Who is the Village Keepers Inc.?

I think this thread is a good example of how MOL can be more responsible than some of the local investigative "journalism" blogs. I would think the first thing people would want to know when lawn signs go up around town that say they're paid for by Village Keepers Inc., would be - who are Village Keepers? And given the vague platitudes on the signs urging us to keep the village a village, and do the site right, it's even more important IMHO to know. All the groups on the development side are transparent, and the TC is accountable at election time. A group whose members aren't yet known, with no accountability? Don't "journalists" want to know the answer to that? Also other questions - are these just a bunch of concerned citizens? Do any of them have connections to architects, builders, or developers who might seek to benefit if the JMF deal is derailed? Given the fact that a couple of people on MOL have hinted at a lawsuit, I'd also ask if they plan to sue the town if they don't get their way in the planning process. And none of this is meant as innuendo. I think they are legitimate questions. And if the answers are just that it's a bunch of concerned Maplewood citizens who want input in the next step in the process, that's great. But we don't yet know who they are. After over a year of hearing from Engage Maplewood, and several months of OhNo60, another group now springs up at the last minute with vague slogans about doing things right.

I would think real investigative "journalists" would try to get to the bottom of it.

But rewriting Village Green articles and publishing them 2 days afterwards is so much easier.

"I would think real investigative "journalists" would try to get to the bottom of it."

Why not cut to the chase; this issue is in large measure about selling (developing) township (the peoples)property. What's the rush? IMHO, everyone in Maplewood should be entitled to have a say in the matter. Given its significant location, and the on going debate, why not have a referendum to settle it?

because the law doesn't allow for a binding referendum on this issue

fredprofeta has this little problem with funny/ironic/sardonic/sarcastic: he's just too earnest to have even a reasonable level of artistic distance from what he wants to say (vs., for example, how to punch it up), hence the vaguely uncomfortable nature of his attempt at humor. At least he didn't come up with "Let's Get The Dam Right"!

I like where Fred's usually coming from on non-political issues (easy for me to say as a South Orangino), so I suggest that he immediately hire sbenois to screen his MOL communiques for Failed Funny.

-s.

BTW: Can't wait for the new MOL setup to allow (PLEASE!) insertion of hilarious laughter/boisterous applause .mp3s as attachments, to allow for further clarification of Fred's posts...

rule of thumb: irony is a fail if people really believe that you believe what you think you're trying to say ironically.

Absolutely.

-s.

Connoisseurs of irony can live with failure.

Spoken like a true Phillies fan...

-s.

soda said:

fredprofeta has this little problem with funny/ironic/sardonic/sarcastic: he's just too earnest to have even a reasonable level of artistic distance from what he wants to say (vs., for example, how to punch it up), hence the vaguely uncomfortable nature of his attempt at humor. At least he didn't come up with "Let's Get The Dam Right"!

I like where Fred's usually coming from on non-political issues (easy for me to say as a South Orangino), so I suggest that he immediately hire sbenois to screen his MOL communiques for Failed Funny.

-s.

BTW: Can't wait for the new MOL setup to allow (PLEASE!) insertion of hilarious laughter/boisterous applause .mp3s as attachments, to allow for further clarification of Fred's posts...

Well I don't know much about Fred's funny bone but I do know this: I took a lawn sign yesterday and made a small donation.

And I am with Fred on this issue.

+1000

What I wonder about the Village Keepers is: if they are anything other than a re-branding of the failed Engage Maplewood and ohno60 efforts, where the hell have they been? This process formally started in January 2012 with the first of multiple public forums. From the beginning, it's been clear that the favored proposal involved demolishing the PO and replacing it with first-floor commercial and upper-floor residential. Now, with a developer selected, a basic plan approved and the process moving into the final pre-construction phase, they come along trying desperately to throw a wrench into the works. Certainly, they have every right to agitate, but if they've been sitting on the sidelines for three years, they lack some credibility in my eyes.

Given that I know Fred and Dirk to be deeply strategic thinkers, this effort may be more aimed at bolstering the insurgent Lembrich primary challenge than at actually derailing the PO development.

Right, wrong or indifferent, that's already the assumption most I've spoken to have. It's hard not to come to that opinion given the timing and the players involved. Though I'll give Fred & Co. credit, if so: quite a lot easier to run a campaign as a complete unknown under the guise and work of an issue-based NFP backed by seasoned politicos than by oneself.

davidfrazer said:

What I wonder about the Village Keepers is: if they are anything other than a re-branding of the failed Engage Maplewood and ohno60 efforts, where the hell have they been? This process formally started in January 2012 with the first of multiple public forums. From the beginning, it's been clear that the favored proposal involved demolishing the PO and replacing it with first-floor commercial and upper-floor residential. Now, with a developer selected, a basic plan approved and the process moving into the final pre-construction phase, they come along trying desperately to throw a wrench into the works. Certainly, they have every right to agitate, but if they've been sitting on the sidelines for three years, they lack some credibility in my eyes.

Given that I know Fred and Dirk to be deeply strategic thinkers, this effort may be more aimed at bolstering the insurgent Lembrich primary challenge than at actually derailing the PO development.

Failed efforts? Cute. Also could not be further from the truth. A casual walk of about two hours through the Village and speaking with citizens at random got exactly 3 sour faces and more people in agreement that this is not the way to go then the TC would care to believe. It was heartening and no there was nothing to sign , just give and take among those active and our fellow townspeople.

The fat lady is almost in Oregon.

"A casual walk through the Village, speaking with citizens at random got more people in agreement that this is not the way to go then the TC wants to believe. "

Failed efforts? Not completely; and it's not over till it's over. The fat lady has yet to sung; and those ever increasing number of people who are now willing to take a closer look are growing, and are unhappy with the decision, and want, and deserve a voice.

Is anyone willing to explain why this has to happen right now; and why we all can't wait for a town wide referendum? Wouldn't it be nice knowing for a fact that the majority has voiced their opinion on this very sensitive issue.

Hey, think about this. If David Hummer and Fred Profeta were still on the TC, we wouldn't be having this debate; and here's something else to think about given there are two seats available on the township committee up for grabs.....................ARE YOU READY FOR THIS????

What if, (and not to put pressure on any of the current candidates for the TC), but what if two of the folks running were siding with the two who voted against Vic, Kathie, and Jerry? By my calculations that would make the vote four (4) against, and only one (1) in favor....

Let's see, it's been 12 years since I last ran for TC. Maybe like Fred, I'll try my hand as an Independent this time around? Wouldn't a referendum on the ballot be better than having all those AJC posters all over town???? LOL

Got it.
It's not political.

It wasn't, but it is now!

ajc said:

This fight is clearly not political

ajc said:

It wasn't, but it is now!

A lot can happen in 8 hours.

The question that is the thread title was not unreasonable. Previously on MOL, there was no mention of the group or nonprofit or whatever it is. Some residents might have noticed the signs touted on Facebook, with a brief explanation. There may have been other communications made about it elsewhere.

For other residents, they first saw the signs on lawns. Or, they may have seen them in Maplewood Village on Saturday. From evidence, it seemed to be associated with the "Engage Maplewood" and "OhNo" efforts, since the "OhNo" literature and the old "Dickens Village not Transit Village" article from "Engage" were being handed out. And, of course, if one recognized the players by sight, that was another clue.

But, from the sign content, that's not obvious. Starting with the tag line, I don't think anyone disagrees with the sentiment, "Get It Right At The P.O. Site". It's how to get to "get it right" which creates the disagreement.

And then there is the slogan, "Keep The Village A Village!" Again, not a point of disagreement, but also not as informative as, say, "No Dam" was regarding the point of view expressed by the sign.

By the way, what does "Keep The Village A Village" actually mean, in the context of discussing the post office site? Does it mean that retaining the existing building is necessary to "Keep the Village a Village"? Does it mean that a new building with retail space and residences above would NOT "Keep the Village a Village"? And if so, why would that be?

Yes, I know, if one is aware of who is behind the sentiment on the sign, then one is probably able to guess what "Keep The Village A Village" means. But that brings us back to the question that is the thread title.

Hey, it ain't no crime, 'cause if we get it wrong we'll get it right next time.

https://youtu.be/SXW-sL5gzHQ

Like the music but the message is sadly mistaken. There are no do overs on this one.

Get it wrong and you're stuck with it for 50 years or so.

Since that would make me about 120 maybe I have less to worry about.

I bet that, if MOL had existed when the post office was built, Fred would have been part of the group rallying against it ...

author said:

Like the music but the message is sadly mistaken. There are no do overs on this one.

Get it wrong and you're stuck with it for 50 years or so.

Since that would make me about 120 maybe I have less to worry about.

In the grand scheme of things, 50 years is meangingless. We've been stuck with the current building for nearly 70 and there are people who still can't imagine a world without it, wishing it were filled with couches and football tables, because apparently our lounges aren't large enough for us.

The Village Keepers want the P.O. to be repurposed. They don't want the site developed as proposed by the TC.

Also, the TC is giving away an unnecessary PILOT.

Does anyone who suggests a nonbinding referendum have a suggestion for what the question would be?

we should have a referendum to decide what the question should be.

ridski said:

author said:

Like the music but the message is sadly mistaken. There are no do overs on this one.

Get it wrong and you're stuck with it for 50 years or so.

Since that would make me about 120 maybe I have less to worry about.

In the grand scheme of things, 50 years is meangingless. We've been stuck with the current building for nearly 70 and there are people who still can't imagine a world without it, wishing it were filled with couches and football tables, because apparently our lounges aren't large enough for us.

author said:

ridski said:

author said:

Like the music but the message is sadly mistaken. There are no do overs on this one.

Get it wrong and you're stuck with it for 50 years or so.

Since that would make me about 120 maybe I have less to worry about.

In the grand scheme of things, 50 years is meangingless. We've been stuck with the current building for nearly 70 and there are people who still can't imagine a world without it, wishing it were filled with couches and football tables, because apparently our lounges aren't large enough for us.

I think everyone fails to realize that the old Post Office Building served the purpose for which it was built quite well. Parking was fairly easy as parking goes and it was certainly built according to a style
that was acceptable at the time.

It was a 1950's building that did what it was supposed to do until a few weeks ago.
It was built well and could certainly be the basis for another structure and function that will serve the Village and the Township and remain the property of the Village and the Township.

Ugly and beauty lie in the eye of the beholder. But ugly can easily be brought up to modern
standards.

The days of the disposable economy are sliding into the past.

We can do better than an apartment building that belongs in Morristown or Westfield...........
certainly not our much smaller Village.

mapleman said:

donnieo said:

Another example of why MOL is lacking in credibility in many cases, people say things without knowing facts and the lies spread.

I think you owe fredprofeta an apology. I think he's very credible.

the comment was in defense of fred and against those who were accusing him you moron

donnieo said:

mapleman said:

donnieo said:

Another example of why MOL is lacking in credibility in many cases, people say things without knowing facts and the lies spread.

I think you owe fredprofeta an apology. I think he's very credible.

the comment was in defense of fred and against those who were accusing him you moron

lawl

donnieo said:

mapleman said:

donnieo said:

Another example of why MOL is lacking in credibility in many cases, people say things without knowing facts and the lies spread.

I think you owe fredprofeta an apology. I think he's very credible.

the comment was in defense of fred and against those who were accusing him you moron

whoa.

I think somebody needs to go down to the dollar store and buy himself a sense of humor.