The Case for Term Limits in Maplewood Politics

No,   do what you suggest below and the voters will appreciate your experience and commitment - and maybe you wont have to spend $10,000 and misrepresent hot button issues to get elected.

yahooyahoo said:

Do enough time volunteering for the right causes and organizations and get involved with Town government and the Wizard of Oz will let you behind the curtain!

yahooyahoo said:

Fluid as in $$$.

Greg spent $10,000 to get elected in a local race.  Does that sound logical to you?

 

Actually, he spent nearly $33K on the primary election.

The system is not open, it's not fluid.  It's insular and more about who you know than what ideas you have.

Its about getting your message to as many voters as possible, provided those voters can be persuaded to agree with what you are saying.

yahooyahoo said:

The system is not open, it's not fluid.  It's insular and more about who you know than what ideas you have.

It's about experience and ability. The reason you know who you know, or rather the reason those who know you select you is because they have worked with you on community projects, and can judge your ability.

In any event what system would you favor?

yahooyahoo said:

The system is not open, it's not fluid.  It's insular and more about who you know than what ideas you have.

Like life. Make some effort and get to know the right people.

has a single person aside from the OP expressed support for term limits?

ctrzaska said:

One could easily argue that Maplewood wouldn't be what and where it is today were it not for the fact that Grasmere (a Republican!) stayed in office for so long.

Can you please expand upon this and tell us why you think Grasmere and his multi-term tenure was so instrumental in making Mplwd what it is today.  Thanks.

sarahzm said:

And after being resoundingly defeated  in his quest to prevent the new development he is now calling for term limits for the very bodies that voted against him - the Township Commitee and Planning Board.  How can anyone take him seriously ?

Sarah - I for one take John Harvey very seriously.  He is a bright and thoughtful person who understands proper leadership and governance.  His call for term limits is not merely a reaction to the Post Office debacle, but to the general evolution, or I should say devolution of our local government, it's committees and boards.  This is worth considering and examining...perhaps looking at how term limits have impacted other communities where it is in force.

Another idea related to governance and elections is something that has been done and suggested by some very intelligent folks.  On each ballot, along with the candidates there is a category that may be chosen which simply states "None of the Above", also called a "scratch" vote.  If for a certain position, the "None of the Above" category gets the most votes, then that part of the election is voided and a new slate must be selected for that position There are variations on this procedure.

sarahzm said:

No,   do what you suggest below and the voters will appreciate your experience and commitment - and maybe you wont have to spend $10,000 and misrepresent hot button issues to get elected.

yahooyahoo said:

Do enough time volunteering for the right causes and organizations and get involved with Town government and the Wizard of Oz will let you behind the curtain!

Sarah - Please tell us what "hot button issues" Greg misrepresented.  I find him to be quite honest, open, and intelligent about most issues.  Thanks.

There should be a term limit for certain posters.

OliveBee said:

ctrzaska said:

One could easily argue that Maplewood wouldn't be what and where it is today were it not for the fact that Grasmere (a Republican!) stayed in office for so long.

Can you please expand upon this and tell us why you think Grasmere and his multi-term tenure was so instrumental in making Mplwd what it is today.  Thanks.

Midtown Direct?  78?  

Consistency?  Experience and perspective from having served in nearly every major role outside (LOM, JSC) and inside the local govt spectrum?  Political clout built over time?  Cross-party kinda guy that had as many Dems fawning as Reps for most of his time as mayor?

OliveBee said:

ctrzaska said:

One could easily argue that Maplewood wouldn't be what and where it is today were it not for the fact that Grasmere (a Republican!) stayed in office for so long.

Can you please expand upon this and tell us why you think Grasmere and his multi-term tenure was so instrumental in making Mplwd what it is today.  Thanks.

I moved to Maplewood towards the end of Mayor Grasmeres tenure.  If memory serves correctly (I tried to verify but couldnt find sources) Mayor Grasmere led the effort to establish both the Maplewood Community Pool and Durand Hedden House.   This was before my time but I have been told that the original pairing of Marshall/Jefferson schools was a very heated controversy with a great deal of dissatisfaction in the Jefferson neighborhood.  At the time 'busing' was a heated racial issue.  In the wake of the Newark Riots where the violence and looting had extended up South Orange Avenue, Montrose was decidedly down on its heals and was seen as the least desirable and most unstable neighborhood in South Orange/Maplewood.  Although this was a school board decision I have been told that Grasmeres leadership and influence were instrumental in the success of the pairing and in coaxing the Jefferson neighborhood into acceptance.  I was not in Maplewoood to experience this, nor could I find any material to confirm this.   This is what I was told by a number of people who were either involved or lived through it.  If this is accurate then his contribution to Maplewood is beyond measure.  

By the way,  I voted against him in his last election.  His ally, the vice mayor  who also served on the planning board was involved in some specific zoning changes that allowed for some controversial development.  The vice mayor (but not mayor Grasmere) was financially involved in the development.  Whether it was on the up and up or not it left a bad taste. 

OliveBee said:

sarahzm said:

And after being resoundingly defeated  in his quest to prevent the new development he is now calling for term limits for the very bodies that voted against him - the Township Commitee and Planning Board.  How can anyone take him seriously ?

Sarah - I for one take John Harvey very seriously.  He is a bright and thoughtful person who understands proper leadership and governance.  His call for term limits is not merely a reaction to the Post Office debacle, but to the general evolution, or I should say devolution of our local government, it's committees and boards.  This is worth considering and examining...perhaps looking at how term limits has impacted other communities where it is in force.

Another idea related to governance and elections is something that has been done and suggested by some very intelligent folks.  One each ballot, along with the candidates there is a category that may be chosen which simply states "None of the Above", also called a "scratch" vote.  If for a certain position, the "None of the Above" category gets the most votes, then that part of the election is voided and a new slate must be selected for that position There are variations on this procedure.

Perhaps I should have said  "How can anyone take him seriously (other than his fellow ohnos and engagers who share the same somewhat paranoid delusions about what they claim is the faulty leadership of our elected officials)

sarahzm said:

Perhaps I should have said  "How can anyone take him seriously (other than his fellow ohnos and engagers who share the same somewhat paranoid delusions about what they claim is the faulty leadership of our elected officials)

Not that it counts, but I'll raise my hand. I wish I could say I take everybody seriously -- I can't -- but when Johnharvey8 posts, I listen.

While what you write is all great re Grasmere, you admit that you really don't know.  I would like to hear from someone who really knows what his accomplishments were.  I myself know a few, and he was revered, lived on my street, etc.

Re Duran Hedden, my understanding is that there was a strong effort to demolish DH, and replace it with something else.  Was it Gramere who had the town take it over?

Does anyone know this history?  TIA.

sarahzm said:

OliveBee said:

ctrzaska said:

One could easily argue that Maplewood wouldn't be what and where it is today were it not for the fact that Grasmere (a Republican!) stayed in office for so long.

Can you please expand upon this and tell us why you think Grasmere and his multi-term tenure was so instrumental in making Mplwd what it is today.  Thanks.

I moved to Maplewood towards the end of Mayor Grasmeres tenure.  If memory serves correctly (I tried to verify but couldnt find sources) Mayor Grasmere led the effort to establish both the Maplewood Community Pool and Durand Hedden House.   This was before my time but I have been told that the original pairing of Marshall/Jefferson schools was a very heated controversy with a great deal of dissatisfaction in the Jefferson neighborhood.  At the time 'busing' was a heated racial issue.  In the wake of the Newark Riots where the violence and looting had extended up South Orange Avenue, Montrose was decidedly down on its heals and was seen as the least desirable and most unstable neighborhood in South Orange/Maplewood.  Although this was a school board decision I have been told that Grasmeres leadership and influence were instrumental in the success of the pairing and in coaxing the Jefferson neighborhood into acceptance.  I was not in Maplewoood to experience this, nor could I find any material to confirm this.   This is what I was told by a number of people who were either involved or lived through it.  If this is accurate then his contribution to Maplewood is beyond measure.  

By the way,  I voted against him in his last election.  His ally, the vice mayor  who also served on the planning board was involved in some specific zoning changes that allowed for some controversial development.  The vice mayor (but not mayor Grasmere) was financially involved in the development.  Whether it was on the up and up or not it left a bad taste. 

Yes, it was Grasmere.  I didn't mention Durand-Hedden as it probably doesn't qualify as an accomplishment that was the result of his lkng tenure, but more of his deep-rooted affection for the town and its history.  I'm sure they can confirm if you really feel it necessary.

As to not knowing, I'm not sure why you think his long-standing and consistent efforts on Midtown Direct (electrifying the lines, Secaucus junction, etc.) and rerouting 78 aren't enough on their own, outside of the other things noted.

OliveBee said:

While what you write is all great re Grasmere, you admit that you really don't know.  I would like to hear from someone who really knows what his accomplishments were.  I myself know a few, and he was revered, lived on my street, etc.

Re Duran Hedden, my understanding is that there was a strong effort to demolish DH, and replace it with something else.  Was it Gramere who had the town take it over?

Does anyone know this history?  TIA.

I'm confused (It happens a lot) ... Why is this relevant to term limits in the year 2016?

Help me out here.

Probably my fault.

I asked this early in the thread and afaik got no response -- with two brand spanking new TC members out of five, and two who haven't served more than two terms, what on earth would be the compelling rationale for term limits?

unless it's just about getting Vic DeLuca out of office, that is.  then it makes perfect sense.

ml1 said:

I asked this early in the thread and afaik got no response -- with two brand spanking new TC members out of five, and two who haven't served more than two terms, what on earth would be the compelling rationale for term limits?

unless it's just about getting Vic DeLuca out of office, that is.  then it makes perfect sense.

Winner. Winner. Chicken dinner!!

As I said upthread, there's clearly an election coming up.

People have already started doing their warmup exercises... it's like pitchers and catchers for local politics!

what do they have against Marlon Brownlee?

The Foundation for Economic Education link at the top of the thread didn't do much for me. But political entrenchment and obstacles, real or perceived, to new blood and fresh perspectives are possibilities compelling enough for me to acknowledge that advocates of term limits just might be acting on principles beyond sticking it to a specific office holder.

DaveSchmidt said:

But political entrenchment and obstacles, real or perceived, to new blood and fresh perspectives are possibilities compelling enough for me to acknowledge that advocates of term limits just might be acting on principles beyond sticking it to a specific office holder.

Oh, please. You're one of MOL's most reasonable, likable posters, but this is the purest of BS. The motivations of the OP and other members of the sour-grapes crew are as transparent as invisible glass.

DaveSchmidt said:

The Foundation for Economic Education link at the top of the thread didn't do much for me. But political entrenchment and obstacles, real or perceived, to new blood and fresh perspectives are possibilities compelling enough for me to acknowledge that advocates of term limits just might be acting on principles beyond sticking it to a specific office holder.

We have new blood and the opportunity for fresh perspectives on the TC.  

My claims of savviness are matched only by my claims of objectivity.

mjh said:

We have new blood and the opportunity for fresh perspectives on the TC.  

I don't happen to see it as a problem here, either. 

DaveSchmidt said:

My claims of savviness are matched only by my claims of objectivity.

Objectivity is overrated. At some point you have to weigh the evidence and make a call. This one doesn't seem hard. 

imonlysleeping said:

DaveSchmidt said:

My claims of savviness are matched only by my claims of objectivity.

Objectivity is overrated. At some point you have to weigh the evidence and make a call. This one doesn't seem hard. 

What I meant was I don't claim to be either. And my call is to take Johnharvey8 at his word.