Suarez denying a motion by Hillary Zaer Goldberg to dismiss the charges that Goldberg defamed Wayne Puppies.

Shortly after, she sent multiple emails to the Township Manager (Dean Kazinci), cc’ing the Town’s Mayor (Michael Pagan), Deputy Mayor (Danielle Gee), and Township Attorney (Scott Salmon), requesting the Township turn off the spigot for official information sent to press.  In her initial email, she called Teaneck Today “a toxic Facebook group”.

A note for the sake of transparency: Goldberg is a member of the Facebook group

Kazinci declined to comment on the story.  Township attorney Scott Salmon, who started working for the Township on May 23 (a week prior), indicated he would not be commenting on this piece or answering whether legal questions about the issues were discussed.

I reached out to the plaintiff’s attorney in the Wayne Puppies defamation action but did not get a response.

Requests for comment to Pagan, Gee, and Goldberg have gone unanswered (if responses come in after publication, they will be appended to the story).

The first email

On June 1st, at 5:06 AM [35 hours after the story about Wayne Puppies], Councilwoman Hillary Zaer Goldberg emailed the Township Manager:

“Dean why is Teaneck Today on the list for press releases??! That is a toxic Facebook group, not a news source that should be on a press release distribution group.”

Why would a sitting member of the governing body try to prevent residents from knowing what is happening in their town?

That’s the question I sought to answer when I discovered, within Open Public Record Act (OPRA) requests, that Councilwoman Hillary Goldberg was actively using her position on Council to interfere with timely public information getting to Teaneck Today.

It wouldn’t be the first time someone found a local council member was abusing her position to attempt to coerce employees into acting contrary to the First Amendment to the US Constitution, her oath of office, and in contravention of the law–but Teaneck Today had been on the Press Release list for months (see request to join from 2022).  The Press Releases have been shared with tens of thousands, in the Facebook group (where Goldberg is herself, a member) and beyond.  Goldberg had been in office for five months and cc’d on many such releases.

Why now?

Local news is a tough gig.  There aren’t a lot of companies willing to devote enough journalistic resources to cover local news.  As a consequence, so many stories that may matter to you and a few neighbors, often go unreported.

Teaneck Today

Teaneck Today was created in May of 2016.  As its name implies, it’s a place for residents, neighbors, and friends to post issues, chat about the state of Teaneck and communicate what they are doing–today.  At times, pols (including the current Mayor and several members of the Council) have used the forum to disseminate information.

Some posts range from the mundane (potholes, leaves, and snow complaints), and some are deeply personal (cuts by BOE for special-ed classes) and some are just politically fraught (Council removal of individuals from boards) with proponents and detractors commenting to and at each other.  It’s a common occurrence to hear people claim it’s an echo chamber (an ironic thing that true echo chambers typically don’t exhibit).

At current, there are approximately 9k+ members, with more going to sources on the web (TeaneckToday.com) and signing up for the mailing list.

I (Keith Kaplan) run the group and I’ve long been a fan of getting as much information as possible (including source materials) out to the public–through whatever means are available.

As many know, I post to Facebook (via the Teaneck Today group), I email information (sign up here) and I post on the web.

A simple philosophy: The answer to censorship and bad speech is not more of the same

Those who regularly read my columns know that my answer to “bad” or “wrong” speech is more speech, better speech.  For those reasons, I discuss issues, I post source documents, and I attempt to explain what happens behind the closed doors of government.

The OPRA request (Open Public Records Act)

To that end, I’ll often submit requests to “OPRA” on various topics, such as Cannabis (we never saw the town release the results of the town-wide poll, why is that?) or Zoning (new AirBNB legislation just went into effect, which will cost residents more money to offer homes for use).  I’ll also request information regarding litigation.

As Gerard DeMarco wrote in the Daily Voice last week:

“Keith Kaplan, a former councilman himself, has rigorously kept township residents and business owners informed for more than five years through his “Teaneck Today” blog.

“Teaneck Today” also has a Facebook group with more than 8,900 members.

Combined, both have been invaluable resources, reporting and providing information on elections, building in town, school calendars, roadwork, COVID developments and more in much the way a weekly newspaper would.

Like most bloggers, Kaplan has his causes, as well as his targets.

One of those targets, Councilwoman Hilary Goldberg, was part of a three-woman slate that bounced him from office in last November’s election.

After Goldberg was sued by a pet store hoping to set up shop in Teaneck, Kaplan provided blow-by-blow accounts and published legal filings without editorializing about it.”

You can read that article here:

Wayne Puppies took Hillary Goldberg to Court. What happened next might shock you…

I had requested back in 2022, to be added to the Teaneck Police Department list for Public News Releases.  The list is public, any news org can join (there are scores of emails on the list at present) and when I receive news releases, I share them with you, the public.

Hillary Goldberg ran on a platform of transparency, but in private, she is trying to prevent access.

Ironically, obtaining information from Government actors that they are trying to hide via OPRA, was the subject of a campaign video from Goldberg, herself.

State Law Requirements and Teaneck’s Form of Government

Teaneck operates under the Council-Manager form of Government as created in the Faulkner Act.  Under our somewhat unique form of government, the members of the Township Council act solely as a body, and any requests/demands must be made by the body to the Manager.   As the Manager is the executive office of the municipality, and the authority of the Council is solely as a body, there’s a specific requirement to guard against incursions to the manager’s authority in State Statute.

It is the intention of this article 1 that the municipal council shall act in all the matters as a body, and it is contrary to the spirit of this article for any of its members to seek individually to influence the official acts of the municipal manager, or any other officer, or for the council or any of its members to direct or request the appointment of any person to, or his removal from, office;  or to interfere in any way with the performance by such officers of their duties.  The council and its members shall deal with the administrative service solely through the manager and shall not give orders to any subordinates of the manager, either publicly or privately.  Nothing herein contained shall prevent the municipal council from appointing committees or commissions of its own members or of citizens to conduct investigations into the conduct of any officer or department, or any matter relating to the welfare of the municipality, and delegating to such committees or commissions such powers of inquiry as the municipal council may deem necessary.  Any council member violating the provisions of this section shall, upon conviction thereof in a court of competent jurisdiction, be disqualified as a council member.
NJSA 40 § 69A-91

Timeline:

  • May 26, 2023: Judge Suarez denies Goldberg’s motion to dismiss the defamation claims against her in her individual capacity
  • May 30, 2023: Teaneck Today reports the result of the Motion to Dismiss and publishes the opinion from Judge Suarez
  • June 1, 2023: Councilwoman Goldberg, in her official capacity attempts to have news@teanecktoday.com removed from the Teaneck Police Department PR listing.

“Dean why is Teaneck Today on the list for press releases??! That is a toxic Facebook group, not a news source that should be on a press release distribution group. Please either remove Keith- he can opra like everyone else.”

  • June 1, 2023: Manager Kazinci responds to Councilwoman Goldberg that the Police Department maintains the list, but if she wishes, others can be added (e.g. Teaneck Voices)

    “Hillary:I do not send press releases to Teaneck Today. I receive them from the police department. They maintain the email list.I can have the Chief add Teaneck Voices if that’s helpful.”

  • June 1, 2023: Township attorney responds with [redacted] legal advice to the Manager.

 

At this point, the matter should be settled.  But Councilwoman Goldberg is not done.

  • June 1, 2023:Councilwoman Goldberg asks the manager:

“Do we know how Keith got himself on that list? If Keith is on there so should Bill Orr, Chuck, Alan and Stephen Gruber.”

This begs the question as to why those others “should be” on the list.  Anyone may request to be added to a Press Release list.  The Appellate Division in In re January 11, 2013 Subpoena by the Grand Jury of Union Cnty., N.J. discussed the statutory factors regarding who may receive the benefit of press-shield laws, and such, but assuming they meet the generally accepted criteria, anyone requesting, should have been added to the PR list.

Did they ever request to be on the list and find themselves denied?  No.  A request for information to the municipality found no one was denied.

Is it acceptable for a Government agent to request certain “news” orgs be added to a list?

For the sake of clarity –  all should agree that if those organizations meet the criteria, and request to join, they should be added.

The question is whether or not organizations that are “favored” by one pol can be added for access at that pol’s request.

And what is it about those particular individuals Goldberg mentions that merit their inclusion on the release list, even as Councilwoman Goldberg seeks to have Teaneck Today removed?

Is it because Goldberg considered Teaneck Today a “toxic Facebook group, not a news source”, while she views those other outlets differently?

Content-Based Distinctions by Government Actors

In REED et al. v. TOWN OF GILBERT, ARIZONA, et al., the US Supreme Court stated:

Because content-based laws target speech based on its communicative content, they are presumptively unconstitutional and may be justified only if the government proves that they are narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests. E.g., R. A. V. v. St. Paul, 505 U. S. 377 . Speech regulation is content based if a law applies to particular speech because of the topic discussed or the idea or message expressed. E.g., Sorrell v. IMS Health, Inc., 564 U. S. ___, ___–___. And courts are required to consider whether a regulation of speech “on its face” draws distinctions based on the message a speaker conveys. Id., at ___.

Whether or not Councilwoman Goldberg considers the opinions in Teaneck Today to be “toxic”, she may not target them with official action based on the communicative content or because of the topic discussed or the idea or message expressed (although she’s free to remove herself from the group).

To demand that the manager take such action also violates the NJ Statute (40:69A-91).

Later in the afternoon, the manager told Councilwoman Goldberg that:

1) he doesn’t maintain the list and
2) if she has an issue with it, perhaps they can post them publicly elsewhere e.g. Facebook:

“I do not maintain the news media list. I’m going to speak to [town attorney] Mr. Salmon. As this appears to be an issue, it may be easier to just post releases on the TPD Facebook page which is open to the public.”
– Dean Kazinci to Hillary Goldberg

And Councilwoman Goldberg responds, removing all doubt as to what her issue truly is:

At the end of the day I am fine with the real press (emphasis added) of course. But either all the Teaneck media
(Voices, Blue, Today, Tomorrow, and Newsroom) gets it or none and they all go via opra. Keith cannot get special
treatment.
Thanks please let me know asap.
Hillary

Special Treatment?

Teaneck’s Manager, Dean Kazinci is a man of principle and would not offer or accept special treatment.  He responded to that charge quickly:

Hillary:
Keith does not get and/or receive special treatment. If you know of someone who is doing so that violates any of our internal rules or regulations, please let me know. I will address it immediately. I’m sure Keith submitted something to the PD under Teaneck Today for press releases.

The final demand:

“Keith knows to inquire….
Again please either remove Keith and only the formal press gets them and Keith can get from social media.”

I do know to inquire – just like I know that a government actor seeking to define a “news” organization as “legitimate” is going to fail out of the gate (NJ has extended bloggers and other news protections, including media shield laws).  I also know that choosing one type of speech (Teaneck Tomorrow or Voices, etc..) over another like Teaneck Today, is an outright violation of the First Amendment Councilwoman Goldberg gave an oath to uphold.

The demand to have the Manager and Police Chief remove someone, based on their opinions and the content of their ideas is certainly a colorable violation of 40 § 69A-91, which ends with:

“Any council member violating the provisions of this section shall, upon conviction thereof in a court of competent jurisdiction, be disqualified as a council member.”

Councilwoman Goldberg, if you attempt to block access to public information again, you may well find yourself in court.


Emails obtained from Open Public Records Act request:

 

On advice of counsel….

Well, that didn’t take long.

We hadn’t even had the second reading on our flag ordinance policy1 yet (that took place at our September 10th meeting this evening), and we already got the first threat of a lawsuit — from an individual demanding we also raise a pro-life flag.


For those that haven’t been flowing the issue closely: Continue reading “On advice of counsel….”

The code was meant to be a shield, but someone is using it as a sword

In my previous post (Sidewalks – the deal you didn’t know you made),  I discussed some of the origins of our sidewalk codes and explained a little bit about the deal residents made to repair them if they became a hazard.

In this post, I want to focus a little bit on how our municipal code operates and the norms that existed when certain provisions were created.

The importance of Norms

While it’s clear that residents who wanted sidewalks, agreed to fix them if they fell into disrepair, problems became apparent from the start.  New residents would buy homes and discover they had to fix sidewalk slabs, coming to council for relief.

Here is how Councilman Haggerty described the problem in January of 1948: Continue reading “The code was meant to be a shield, but someone is using it as a sword”

Why re-codification of the Teaneck Code is important

At some point in the past, the township passed a rule to prohibit businesses from operating on the first floor of buildings.  Not only could they not operate, say, in a basement — but they had to be seen from the street.

Maybe this provision made sense at some point in time.  It has become pointless today. 

Whether or not it made sense when the provision was last tinkered with (in 1951) is debatable, but it appears that I’m not the first person to think this is pointless and counter-productive.  Teaneck also considered it pointless in 1973.

That’s the year that the Teaneck Council passed ordinance 1568, which reads in relevant part:

Section 3. That Sec. 5-14 entitled “Buildings to be open to public view” and Sec. 5-15 entitled “Business to be conducted at street level; exception as to bowling alleys” of said Chapter 5 entitled “Amusements” be deleted in their entirety“. (emphasis added)

Continue reading “Why re-codification of the Teaneck Code is important”

[UPDATE x2] [LAWSUIT] Senator Weinberg to Teaneck Business: Not in my backyard!

There’s a new kid-friendly establishment coming to Teaneck, but not if State Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg has anything to say about it.

Senator Loretta Weinberg, in her capacity as our representative, has sued the Township and a business trying to open up in “her” building (full complaint available below).

The tenant, Teaneck Speedway LLC wishes to put in two amenities:
1) Slot-Car Racing tracks and 2) a Mini-Bowling area.  (The latter is kind of a mix between skee-ball and bowling)

Here’s what it will look like: Continue reading “[UPDATE x2] [LAWSUIT] Senator Weinberg to Teaneck Business: Not in my backyard!”