Why NJ Sucks

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=90 BGCOLOR="#006699" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="133285a1erlcgo.png"> <div> <FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#FFCC66" FACE="Arial" ><B>ProTeeGolf - Classic Woods and Forged Blades</B></FONT><B>    </B><B> |     </B><A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="ProTeeGolf Classic Woods and Forged Bla"><U><B>home</B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id2.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="About Me:"><U>About Me:</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id3.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Golf Clubs for Sale"><U>Golf Clubs for Sale</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id47.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="ELECTRONICS"><U>ELECTRONICS</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id46.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Headcovers"><U>Headcovers</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id27.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Various other Items for sale"><U>Various other Items for sale</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id6.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Contact Us"><U>Contact Us</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id58.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Marine Parts for Sale"><U>Marine Parts for Sale</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id86.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="NIssan"><U>NIssan</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id56.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Automotive"><U>Automotive</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id79.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Miscellaneous"><U>Miscellaneous</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id80.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Boats For Sale"><U>Boats For Sale</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id81.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="CARS"><U>CARS</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id83.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Phones"><U>Phones</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id85.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Repairs"><U>Repairs</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id87.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Fishing Reels"><U>Fishing Reels</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id88.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Furniture"><U>Furniture</U></A>   |   <B>Why NJ Sucks </B>   |   <A HREF="id90.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Dining"><U>Dining</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id91.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Ford Excursion"><U>Ford Excursion</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id92.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="1994 Mercedes"><U>1994 Mercedes</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id93.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="1991_Mercedes"><U>1991_Mercedes</U></A></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=210 BGCOLOR="#FFCC66" TEXT="#080000" background="132d2c00dkelyh.png"> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" height=390 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <bR> <div>  Martin: The other side of superintendent bashing</div> <div> Thursday, June 5, 2008</div> <div> BY PATRICK W. MARTIN</div> <div> Comment on this story Email this story Printer friendly version Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size</div> <bR> <div> I believe it is undemocratic to limit superintendent compensation packages.</div> <bR> <div> YESTERDAY, I, along with the other public school superintendents in the state, received a directive from the state Department of Education to send a copy of my employment contract to the state for review. The directive indicated that "the results of this review will be utilized to revise the standards for review of contracts in the future."</div> <bR> <div> I realize that this review is being prompted by perceived excesses in the contracts of several superintendents throughout the state. But I find it disturbing nonetheless.</div> <bR> <div> Superintendent contracts are being singled out because superintendents as a group have limited political power and thus are easy targets. Those in power can "review" and alter superintendent contracts without fearing any meaningful retribution. What are the superintendents going to do, cry "injustice"? We have been painted in the media as indulged fat cats. So the powers that be can accrue some political capital by publicly chastising us.</div> <bR> <div> Would the same powers that be review teacher contracts across the state, seeking provisions deemed to be overindulgent and wasteful? Would they tell the teachers that teacher contracts of the future will have to conform to "standards" set by the state? What if one of those standards for teacher contracts was that annual salary increases could not exceed 2 percent? This would never happen because the state teachers association would rise up (rightfully so) with tens of thousands of voices and decry the standards as impediments to free and fair collective bargaining.</div> <bR> <div> And make no mistake about it, government officials and politicians who backed such a review of teacher contracts would soon be replaced.</div> <bR> <div> Compare the amount of taxpayer dollars that conceivably could be gleaned from "revising" the 612 superintendent contracts in the state with the amount of money that could be accrued from a similar revision of the contracts of tens of thousands of teachers. The comparison is not even close.</div> <bR> <div> A school superintendent's job is challenging, and superintendents are paid what the market will bear. In other words, if a locality believes that the "going rate" for a superintendent is too high, why doesn't the locality simply hire an individual who will take the job for half the going rate?</div> <bR> <div> The answer is that localities realize the importance of having a knowledgeable professional who will assume the ultimate responsibility for the proper education of their children. It is an awesome responsibility (arguably the most important responsibility in a community) and, in an effort to save some money, appointing an individual willing to take a cut-rate price is understandably troubling to boards of education.</div> <bR> <div> In the same way that our country does not limit what a doctor, lawyer or other professional can charge for services, I believe it is undemocratic to limit superintendent compensation packages.</div> <bR> <div> If the public and press believe that a certain superintendent's remuneration is excessive, they are free in our society to decry that remuneration publicly. The public, through its elected board of education, can change the remuneration through free-market bargaining with the superintendent when the superintendent's contract comes up for renewal. If they desire, board of education trustees can decline to offer contract extensions to superintendents.</div> <bR> <div> I believe it is unfair and un-American to establish contract standards that limit free-market bargaining simply because public school superintendents are easy targets ripe for political point-making.</div> <bR> <div> Patrick W. Martin is Ringwood schools superintendent.</div> <bR> <div> I believe it is undemocratic to limit superintendent compensation packages.</div> <bR> <div> YESTERDAY, I, along with the other public school superintendents in the state, received a directive from the state Department of Education to send a copy of my employment contract to the state for review. The directive indicated that "the results of this review will be utilized to revise the standards for review of contracts in the future."</div> <bR> <div> I realize that this review is being prompted by perceived excesses in the contracts of several superintendents throughout the state. But I find it disturbing nonetheless.</div> <bR> <div> Superintendent contracts are being singled out because superintendents as a group have limited political power and thus are easy targets. Those in power can "review" and alter superintendent contracts without fearing any meaningful retribution. What are the superintendents going to do, cry "injustice"? We have been painted in the media as indulged fat cats. So the powers that be can accrue some political capital by publicly chastising us.</div> <bR> <div> Would the same powers that be review teacher contracts across the state, seeking provisions deemed to be overindulgent and wasteful? Would they tell the teachers that teacher contracts of the future will have to conform to "standards" set by the state? What if one of those standards for teacher contracts was that annual salary increases could not exceed 2 percent? This would never happen because the state teachers association would rise up (rightfully so) with tens of thousands of voices and decry the standards as impediments to free and fair collective bargaining.</div> <bR> <div> And make no mistake about it, government officials and politicians who backed such a review of teacher contracts would soon be replaced.</div> <bR> <div> Compare the amount of taxpayer dollars that conceivably could be gleaned from "revising" the 612 superintendent contracts in the state with the amount of money that could be accrued from a similar revision of the contracts of tens of thousands of teachers. The comparison is not even close.</div> <bR> <div> A school superintendent's job is challenging, and superintendents are paid what the market will bear. In other words, if a locality believes that the "going rate" for a superintendent is too high, why doesn't the locality simply hire an individual who will take the job for half the going rate?</div> <bR> <div> The answer is that localities realize the importance of having a knowledgeable professional who will assume the ultimate responsibility for the proper education of their children. It is an awesome responsibility (arguably the most important responsibility in a community) and, in an effort to save some money, appointing an individual willing to take a cut-rate price is understandably troubling to boards of education.</div> <bR> <div> In the same way that our country does not limit what a doctor, lawyer or other professional can charge for services, I believe it is undemocratic to limit superintendent compensation packages.</div> <bR> <div> If the public and press believe that a certain superintendent's remuneration is excessive, they are free in our society to decry that remuneration publicly. The public, through its elected board of education, can change the remuneration through free-market bargaining with the superintendent when the superintendent's contract comes up for renewal. If they desire, board of education trustees can decline to offer contract extensions to superintendents.</div> <bR> <div> I believe it is unfair and un-American to establish contract standards that limit free-market bargaining simply because public school superintendents are easy targets ripe for political point-making.</div> <bR> <div> Patrick W. Martin is Ringwood schools superintendent.</div> <bR> <div> MIDDLETOWN — Several area school districts are exploring a new source of revenue: corporate advertising.</div> <bR> <div> The man offering the method is John Gulluscio, president of Middletown's Corporate Marketing Associates.</div> <bR> <div> Gulluscio, 61, arranges multiyear contract packages with advertisers who want to place ads on high school grounds. The advertising revenue goes to the district as additional funding, with the company taking a portion of the sales as commission.</div> <bR> <div> Gulluscio said that he believes he has discovered a niche market, and that CMA is the only company providing this kind of service within the New Jersey/New York area. While companies similar to his exist in the Midwest, New Jersey has yet to take full advantage of bringing corporate advertising into its districts, Gulluscio said.</div> <bR> <div> In Monmouth County, the Middletown and Holmdel boards of education are expected to vote tonight on awarding contracts to CMA to line up advertisers. CMA has already been awarded contracts by the Red Bank Regional, Old Bridge and Monroe districts.</div> <bR> <div> CMA's most prominent client, though, may be what is now called the Poland Spring Arena at the Ritacco Center in Toms River, Gulluscio's first undertaking with a school district. CMA has worked with the Toms River Regional district for the past five years, during which a total of nearly $1 million in ad revenue was generated, and the company's contract renewed three times.</div> <bR> <div> Gulluscio referred to the revenue from the Ritacco Center, located at Toms River High School North, as "found money." It is not intended to fund huge projects, like building the next sports venue, but rather to enhance existing facilities, such as new computers for their laboratories or new uniforms for their bands and sports teams.</div> <bR> <div> Holmdel school Business Administrator Michael Petrizzo said that after speaking to Toms River Regional Schools Superintendent Michael J. Ritacco, who he said "raved" about CMA's results, Petrizzo contacted Gulluscio almost a year ago as part of the district's pursuit of revenue opportunities.</div> <bR> <div> "It's a new concept for public school districts," Petrizzo said. "Certainly in this community, (the idea) has never been (approached) before. We wanted to get everyone comfortable with it."</div> <bR> <div> Petrizzo said that Gulluscio gave a presentation at a Holmdel school board meeting, addressing questions and concerns of the public. Gulluscio also gave a presentation before the Middletown board at the beginning of the year.</div> <bR> <div> "There were certainly questions that it didn't interfere with other fundraisers, and that there was no loss of any type of control and that (ads are) done tastefully." Petrizzo said.</div> <bR> <div> Districts are recognizing that property taxpayers are becoming overburdened, and there is no certainty of state funding, said Frank Belluscio, director of communications for the New Jersey School Boards Association.</div> <bR> <div> "Over the last 15 years, we've seen the interest in non-tax revenues for schools (rise)." Belluscio said.</div> <bR> <div> To a similar degree, within the state, there are about 120 districts with active education foundations, Belluscio said, whose purpose is to pursue alternative funding, with advertising being an option.</div> <bR> <div> Gulluscio lists among his 27 clients all of the major New Jersey-New York professional sports teams, the Lakewood BlueClaws and other minor league teams, Monmouth Park Racetrack and the Woodbridge Community Center. He said, however, that his focus has now shifted to working with school districts.</div> <bR> <div> Gulluscio insisted that he doesn't see any harm being done to the students by bringing advertisements onto school property, as long as they are in good taste and at the discretion of the district administration.</div> <bR> <div> To that end, the process of choosing which companies advertise on school grounds will be heavily influenced by what the board of education decides, he said.</div> <bR> <div> Middletown Schools Superintendent Karen Bilbao said that her district has been investigating this type of revenue for more than a year, and that seeking alternative funding is a goal in the district's five-year strategic plan.</div> <bR> <div> After reading about the work Gulluscio had done with the Ritacco Center, Bilbao said that Gulluscio was invited to draft a proposal for Middletown. The administration also visited Ritacco "to get a reference and . . . a sense of the work done in Toms River," she said.</div> <bR> <div> One of the concerns of bringing in another company to secure advertising is the potential conflict between a company like CMA and the high school booster clubs, who customarily bring advertising to school sports venues themselves.</div> <bR> <div> Gulluscio said that he is not looking to compete with booster clubs, but to work alongside them.</div> <bR> <div> Holmdel Booster Club President Jim Murtaugh said that historically the club has not been able to pursue advertising as a form of revenue. It generates the majority of its revenue from memberships, donations and concession fees, Murtaugh said, so there isn't much conflict bringing in another group searching for advertisers.</div> <bR> <div> However, Murtaugh said that for some booster clubs, advertising is a very lucrative source of income.</div> <bR> <div> Bilbao said that as a result of a recent meeting held for members of parent groups seeking to learn more about the process, a set of guidelines is being drawn up based on suggestions and concerns from the public, which will serve as a guide during the process.</div> <bR> <div> Belluscio said that ultimately, each district will have to individually decide how to handle the placement of ads, based on their needs and the concerns of the community.</div> <bR> <div> "The decision must be made locally," he said. "If the (state) steps in and makes an overall rule, that wouldn't be right."</div> <bR> <div> Jennifer Bradshaw: (732) 888-2621 or jbradshaw@app.com</div> <div> In your voice</div> <bR> <div> DOVER — The town will pay its lone female police officer $750,000 to settle the 2005 lawsuit she filed against the town alleging that she was discriminated against because of her gender and because she is openly lesbian.</div> <bR> <div> According to settlement terms approved by the state Civil Service Commission on Wednesday, Sharon Whitmore also will be immediately reinstated to the rank of sergeant. However, she will not be returned to active duty and will be placed on terminal leave, meaning she must resign within nine months.</div> <bR> <div> Whitmore was a 12-year police department veteran when she sued the town in Superior Court in April 2005. She claiming that several town employees engaged in or condoned discriminatory, retaliatory and harassing conduct against her, including calling her demeaning and offensive names and making sexually explicit gestures and comments against women and gays.</div> <bR> <div> The individuals named as defendants were then-town Administrator Paul McDougall, Police Chief Harold "Butch" Valentine, Police Capts. Peter Ugalde and Robert Kerwick, and Sgts. Richard González and Edward O'Rourke.</div> <bR> <div> In her lawsuit, Whitmore alleged that there also were sexual advances by her superiors. In addition, she claimed that her superiors sought to punish her when she spoke up, and gave her "written warnings and inaccurate performance reviews denigrating her character and work abilities and falsely accusing her of inappropriate conduct."</div> <bR> <div> Whitmore was demoted from sergeant to patrol officer in October 2004 after she was accused of driving out of town to visit friends on multiple occasions while on duty and in uniform. She was suspended without pay the following month.</div> <bR> <div> She later challenged the demotion in state Administrative Law Court and then sued the town in Superior Court.</div> <bR> <div> Whitmore also faced a number of other disciplinary charges. However, all but one of them will be dismissed as a result of the settlement.</div> <bR> <div> The lone remaining charge concerns a two-day suspension that Whitmore can continue to appeal.</div> <bR> <div> Neither Whitmore nor the town admitted wrongdoing as part of the settlement.</div> <bR> <div> "It was a fair settlement for all parties, and my client is relieved the litigation is over," Gina Mendola-Longarzo, one of Whitmore's attorneys, said on Friday.</div> <bR> <div> "Sharon is happy with it and is relieved and is moving on with her life," Mendola-Longarzo added.</div> <bR> <div> Valentine declined to comment on the settlement. Mayor James Dodd and town attorney David Pennella could not be reached for comment.</div> <bR> <div> While she officially will be reinstated as a sergeant, Whitmore will not be on active duty and will not be provided with a badge and gun by the town. She also will have to submit her resignation from the department in nine months or when she receives a job with another police department, whichever is sooner.</div> <bR> <div> The $750,000 settlement includes money for Whitmore's attorney fees and includes back pay that she did not receive while she was suspended without pay. It also includes future salary payments that will be made to her while she is on terminal leave.</div> <bR> <div> Michael Scholl may be reached at (973) 428-6644 or mscholl@gannett.com.</div> <div> In your voice</div> <bR> <div> TOMS RIVER — The "Walter Mitty" of Ocean County who never delivered, much less had the $2.5 million he pledged to save the Planetarium at Ocean County College or the</div> <div> $500,000 he wrote in bad checks to The United Way, was sentenced this morning to five years in state prison.</div> <bR> <div> Edward Devine, 51, of Toms River, was led away by sheriff's officers in a torso strap after he had failed to convince Superior Court Judge Barbara Ann Villano that he was the victim of a big misunderstanding although sorry to those he disappointed.</div> <bR> <div> He even tried to have his plea agreement, which he had accepted earlier this year</div> <div> with the Ocean County Prosecutor's Office, thrown out of court. That agreement led</div> <div> Devine to admit his guilt before Villano on April 7 to three counts of theft by</div> <div> deception. He also pleaded guilty to two counts of passing bad checks, including the one for $500,000 he gave to The United Way of Ocean County last year.</div> <bR> <div> Deputy Public Defender Philip Pagano, who represented Devine, told Villano that his client thought he would be entitled to probation under the plea deal.</div> <bR> <div> Pagano also made the case that his client would not be able to make restitution after he was released from prison as he is required to do under the terms of the plea, because he stood to lose his present job as a result of his incarceration. Devine claims he currently earns $85,000 in annual income as an employee for Yellow Transportation, Inc.</div> <bR> <div> Villano rejected the motion. She read portions of the court transcript from April,</div> <div> when Devine testified under oath he had indeed committed the fraud for which he was charged. She observed there was no mention of probation and made clear that probation would have been out of the question anyway, given the nature of the offenses.</div> <bR> <div> Indeed, Villano suggested she thought the agreement with the Prosecutor's Office was too "generous" and at one point in today's proceedings even called on Assistant Ocean County Prosecutor Martin Anton to justify the deal.</div> <bR> <div> "So Prosecutor, how do I get to five (years)?" Villano asked.</div> <bR> <div> While Anton said he did not want to defend Devine, he noted that his fraud did not</div> <div> result in any "significant personal gain."</div> <bR> <div> In a story that plays out like "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty" meets "Six</div> <div> Degrees of Separation," Devine charmed his way into some of Ocean County's most influential social circles, passing himself off as a major trucking magnate with a heart of gold.</div> <bR> <div> After his pledge to rehabilitate the struggling Planetarium, the college's foundation advanced Devine $30,343 in May 2006 so he could award scholarships to three students he was interested in. He also received $11,200 worth of tickets to the foundation's charity ball and advertising for his trucking company, Eastern Carriers, in the ball's program.</div> <bR> <div> In The United Way of Ocean County case, Devine wrote two checks worth $500,000, both drawn from either a closed account or one with insufficient funds. Prior to realizing the checks were bad, United Way thanked Devine by giving him 16 dinner tickets worth $2,400 to attend its gala fundraiser where the first check was presented, prosecutors said.</div> <bR> <div> "I apologize to everyone I've disappointed," Devine said, in a calm, confident</div> <div> voice, before he blamed his predicament on his ex-wife, who was not charged as a</div> <div> co-defendant in the case. "My wife owned that company and I apologize."</div> <bR> <div> A hearing on how much Devine will have to pay back to his victims in restitution will be held at a later date. Under the terms of the plea, Devine was expected to have to pay $43,943 to OCC and The United Way. However, Pagano objected to the amount.</div> <bR> <div> Devine is expected to serve less than one year behind bars.</div> <div> In your voice</div> <bR> <div> WALL — Township taxpayers could be forced to pay higher taxes to close a more than $20 million gap, as township officials try to figure out how to meet its affordable housing requirements now that state lawmakers have taken away the option of selling off those requirements to other municipalities.</div> <bR> <div> Last month, Gov. Corzine signed legislation to eliminate Regional Contribution Agreements (RCA) among municipalities, effectively outlawing municipalities from paying other municipalities to build their affordable housing requirements.</div> <bR> <div> "It's despicable legislation," Mayor John Devlin said.</div> <bR> <div> "This is a colossally foolish piece of legislation of epic proportions," said Jeffrey R. Surenian, an attorney who specializes in affordable housing requirements and sits on the township's affordable housing subcommittee.</div> <bR> <div> Township officials met Thursday afternoon to discuss ways to satisfy the state Council On Affordable Housing (COAH) requirements to build 667 affordable housing units by 2018. The new affordable housing units built must be for levels rated as very low-, low-, and moderate-income households.</div> <bR> <div> For a typical family of four, a moderate income is listed as $67,653; Low-income is $42,283; and very low income is $25,370.</div> <bR> <div> According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median family income in Wall was roughly $83,795 in 2000. That number increased nearly 60 percent between 1989 and 1999, but there are no estimates available since the 2000 Census was completed nearly eight years ago.</div> <bR> <div> "A policeman in Wall Township isn't eligible unless he has a wife and two children — if he's single he's certainly not going to qualify," Township Administrator Joseph Verruni said.</div> <bR> <div> Of the 667 affordable housing units that need to be built, a minimum of 25 percent (167 units) will need to be rental units, while no more than 25 percent (167 units) can be built for senior citizens only. The remaing 50 percent of the units can be more rentals or some other type of affordable housing as long as it is not restricted or limited to senior citizens.</div> <bR> <div> Rent would also be controlled by federal Housing and Urban Development rules and the COAH requirements. The rent on a two-bedroom unit would be as low as $446 for low-income families, with about a $125 utility allowance added. Moderate-income households would pay about $1,017 for rent with the same $125 utility allowance for the same two-bedroom rental unit.</div> <bR> <div> Houses built under the COAH requirements would have an allowable price tag.</div> <bR> <div> To buy a two-bedroom home under the COAH requirements, housing prices for very low- and low-income families would be between $51,374 and $85,623 depending on their annual income. A moderate-income household buying the same two-bedroom home would be charged $119,872.</div> <bR> <div> "In order to build that house, you're looking at huge subsidies for the builders, and at this point that will come from the taxpayers," Verruni said.</div> <bR> <div> The minimum of 167 rental units would put a $5-$7 million strain on Wall taxpayers, and would grow with every new rental unit added. The maximum of 167 senior housing units places the burden at around $3-$5 million, according to Verruni.</div> <bR> <div> In order to make up the more than $20 million that township taxpayer would need to fork over to build all 667 units, developers would need to propose building literally thousands of market-rate housing units along with the affordable housing unit. But building thousands of market-rate units over and above the 667 affordable units would place a huge strain on the township's infrastructure and school system.</div> <bR> <div> "COAH has created an impossible situation," Surenian said.</div> <bR> <div> Township officials must have a plan in place by Dec. 31.</div> <bR> <div> "We are going to try and find a solution that doesn't deviate drastically from the Master Plan," Verruni said</div> <bR> <div> Right now, township officials are not sure where they will find the solution, but they are willing to admit that there are large tracts of land along Route 34 that are attractive but denied the former Wall Speedway tract was a primary target area.</div> <bR> <div> In the meantime, the township is joining in a lawsuit with other municipalities and the League of Municipalities to put a stop to the COAH rules.</div> <bR> <div> The township is also appealing COAHs determination that it build the 667 units.</div> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>