the Middle Road

Do we really need another tax?

2006-10-18T20:30:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
10-19-06
By Rich Kohler

Every year, New Jersey voters head to the polls on Election Day with thoughts of rising property taxes weighing heavily on their minds, and this year is no exception. Most of us vote for the candidates that we believe – or hope – would make responsible use of our tax dollars while working to improve the quality of life in our community. This November, Hazlet citizens also have an opportunity to consider a referendum that would implement an additional tax on township property owners. The proposed tax intends to “raise revenue for the acquisition, preservation and improvement of lands for open space, conservation, recreation, farmland preservation and historic preservation purposes.”

The 2006 election will mark the fourth time that the question of an open space tax has appeared before Hazlet voters, and despite three previous rejections, the Hazlet Environmental Commission has decided to try yet again. This latest plan is similar to those proposed in previous years. Beyond taxing an additional penny for every dollar of assessed property value, the “plan” is still vague. Supporters of the previous open space tax initiatives blamed the ambiguous wording of the referendums for the voters’ repeated rejection. The past plans included “maintenance”, such as grass cutting and repairs to existing structures. This year’s version includes “improvements”, described as hiking trails and parking facilities.
In the past, Hazlet has managed its remaining undeveloped land in a variety of ways, with mixed results.

Several years ago, the then Democrat-led Township Committee attempted to establish a site for a new town hall at the corner of Middle Road and Union Avenue, by acquiring the land through eminent domain. The result was a disaster. The ensuing legal and engineering fees ultimately exceeded the value of the land itself, and the township eventually purchased the land as open space. This property remains in its natural state, but at an excessive cost to Hazlet.

In 2004, the Republican-led Township Committee conducted an auction to sell an undeveloped piece of property and used the proceeds to offset a municipal tax hike, knocking ten cents off an anticipated fourteen-cent increase. The property presently remains undeveloped, and the township as a whole benefited from its sale.

Last year, the Hazlet Board of Education and its then president, Democratic candidate Joseph Belasco, sold wooded land near Raritan High School to a developer. The proceeds from this sale did little, if anything, to offset the ever-rising school tax and the new owner has threatened to sue the township for the right to build fifty-eight low-income units on Middle Road.

Another parcel of undeveloped land is the Stone Road Meadows, a cornfield on Highway 36, next to the former Bradlees store. Some residents want the township to purchase and preserve this thirty-acre plot as a county park, but the initiative lacks logic. The land does not have any historical, environmental, or scenic attributes, and it falls well below the 100-acre minimum required for county park designation. Responsibly developed as a mixed-use property, this area could bring much needed tax revenue, which would help hold down the tax rate for residents.

The Waackaack Creek area is a sensitive estuary that flows directly into the Raritan Bay. This land on Hazlet’s eastern boarder is home to many species of wildlife, can be connected to county and state greenway passages, and is worthy of preservation. The township Republicans began actively seeking ways to acquire this land with little or no cost to Hazlet residents – through state and county programs and collaboration with legislators in higher office. Not to be outdone, the Democrats have since claimed their determination to accomplish the same goal through similar cooperation with different environmental organizations and government programs. After two years of wrangling over which political party deserves credit for the pending preservation of Waackaack Creek, we are still waiting for the final word on this vital project. Political grandstanding tends to stall great ideas.

The Hazlet Township Committee, in conjunction with another project, recently created a walking track at Leocadia Park and rebuilt the hockey rink at Veterans Park. With bipartisan effort and support, the committee undertook these projects to improve our existing parks at significant cost savings, demonstrating that a competent administration is capable of planning and achieving “open space” goals without an additional tax.

The preservation and improvement of open space is imperative, and when undeveloped space is limited as it is in Hazlet, a case-by-case approach with both parties working together is more effective than additional taxes, vague or illogical plans, and politically strategic photo-ops.

Rich Kohler is a life-long resident of Hazlet. Please send comments to richkohler@comcast.net. All of Rich Kohler’s columns are available online at http://middleroadhazlet.blogspot.com/.

Pandering, Patronage, Playgrounds and Palughi

2006-07-13T09:10:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler

Whether it is through the state budget, county budget, or local school budget, many New Jersey politicians and administrators seem motivated to increase our tax burden, which in turn, supports a virulent system of patronage and pandering.

When a budget proposal fails, more often than not, the dissenters object to an unacceptable level of extravagant spending within that proposal. However, too few of our elected and appointed officials pursue honest assessments of income and need vs. expenditures and luxury.

What perpetuates “the political system” that continues to waste our tax dollars? The answer just might be a question of motivation.

Governor Corzine enjoyed enthusiastic support from state labor unions during his run for office. His relationship with these large unions has undoubtedly influenced the recent budget woes at the state level. The ability of organized labor to deliver large voting blocks of support to a candidate creates mutual loyalty and motivates some politicians to raise taxes, rather than negotiate union contract demands or cut nonessential wages or personnel.

Senator Joe Kyrillos recently awarded a grant to Hazlet. Our township received $50,000 for playground equipment. The baseball fields in our parks are in terrible shape. The tennis and basketball courts at Leocadia Court and Beers Street are unplayable. The hockey rink near the swim club needs a new surface. Although there are several parks in town that could have used an upgrade in playground equipment, Veterans Park now has new playground equipment within steps of its existing jungle gyms and swing sets. The township’s recreation department wanted to use the grant money toward something Hazlet needed, but “the political system” dictated its use.

What motivated Senator Kyrillos to allocate state tax dollars for which we had not asked, in order to fund a project for which we had no need?

Anthony Palughi, a key witness in the recent corruption trial of Raymond O’Grady, former mayor of Middletown and former director of the Monmouth County Central Motor Pool, candidly explained his experience as a beneficiary of wasteful spending.

Monmouth County employed Palughi from 1986 until his arrest in 2004. During those eighteen years, the county promoted him from his “entry level” position as director of the motor pool – to assistant highway supervisor – to superintendent of bridges, where he was earning $92,000 per year. Without even a high school education, Palughi knew he was overtly under qualified for these positions, but two former county freeholders and one former county administrator assured Palughi that he would not need to manage any aspect of the county’s public works. As a county employee, Palughi had one responsibility: to “take care of Harry [Larrison].” Defense attorney Kevin Roe asked Palughi how he got the job as director of the motor pool, to which he answered, “Like everyone else before me got it; through the political system.”

Most of the politicians who served on boards that had approved Pulighi’s appointments are now retired, or are awaiting trial or sentencing. Monmouth County voters elected one of them to higher office.

Will the testimony of her former/fellow county cronies motivate Amy Handlin to act more conscientiously regarding the state’s budget?

After three years of passing the school budget by an average margin of 11%, Hazlet voters defeated this year’s proposal by a margin of 34%. When this proposed budget failed, the responsibility fell to the Hazlet Township Committee to review the proposal and mandate which items to cut. They found $650,000 in cuts, many of which were the extra items with which the school board seemed to have padded the budget. If the school board is not happy with the township’s decision, “the political system” lets them appeal to the state, which has the authority to approve the original budget proposal; the same proposal that Hazlet voters soundly rejected. In that case, the negative response to the 2006-2007 school budget proposal would not likely motivate the Hazlet Board of Education to include less padding and pandering in their 2007-2008 school budget proposal.

I agreed with Hazlet School Superintendent Renae LaPrete’s assessment that, with this being the only government budget that citizens vote on directly, Hazlet voters took the opportunity to express their frustration with higher taxes. Ms. LaPrete had a point; “the political system” that motivates civil servants to squander our tax money is rather frustrating.

If voters diligently object to officials who submit and legitimize irresponsible budgets, we just might motivate the offending bureaucrats and politicians to stop their systematic abuse of our money.

Rich Kohler is a life-long resident of Hazlet. Please send comments to richkohler@comcast.net. All of Rich Kohler’s columns are available online at http://middleroadhazlet.blogspot.com/.

Swim Club II

2006-05-10T21:00:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler

Note: This is a revised and updated version of a column that was previously published in the December 11, 2003 edition of this newspaper.

The Hazlet Township Swim and Tennis Club has been part of our community for more than thirty years. I fondly remember conjuring up the courage to take my first “real” dive on the club’s 3-meter springboard and going with my friends to the live music concerts on Teen Night.

Many residents have pleasant memories of warm summer days at the swim club with their friends, neighbors and family. The club contributes to the quality of life in Hazlet, but it has also become an expensive problem for the taxpayers. The club is suffering from a case of community apathy; membership has drastically declined.

The swim club operates as a utility. Under New Jersey state law, such utilities must be self-supporting. Membership fees and sources other than township tax money are supposed to cover the swim club’s operating expenses, but the township is ultimately responsible for its financial solvency. During the last seven years, the average operating cost of the club was $360,000 per season. Membership fees collected by the club have declined steadily from over $270,000 in 1999 to a paltry $129,000 in 2005. Hazlet taxpayers, including those who are not members of the swim club, have paid several hundred thousand dollars to balance this utility’s budget. The township has considered numerous ideas to fix the deficit, such as contracting with the YMCA to manage the day-to-day operations of the club and leasing out the food and beverage concessions, but nothing could generate enough money to overcome the problem of moribund membership.

In attempt to minimize this illegitimate use of taxpayers’ money, the township raised the swim club’s membership fees. Not surprisingly, the number of members continued to decline and last month, the Hazlet Township Committee decided to shut it down.

The Tuesday, May 2, meeting of the Township Committee was a standing-room-only event. It seemed as though every member of the swim club attended, many of whom addressed the committee. Most were malcontents expressing how the closure of the club would adversely affect their families, even while acknowledging that it is wrong for the club to operate at a deficit. After listening to residents repeat this conflicted mantra for over an hour, Mayor Sachs called the committee into executive session to reconsider the motion to close the club. The Township Committee resolved that the club would remain open for the 2006 season, but only if 250 families signed up for membership before May 25. However, this potential compromise still leaves the township with a problem. At the current rate of $385 per family, 250 memberships add up to less than $100,000 in membership fees, leaving a substantial shortfall in the amount needed to operate for the 2006 season.

Continuing to provide a service, in which most of our community seems to have lost interest, would be fiscally irresponsible. Hazlet could use those resources to manage quality of life issues that are more germane to the interests of the majority its current residents.

In a letter to the editor in the May 4 edition of The Courier, one Hazlet resident asked, “When will Mayor Sachs start watching out for us taxpayers?” The initiative to close the swim club was just one of many vigilant efforts by our mayor and the current Township Committee to curtail wasteful spending of Hazlet’s tax revenue. Yet, at Tuesday’s Township Committee meeting, that same resident vociferously complained about the motion to close the swim club.

Our Township Committee has a responsibility to make decisions that will benefit all citizens, not just the hypocritical ones with membership cards.

Rich Kohler is a life-long resident of Hazlet. Please send comments to richkohler@comcast.net. All of Rich Kohler’s columns are available online at http://middleroadhazlet.blogspot.com/.

2006/07 School Budget

2006-04-12T16:41:00.000-04:00

Aside from May flowers, April showers bring forth a crop of lawn signs, advising taxpayers to support the school budget because education is “priceless”. Such rationale supports unchecked spending and implies that a vote against the school budget will harm the children of Hazlet. We all want the best for our children, but a strong education comes with a price. In fact, behind this spring’s bloom of empty rhetoric, the school board actually named a rather high price for a budget increase that includes obvious pandering to the interests of a few.

Why, when academic needs such as a science lab upgrade or additional teachers are expensive enough, does the school board create a new sports team, such as a wrestling program at the middle school or a freshman soccer program at the high school, to justify another huge tax increase? The answer is that few people actually vote on the school budget. With each newly proposed sports team, the school board can expect both parents of each potential player to vote YES. These thirty or forty votes will often change the outcome of the usually poorly attended school elections.

Legitimate high-ticket items, such as a new weight room (to fortify existing sports programs) or new science labs, seem to be included in the budget as expendable. If the budget does not pass, the school board can blame the taxpayers when they “cut” these needed items. If the budget does pass, we end up paying for more than is needed. At a time when major corporations, small companies, and state aid programs are streamlining their expenditures, it seems unreasonable for our public administrators, whether they be a member of the school board or the governor himself, to ask us to support a substantial tax increase. Especially, when in order to capture a special interest vote, they attach new and/or non-essential programs to the budgets of programs we do need.

As voters, we do not have to support the games that many public officials play with our tax dollars. I, for one, resent that while one hand tugs at our heartstrings, the other hand is reaching in our pockets. On Tuesday, April 18, I will to vote NO on Hazlet’s school budget proposal. If enough residents do the same, perhaps “for the sake” of our children, the next board of education will present Hazlet residents with a more honest and responsible school budget.

Rich Kohler is a longtime resident of Hazlet. Please send comments to richkohler@comcast.net.

2006-02-01T09:02:00.000-05:00

The Middle Road, 2/3/06
By Rich Kohler

Many Republicans in Monmouth County would probably rather forget the year 2005. However, behind the scandals, the headlines, and the name-calling, it is apparent that the Hazlet Republican leadership has quietly taken giant steps to move the township in a positive direction.
Last year, Mayor Michael Sachs put to rest one of the most contentious subjects in recent township politics. This summer, without jeopardizing our library or any other vital services, our township will have a new town hall in Veterans Park. Although a group of citizens objected to its location, Mayor Sachs addressed, but did not bow to the political or public pressure, and he stuck by his guns to get the project started.
Deputy Mayor Scott Aagre, a professional architect, has been diligent in supervising nearly every aspect of the town hall project, even going as far as posting photos and progress reports from the engineers on the township’s website, hazlettwp.org. As of mid January, Deputy Mayor Aagre reports the construction is “on time and under budget”.
As a candidate in 2003 and as a long-term member of the planning board, Mr. Aagre saw a need for a comprehensive review of the Development Review Ordinance (DRO) of the township’s master plan, an important step in responsible management of the land-use in Hazlet. With the help of its chairperson, Christopher Cavanaugh, the planning board recently completed this project, and the DRO is now completely up-to-date.
Also during his campaign, Mr. Aagre advocated for a plan to examine the possibilities of developing the long-vacant Bradlees/Foodtown site and the adjoining empty lots. The Township Committee is currently looking at hiring a certified planner to investigate viable solutions for eliminating the eyesore of the empty stores, and to help turn the land into a properly planned, tax revenue-generating asset.
For some time, many residents have complained about cars speeding through our residential neighborhoods. Early in his term, Committeeman Aagre initiated a township-wide “Drive 25, Keep Kids Alive” program. The township will soon introduce a long overdue ordinance to change the speed limit on all township roads to 25 miles per hour.
Both Mr. Sachs and Mr. Aagre have long recognized the need to preserve Hazlet’s remaining open space at minimal cost to the taxpayer. Along with former Republican candidate, Ric Medrow, former Deputy Mayor Tracey Maffiore, and a dedicated group of residents, the township is working to preserve a greenway along the Waackaack Creek, which flows along the township’s eastern boarder. With the help of the NY/NJ Baykeeper, Friends of Holmdel Open Space, and the Monmouth Conservation Foundation, Hazlet is working with neighboring townships to preserve contiguous parcels of land along this estuary by searching out grants and other funding, and by supporting legislation to limit development along the greenway.
Michael Sachs is serving a second consecutive term as mayor. The Township Committee unanimously selected Scott Aagre to be deputy mayor. With the addition of Democrats Kevin Lavan and Jim DiNardo to the committee, both parties have an opportunity to work together for the responsible management and continued improvement of the quality of life in Hazlet.
Throughout 2005, while the local news, gossip, and opinion (including this column) focused on a few Hazlet politicians who only seemed interested in maintaining and exerting their power, the people who are interested in serving their community have been hard at work doing just that.

Rich Kohler is a life-long resident of Hazlet. Please send comments to richkohler@comcast.net.

Mr. Broschart Responds

2005-12-09T22:07:00.000-05:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
November 10, 2005

Last month, I wrote a letter to the editor of another newspaper criticizing its lax coverage of interim Committeeman Scott Broschart’s decision to withdraw his candidacy for an open seat on the Hazlet Township Committee. This month, Committeeman Broschart signed his name to a written response. In the interest of open debate and at the risk of being redundant, I dedicate this column to both sides of the issue.

“Mr. Kohler makes false accusations in his letter, such as his claim that Deputy Mayor Tracey Maffiore and Committeewoman Bridget Antonucci ‘assisted in helping to undermine the customary selection process,’ making reference to the appointment of myself to the Township Committee to fill Paul Coughlin’s seat.”

I did not make false accusations. I drew a logical conclusion from the events that had taken place.

“The county committee, which Rich Kohler is not a member of, selects three potential candidates to fill the vacancy.”

I never claimed to be a member of this committee. It is important to note, however, that since a fourth contender inexplicably withdrew his name at the last minute, no one on the county committee voted for Mr. Broschart.

“Those three names are turned over to the mayor and Township Committee to select one. This vote is confidential, so neither I nor Rich Kohler knows, or should know, how the committee voted. Since I was appointed to be on the committee, one must make the assumption that the majority, if not all, of the Township Committee selected me.”

Mr. Broschart can make whatever assumption he chooses, that’s why letters to the editor appear in a newspaper’s opinion pages. Nonetheless, I stand by my opinion of how he came to be a member of Hazlet’s Township Committee.

“Another false statement Mr. Kohler makes reference to is my résumé and the campaign I ran for both Michael Sachs and Bridget Antonucci. As I have stated, the money listed on my résumé reflects not just the campaign funds, but funds I have raised over a period of time for the Hazlet Republican Club and Executive Committee.”

Again, Mr. Broschart can make any statement he chooses, but the facts remain. Mr. Broschart’s résumé states that in his capacity as manager of the Hazlet Republican Campaign Committee, he “raised over $40,000 in contributions”. The reports filed with ELEC say otherwise. Should I believe Mr. Broschart’s letter to the editor, his resume, or the ELEC reports?

“Mr. Kohler, please, if you are going to dress up and play reporter, please play correctly. Instead of spreading false accusations about me, call and confirm facts before reporting on them so you don’t mislead readers.”

I am not a reporter, nor do I aspire to be one. I have written persuasive essays and the editorial staff at The Courier has seen fit to publish them as editorial columns. I did call and confirm the facts I cited in my columns...I just didn’t call Mr. Broschart.

“My decision to resign as the Republican candidate this year was due solely to a career change, which Mr. Kohler would have no knowledge of .”

Nor, would I have knowledge of Mr. Broschart’s present career. His resume lists a temporary job with the unsuccessful gubernatorial campaign of John Murphy and a job with State Senator Joe Kyrillos that lasted less than three months.

“I, unlike Mr. Kohler, have dedicated my time and energy to serve my town, not just stand on the sidelines and attempt to write about it.”

Writing an editorial column takes time and energy, and so does running a business well enough to support my family. I serve my community by paying attention to the actions of people acting on behalf of its multi-million dollar, tax revenue-financed budget. I also dedicate some of my time and energy to helping the library on behalf of the township. Many residents, as I do, spend most of their time and energy earning an income so they can live with their family in a decent community. Furthermore, I respect the great level of time and energy it takes to serve effectively and responsibly in elected office, and I vociferously support those who rise to the challenge.

“Since June, Mr. Kohler has openly attacked me and my family.”

I have criticized Mr. Broschart’s appointment to the Township Committee. I have criticized his manipulation of the selection process for his subsequent and brief candidacy. I have even criticized his decision to pass out campaign-related balloons along the 2004 Hazlet Day parade route. I have not “attacked” Mr. Broschart. I have not even mentioned his family.

“He has tried to convince people that I do not respect the office that I hold, but it is for that reason alone that I do not return his personal attacks.”

Since Mr. Broschart recently called me “a dirt-bag” in the parking lot of the Lakeside Manor, perhaps he has difficulty discerning between public opinion and a personal attack.

“Mr. Kohler, be forewarned that when my term ends next month, I will happily engage you in any public forum.”

Is this a threat or an invitation? Aren’t newspaper op/ed pages, community clubs, and committee meetings, public forums? What does Mr. Broschart propose: a push fight behind Middle Road Elementary School?

“Mr. Kohler is merely a salesman…”

This comment is rather condescending for someone who has yet to hold a steady job. Or at least, one that Mr. Broschart deems worthy of mentioning on his résumé.

“…trying to sell his poison to the public.”

My opinions do seem somewhat toxic to self-serving politicians, but they are not for sale.

“Good riddance to bad reporting.”

I would rather help rid our community of politicians who attempt to silence his or her critics by claiming that the pertinent facts are confidential.

Election 2005

2005-12-09T22:06:00.000-05:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
November 3, 2005

“You don’t even belong here. You’re a dirt-bag.”

Those were the words with which Hazlet’s interim committeeman, Scott Broschart, chose to greet me as I entered the newly remodeled Lakeside Manor for the October meeting of the Hazlet Republican Club.

After the regular business portion of the meeting, Mr. Broschart asked for the floor. In the spirit of the brown shirted, armband wearing fascists who dominated Europe sixty-some years ago by eliminating all those who opposed their point of view, he angrily accused me of not supporting the Republican Party. Disregarding proper procedure, Mr. Broschart then demanded that I be dropped from the membership rolls of the club and requested an immediate vote on his resolution.

Led by the club’s president, Tracey Maffiore, the executive committee did not to allow Mr. Broschart’s antics to continue and tabled his motion pending further debate. This civil reaction to Mr. Broschart’s shocking demand for a no-dissention policy reinforced my belief in the integrity of Hazlet’s Republican Party.

When I joined the Hazlet Republican Club, I was an unaffiliated voter. Many of my early letters to the editors of local newspapers and my early columns in this newspaper criticized the Hazlet Democrats for conducting themselves in a manner that seemed to be more concerned with staying in office, than with serving the residents of Hazlet. When I disagreed with the direction of the then Democrat-led Township Committee, perennial candidate Kevin Lavan publicly and angrily claimed that I was suffering from dementia. I don’t doubt that anyone even mildly involved with politics could recall an incident when either political party encouraged members who had acted in a similar manner, as this is, after all, politics in New Jersey.

That was then, but this is now. Today’s political climate demands more accountability from our elected officials. Recently enacted sunshine laws and campaign finance reforms are a beginning, but without any real punitive action, loopholes are aplenty. It is the responsibility of the individual political parties or governing bodies to police themselves by encouraging open and legitimate debate from their members or constituents.

That’s exactly what is happening with the Hazlet Republicans. While the township Democrats are running recycled candidates from the same old Democratic group of cronies, the Republicans sought out and fought for the opportunity to bring new faces to the township dais. After two fair and open conventions of the district leaders, the Hazlet Republican Party chose Ric Medrow and Will Kolibas as its 2005 candidates.

Democratic candidates Kevin Lavan and Jim DiNardo have centered their deceitful campaign on the fact that Hazlet’s badly-needed municipal complex could cost up to 9 million dollars, interest included. Anyone who takes the time to either check the information on record with the township or to discuss their concerns with those involved with this large-scale and important project, will learn that Committeeman Scott Aagre, an architect by trade, and Mayor Michael Sachs have supervised it with professional and cost-effective pragmatism.

Hazlet Democrats recently concocted a plan that includes abandoning the construction already in progress, buying a building that is not currently for sale, and reconfiguring an old medical building into a functional town hall for an unlikely and unconfirmed 1.8 million dollars, interest not included.

Much like the leading members of the Township Committee, the 2005 Republican candidates, Ric Medrow and Will Kolibas, believe that honest management of our tax dollars is crucial to sustaining and improving the quality of life in our community. By vowing to respect the value of opposing opinions and reasonable debate, both candidates characterize the positive direction of Hazlet’s Republican Party. Mr. Kolibas’s candidacy alone is a testament to how a clean and open political process combined with strong party leadership can offset a sometimes volatile political climate.

Professional and transparent leadership often exposes power hungry political hacks that advance dishonest schemes, push personal agendas, and aspire to exert and maintain their own sense of power. Because when an informed public objects to such behavior, these self-serving perpetrators often resort to condescension and name-calling.

Broschart II

2005-09-14T19:33:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
September 28, 2005

Each election season, in order to faithfully practice and protect our right to self-governance, responsible American voters attempt to sort through noisy rhetoric from and about incumbent and prospective politicians.

In my attempt to assess my choices for the 2005 election, I noticed that the Hazlet Republican Party is unusually quiet regarding the special election to fill the unexpired term of former mayor, Paul Coughlin.

Normally, a large committee of district leaders, within each local party, peruses résumés, checks references and credentials, conducts interviews, and then convenes to select the appropriate person or people to represent the party at the polls. Through their district leaders, party-affiliated residents have a voice in the selection of candidates for open seats on Hazlet’s Township Committee. Voters rely on the political parties to be accountable for ensuring that each candidate meets the basic standards of professional conduct. The winning candidate, after all, would be responsible for managing the municipality’s business on behalf of all its residents. The selection process gives a voice to the people and limits our obligation to the whims, influence, or personal agendas of any chairpersons and/or incumbent politicians at the local, county, or state level.

Under a little known and even less utilized rule, the chairperson of the Monmouth County Republican Party does have the power to appoint a municipal candidate in a special election, but according to the chairman of the Hazlet Republican County Committee, Steve Grossman, “this obscure rule hasn’t been used in a township election for at least twenty years.”

There was no shortage of Republican contenders for this special election and in the weeks following former Mayor Coughlin’s resignation, Chairman Grossman set the candidate selection process in motion. However, with inexplicable, supposedly accidental, unannounced, and barely acknowledged impropriety, Chairman Fred Niemann, the boss of the Monmouth County Republican Party, exercised his power to silence the voice of Hazlet’s Republican Party by single-handedly placing interim Committeeman Scott Broschart on November’s ballot.

Last year, Monmouth County Republicans criticized Chairman Niemann’s predecessor, Bill Dowd, for hand-selecting their candidate for Freeholder. Along with support from New Jersey State Senator Joe Kyrillos, but seemingly without cause or the support of many other party members, Mr. Dowd removed well-respected incumbent Freeholder Ed Stominski from the ballot and named former Matawan Mayor Rob Clifton as the party’s candidate. Unwilling to pilfer the voices of its members, the Republican Party in Monmouth County subsequently removed Mr. Dowd from his long-held seat at the top of their organization. And now, Chairman Niemann has disenfranchised Hazlet in the same manner that Mr. Dowd betrayed the Monmouth County Republican Party.

This newspaper has since linked Freeholder Clifton and Senator Kyrillos to shady campaign contributions from a developer seeking approval for the redevelopment of Matawan’s Train station. Like most towns and cities in Monmouth County, Hazlet’s most pressing challenge is to prevent developers and contractors from “owning” our political leaders.

On September 7, the Hazlet Township Committee passed an ordinance that prevents candidates from accepting campaign donations from people or companies doing business with the town. While this legislation is an appropriate first step in reducing corruption, it still allows candidates to accept such a donation, as long as the money filters through a political party at the county level.

Interim Committeeman Broschart, who introduced and championed this latest pay-to-play ordinance, will now have a record of “reform” to flaunt during his upcoming campaign. The new ordinance does kick the pay-to-play money out of town, but those newly prohibited campaign donations will likely be waiting for Candidate Broschart in the county coffers.

The last Hazlet Township Committee meeting inspired a steady barrage of frustrated residents with questions for or about Committeeman Broschart. Why does his résumé claim that he raised almost $20,000 more for the 2004 Sachs-Antonucci campaign than the amount on file with the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission? Did he misappropriate the money or lie on his résumé? Why did Chairman Niemann usurp the power of the Hazlet Republican County Committee to choose its own candidate? What motivated Senator Kyrillos to employ Scott Broschart after he became a member of the Hazlet Township Committee?

Hazlet residents must stridently demand reasonable answers to these and many other questions, especially if Senator Kyrillos, Chairman Niemann, and Committeeman Broschart wish to keep their respective positions of power within a legitimate political organization and a legitimate governing body. Otherwise, we will only have ourselves to blame for allowing unaccountability, backroom politics, and corruption to compromise the quality of life in our own community.

Broschart 5/19/05

2005-09-11T18:57:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
May 19, 2005

After considering the credentials of three people, The Republican-led Hazlet Township Committee recently appointed Scott Broschart to fill the seat left vacant by former Committeeman Paul Coughlin. Since Mr. Broschart seems to be the least qualified of the three applicants, I am disappointed by the Committee’s decision.

According to his résumé, Mr. Broschart has a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science from Rutgers University, with a concentration in Political Campaigns, but his professional experience is limited. In 2003, Mr. Broschart held a three-month internship and an equally brief job as an aide for Senator Joseph M. Kryllos. Currently, he is providing computer-related support for the campaign of long shot gubernatorial candidate, John Murphy.

In 2004, Mr. Broschart served as Campaign Manager for Bridget Antonucci and Michael Sachs. In this capacity, he sent several arrogant and hostile campaign-related emails to members of the Hazlet Township Republican Campaign Committee. These letters were barely written at a fifth grade level (I actually ran one of them through the readability program in my Microsoft Office software). Although I supported both candidates, I limited my involvement in that campaign as a result of Mr. Broschart’s irresponsible correspondence and his lack of regard for the value of positive leadership.

Mr. Broschart’s résumé claims that he “raised over $40,000 in contributions” for the 2004 Sachs-Antonucci campaign. However, according to the mandatory report on file with the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission, the campaign actually received $20,831 in contributions.

Mr. Broschart’s résumé names www.hazlet.info and www.hazletgop.com as examples of his “well-developed” web creations. Despite its once-popular message forum, www.hazlet.info wasn’t kept up-to-date with either news or editorials and it eventually died from neglect. Although still in existence, www.hazletgop.com hasn’t been updated since last summer. The website still lists Mr. Coughlin as a member of the Hazlet Township Committee, but not Ms. Antonucci.

Mr. Broschart served on the Rent Control Board last year, but according to the Board’s attorney, Wes Kain, he only attended one or two meetings. Throughout 2004, mobile home park owners often complained that their applications were frequently stalled by consistently poor attendance of the board’s members.

Mr. Broschart lives with his parents. He does not own any property in Hazlet, nor does he pay property taxes. Mayor Michael Sachs recently acknowledged that an extremely qualified Hazlet Republican has continually been denied a nomination for candidacy on the basis that she does not own property in Hazlet. Apparently, three Republican members of the Township Committee (curiously, including Mayor Sachs) felt that it was appropriate to ignore this long-established protocol, in order to put Mr. Broschart in power.

I originally joined the local Republican Party because the organization seemed free of the condescending sense of privilege that I encountered with several leaders of the local Democratic Party. Since Mr. Broschart became officially involved with the Hazlet Republican Club in 2003, I have reluctantly noticed a seemingly unaccountable attitude of arrogance and entitlement growing within a faction of the party. Rewarding this type of leadership with ordained political power will most likely lead our township in a negative direction.

By denying two other, more qualified people the opportunity to serve the residents of Hazlet, the Township Committee chose to offer an aspiring political hack, with a blatantly embellished résumé, the opportunity to advance his career.

Moving Forward 5/3.05

2005-09-11T18:56:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
May 3, 2005

Under the continued guidance of Chairman Steve Grossman, The Hazlet township republicans are moving forward with confidence.

On Thursday, April 28, Chairman Grossman convened an assembly of district leaders in Hazlet to select three candidates from which the current Township Committee will choose a replacement for former Committeeman Paul Coughlin. Whomever they chose, will most likely represent the Republican Party in a special election, concurrent with this November’s regular election, to complete Mr. Coughlin’s unexpired term.

Lawyers from the Monmouth County Republican Party also attended the meeting to oversee the selection process.

After a quick volley of debates and votes to establish the requirements each candidate should meet to hold office, Mayor Michael Sachs gave an impassioned speech about the necessity to select worthy candidates who can meet the challenge of what will likely be a contentious campaign this fall.

The township Republicans are looking for new faces to keep the Hazlet moving forward in the wake of the FBI’s “Operation Bid Rig”. In order to accomplish this daunting task, they need to be mindful of the public perception about the current political climate. Chairman Grossman believes that a more open dialog with both the media and the public is essential to earning and maintaining the public trust. The combination of experienced legislators and “average” citizens who wish to become involved and improve their community is a strong deterrent for politicians who would consider subverting the public trust to gain power or sell influence.

Our township committee is moving in a positive direction. Projects such as the new town hall, the renovations of Veterans Park, and further integration of shared services are all signs of real progress toward the goal of responsible municipal administration. However, challenges still remain. The majority of Hazlet residents recently voted to increase the school budget, which already accounts for more that sixty percent of property taxes. Our current Township Committee has worked creatively, diligently, and responsibly to minimize the cost of building a new town hall, but it is still a multi-million dollar project that will be billed to the township. Hazlet taxpayers will undoubtedly bear an increase in their property taxes. Regardless of the circumstances, the opposing party is sure to portray the increase as a reason to vote for their candidates this fall.

Chairman Grossman is determined to keep the Republican Party strong in Hazlet. Throughout the upcoming election season, both Republicans and Democrats will be out in force, looking for your vote. By increasing the amount of information the public receives regarding township politics and bringing fresh faces and ideas to Hazlet, the Republican Party is well prepared to meet the challenges ahead.

Corruption 3/3/05

2005-09-11T18:54:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
March 3, 2005

For more than two hundred years, the rule of law has been preserving the freedom of American citizens. For more than two years, under the capable leadership of United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, Christopher Christie, the rule of law has been liberating the people of New Jersey. Two weeks ago, with the arrests of eleven public officials, the rule of law took a big step toward emancipating the residents of Monmouth County from nefarious and veiled oppression.

While few people dispute the idea that extortion and money-laundering are unacceptable practices, I have already read and heard comments that twenty years in prison seems an excessive punishment for crimes involving such low-level public servants and such small sums of money. Politicians who sell the trust of their constituents deserve harsh sentencing, no matter his or her elected or appointed position, and no matter the amount of cash involved.

Our country was founded on the belief that honoring just two basic human rights will secure the opportunity for its citizens to pursue happiness. The three branches of government, legislative, judicial, and executive, work independently and cooperatively to define, enforce, and manage the rule of law. As cumbersome as this system of government can seem at times, it enables our society to protect the human rights of life and liberty.

Murder and assault with a deadly weapon carry maximum sentences of twenty years to life in prison. In a society that values life, the penalty for taking or threatening anyone’s life is severe. The penal code for abusing the public trust is a reflection of the value our society places on liberty.

The acts that the eleven arrested officials in Monmouth County allegedly committed are not victimless crimes. The victim is freedom.

Every year on Election Day, our free society chooses people to oversee to the day-to-day business of maintaining the rule of law within every community. Each following January, these elected candidates and newly appointed government officials take an oath, during which he or she does solemnly swear to honor the rule of law on behalf of not just the people who elected to give them responsibility, but of ALL the people living within the town, district, county, state, and country in whose name he or she will conduct business. When politicians betray their oath of office and put their integrity up for sale to the highest bidder on behalf of their own financial assets, the society they were elected to govern is not free. Because corruption gives illegitimate power to a select few, it undermines the principles of self-government.

It makes no difference whether the perpetrators are Republican or Democrat. These crimes are not committed by political parties. These crimes are committed in secret, by arrogant and greedy individuals, who effectively blind us to the treachery afoot in our own communities. They may have fooled us, but they also fooled themselves.

It is hard for me to believe that anyone, much less an elected official, living in today’s world of micro video and audio equipment, can be foolish enough to believe that any place is safe from the prying eyes of the governmental agencies that protect the integrity of our free society. Add stupidity to the aforementioned arrogance and greed, and you have a recipe for heavy fines and long prison terms.

At least one of the defendants has already claimed that he is the victim of entrapment, which inspires me to articulate the obvious.

If you are a public official and someone offers you an envelope filled with cash, and you take it…it’s a trap. If you sell your influence in government, you will be caught. Maybe not immediately, but eventually your picture will appear in the newspaper hiding underneath your jacket with hand-cuffs around your wrists. If you have already sold your influence in government (but haven’t been caught yet), resign now and spare the taxpayers the expense of rooting you out and sending you to prison.

Some of the alleged offenders are life-long residents of the towns in which they served. This is perhaps the worst betrayal of all and if found guilty, these criminals should be made an example of and handed the strongest sentences allowable.

Thanks to the help of the Federal Bureau of Investigations, the determination of Mr. Christie and the many politicians who still honor their oath of office, New Jersey is a little less corrupt and the freedom of New Jersey residents is a little more secure.

New Town Hall 2/24/05

2005-09-11T18:50:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
February 24, 2005

Led by Committeeman Scott Aagre, the 2005 Hazlet Township Committee has unveiled a cost efficient, practical solution to a problem that has challenged our community for a long time.

Recently and without controversy, Mayor Paul Coughlin announced that, in order to create a site for a new town hall, the township will move the Office of Emergency Management from its present location on Union Avenue to the Department of Public Works building on Leocadia Court.

Kevin Lavan, a former candidate for Township Committee, submitted a letter in last week’s edition of the Courier, in which he gravely warns residents that “Hazlet has the potential for disaster,” and insists that in order to adequately safeguard our community, the O.E.M. building must remain at its current location.

Hazlet is a small town with one police department, two first aid stations, and three volunteer fire companies, each of which is well-staffed, well-equipped, and continually training to act as first responders to any disaster that develops within our borders. With the support of the O.E.M, our town is well prepared to properly handle any emergency situation.

Since Hazlet’s safety professionals have not voiced any concern about the O.E.M.’s pending move of less than one mile away from its present location, Mr. Lavan’s rhetoric of fear and doubt reminds me of the campaign literature he distributed during his unsuccessful bid for election last year.

At a recent Hazlet Township Committee meeting, Mr. Lavan, along with former Mayor, Christopher Cullen, voiced his concern regarding the recent development of a resolution to Hazlet’s town hall problem.

Mr. Lavan asked irrelevant questions regarding the transport of the O.E.M.’s communication equipment.

Disregarding his own past statements, as well as several engineering studies, which pointed out the unfeasibility of rebuilding at 319 Middle Road, Mr. Cullen asked Mayor Coughlin to justify the Township Committee’s decision to relocate town hall.

During Mr. Cullen’s term in office, Hazlet’s Democrat-controlled Township Committee led the township into a legal battle with an ill-conceived purchase of land, on which they planned to construct a town hall. The resulting legal fees exceeded the cost of the land, which was ultimately deemed an unfeasible site for a new town hall project.

The subsequent, also Democrat-led, Township Committee sparked additional controversy by proceeding with a plan to build a municipal complex next to the police station, in place of our library. The proposal included the closure of our town’s branch of the Monmouth County Library, but it did not include a viable plan to reopen it.

One of Hazlet’s most pressing problems has gone unresolved for many years, but the dynamics of this issue have changed.

The poor planning and deception that plagued Hazlet’s quest for a new town hall in the past have been replaced by common sense and professional protocol. The media frenzies, public outcries, and standing-room-only township meetings have been replaced by a couple of seemingly sour grapes.

Post Election 11/12/04

2005-09-11T18:49:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
November 12, 2004

Just after the tollbooths at exit 117 off the Garden State Parkway, there is a fork in the road. Although both roads lead to Hazlet, the sign implies that the best route veers off to the right, which is exactly what Hazlet voters did this past Election Day.

Hazlet voters (in every one of its seventeen districts) re-elected President George W. Bush. Hazlet voters (in all seventeen districts) also chose to maintain the Republican administration of Monmouth County by re-electing Amy Handlin and Sheriff Joe Oxley. Hazlet voters (in fifteen of the seventeen districts) re-elected Republican Michael Sachs to his third term on the Hazlet Township Committee. Even the two newly elected candidates to the county and township dais, Rob Clifton and Bridget Antonucci, are Republican. They won in all but two of the seventeen districts.

Written before, but published after Election Day, a column in this newspaper wondered what kind of government we would have come January 2005. The voters’ answer was loud and clear…responsible.

Under the leadership of President Bush, our country has grown stronger and is leading a crusade (and not the religious kind feared by many liberal pundits) to make the world safer for all people, not just Americans. By winning the popular vote as well as the electoral votes, all the claims that President Bush’s presidency is illegitimate are exposed as lies, like the many others, as told in Michael Moore’s film or on CBS.

Frank Pallone, the only Democrat to win in Hazlet, will continue to serve his constituents as he always has, faithfully and intelligently.

Republicans have held the majority on the Board of Monmouth County Freeholders for at least 10 years. During that time, Monmouth County residents have enjoyed responsible use of our collective resources. The Republican Freeholders have worked hard to manage growth by developing and executing plans to preserve open space, and they have provided efficient administration of county services. Sherriff Joe Oxley’s department has aggressively identified and responded to the security needs of our diverse communities.

In Hazlet, the police department and court are bringing in record revenues. Our tax rate is on the decline. A responsible, cost-efficient plan for a new town hall is under development. A plan to share services between the sewerage authority and the township is also in the works. Strategies to preserve open space and gain better control over commercial development are well underway.

For three consecutive elections, Hazlet Democrats have failed to gain the trust of Hazlet voters. As a result, there will not be a single Democrat left on the Hazlet Township Committee in 2005. The positive direction of the current committee will continue for at least the next two years, because that is what the majority of residents want to happen.

What kind of government will we have? We will have a government that closely resembles the one we had last year. That is what Hazlet wanted and, thanks to the opportunity inherent in American democracy, that is what Hazlet will get.

Election 2004 10/28/04

2005-09-11T18:48:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
October 28, 2004

I recently received some mail from the Committee to Elect Democratic candidates, Kevin Lavan and Jim DiNardo. The flyer lists a crumbled town hall, rising taxes, over-development, and poor management of our remaining open space as reasons to oust the current leadership in Hazlet.

I considered other campaign information that I have seen and heard in support of the four candidates, who are vying for two seats on the Hazlet Township Committee.

Propaganda and marketing tricks traditionally shadow every election season, so I made an effort to look past balloons, billboards, and pandering rhetoric in search of substance.

I saw that the issues concerning our local candidates are the same as in past years.

The Lavan/DiNardo campaign piece blames the Republicans for the condemnation of the old town hall. Acknowledging the problem and taking appropriate action to solve the problem is a different matter from causing the problem. Buildings do not fall apart in six months.

Several years ago, as the old building deteriorated beyond repair, the Democrats led the township into a legal battle for land on which they intended to build a new town hall. The land cost the town almost twice the amount for which the owner had originally asked. Eventually, the engineering studies found that the site did not meet the appropriate specifications for a new town hall.

Continuing their irresponsible pursuit of a new town hall, the Democrats’ then commissioned an additional engineering and architectural study of their concept to close our library and build buildings on top of buildings.

After three years of municipal tax increases that averaged 4.5%, under Democratic authority, the Republican-controlled Township Committee reduced this year’s tax increase to 3.7%.

The Democrat’s position on Hazlet’s concern with the preservation of open space is plain and simple. They want to impose an additional tax, but they have no specific plan for spending the proposed revenue to responsibly manage land use. Hazlet voters have already rejected this initiative three times.

Mayor Paul Coughlin and the Republicans are actively seeking county, state, federal, and private resources to preserve natural land within our residential community. They have also begun to investigate every available piece of land within Hazlet’s borders to determine its value to the township.

This year, the township sold property that had no strategic value in a responsible plan for land conservation. The proceeds provided immediate tax relief for every homeowner in Hazlet. The township is negotiating to sell one parcel of land to owners who would be bound financially and legally to preserve it as open space.

The current Republican-led administration is responsible for the continuing improvements to Veterans Park. By soliciting grants and corporate donations, these important projects are taking place with little or no taxpayer dollars.

Hazlet’s Republicans are determined to decrease commercial development within our borders. The township has successfully stopped new construction proposals for a funeral home and a discount supermarket near residential areas.

The Democrats allowed the Fox Building to be constructed at one of the busiest intersections in town.

As deputy mayor of the current administration, Michael Sachs is already a valuable part of the team that has been working hard to improve the quality of life in Hazlet. Along with Mayor Paul Coughlin, Committeepersons Michael Christopher, Tracey Maffiore and Scott Aagre, Mr. Sachs deserves our support for his successful efforts to lead Hazlet in a positive direction.

Bridgette Antonnuci supports the hard work and direction of our current committee, and she is eager to contribute to their efforts.

Our local Democrats seem to be following the lead of the national party by claiming the incumbent Republican administration is failing to properly serve the best interests of the public.

As with the campaigns of our state and national candidates, the facts fail to support many of the Democrats’ accusations and many Democrats fail to support their goals with viable plans.

Democratic candidates Kevin Lavan and Jim Di Nardo want me to vote for open space, our children, and stable property taxes, which is exactly what I plan to do.

I will cast my vote for Republican candidates Michael Sachs and Bridgette Antonnuci, because I believe they understand that solving problems requires debate, planning, and leadership.

Team America 10/21/04

2005-09-11T18:46:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
October 21, 2004

American cinema has a long tradition of portraying the tragedy of war. By setting movies in heinously violent global conflicts, the film industry has provided meaningful perspective and commentary on America’s participation in wars during and before the twentieth-century.

Because mass access to information and rapid film production developed along with satellites and guided weaponry, modern technology has changed more than the way America wages war; it has changed the way Americans think about war.

In the last fifty years, a loud and constant debate has developed in America over whether the media forwards less, as much, or more propaganda than does the government.

Freedom has taught many Americans that the best way to separate truth from propaganda is to give time for the facts to present themselves. We listen to what the media and many governments, especially our own, are saying, and have said, about war, terrorism, and peace.

America has been involved in three major conflicts since the beginning of the twenty-first century: the attack on The World Trade Center, the War on Terror, and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

American filmmakers have already offered the world two important pieces of propaganda about the still current events of the wars in which Americans are still fighting.

This past summer, Michael Moore (Roger and Me) presented Fahrenheit 9/11. Moore’s supposed “documentary” blends fact and fear to create an illusion of President George W. Bush’s hidden agenda of greed, corruption, and reckless power. Moore frames his message with cleverly and questionably edited sound bites and images of destruction and turmoil.

Fahrenheit 9/11 inspires the audience to question President Bush’s motives for waging war in his attempt to stop world terrorism. The film intentionally undermines the mission of our soldiers in action and depicts as fools anyone who supports the use of the highly trained and professional U.S. military to resolve global conflict.

Mr. Moore’s assumption that the majority of Americans do not question their government is as insulting and ignorant as many American celebrities', a few NYT columnists', certain CNN commentators', and one particular CBS anchorman’s assumption that no one, but those who agree with them, is intelligent enough to actually think about world events or seek the truth.

This past weekend Trey Parker and Matt Stone (South Park) released Team America: World Police.

Team America is a fictional squad of heroes who fight to eliminate threats to world peace.

Mr. Parker and Mr. Stone use comedy and satire to portray why America has taken action against international terrorists and inhumane tyrants.

In a particularly compelling scene, Hans Blix meets with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il regarding a search for weapons of mass destruction in the palace. The dictator asks what will happen if he does not grant full access to all areas of the palace. The weapons inspector replies that United Nations will be very angry with the dictator, and “then we will write you a letter telling you how angry we are”.

The message of this film is loud and clear. Why does America lead the fight against worldwide terrorism? We do it, because we are the only ones who can.

Mr. Parker and Mr. Stone reinforced my sense of pride that the world depends on America to identify and defeat the spread of terrorism and inhumanity.

Team America: World Police is positive, hysterically funny, straightforwardly manipulates puppets, and reinforces my perspective on the truth.

Fahrenheit 9/11 is negative, hysterically disturbing, deceitfully manipulates facts, and reinforces my perspective that Michael Moore is a puppet of the liberal propaganda machine currently running much of American media.

I look forward to supporting “Team America” on November 2 by casting my vote for George W. Bush.

Hazlet Day 2004

2005-09-11T18:45:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler

Some political leaders in Hazlet have conducted themselves in accordance with the belief that some rules were made to be broken.

Hazlet Township has several ordinances that specify the rules under which all political campaigns must operate. For example, one ordinance governs the use, placement, size, and removal of those inevitable and unsightly campaign signs throughout our community.

Since I moved back to Hazlet in 2001, I have spotted many violations of the intention of these laws, but the offending actions were usually subtle and/or promptly remedied.

Hazlet Day is a casual occasion, at which residents and neighbors gather to enjoy and celebrate our fine community.

The Hazlet Recreation Commission did an outstanding job organizing this year’s traditional Hazlet Day festival. The addition of a parade was a big hit with residents. Bands, clowns, local organizations, clubs, and students all joined to march down Middle Road from Route 36 to Veterans Park, where the rest of the festivities took place.

Hazlet Day is also an important, yet relaxed, opportunity for the average citizen to meet and talk with our current and prospective elected officials

Because the annual celebration draws an impressive crowd and takes place one month before Election Day, it is an enticing chance for our local politicians to campaign.

Several years ago, in an effort to prevent this community event from becoming an unabashed venue for political campaigns, the recreation commission asked that each political party limit overt politicking to respectively assigned “booths”.

Leaders from both parties have traditionally abided by the commission’s long-standing request.

Even though the parade was clearly an extension of the Hazlet Day festivities, there was plenty of politicking along the parade route.

Managing a campaign is all about taking advantage of every opportunity to get the attention of as many voters as possible, so I did not take much notice of the inoffensive efforts by both parties to make their candidates visible during Hazlet Day.

I initially felt no urge to cry foul, but then I heard several people offhandedly cite the opposing political party’s actions as justification for their own less-than-honorable electioneering practices.

Blaming others for one’s own questionable conduct is not a productive approach to improving the quality of life in our community. Deliberate dismissal of accountability is no way to approach any situation, let alone a political career.

The political integrity vacuum might be starting to suck in some of Hazlet’s most promising politicians.

Dirty campaigns result in dirty elections. When party leaders do not maintain a clean campaign strategy, they compromise the character of their own candidates.

I would rather focus my column on ideas for smart community growth, but some of the politicians to whom I spoke this weekend were surprisingly more interested in cleverly growing their own power.

I have a better cliché for guiding political conduct: Two wrongs don’t make a right.

Independant 9/22/04

2005-09-11T18:44:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
September 22, 2004

On Friday, September 26, I joined the Middletown Township Democratic Party in their protest of Greater Media’s Independent weekly newspaper. The democrats were there to protest what they perceived as that paper’s attempts to influence municipal elections in the Bayshore area, specifically in Middletown. I was there to support them, because I noticed a similar situation in Hazlet.

I have followed many issues in Hazlet, including the over development of Middle Road, the sewerage authority and last year’s library/town hall fiasco. The Independent’s reports on these issues repeatedly omitted relevant and on-the-record facts.

As I read the coverage of these stories in the local media, I began to notice that the Independent reflected a decided slant toward the side of the Hazlet Democrats.

Last year, our township’s library commission opposed a plan put forth by the Democratic leadership. The plan would have closed our library for more than two years and cost the taxpayers millions more than the township committee was willing to admit. Reporters from the Courier and the Asbury Park Press were eager to hear the details of our opposing perspective.

Knowing that the Independent is delivered free to nearly every home in Hazlet, we attempted to contact their reporter to present our concerns. After leaving many messages, a reporter finally contacted me.

During this interview, the reporter argued with our library committee’s analysis of the projected costs of a new library. She also suggested that we not waste our time, because the township had already decided to go ahead with their plan.

Due to the subsequent diligence of the library patrons, concerned citizens, and the fair reporting of the Courier and the Asbury Park Press, the township eventually scrapped their flawed plan. Hazlet’s library remains open.

Last month, the Independent ran an editorial announcing their new policy for general letters of endorsement. It stated “we will accept them from citizens who are not directly involved in a politician’s campaign.”

Editorial letters about issues of local governments will often balance news stories that fail to divulge political motivations accurately or thoroughly. Often, a sitting politician, political appointee, or an un-elected party official will respond. The responses often reveal the character and opinion of the letter writer. This back and forth dialogue allows the citizens to see not only both sides of an issue, but the reactions and demeanor of those involved in our communities.

I am registered as an Independent. I have had conversations and worked with Democrats and Republicans on various issues, campaign related and otherwise. What does this mean to my status? How does the Independent know who is involved with each campaign, in every municipality within their coverage area?

Every citizen with comments and opinions deserves to have a voice in their local paper. The purpose of an op-ed section is to ask questions and present facts that news stories did not cover.

A newspaper that presents subjective news stories and establishes censoring policy for its opinion pages, does not deserve to use the moniker: Independent. They should consider changing the name of their paper to the Suppressed.

Mis-Information 9/16/04

2005-09-11T18:42:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
September 16, 2004

Election season is here, and with it comes a hurricane of propaganda.

I wanted to get Mayor Paul Coughlin’s perspective on the direction of the current Hazlet Township Committee, so he graciously and candidly sat down to talk with me. Mayor Coughlin is concerned with some campaign-inspired criticisms regarding his administration of township business.

The open space issue has beleaguered our township for the last several years. Hazlet has swapped, condemned, bought, re-zoned and sold land. Three times, Hazlet voted down the Democrat-sponsored open space tax. The motivation and result of Hazlet’s open space initiatives have stirred heavy controversy.

According to Mayor Coughlin, the truth is that Hazlet has 445 acres of open space in the form of various lots and parks. Some of this land is privately owned. Some, such as Veterans Park, the swim club and other municipal properties, is township owned. This undeveloped acreage equals 14 percent of the total land area of Hazlet. Natco Conservation Area is 259 acres and represents an additional 8 percent of open space.

Mayor Coughlin supported the recent sale of a 7-acre lot on Middle Road, because the revenue significantly reduced this year’s tax increase for every homeowner in Hazlet. The township is now attempting to obtain an 11.5-acre plot of open land within its borders.

The current administration is particularly focused on limiting the commercial over-development of Hazlet’s remaining vacant land without creating an additional tax.

Also of concern to the Mayor, is the campaign-driven sense of urgency regarding the dissolution of the Hazlet Township Sewerage Authority. The Mayor explained, “there is a serious flaw in the proposal brought forth by township Democrats last year. In order to operate in accordance with state law, the newly formed sewerage utility would have had to immediately mandate a $20-$25 increase per quarter/per household.”

State law requires both a utility and an authority to have a cash reserve, but the legal accounting method for each entity is different. As an authority, the sewerage operation is able to use anticipated revenue as this reserve. As a utility, a rate increase would need to fund the required cash reserve.

Mayor Coughlin believes that a responsible plan based on professional study has the strongest potential to reduce operating expenses without jeopardizing Hazlet’s proficiently maintained sewer system.

The township committee is now working with the sewerage authority to build an intra-local agreement in order to best utilize the township’s resources.

The Mayor is pleased with his administration’s determination and ability to apply sensible financial and business management to municipal government.

Mayor Coughlin seemed most uneasy about rumors that he “quit” after his last term. “I have never quit anything. My parents didn’t raise me that way. I’m right here.”

“I served in the minority two of the three years of my last term. It was a frustrating situation. When I was offered the opportunity to run with Committeeman Scott Aagre, I realized that we had a chance to develop and complete projects that had been stalled by a contentiously split committee”.

“Our municipal tax burden had been steadily increasing for years. I’m proud to say this year is the second lowest tax increase in the last ten years,” the Mayor told me.

During the next few years, Mayor Coughlin believes the current township committee has set solid groundwork on which future township committees can further stabilize the tax rate and preserve the quality of life in Hazlet’s community.

I urge Hazlet residents to beware the eye of the campaign rhetoric storm. Before you go to the polls, please make an effort to question your local politicians, not just the candidates.

Rumors and misinformation will continue to circulate as election season intensifies. Sorting through the inevitable debris is the responsibility of every voter.

I Am A Republican 9/2/04

2005-09-11T18:41:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
September 2, 2004

“At a point in every person’s life, one has to look deeply into the mirror of one’s soul and decide one’s unique truth in this world, not as we may want to see it or hope to see it, but as it is”.

Those were the poignant words, with which Governor James McGreevey framed his decision to resign from office. Immediately following, market news media began its supportive analysis of Mr. McGreevey's “courageous” announcement.

Governor McGreevey’s sexual orientation does not excuse his abuse of the power entrusted to him by the people of New Jersey. Illegal campaign contributions, falsification of public records, misappropriation of taxpayer dollars, and other outrageous scandals continue to plague his administration.

His announcement to remain in office until mid-November further alienated voters, which reminded me of Frank Lautenberg’s replacement of convicted Senator Robert Torricelli and Al Gore’s refusal to accept defeat in Florida.

Governor McGreevey’s speech inspired me to consider my experience with the local political organizations.

In my non-political term as president of the Hazlet Township Library Committee, I endured personal attacks in the media from Hazlet’s Democrat officials. The local Republican organization steadily worked to study and resolve Hazlet’s issue with the county library branch on township property.

For the past two years, each political party has consistently approached the issues challenging the quality of life in Hazlet as described above: negative vs. positive. I began to realize this difference was not just the character of our local political climate.

As I thought about Governor McGreevey’s landmark speech, I became aware of my own “unique truth”.

And so…I am a Republican American.

The you-must-be-demented-if-you-disagree attitude of many Hazlet Democrats, the still developing scandals of the McGreevey administration, and the insultingly patronizing rhetoric inherent in the speeches of prominent Democrats like senators John Kerry, Hilary Clinton and John Corzine, influenced my decision to take an official stand.

Like Governor McGreevey’s declaration, my announcement might not come as a surprise to some of you.

I have made no efforts to conceal my appreciation for the thousands of brave Americans serving overseas, and for President George W. Bush’s courage to take action against terrorism, instead of taking polls in the manner of his predecessor, President William J. Clinton.

President Bush deserves more than my vote; he deserves my commitment to the values his political party strives to preserve.

Senator Kerry does not acknowledge the historic and extraordinary achievements of the U.S. military forces, civilian organizations, and international corporations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world. Senator Kerry has already changed his position more than once regarding the war on terror and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Our military forces continue to liberate millions of oppressed people and improve global security. If Senator Kerry wins the presidency, I shudder to think of our soldiers’ fate under the command of a man who has denounced their mission throughout his campaign.

I am proud to openly criticize politicians who mire in self-interests and hypocrisy. Democratic ideology attempts to secure a voting base through the persecution of those who have achieved success and the promise of entitlements (as opposed to opportunity) to those who are struggling.

I am proud to officially be part of the Grand Old Party.

I will not regret my decision to publicly acknowledge my unique truth by putting an “R” next to my name on the voting rosters, because when the curtain closes on the voting booth, I am still free to cast my vote for whomever I feel will best serve the interests of my town, county, state and nation.

Governor McGreevey’s unique truth is less political than mine is, but it is just as liberating. The truth is like that.

Bush and Iraq 8/5/04

2005-09-11T18:37:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
August 5, 2004

September 11, 2001 was a terrible day for America. This seems to be the only truth regarding terrorism, on which Democrats and Republicans agree.

Many Democrats and our largely uneducated celebrity liberals are outright shameful in their portrayal of President Bush as a lying idiot. Within the context of the upcoming presidential campaign, their emotional, unsubstantiated and illogical conclusions are deceitfully influential.

I shelled out my $8.00 to see the most prominent piece of modern liberal propaganda: Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11. I wanted to know if the film merited the hype.

The film opened with a bizarre retelling of the 2000 presidential election. Mr. Moore painted an amusing image of President Bush as a “stupid” hillbilly, who had relatives around the country handing him the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

The film failed to acknowledge that President Bush earned a bachelors degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School. The film did not mention the many the independent and non-partisan recounts in Florida, all of which confirmed that George W. Bush was the legitimate winner.

I was confused by Moore’s focus on the seven minutes after which an aid had discreetly notified President Bush of the 9/11 attacks. The President was in a Florida classroom and surrounded by young children. The footage showed a calm and reserved leader, who graciously, smoothly, and quickly ended his visit to the school.

Eight minutes after he knew the United States of America was under attack, the President began a long journey to various secure locations. Washington, DC was a target for the terrorists, so the President could not return there. Air force One is a fully equipped and secure presidential office, Mr. Moore, not a hidden hole in the dirt.

President Bush promptly declared war on terrorism and those who enabled its existence. Afghanistan was the training ground for al Qaeda, and thus felt the wrath of American firepower when the Taliban continued to harbor terrorists.

The film failed to support Moore’s theory that a group of highly educated Republican “idiots” masterminded an international conspiracy to kill Iraqi and American people, under the “pretense” of liberating the oppressed, with the goal of increasing the profitability of Bush family’s business dealings.

Iraq had shown mounting aggression since Saddam Hussein took power. A brutal war with its neighbor Iran, an unprovoked attack on the small country of Kuwait, and continuing reports of heinous human rights abuses were only part of his undeniable reign of horror.

Republicans and many prominent Democrats, including President Clinton (on record, as far back as February 1998), Al Gore, Senators Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, (each on record, throughout 2002), made clear and definitive statements that Saddam was seeking, storing, developing, and threatening to use weapons of mass destruction.

In October 2002, Senator John Kerry characterized Saddam Hussein as a, “real and grave threat to our society.”

International criminals and tyrannical governments were working together in an attempt to destroy Western culture and innocent people.

Knowing they would lose their lucrative, but illegal business arrangements with Iraq if the U.S. military removed Saddam Hussein from power, several countries prevented the United Nations from performing its function.

The United Nations’ failure to negotiate a peaceful, lawful and humanistic resolution to serious global problems and conflicts was only escalating the threat facing our nation’s security. President Bush and his staff chose to take action.

In 2003, Senator John Kerry stated, “Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein…the threat of [Iraq] with weapons of mass destruction is real.”

Recently, Charney Research, a partisan Democratic polling firm, conducted an opinion poll in Afghanistan. Of those polled, 64 percent agree with the direction the country is taking; 64 percent are not worried about their personal safety, as opposed to 36 percent under Taliban rule.

Libya has surrendered their WMD program. Syria, Israel, and other countries seem to be taking a more cautious approach toward foreign policy. Is it such a stretch of the imagination to believe that an increasing number of Iraqis are becoming less worried about their personal safety?

Fahrenheit 9/11 was an entertaining piece of twenty-first-century propaganda, but the film’s deceitful hysteria failed to challenge my political views.

·I am proud to be an American.

·I am thankful for George W. Bush’s intelligent and brave leadership.

·I believe that 9/11 was a tragedy of unimaginable layers.

The Jukes 7/01/04

2005-09-11T18:36:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road
By Rich Kohler
July 1, 2004

Home. It is something we all long for. My parents grew up in this state and I was born here. Connected through countless relatives and more than a few ancestors, I have always considered New Jersey my home.

As the son of a salesman, we moved every time Dad climbed another rung on the corporate ladder. Whether we were in Omaha, Racine, New Orleans or Queens, each holiday we anxiously awaited gift packages, news and greetings from ‘home’.

Since 1974, my home has been here in Monmouth County. I lived my teenaged years in Hazlet, during which Bruce Springsteen exploded onto the national music scene. Bruce lived in nearby Holmdel, Born To Run had already sold millions of copies, and Darkness on the Edge of Town was on everybody’s turntable.

One day, my best friend excitedly demanded that I come right over to his house. Joe had an older brother who refused to let us touch his top-quality stereo equipment. When we snuck into Pat’s room, I knew Joe had something big. Joe cautiously put an unfamiliar album on the record player and cued up the first song: Got To Be A Better Way Home. The album was Hearts of Stone, by Southside Johnny and the Asbury Jukes. Upon hearing the first chord, I became a devoted fan.

Southside Johnny and the Asbury Jukes have defined party music at the Jersey Shore for thirty years. E Street Band guitarist, Steven Van Zandt, was an original Juke. He wrote many of the best songs in the Jukes’ repertoire. Max Wienberg, Gary Tallent and Jon Bon Jovi are just a few of the many “guests” who often join the Jukes on area stages.

Johnny Lyon is always on top of his talent. With smooth style, he leads the band through bluesy ballads and hard driving rock and roll.

The band has had numerous personnel changes over the years, which has been the kiss-of-death for many great bands. The Jukes just keep getting better.

Up front with Johnny is Bobby Banderia, another Jersey shore native and a natural Juke. His guitar style and back up vocals are an extraordinary compliment to Johnny’s bold stage presence. Bobby regularly performs with his own band in Red Bank and Sea Bright.

Original Jukes, Eddie Manion on Baritone sax, and trombonist Richie “La Bamba” Rosenberg, give the horn section a rich, full sound.

Chris Anderson is the lead trumpet. Chris’s talent for musical arrangement embellishes the band’s latest CD. Longtime Juke, Joey Stann, wails on the saxophone.

Mark “The Loveman” Pender is amazing on the trumpet. Mark can do things with his horn that seem to defy the laws of physics. La Bamba and The Loveman play in the house band for Late Night with Conan O’brien, The Max Weinberg 7.

Over the years, various incarnations of the Jukes’ horn section have played and recorded legendary performances of several songs with the E Street Band, i.e.Tenth Avenue Freeze Out and Mary’s Place.

On keyboard, Jeff Kazee pounds out a constant stream of rhythms and fills the gaps with blistering riffs. He often fires up the audience (and Johnny) when he “piano surfs” on his rickety old Hammond organ. Steven “Muddy Shews” Shewchuck is rock solid on the bass guitar.

Southside Johnny and the Asbury Jukes consistently and increasingly perform with talent and experience. In the party atmosphere of the Jersey Shore, this band’s live shows provide the most fun and entertainment one can find without a surf board.

This holiday weekend, Southside fans can catch two shows at the Stone Pony. On Saturday July 3, La Bamba and The Loveman lead their Big Band into the Pony. Complete with an 18-piece horn section, they play everything and anything from swing to soul to rock ‘n’ roll. Clarence Clemons and the Temple of Soul will also perform.

On Sunday July 4, Southside Johnny and the Jukes take the stage. It promises to be a night of fireworks: overhead and onstage. Ticket information for both shows is available on the band’s website, www.southsidejohnny.com, or at www.stoneponyonline.com.

The Stone Pony was recently sold to Asbury Partners, LLC. While the name will probably live on, this classic rock and roll venue is destined to go the way of the Palace and Tilly. This might be the last chance to see the “world’s greatest party band” in this historic New Jersey musical landmark.

From the classic Havin’ A Party to the recently released Going To Jukesville, the Jukes are the perfect soundtrack to fun at the Jersey Shore.

I always have the Jukes in my car and they never fail to bring me home.

Fairness 6/17/04

2005-09-11T18:35:00.000-04:00

There have been several commercials airing on local radio that have left me scratching my head in wonder.

Various political action committees paid for these liberal, conservative, and even affiliation-ambiguous advertisements. The ads blur the traditional boundaries of political ideology, because they are each selling the same objective: To make life more “fair”.

My thesaurus considers the following words synonymous with “fair”: Non-discriminatory; Even-handed; Rational; Reasonable and Impartial. These are noble words to associate with an election campaign, but they are highly subjective.

Governor James McGreevey is touting his new tax initiative as the F.A.I.R. (Fair And Immediate Relief) plan. Although a family earning $500,000 per year is already paying more into the tax base and the economy than a family earning $70,000, the F.A.I.R. plan only applies to those who earn more than a half-million dollars per year. The proposed new tax is commonly referred to as the “Millionaires Tax”, because it discriminates against prosperity.

Governor McGreevey is using the word “fair” to describe a redistribution of wealth.

Consider the business owners who want to relocate his or her companies. Will they choose New Jersey, a state that levies a tax on their success? Most wealthy people work hard or do something extraordinary to earn their money. How many “millionaires” will move from our state because of this? Wealthy people directly and indirectly create employment opportunities. Will they take jobs with them?

An even-handed solution would be to identify and close tax loopholes (a creation of politicians) and tax each dollar earned by everyone at the same rate.

One of the advertisements portrays a commencement ceremony at a college in New Jersey. Along with their diplomas, the graduates receive bus, train or air fare to other US cities. Why? Because they cannot afford a home in NJ, “near our family and friends.” The narrative ends with the now familiar whine, “that’s not fair”.

Housing costs are determined by the free market economy and the rule of supply and demand. I have some friends and family who live in Manhattan. I conduct the majority of my business on Fifth Avenue. Would it be rational for me to claim that the government should be concerned with my inability to afford a home in my own ‘neighborhood’?

When my wife and I first married, we lived in a series of rented apartments and houses throughout Monmouth County. We based our choices on what we needed, on what we wanted, and on what we could reasonably afford.

Local rent control laws protect tenants from increases in their rent by limiting the profitability of investment property. Federal housing laws protect senior citizens, disabled persons, and low-income families from being forced out of their homes by a rise in the value of the property on which they live. Voters who support rent control in the name of fairness contribute to the decline in the quality of life in their own neighborhoods.

My experience has taught me that life is not fair. Hardship has enabled me to overcome many obstacles with difficult work and tenacity. Proffering entitlements to secure a voting base has gone too far this election season.

With cavalier use of the term “fair”, current campaign rhetoric has launched an attack on the character of our nation. The Declaration of Independence demands only the “pursuit” of happiness.

Since both ends of the political spectrum appear to be selling their intent to legislate compassion, I acknowledge that this tragic attack is impartial.

These high-impact political ads commit an enormous foul with their deliberate use of a vague and emotional word such as “fair”.

Bill Dowd 6/3/04

2005-09-11T18:25:00.000-04:00

Primary season has ended. Political infighting and backbiting season has not. As the various political parties reorganize for the upcoming election season, fellow party members attack each other with vicious well-placed lies and half-truths.

In unfortunate tradition, The Monmouth County Republicans held their much anticipated reorganization meetings this month.

The event for the county Republicans, complete with cold drinks and hot dogs in the parking lot, resembled a tailgate party. Indoors, long time chairman, Bill Dowd, and Wall Township’s Fred Nieman vied for the position of county chairman.

Despite the faulty sound system, the nominees made their speeches. Mr. Nieman laid out a rhetorical (yet sensible) vision for change and growth. Mr. Dowd used the podium to hurl a few last minute verbal barbs at his opponent.

Mr. Nieman advocated for creating a more inclusive party. Mr. Dowd spoke about his past record, which he claims, among other things, is the “envy of every other republican organization in the tri-state area”.

The polls closed at 9:30, and party officials began to open the voting machines and tally the votes. Mr. Dowd, who had been nervously pacing the perimeter of the room, glanced over the huddled shoulders to catch a glimpse the election results. Before the last machine was opened, Mr. Dowd turned to walk away.

“Is it close?” I asked him.

“No,” he answered. He was right and he was gone.

The chairman of any political party is expected to make himself available to all of those he serves. Mr. Dowd had been excluding many regular members from the political process of candidate selection. Mr. Dowd may take credit for long term republican control of the Board of Freeholders, but his actions last year cost the party not only a seat in the state senate, but one of it’s most valuable members, Senator John O. Bennett.

This year, Mr. Dowd publicized deceptive information about the campaign expenditures of Ed Stominski. Although a state investigation used the “evidence” to fully exonerate Mr. Stominski of any impropriety, Mr. Dowd had sufficiently tarnished an honorable reputation. Mr. Stominski will not be on the Republican ballot for the 2004 election for Monmouth County Freeholder.

Mr. Dowd’s actions caused a rift within his party. Historically, voters disapprove of division among people we expect to work together. Such division is an undeniable sign of weakness.

Mr. Dowd’s antics may have created enough skepticism to hand at least one county seat over to the Democrats this year. A split political party is weak. A resentful political party loses elections. Politicians who are primarily concerned with exerting and maintaining his or her power are not effective leaders.

Other political organizations should take note of the many voters who read between the lines of political rhetoric. We strive to improve the quality of our community life by voting against scandals…real or contrived.

The Monmouth County Republicans are doing what they must to effect real change in the process of nominating candidates. Mr. Nieman faces a tough road to reunite his party and put forth candidates with exhibit honesty and accountability.

I wish him the best of luck.

Rent Control 5/20/04

2005-09-11T18:24:00.000-04:00

The private roads of Hazlet’s mobile home parks are cutting through issues that concern our community.

Congruent with the popular political trend of “legislate this behavior” and “reform that function of government”, Hazlet’s Democrats attempted to abolish the township’s sewerage authority.

Professional research did not adequately support the Democrat’s claim that the authority is wasting money. Combined with an inadequate transition plan, common sense forced the township committee to temporarily reject an idea worthy of further debate.

The sewerage authority serves every resident and business in town. Studying this “issue” cost the taxpayers and ultimately changed nothing, but the Democrats used the issue to create an illusion of reform.

The Hazlet Township Rent Control Board might be a better candidate for elimination and actual reform.

Rent control legislation developed in large cities, in which there is a predominance of multi-family dwellings. Rent control laws prevent landlords from raising the rent to force people out of their homes in an attempt to attract “better” tenants. Enacted with the intention to protect poor, disabled and elderly people, these laws prevent landlords from realizing fair profits on their real estate investments.

Although current county, state and federal programs protect the housing rights of poverty stricken, retired and disabled people, local variations of such legislation still support this municipal social program. Corruption and superfluous entitlement have inspired many cities and towns to revise or eliminate their rent control laws.

In Hazlet, the rent control board governs the rental price of mobile home “pads”.

Hazlet consists of mostly single-family homes. Duplex, apartment, condominium and commercial rentals are not subject to the authority of the Hazlet Rent Control Board.

Mobile homeowners can set up on their own land, if they pay property tax, comply with existing zoning laws and install access to water, sewerage, electric and gas, etc. Many mobile homeowners choose to rent a pad in a privately owned mobile home park, complete with access to utilities.

Only the laws of supply and demand limit the potential profit of most businesses in Hazlet. Mobile home parks are private enterprises, but the local government regulates their profitability.

Many park owners improve their investment in land and community with landscaping, paving and utility access projects. Currently, the rent control board is responsible for determining whether the upgrade is a capital improvement or an extraordinary expense. The subjective opinion of the board lawfully controls the profitability and quality of mobile home parks in Hazlet.

A mobile home pad in a well-maintained park should be more expensive than a pad in a park with unpaved roads and septic systems. Furthermore, because the rent control board must approve all rent increases, the park owner risks losing money with every improvement.

Limiting the profits of local business should not be the business of our local government.

The free market provides a more objective determination regarding the cost and quality of Hazlet’s mobile home parks. Taxpayers will save money with the elimination of the professional fees and lawsuits associated with the rent control board.

Traditionally, Republican ideology advocates less government, while Democrat ideology promotes government-run social programs, which often protect little more than voter loyalty by creating a sense of entitlement.

Common sense, as opposed to common party affiliation, will motivate the tenants, landlords, members of the rent control board and the township committee to consider the direction of this issue.

I look forward hearing these people continue to debate Hazlet’s rent control laws.

2004 Presidential Election 5/6/04

2005-09-11T18:22:00.000-04:00

The Middle Road, 5/6/04

America has rallied unprecedented industrial, intellectual, financial and spiritual strength behind our beloved sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters who are working to protect humanity from the horrors of terrorist organizations and criminal governments.

The 2004 presidential election will have a profound impact on the achievement of our goal.

Propaganda, subtle and overt, is corollary to political campaigns. All news reports are unavoidably subjective to some degree. To choose candidates with values, goals and principles that match our own, we must first dig for the truth within a mudslide of rhetoric.

Voters have a responsibility to reject politicians whose words and actions are only consistent with the latest poll.

Recent news has inspired doubt regarding the Bush Administration’s resolve and ability to keep one of the most solemn and grave presidential promises in American history. President George W. Bush bravely declared that he would to use every resource at his disposal to seal the cracks in our security, which cumulatively enabled al Qaeda to attack the world on September 11, 2001.

Americans worked diligently and together in the months following this tragic date. Our country (except for government, media and emergency organizations) completely shut down for almost ten days. Our economy took a hit, but the national and regional business climate has steadily recovered.

Recent political controversy has debated retrospective opinion regarding our government’s advance knowledge of a pending terrorist attack. Two germane facts render this debate irrelevant:

1) There have been no terrorist attacks in America since 9/11/01.

2) Preventative ‘shutdowns’ cause resonant economic hardship and are ultimately illogical. Imagine if our government had ordered the World Trade Center closed or grounded airlines before the attack in 2001. The terrorists would not have attacked and political opponents would have accused the government of overreacting at the workingman’s expense.

A brief review of statements by prominent national leaders reveals a dangerous disregard for consistency.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry( D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

These were not ambiguous statements. The ambiguity needed to explain the contradiction inherent in their current campaign rhetoric weakens the integrity of each one of these politician’s character.

I am more comfortable with politicians who are popular because he or she is doing what they believe is right, as opposed to those who judge right and wrong by which side will garner their party the most votes.

I believe we owe it to our brave soldiers to focus on America’s goals this November by voting Republican. I fear that the Democrats’ fleeting support of the progress and sacrifice our military has made, and is making to achieve peace and security in Iraq could bring disastrous results for America.

Stominski 4/22/04

2005-09-10T07:51:00.000-04:00

I have maintained my independent voter status, because I support politicians who consider their own ideology to be more important than party affiliation.

I make no efforts to conceal my support for the Republican Party in Hazlet. I proudly believe that President George W. Bush is leading our country with honor and integrity.

Monmouth County Republican GOP Chairman, Bill Dowd, has reminded me why I resist officially joining any political party.

Mr. Dowd made outrageous and misleading statements to the media regarding incumbent Freeholder Ed Stominski’s use of campaign funds.

An investigation by the New Jersey State Election Law Enforcement Commission found that Mr. Dowd’s accusation had no merit, which immediately exonerated Mr. Stominski.

Chairman Dowd did not include the general Republican membership or the majority of municipal chairpersons in the selection process of the Republican Party’s candidate for county freeholder. He circumvented political protocol by personally selecting the GOP’s 2004 candidates, Freeholder Amy Handlin and Matawan Mayor Rob Clifton.

Mr. Clifton may be a fine candidate, but not under the circumstances created by Mr. Dowd.

If Ms. Handlin wants to be known as a crusader for reform, I suggest she start with the leadership in her own party.

Mr. Stominski regularly visits the communities in his district. During such visits, whether they are parades, dedications or club meetings, Mr. Stominski is there to find how he can best serve his constituents.

While maintaining a career outside of politics, Mr. Stominski has devoted twenty-five years to public service in Monmouth County. Mr. Stominski serves with intention to improve the quality of life in our community. As Mayor of Eatontown and a member of the board of chosen freeholders, his unblemished record points to his nobility.

Mr. Stominski deserves to be the 2004 Republican candidate for Monmouth County Freeholder.

Mr. Stominski publicly supports the many volunteers who serve our county. In reference to travel-meal expenses, he noted that when a volunteer is taken away from their regular life to attend a function, he or she is entitled to a decent meal.

This comment caused Mr. Dowd to declare Mr. Stominski “un-elect able”.

The politics of personal destruction is an unfortunate crutch for politicians like Mr. Dowd, who are not willing, or are not able to abandon the power of corruption.

I expect political opponents to attack each other’s public service record or ideas during a heated election. I am shocked by the party chairman’s devious attack on such a responsible representative of his own party, months before the official campaign season.

Mr. Dowd and power-corrupt politicians are becoming dinosaurs. A movement toward empowering the governed, and away from backroom deals that empower politicians is alive and well in the modern political arena.

Mr. Dowd’s behavior is destined to drag him, along with other public servants who similarly conduct themselves, into the political tar pits, where they belong.

Town Hall Collapse 4/8/04

2005-09-10T07:50:00.000-04:00

April showers might bring May flowers, but March rains brought down the house.

The Hazlet Township Municipal Building was condemned, which put an old and historically contentious issue on the very top of Mayor Paul Coughlin’s agenda.

Where do we build a new town hall?

Several past administrations have tried to address the problem of our dilapidated municipal building. During the tenure of former Mayor Christopher Cullen, the township attempted to initiate a plan to convert the township library building into a new town hall.

The citizens of Hazlet soundly rejected this plan as irresponsible and unrealistic, primarily because it included closing the library for over two years and underestimated the cost of a new library by several million dollars.

The options available to this committee are limited. Because space is at a premium in Hazlet, creativity will be essential to the management of a satisfactory resolution.

Several citizens have mentioned the empty retail stores and land along Highways 35 and 36. Highway frontage is prime real estate and, therefore, the most expensive. The empty retail stores are mostly for rent or long-term lease. Along with an overdeveloped and urban sprawl character, traffic congestion is already a problem at most of the currently available locations.

Many ideas suggest rebuilding at 319 Middle Road. The current site may not adequately support a large building, due to the adjacent creek. Hazlet could end up experiencing the same problem in 30 years.

Much of the land that is already owned by the township is protected by Green Acres. Hazlet has accepted grants to purchase such land, which often restrict land use options.

The township will need to issue bonds to cover costs of the land and the construction of a new facility. Other governments (county, state, federal) might provide aid in the form of grants, emergency aid or low rate loans, but approval is uncertain and the application process is lengthy.

The current administration responsibly hired a grant-writing firm earlier this year. I assume these professionals are now hard at work on this urgent project.

The public will, and should, have many, and varied, ideas regarding the issue of Hazlet’s future municipal building. Our 2004 township committee is demonstrating their commitment to learning the opinions and concerns of Hazlet residents.

If you have comments or questions regarding the new town hall, please look for meeting times in the public notices section of your local paper, online at township official site: www.hazlettwp.org , or the privately owned, informational and forum site: www.hazlet.info.

Township committee members and township personnel reacted swiftly, professionally and productively to remedy Hazlet’s sudden loss of office space. I believe we can trust them to apply similar intentions to realizing a more permanent solution.

Budget 4/1/04

2005-09-10T07:49:00.000-04:00

The Hazlet Township Committee introduced the municipal budget for 2004. As usual and expected, the budget’s introduction sparked immediate questions and debate. However, this year’s budget revealed some unexpected facts and unusual creativity.

Committeeman Michael Christopher was the only voice of dissent during the adoption of this preliminary budget. He had a good reason. Mr. Christopher stated that he had just recently received a copy of the proposed budget. Noting that he needed more time to scrutinize the details, Mr. Christopher expressed his concern that the budget reflected a $725,000 revenue increase from the proposed sale of township-owned property.

Mr. Christopher went on to explain that, as unbelievable as this sounds, Hazlet owns approximately 14 acres of undeveloped land that is technically in Holmdel, on Hazlet’s border. The township committee is attempting to sell this land and use the revenue to provide property tax relief for its own citizens. The legal fees involved with changing Hazlet’s borders to include this property would exceed the value of the land.

Mr. Coughlin expressed the township’s interest in preserving the natural condition of this land. An endangered raptor has been spotted in that area. The reports of these sightings have prompted thoughts of conservation, rather than development. Mayor Coughlin later explained that Hazlet does not intend to sell this land to developers.

In the interest of protecting this community asset, the township has approached the open space commissions of Holmdel and Monmouth County, and at least one environmental group.

The republican majority focused their last two campaigns on limiting municipal tax growth through responsible management of township resources. They are working to follow through on their pledge by preserving open space without additional taxation to the residents.

Mayor Coughlin further explained that some of the increases in the budget expenses like pension payouts and health insurance, are unavoidable. The mayor and township committee are taking steps to minimize these costs for future budgets by restructuring payments and by continuing to research less expensive insurance options.

Hazlet has also applied for $400,000 of extraordinary state aid. If the state approves Hazlet’s application, as the budget stands now, the property tax increase would be only .9 cents. Last year, the state offered Hazlet only $25,000 in extraordinary aid.

Governor McGreevey has promised to provide more aid to municipalities, but New Jersey has many communities that need help maintaining their quality of life.

This budget is by no means final. Each member of the township committee has expressed concern about the increase. They are also searching for ways to stabilize the municipal tax rate for future administrations.

The township committee is applying determined accountability and creativity to solving Hazlet’s problems. Most refreshing is each member’s enthusiasm for explaining their ideas and listening to the ideas of others.

A public hearing on this budget is scheduled for April 19, 2004 at 8:00 pm, in the municipal building, 319 Middle Road.

Ethics Reform 3/11/04

2005-09-10T07:47:00.000-04:00

Local media has been reporting on the attempt of various governments to reform ethics laws. New Jersey has long been the butt of jokes on this subject, and we have the names to support many a punch line. People at all levels of government have been accused and convicted of everything from accepting bribes to sexual misconduct.

In their eagerness to curb the abuse of civil service positions, several politicians have initiated ideas and proposed legislation intended to minimize the opportunity for corruption.

Monmouth County Freeholder Amy Handlin is attempting to tighten controls on travel spending at the county level by freezing the current travel budget. Ms. Handlin wants the county administrator to be ultimately accountable for the approval of all travel expenses. Logic dictates that by monitoring this budget more closely, Monmouth County will save tax dollars.

Other municipalities, such as Holmdel, have enacted laws to limit campaign contributions from professionals seeking contracts from the township. While this may seem like a good idea on the surface, it limits Holmdel to a two party system.

In order to mount a successful run for office, a candidate must budget at least ten thousand dollars to cover expenses related to the campaign. Newspaper ads, bumper stickers, signs, fliers, pizza parties for the volunteers, and an election-night party all add up to big bucks, win or lose. Republicans and Democrats can usually count on support from their respective party. Where does that leave an independent candidate?

Without the ability to solicit financial support from those most willing to donate, not many people would be able to spend that much of their own money. A third party candidate does not stand much of a chance.

Holmdel Committeeman Terrance Wall is offering a plan to utilize a bidding process for professional services to the township. Mr. Wall is watching out for his community, and I applaud his efforts to minimize the opportunity for “pay-for-play”. However, I believe the plan needs further consideration and debate, before it becomes law.

Bidding is fine for a tangible project like construction or road repair. Professional services, which include legal, financial and engineering, are an entirely different matter.

Mr. Wall’s proposed ordinance might stop the highest campaign contributor from securing a professional contract. It might stop a committeeperson’s tennis partner from even wanting a professional contract. The proposal stops short of legally binding the township committee to hire only professionals that are willing to take the least amount of compensation for his or her services.

An important function of a township committee is to hire professionals that offer the most experience, backed by the most appropriate resources, at the most reasonable and competitive price. What is the point of legislating an already established responsibility?

Mr. Wall and Ms. Handlin are advancing ideas that value honesty and accountability. Unfortunately, there will always be government officials who corrupt the power bestowed upon them by his or her constituents.

Voters are responsible for exposing politicians who take advantage of public resources to serve their own interests. Voters are also responsible for electing politicians who take advantage of public resources to serve the community.

Local political parties are responsible for supporting candidates who exhibit accountability, as well as elect-ability.

World history has shown us that it is futile and impossible to legislate every aspect of human behavior. It is constructive and practical for taxpayers to monitor and question our governments. It is essential for us to demand honesty and accountability from our politicians, regardless of what the law allows.

Just as gun laws fail to stop criminals from using illegal firearms, if no one is watching the store, thieves make out like bandits.

K-9 3/4/04

2005-09-10T07:46:00.000-04:00

The Hazlet township committee recently held a ceremony to swear in the newest member of the Hazlet Police Department. Moments before the ceremony was about to begin, the rookie officer entered the chamber. With his straight back and alert senses, he gained my confidence in his ability to protect and serve the citizens of Hazlet. He even projected an air of calm, compassion and honor with each discreet wag of his tail.

Memphis, a two-year-old German Shepard, officially went on duty January 24 of this year. He and his partner, Officer Kevin Geoghan, recently completed an intensive, twenty-week, one thousand-hour training program. The program was physically challenging for both Officer Geoghan and Memphis, but these highly skilled officers are now ready to hit the streets, so criminals beware.

Memphis is trained to fight crime, and to protect citizens and other police officers. K-9 officers from nearby towns have earned commendations for acts of valor and bravery.

Memphis is a trained narcotics dog. He can sniff out the smallest amount of contraband, which helps curb the flow of illegal drugs through our community.

Knowing that a K-9 officer is on the scene, many suspects more readily stop and comply with police. Should a suspect decide to run rather than face the police, Memphis is trained to catch and detain the perpetrator until police can place them in handcuffs. Every man and woman on our force now enjoys an increased level of protection while performing his or her dangerous job.

Memphis cannot only track criminals, but missing children as well. This should bring a great sense of comfort to the parents of Hazlet’s children.

A police dog is an expensive investment of time and money. The pride and security that Officer Memphis brings to Hazlet’s police force, along with the dedication that Officer Geoghan brings to our community, have already improved the quality of life in Hazlet.

Planning Board 2/19/04

2005-09-10T07:45:00.000-04:00

In the movie, Dogma, the characters of Jay & Silent Bob were warned not to underestimate the staggering drawing power of the Garden State.

The rich culture and history of Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington D.C. are within a 5-hour drive of New Jersey. New York City is less than an hour away from the north and central regions. The coastal region offers National and State Parks, boardwalk amusement parks, casinos, and entertainment for families, as well as thrill seekers. New Jersey has something for everyone, and it seems like everyone is here.

Many people live, work and vacation in New Jersey. New Jersey has long been the most densely populated state. Current estimates claim that only two percent of the land within the borders of Hazlet is undeveloped. Responsible management of our township’s scant remaining land has been debated in the media, and was a major issue during the last two local elections.

Managing the use of Hazlet’s land is not the sole responsibility of the township committee. The planning board is the governing body with the power to stop over development. The 2004 planning board is comprised of a cross section of residents who live here, endure the same traffic, and pay the same taxes, as do all Hazlet citizens. This year, Mayor Paul Coughlin appointed citizens and professionals with valuable and relevant experience to the open positions on the board.

The chairman and vice chairman are both professional engineers. Committeeman Scott Aagre, a licensed architect, holds a seat along with a supervisor from the public works department and Mayor Paul Coughlin. The board attorney grew up in Hazlet, and the board’s consulting engineer has past experience with our township.

One of the first issues presented to this planning board is an application to construct a 15,000 square-foot Aldi’s supermarket and a separate 5,000 square-foot retail store on Poole Avenue, adjacent to Walgreens.

If an application is filed without requests for waivers or variances, the board must approve it or subject the town to a lawsuit. The lot on Poole Avenue is currently zoned as business highway, so a supermarket is an approved use. The application for Aldi’s does require both waivers and variances. The board must have just cause to deny them, or it exposes Hazlet to costly and losing legal battles.

This site contains wet spots and a swale (wetlands), which help drain surrounding property. The Aldi application includes plans to construct a drainage system that complies with state guidelines regarding water runoff.

Anyone with a basement in Hazlet knows that groundwater is a sensitive issue; because newly developed land often turns nearby dry basements into wet ones. The chairman of the planning board has made it clear to the applicant that this issue must be studied further, and engineering testimony will continue at a later date.

Until the laws governing land use in Hazlet are changed, the planning board’s power to stop development of our precious open space is limited. A review of the Zoning Element of the Master Plan is forthcoming, but in the meantime, all applications are subject to current law.

Public input can often influence the planning board’s handling of an application. The only way to make an informed effort to preserve this open space is to attend the meetings and hear the facts. Public participation assists the board in determining the effect on citizens and their daily lives.

Public apathy is now the greatest threat to Hazlet’s last remaining morsels of open space.

Changes 1/22/04

2005-09-10T07:44:00.000-04:00

The 2004 Hazlet Township Committee is taking the reigns of our local government and putting them back where they belong: in the hands of the people.

Mayor Paul Coughlin, along with his fellow committee members, is actively seeking the input of his constituents as his first step to properly address issues facing the community of Hazlet. He is implementing new ideas to keep the public informed of the activities of our numerous branches of government.

The previous administration frequently told concerned residents to direct questions to other boards, committees or governing bodies. After asking the business administrator to confirm that the township had complied with notification laws, former committee members would often imply that they had fulfilled their obligation regarding a problem they had not solved. During the public portion of township committee meetings, the township attorney regularly responded to concerned residents by condescendingly explaining a legal technicality that absolved the committee of accountability.

Historically, the printed agenda for each township committee meeting acknowledged mundane business like the total dollars collected by the court and tax office, the number of police activities, and the amount of revenue received from the zoning and construction departments. The agenda simply named the reports and noted that each had been received and read.

Mayor Coughlin announced that he is expecting to hear detailed reports from each township committee member about the boards, departments and sub-committees to which each serves as the liaison. During township committee meetings, the members will report on more than the financials and statistics of the various township organizations. For example, Committeewoman Tracey Maffiore will report on the activities of the board of education and library commission; Committeeman Michael Sachs will provide reports from the police, public works, health departments and the sewerage authority; Committeeman Mike Christopher is responsible for informing the public of the business of our recreation commission.

Our newly elected committeeman, Scott Aagre, will report on the zoning and planning boards. The activity of these boards will be instrumental to addressing Hazlet’s growing problem of over development.

Building applications generally require landowners to send notice to every property owner within a 200-foot radius of the site on which they intend to begin construction. Mr. Aagre will include new applications in his reports, as well as the status of those that are pending. Since most applications also affect more residents than those within 200 feet, the committee hopes to better inform the public of building projects that might affect the quality of life in Hazlet.

Every citizen has the right to address any township board or committee with their concerns. Many citizens are not comfortable speaking in a public forum. Publicly challenging professionals is understandably intimidating for many people.
When they learn that the township has received an application to build a supermarket on the land adjacent to their backyard, most people do not have a problem finding their voice.

During the public portion of the Hazlet Township Committee meeting on January 13, Mayor Coughlin and the committee members took the time to thoroughly address the concerns of each citizen. The committee’s responses lacked the patronizing, deflective and dismissive tone of the previous administration.

The township’s website, www.hazlettwp.org, www.hazlet.info, and the bulletin boards at town hall post the dates and meeting times of each board and committee. If you think you have relevant knowledge, skills, concerns or experience, please attend a meeting or two. If you think you can help, please speak up. For anyone who is more comfortable interacting with their government in a less public forum, Mayor Coughlin will continue the monthly “Meet the Mayor” night.

The 2004 Hazlet Township Committee is implementing policies and looking for ways to enable the citizens to make a difference in their community. Because they want to hear your concerns and ideas, it is an excellent time to consider how the township committee might improve the quality of your life in Hazlet.

Reorginization 1/8/04

2005-09-10T07:39:00.000-04:00

The start of a new year is traditionally a time for change. Many people make resolutions to lose weight, stop smoking or otherwise make positive changes to their lives.

This past Election Day, the 2004 Hazlet Township Committee made a resolution to approach municipal administration with respect for the citizens it governs. At the first township meeting of this year, our new township committee demonstrated their determination to bring positive change to the community.

Paul Coughlin, our new mayor, is committed to leading a team of officials, professionals and volunteers, who dedicate their services to more than the exertion and maintenance of their political party’s power.

As Deputy Mayor, Michael Sachs’ experience with, and knowledge of our township, county and state operational government will enable Mayor Coughlin to achieve his goals.

Along with committeepersons Tracey Maffiore and Scott Aagre, the republican majority is allowing the concerns of taxpayers to influence of the shape of our township government.

Mayor Coughlin did not reappoint planning board members who have based their votes on personal or political agendas, instead of on the legality of each application. Mayor Coughlin replaced other board and committee members with citizens who exhibit relevant expertise or aspire to advance more than their own power.

We have a new township attorney, James Gorman. In addition to serving as the counsel for the Hazlet Township Sewerage Authority, Mr. Gorman has represented several municipalities in various capacities throughout his career. His fees are lower than are those of our previous attorney.

Mayor Coughlin has fulfilled a campaign promise. Because the previous administration never sufficiently explained or documented the appointed position of Special Counsel, the township committee intentionally left this position unfilled.

Mayor Coughlin spoke of changes during is inaugural address. He is developing plans to engage the input of his constituents.

He suggested holding some of the township committee meetings at various locations around town. Working with the PTO organizations, the committee hopes to attract concerned residents who will voice their complaints and suggestions.

Mayor Coughlin will continue Meet the Mayor night. Initiated by former Mayor Christopher Cullen, this forum became nothing more than a chance to campaign unchallenged during his failed bid for re-election. Instead of seeking support for his own agenda, Mayor Coughlin will maintain the focus on hearing the citizens’ concerns and ideas.

Any citizen can address the township committee during the public portion of the regular meetings. For those less inclined to speak publicly, the republican members regularly make themselves available after the meetings.

No matter what this enthusiastic administrative team ultimately decides to accomplish, it is already obvious that service, rather than power, is their primary focus. Clearly, their goal is to improve the quality of life in Hazlet.

Public safety, the sewerage authority, school and property taxes, over development, a new town hall and many other issues are on this township committee’s agenda. They achieved their first goal in one meeting by following through on their resolve to bring dignity and common sense to the government of Hazlet Township.

As the voters reminded the local Democrats during the last two elections, power is fleeting for those in office who make little effort to earn the respect of the people who vote to grant them authority.

Drive 25 12/18/03

2005-09-09T23:37:00.000-04:00

The season has changed from fall to winter. The first snow has come and gone. The cold dreary weather has driven the children to play indoors.

All year long, on any nice day, children play outdoors in the neighborhoods of Hazlet. This is one of the reasons my wife and I decided to raise our family here. Many of my neighbors also believe that our children benefit from playing together outdoors.

All of my neighbors agree that we deserve to live in a safe environment.

Hazlet needs to address pedestrian safety before the spring when residents, especially children, are more apt to be outside.

The problem with speeding cars is most prevalent on “thru-streets” such as Fleetwood Drive, Lynn Boulevard, Virginia Avenue, Hazlet Avenue and Knoll Terrace. These streets, as well as several others, have become shortcuts that residents use to avoid traffic caused by over development.

Residents have been expressing their concerns about cars speeding through their neighborhoods at township committee meetings, in letters to the editor, and in posts on the website forum dedicated to Hazlet issues.

Committeeman Christopher Cullen once commented that the township would just inconvenience and anger its own residents by changing or more strictly enforcing speed limitations. Patronizing dangerous drivers is no way to solve this problem.

Committeemen elect Scott Aagre and Paul Coughlin began a campaign to place “Drive 25, Keep Kids Alive” signs on residential properties at key locations around town. These signs are an excellent reminder to motorists, but they are also expensive. Scott and Paul are looking for ways to fund additional public awareness materials.

Speed on residential roads is usually limited to 25 mph. However, several thru-streets have a posted speed limit of 30 mph. Other municipalities have instituted a 25 mph speed limit on all township roads. County roads are not under township influence. Hazlet speed restrictions will not affect Poole Avenue, Middle Road or Union Avenue.

We could improve the safety of our school vicinities with bold warnings of severe punitive fines for violations within designated zones. We could impose double fines in areas that experience the most speed-limit violations. Perhaps we could use the increased revenue to pay for additional speed deterrents.

Pedestrian safety in our many busy shopping plazas can also be improved. Holmdel has a law requiring all traffic to yield to pedestrians using crosswalks in the parking lots of their shopping plazas. The property owners are responsible for the cost of altering their lots to comply with regulations by adding signs or repainting.

Signs and laws can only go so far. The police cannot, and should not, be ubiquitous. The success of any vehicle safety initiative ultimately depends on the motorists. Hazlet could do a better job of reminding us to drive responsibly.

Surrounding towns have shown us by example that increasing pedestrian safety is easy and inexpensive. Increasing child safety is responsible and essential.

Concerning the issue of pedestrian safety in Hazlet’s community, inconveniencing and punishing dangerous drivers should not be our excuse. Inconveniencing and punishing dangerous drivers should be our goal.

Swim Club 12/11/03

2005-09-09T23:36:00.000-04:00

The Hazlet Township Swim and Tennis Club has been part of our community for almost thirty years.

I conjured up the courage to take my first “real” dive on Hazlet Township’s 3-meter springboard. I remember going to the live music concerts on Teen Night. Many residents have fond memories of spending warm summer days at the club with friends, neighbors and family.

The club has improved the quality of life for many residents, but the township has an expensive problem. Currently, not enough residents are making memories with friends, neighbors and family at the swim club.

The club has been suffering from a case of community apathy. Membership is declining and the facility has not undergone much change in the way of improvements, since I was a child.

The swim club operates as a utility. Utilities are set up to be self-supporting. Membership fees and sources other than township tax money are supposed to cover the costs of operation.

Since the township is responsible for the swim club’s financial success, Hazlet taxpayers have paid approximately $120,000 over the last two years to balance the swim club’s budget.

In an attempt to reduce this waste of taxpayer’s money, the township has raised the membership rates. Increasing the rates caused the membership to decline even further.

There is a more important explanation for the declining membership. Many residents are installing swimming pools on their own property. On each month’s meeting agenda of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, there are normally several pool applications. The zoning board reasonably approves most of them.

It is not reasonable for the citizens of Hazlet, who are not members of the swim club, to continue paying for this utility to operate at a loss. We need to resolve this problem.

The township has researched seemingly well-planned ideas to balance the swim club’s budget. Hazlet could contract with an outside company to manage the day-to-day operations of the club. We could lease out the food and beverage concessions for added revenue. The township could create a board of unpaid citizens to manage the club. Maybe the recreation commission could do the job. The alternatives are limited. Our elected officials have looked at many options over the years, but none was strong enough to overcome the problem of moribund membership.

Continuing to provide a service, for which the community has lost its need, is a waste of valuable resources. Hazlet could use those resources to manage quality of life issues that are more germane to the interests of its current residents.

I recently heard a resident remark that the main pool, once drained, would “make a great basement for a town hall”.

Hazlet has been searching for land on which to build a municipal complex. This parcel is large and near the geographic center of town. The land is adjacent to parkland.

Closing Hazlet’s pool might be a viable solution to our problem of where to build the badly needed new town hall.

If planned carefully, this concept could involve the environmental, planning, zoning, recreation and other boards and committees in all levels of government. This kind of cooperation could build the momentum this town desperately needs to productively and responsibly address Hazlet’s most critical issue: The preservation of open space.

This last resort has the potential to provide an opportunity for positive results that will benefit all citizens, not just the ones with membership cards.

Open Space Part II 11/27/03

2005-09-09T23:35:00.000-04:00

Several of my columns have addressed the preservation of open space in Hazlet. I am reluctant to focus my attention on this issue again. However, after reading Deputy Mayor Chris Cullen’s comments on the recent defeat of his proposed open space tax, I feel it is important to take this opportunity to reconsider my perspective

The proposal to create a new tax, in the name of open space, has been defeated for the third time. Mr. Cullen claimed that he was “shocked” that the referendum did not pass. He blamed republican opposition for his failure to gain the residents’ approval.

Mr. Cullen is just as much to blame as anyone else. Mr. Cullen appropriately believes that “taxes can be stabilized by stopping or limiting development.” Unfortunately, the ideas he has brought to the township committee have not stabilized taxes, nor have they limited development.

In 2002, as Mayor and a member of the planning board, Mr. Cullen had the opportunity to use the township’s most effective tool for controlling development. I refer to the zoning element of the Master Plan. Our planning board had requested funding that would have enabled them to study and change land use laws. The 2002/2003 township committee never voted to allocate the needed money.

If Mr. Cullen was so adamant about limiting new building projects, why didn’t he lobby to get the funds approved?

Had the planning board been able to research and change the zoning element of the Master Plan, developers would have been required to present building plans that create a minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhoods. The additional cost of conforming to inhibitive zoning laws make vacant lots less attractive to developers and drives the down the monetary value of the land, which makes it more feasible for the township to purchase.

The results of Mr. Cullen’s concern for the preservation of open space are indisputable. We have five new housing developments in town. A new office building on the corner of Poole Avenue and Middle Road is now under construction. We can expect commercial building applications for two other vacant lots near the same busy and dangerous intersection. One lot is on Middle Road (near the corner of Poole Avenue), and the other is on Poole Avenue (near Walgreens). If future applications conform to Hazlet’s zoning laws, our planning board will be legally obligated to approve them.

Mr. Cullen states that the township could have purchased some of the parcels of land that are now being developed, and preserved it as open space. The township’s last attempt to acquire land (also during Mr. Cullen’s service on the committee) was a disaster. The engineering and legal fees ultimately exceeded the cost of the land itself.

The republican leaders criticized that the township would allocate a portion of the tax for the maintenance and improvement of our current parks. Mr. Cullen claims that the main thrust of the referendum was to acquire land to stop development. If that is true, why was maintenance included in the wording of the referendum? Although asked repeatedly what percentage of the tax revenue would the township committee use to acquire land, Mr. Cullen did not have an answer.

Poor planning and a lack of leadership defeated the open space tax. Mr. Cullen’s plan to stabilize property taxes by increasing property taxes was ludicrous. As a registered independent voter in Hazlet, Mr. Cullen insults me with his implication that the republican candidates deceived the majority of residents who are concerned with the over-development of Hazlet.

Shortsighted plans that would create only an illusion of addressing the issue of open space led to the defeat of the open space tax.

Shortsighted agendas for addressing the many other concerns of Hazlet residents led to the defeat of Mr. Cullen’s bid for re-election to the township committee.

Rich Kohler is a long-time Hazlet resident. Rich contributes regularly to the privately owned informational website, www.hazlet.info. Send comments and question to Rich at richkohler@comcast.net.

Dissention 11/20/03

2005-09-09T23:33:00.000-04:00

The voice of dissent is the origin of democracy in America.

The Patriots stood their ground against the hostile control of King George III. They founded our country on the belief that nonconforming opinions are important. In writing one of the most defiant documents of all time, the Declaration of Independence, our founding fathers officially and eloquently articulated their revolutionary dispute with the King of England. The Constitution of the United States of America protects our freedom to disagree with any governing body. Such freedom comes with the responsibility to question the actions of our elected officials.

We are fortunate to live in an age of rising political openness. Journalists, politicians and celebrities often use the media to challenge authority. Newspapers like the Courier, popular Internet sites like www.hazlet.info, and the recently enacted “sunshine” laws, give every citizen more power to influence their government.

The voice of dissent comes from people who have the courage and conviction to stand up for what they believe is right. Locally, citizens have the opportunity to ask questions and present opposing viewpoints during the public portion of our townships’ various board and committee meetings.

When a responsive government works to plausibly debate or incorporate reasoned opposition in the creation of its laws and the development of its goals, we witness democracy in action.

During election season, citizens can hardly escape the many vociferous opinions of the issues at hand.

This year, the editors of the Courier invited concerned citizens from our community, whether running for office or not, to write weekly opinion columns. Alex Desevo, Joe Hawley, Jane Frotton, Marc Nusbaum and others shared their views on these pages.
Now that Election Day has passed, many of these voices have disappeared.

Do these writers believe their opinions are only valuable during the three months preceding an election? Even opinions that take the form of “nasty-grams” should still be heard. Open debate is essential to a government’s ability to resolve conflict and find positive, goal-oriented momentum. By listening to and participating in the debate, our elected officials can more effectively serve the needs of the majority of citizens.

Democracy affords us the privilege of expecting our government to act in the best interest of the community. Democracy demands that governments pave a middle road to progress with respect for the opinions and needs of constituents.

With the election of a four-to-one republican majority to the 2004 Hazlet Township Committee, Mr. Nusbaum’s column could have become an important voice of dissention. I am disappointed that Mr. Nusbaum did not submit a column for last week’s edition of this paper. I will continue to listen for the strictly democratic voice of Hazlet.

If we avoid thorough deliberation of the issues, we cannot rightly hold our elected officials accountable for failing to meet our expectations, nor can we accuse them of not listening to our concerns.

Rich Kohler is a long-time Hazlet resident. Rich contributes regularly to the privately owned informational website, www.hazlet.info. Send comments and question to Rich at richkohler@comcast.net.

New Administration 11/13/03

2005-09-09T23:28:00.000-04:00

The balance of power in Hazlet has shifted. The task of managing township business has become the responsibility of the leaders in our local Republican Party.

The results of this past election present an opportunity for our newly elected and currently serving officials to reflect on the concerns of the residents.

As Democratic Party boss, Marc Nusbaum, predicted, the citizens of Hazlet have cast their “final and deciding vote”. We made it known that Hazlet is ready for a change. The old administration has been swept from office, and the Republicans are ready to clean up the mess left behind by the previous administration.

The Republican candidates, Paul Coughlin and Scott Aagre won the election by a large margin, and the open space tax was defeated again, by a much larger margin than last year.

Committeemen-elect, Scott Aagre and Paul Coughlin, along with committeepersons Michael Sachs and Tracey Maffiore, are working hard to develop a plan of action for their first 100 days in office.

Their plans include cost saving measures such as restructuring the administration, establishing contact with members of the state and county legislature to secure more state aid, and a continued search for a solution to the town hall dilemma and the issue of the management of our sewer system.

I have not heard this group talk of savings in sound bites, or of vague promises like the creation of pocket parks. Their ideas promise to create more than just the illusion of progress. I have heard them debate meaningful changes that will have a positive effect on Hazlet now and in the future.

The republicans ran a clean campaign, and were able to reach the citizens without the aid of last minute misleading ads, or oversized, illegal campaign signs. The republican candidates wanted an opportunity to debate the democratic candidates, but the Democrats decided to take their campaign door to door, where no one would publicly challenge their version of the issues.

The democrats tried to deceive and confuse the voters with their inconsistent position on land use and open space. In a last minute, full-page ad in this paper, Mr. Cullen blamed Tracey Maffiore, Scott Aagre and (for some unknown reason) Paul Coughlin for the destruction of the last piece of farmland in Hazlet. He did not blame the township committee for ignoring the planning board’s desire to review and recommend changes to our land use laws. He did not blame the farmer for selling his land, nor did he blame the developer who submitted a clean application.

Mr. Cullen did however vote to approve the Fox building at Middle Rd. and Poole Ave. That application also came in clean, and as a member of the planning board, Mr. Cullen was obligated to cast the same vote for which he chastised the republicans.

I think the township democrats are correct in assuming that savings can be obtained with changes to the operation of our sewer system. Mr. Cullen’s attempts to initiate such action were halted by a lack of planning and a still unclear picture as to what additional costs may be incurred by this action. Partisan politics became the democrats’ primary motivation to dissolve the sewerage authority.

The leaders of the Democratic Party in Hazlet are to blame for the continual dismissal of legitimate concerns raised by Hazlet citizens. Their behavior has led to the waste of money and resources in our township. Our best defense to this practice, as constituents, is to stay aware by attending the township’s committee meetings, and by becoming involved, when we think we can help.

I believe that each member of the 2004 Hazlet Township Committee has the integrity to abandon the focus on the maintenance and exertion of power that our community has endured during the last few years. Such government only brought us a divisive, angry agenda of ill-advised, ill-planned and ill-explained projects.

I am tired of feeling sick from watching our government in action, and I look forward to contributing to positive change. It is my hope that other dedicated and qualified citizens join the rehabilitation of our local boards and committees.

I challenge the new administration to reincorporate a steady focus on leading as many people as possible to work together to improve our community. Our support will enable the township committee to turn a healing trend into a more functional and responsible government.

Rich Kohler is a long-time Hazlet resident. Rich contributes regularly to the privately owned informational website, www.hazlet.info. Send comments and question to Rich at richkohler@comcast.net.

Political Appointments 11/6/03

2005-09-09T21:26:00.000-04:00

Political appointments of township board members, commissioners and professionals are an important part of our government. They serve as a vital system of checks, balances and advisory focus within our government.

Annually, the majority party is tempted to abuse this privilege of selection. By stacking the list with political supporters and cleansing the list of political opponents, the township committee creates a path of least resistance to the advancement of their agenda, but jeopardizes the integrity of a government designed to work in the best interest of all citizens.

The displacement of valued and dedicated appointees in favor of those whose strongest qualification is their party loyalty or major campaign contribution, has become an expected tradition at the yearly reorganization meeting of the township committee.

This practice is not good for the quality of life in Hazlet. Citizens wind up at the mercy of appointees who are more concerned with maintaining their position, than with the entity they were trusted to manage.

Professional appointments are positions granted to lawyers, engineers, and other consultants that advise the various boards and committees created to oversee the administration of municipal business or services to our township. These professionals submit their resumes, in many cases, along with their campaign contributions, to the political parties of each candidate with the hope of securing employment. Those that submit the most generous campaign checks will often receive an appointment.

Appointments of citizens to the various boards and committees, which include planning, zoning, recreation, environmental, sewerage authority, and several positions within the administration, are made at the new mayor’s discretion. The mayor is supposed to choose people with knowledge or expertise in the field that the board covers, or those who exhibit a true desire to help the elected government improve our community.

Each new administration should be vigilant not to displace anyone (professional or citizen) simply because of political affiliation. The mayor should consider cost, qualifications and experience before a replacement is appointed.

Those receiving appointments have the responsibility to take their position seriously. Dedication and conviction should be the means by which appointees retain their seat, even if that was not how they acquired their position.

Disciplined consideration must be given to laws governing each board. The planning board, for example, approves or disapproves certain projects based on a developer’s compliance with zoning and planning laws. Even if citizens do not want a 12-home sub-division in town, as long as the plan conforms to land use laws and does not require variances, the planning board members still must vote to approve the application, or they expose our township to a lawsuit.

Respecting the law in the face of controversy takes courage. I applaud those who take this seriously and vote accordingly. Our elected township committeepersons, not appointees, are responsible for acknowledging and changing the laws that do not reflect the desires of the residents.

Honest and vocal input is the responsibility of each serving member. Controversial issues are less likely to endure rational debate, if the primary concern of our appointees is to protect their seat or block the opposition from earning credit for doing what is best for the community.

Pay for play has been a hot topic recently. Contributions are an important part of running a successful campaign. Some townships have enacted legislation forbidding candidates from accepting any contributions from persons or companies seeking appointment, or currently doing business with the municipality.

It is unfortunate that our society feels the need to legislate honesty and integrity in our elected officials. Honest officials seek the advice of other board members and resist the urge to extract vengeance or reward corruption through his/her office. Principled elected officials put party affiliation aside and focus on what is best for the municipality.

I may be naïve in expecting honesty and integrity from government officials, but we need to start somewhere.

It begins with politicians who dutifully appoint candidates that have demonstrated the ability to lead toward the best interests of the citizens. It continues when we vote to install those whom we feel will best carry out these duties.

Democracy is designed to keep government in check by utilizing the ideas and abilities of a cross-section of the citizens that it governs.

When the system works correctly, the electorate eventually removes those who fail to exhibit moral fiber. Politicians that serve with integrity, honesty and in the best interest of all citizens are re-elected to continue serving their community.

Rich Kohler is a long-time Hazlet resident. Rich contributes regularly to the privately owned informational website, www.hazlet.info. Send comments and question to Rich at richkohler@comcast.net.

Coughlin Aagre 2003

2005-09-09T21:16:00.000-04:00

Each Election Day, American voters remind politicians to address issues that concern its citizens, and to exhibit leadership in the development of plans that responsibly manage our tax money.

The democrat-led Hazlet Township Committee has advanced ideas that lack responsible plans. Democratic officials have continually blamed citizen and republican opposition for the current administration’s inability to achieve their goals. Democratic party boss, Marc Nusbaum, and Deputy Mayor Christopher Cullen have referred to this opposition as an obstruction of progress.

Progress requires careful planning. Concerned citizens, along with Committeeman Michael Sachs and Committeewoman Tracey Maffiore have worked to prevent the Hazlet Democrats from creating a short-term illusion of progress that promises a long-term risk of expensive mistakes.

The people of Hazlet do not seem to be part of the current majority’s direction on the following issues: A new municipal complex, an improved library building, the sewerage authority, the over-development in and around Hazlet, rising property taxes, the preservation of open space and the employment of a special counsel.

The democrat-directed township committee attempted to push through a concept for a new municipal complex that utilized the library’s building. The concept did not include a viable plan to continue the library services.

The democrat-led township committee is attempting to close the Hazlet Township Sewerage Authority. Committeeman Michael Christopher recently stated several times that he did not know how much money the township will save by eliminating the authority. The township committee unanimously agrees that this action will not reduce our sewer bills or lower the municipal tax rate. The lack of an accompanying transition plan puts our entire sewer system at risk. However, Mr. Christopher and Mr. Cullen are prepared to cast their votes to dissolve the authority.

Last year, the Planning Board asked the township committee to fund a study that would help them rezone certain areas of town to ease over-development. The democrat-controlled township committee has not responded to this request.

With no plan for administrating the revenue from the democrat-proposed open space tax, it carries a high risk of being mismanaged. If Mr. Cullen fulfills his promise to use an undisclosed percentage of this tax to upgrade and maintain existing parks, the tax may not raise enough capital to meaningfully preserve any open space.

On the heels of a large increase in the school tax, the democratic members of the township committee introduced and voted for a municipal tax increase. Prominent democrats recently tried to blame the hike in municipal taxes on the minority, even though the republicans voted against it.

The democratic candidates’ campaign literature blames over-development for the increase in school taxes and proposes an additional municipal tax as the solution.

Township officials have not defined the duties of the special counsel or documented any work he has performed for Hazlet. Taxpayers continue to pay a retainer fee and employee benefits for unknown services.

Hazlet’s republican party recognizes the need for planning in their approach to community concerns. If republicans gain the majority seat this coming election, they are prepared to address each of these issues with responsible leadership.

The republicans realize the need for a new municipal complex, but they understand the need to carefully research and plan a project of this magnitude. If the library is included in the concept, the cost and quality of continued library service will be of primary concern.

Mr. Coughlin and Mr. Aagre have publicly stated they would vote to dissolve the sewerage authority, but only after appropriate professionals review the township’s plan for managing the operation of our sewer system, and thorough financial evaluation indicates potential savings.

Republican candidates Paul Coughlin and Scott Aagre have pledged to advocate for a comprehensive review of the zoning and utility elements of the Master Plan, and for the elimination of the current special counsel position.

Many citizens are concerned about speeding on local roads. Mr. Aagre and Mr. Coughlin have initiated the “Keep Kids Alive, Drive 25” program in Hazlet. The township republican club is currently funding the introduction of this community-based program.

On Tuesday, I will vote against the democratic initiatives to build a new municipal complex, abolish the sewerage authority, curtail over-development, preserve open space, and raise taxes.

I will be voting for the republican candidates, because their ideas on these same important issues show respect for the concerns of Hazlet citizens.

Unlike the current administration, Mr. Coughlin and Mr. Aagre understand that leadership and responsible planning are instrumental for achieving goals that will benefit the township.

Election 2003 10/22/03

2005-09-09T21:13:00.000-04:00

Every year on Election Day, Hazlet voters choose the candidates whom they hope will professionally manage our tax money well enough to maintain, or even improve the quality of life in our community.

I believe that the ideological differences between Republicans and Democrats are only relevant to state and national issues such as abortion, foreign policy and social services. There is, however, a significant behavioral difference between these political parties in Hazlet

In May 2002, I read in the newspaper that the Hazlet Township Committee was planning to convert our library into a new town hall complex. As president of the Hazlet Township Library Commission, I contacted then-Mayor Christopher Cullen to discuss how this plan would effect Hazlet’s library service.

Mr. Cullen assured me that the township committee had only considered the possibility of using the library’s building as a foundation for a new town hall, that there was no “plan” for the library, and that I should not be concerned, because the conversion was only a concept that had been prematurely leaked to the press.

At a township committee meeting in June 2003, an engineering and an architectural firm presented cost estimates and renderings of a new town hall on the library’s current site. Although there were no architectural renderings of a new library, cost estimates for a replacement at the current town hall site were under two million dollars. County and state library professionals estimated that it would cost at least $4-5 million to build a minimally adequate new library in Hazlet. A professional timeline scheduled the project to commence in August 2002, and included a twenty-six-month closure of our library.

The township committee’s new town hall “concept” posed a serious threat to our library services. Our library commission unanimously voted to question this “concept”, until the township committee developed a viable plan to replace the library.

In July 2002, the mayor denied the existence of the cost estimates and the timeline that had been presented to the committee in June. In August 2002, the township committee continued developing their “concept” without acknowledging the precarious position in which it put our library services.

I was not interested in local politics before the summer of 2002, but I had a responsibility to act in the best interests of Hazlet’s library. I feared that we would lose this valuable asset, if I did not talk to Hazlet’s politicians and attend meetings of the township committee.

I contacted the 2002 candidates for township committee, Kevin Lavan and Tracey Maffiore. I was not concerned with their political affiliation.

Mr. Lavan listened attentively and assured me that I need not worry, because he knew that the mayor would do the right thing.

Mrs. Maffiore asked for more detailed information. Soon after, a member of the Hazlet Republican Club invited me to speak at their club meeting. I received no such requests or invitation from the township democrats.
At the bimonthly township committee meetings, democratic township committee members repeatedly dismissed the concerns of residents and argued openly with citizens during the public portion of several township committee meetings.
At the township reorganization meeting on January 4, 2003, Mayor Steven Peich did not re-appoint two long serving, hard working library commissioners. I submitted an editorial letter to local newspapers, in which I questioned these and several other appointments made by Mayor Peich.

Democratic party boss, Marc Nusbaum, responded by attempting to discredit me with outright lies. He did not address the appointments that I criticized.

I wrote an editorial letter questioning the impact of a new office building and a funeral home at the corner of Middle Road and Poole Avenue. Vice Chairman of the planning board, Kevin Lavan, responded with insults to my character, but did not address my concerns.

The democratic leaders of Hazlet have based their opinions on political affiliation, hyperbole, past history and assumptions, rather than on facts that are relevant to what is currently best for Hazlet.

The republican leaders of Hazlet have listened and offered ideas and solutions instead of lies and insults, and have shown a willingness to work with the opposing party to set realistic goals and develop plans that promise to benefit the majority of taxpayers.

I will continue to drive my concerns down the middle of the proverbial road in search of a professional, common sense approach to municipal administration. Whether this journey leads me further to the right, or back toward the left, will continue to depend on what I find along the way.

Special Counsel 10/16/03

2005-09-09T21:10:00.000-04:00

The Hazlet democrats are proudly advertising the frugality of their agenda. Deputy Mayor Christopher Cullen recently stated, “I am obsessed with saving the township money”.

The democratic leadership maintains that by closing the Hazlet Township Sewerage Authority, they will save taxpayers $105,000 per year. Recent campaign literature suggests that their proposed open space tax will save Hazlet citizens from future tax increases. Relevant facts repeatedly contradict the assertion that these proposals will save money for Hazlet.

Curiously, the democratic leadership does not seem interested in reducing the cost of Hazlet’s legal representation.

In addition to Ronald Gordon, our township attorney, Hazlet employs another lawyer as special counsel. The Mayor annually appoints the special counsel at the township committee’s re-organization meeting each January. This year, Mayor Steven Peich re-appointed Norman Kauff to that position. At that same meeting, former mayor and current committeeman, Michael Sachs, stated that he previously, and repeatedly, asked for documentation of the work that the special counsel had performed for Hazlet. Since he received no such records, Mr. Sachs opposed the reappointment of Mr. Kauff as Special Counsel.

On January 7, the first regular meeting of the 2003 Hazlet Township Committee, Mayor Piech was asked to explain the function of Hazlet’s special counsel. He answered, “To be honest with you, the special counsel is set up to be, to have an attorney that is, I guess, if they needed to have a special part of the counsel with [Norman Kauff] to be easily accessible to handle certain items and what not that, I guess, they use.”

During the public portion of the township committee meetings on January 21 and February 4, several citizens asked what services the special counsel had provided to Hazlet over the last two years. No one on the township committee was able to provide information about any meetings with Mr. Kauff.

Last week, at the October 7 township meeting, I asked the committee to detail Hazlet’s use of the special counsel this year. Committeeman Michael Christopher stated that he has met with Mr. Kauff on a regular basis since February. Mr. Christopher further explained why he consults with Mr. Kauff. Not being an attorney himself, Mr. Christopher needs clarification of the legal wording of some ordinances. Mr. Christopher mentioned that he sometimes confers with the special counsel on “other township business”, but added that he does not report to the township committee or keep any notes regarding his meetings with Mr. Kauff.

Neither the township’s business administrator, nor any other committeeperson acknowledged that he or she had any contact with Mr. Kauff regarding township business.

Does Hazlet employ an attorney for the primary purpose of explaining township business to Mr. Christopher?

Mr. Gordon claims that he consults with Mr. Kauff on a regular basis. Why would an attorney employed by one of the largest municipal law firms in the state, need to seek professional advice from a private attorney?

Township records show that Hazlet pays a $1400 monthly retainer fee directly to Mr. Kauff. Hazlet also contributes to Mr. Kauff’s pension, as required by law for township employees. Other municipalities hire an attorney on an as-needed basis, if they need the services of a special counsel. This practice saves the taxpayers from paying expensive retainer fees and benefits.

Why do the citizens of Hazlet pay someone whose position has not been, and seemingly cannot be, reasonably explained or sufficiently documented by those who appointed him?

The township committee may have a legitimate, or even fiscally responsible motive for the less-than-straightforward manner in which Hazlet obtains, and pays for, its legal services. Citizens of Hazlet have been asking in vain for the township committee to explain their reason. We deserve an answer from our elected officials.

If elected this November, Republican candidates Paul Coughlin and Scott Aagre have pledged to advocate for the elimination of the special counsel position, as currently established by our township committee.

The democratic leadership is claiming they will save the township money by raising taxes, and by dismantling an organization that successfully manages our sewer system.

Hazlet’s democrats seem more obsessed with obscuring the facts to make their direction sound logical, than they are with saving money.

Mere common sense determines that the current position of Hazlet’s special counsel is superfluous and costly.

Rich Kohler
Registered Voter
Hazlet, NJ

Open Space 10/9/03

2005-09-09T21:05:00.000-04:00

Whether Hazlet’s Democratic candidates and party members are attempting to raise property taxes or win an election, they continue to exhibit a lack of respect for the quality of life in Hazlet.

The same open space tax that the people voted down last year is on the ballot again this fall. Democratic candidates, Deputy Mayor Christopher Cullen and Terry Moore, are actively campaigning to get the motion passed this year.

I recently spoke to Mr. Cullen and Mrs. Moore about this initiative. They were not prepared to ensure proper administration of tax revenue raised in the name of open space. As a result, I am not convinced that citizens will realize any benefit from this proposed tax.

Mr. Cullen explained that the township could use the additional tax dollars to acquire parcels of land for open space preservation and/or provide supplementary funding for parks and recreation. This might seem like a good idea on the surface, but like most plans put forth by this Democratic leadership, it lacks focus and direction.

The township committee will decide how to spend the $100,000 expected to be raised annually from the open space tax.

Mr. Cullen states that there are approximately 118 acres of land targeted by the township for possible acquisition.

Recently, the township targeted the Straquatanio property on Union Avenue, and acquired the site for building a new town hall. The legal and engineering costs ultimately exceeded the actual cost of the land. Professional study eventually convinced the township committee that the site was not feasible for a municipal complex.

The Democrat’s proposal could use an unspecified percentage of this additional tax revenue to upgrade our existing parks, but they have yet to reveal any plan for doing so.

There is already money in the municipal budget and a separate recreation trust fund dedicated to Hazlet’s parks and recreation. Improved management of the current budget seems to be an idea that escapes the Democratic leadership.

The recreation commission does a good job running year round programs and the popular summer camp at Veterans Park. They also sponsor bus trips to ball games, Broadway shows and other events in order to raise money for their trust fund. Since the recreation commission is accountable for the upkeep of the parks, shouldn't they decide how the proposed tax money could best be utilized?

Mr. Cullen and Mrs. Moore also made vague promises to create and maintain “pocket parks” with an unspecified portion of this tax.

The township can issue bonds and solicit county, state and federal support (both financial and professional) to acquire open space that is adjacent to our current parks, or otherwise beneficial to the township.

Hazlet’s environmental commission did not support this same open space tax proposal last year and is not giving its full support to the measure this year.

I think everyone supports the preservation of open space, but our efforts should be professional and goal-oriented. The proposed open space tax emphasizes the Hazlet
democrats’ lack of leadership and planning.

Last week, the Hazlet democrats placed many campaign signs around town in direct violation of the township ordinance governing their use. Some of them are on township property, multiple signs appear on single private properties, and many of them appeared ten days early. Coincidentally, once given notice, violators have ten days to comply with the law before they are fined.

For ten days before Election Day last year, Hazlet citizens endured the presence of at least five, illegal 4’x 6’ “billboards” at prominent locations throughout Hazlet.

As chairman of the zoning board, Democratic Party boss, Marc Nusbaum, should be well aware of, and instruct his people to comply with, all laws regarding election conduct. Circumventing local campaign law underscores an arrogant pursuit of power.
By recycling an appropriately rejected tax initiative and persistently failing to heed campaign regulations, the local democrats are demonstrating their lack of concern for the quality of life in Hazlet.