East Ramapo School Monitor with Veto Power Bill

Home › Forums › Rants › East Ramapo School Monitor with Veto Power Bill

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • January 14, 2016 12:01 am at 12:01 am #617053
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The current school monitor wants the power to override the Board of Education in East Ramapo. In order to get it a bill must be passed in both the state assembly and senate and signed by the governor. Last year it passed in the assembly by 80 – 56 but didn’t pass the senate. This year Senate Majority Leader said it wasn’t going to be voted on.

    The Board had a proposal to hire a lobbyist to help defeat it in the assembly for $41,000.00 but it wasn’t approved by the board. If 13 more assembly people can be convinced that the bill is anti-Semitic the bill will be defeated. Remember last year Silver was the Speaker so if the bill was voted on it had his approval and he is an Orthodox Jew. This year it’s Heastie who happen to be black so if the bill is claimed to be anti-Semitic they may not vote for it especially if there is no chance of it becoming law.

    Last year the senate was willing to have the Board monitored by the State Comptroller’s Office but not veto power nor have the monitor appointed by the State Education Dept. but the assembly didn’t agree so no bill passed.

    This year the monitor says no extra money with out a monitor with veto power. Since, School busing and special ed. is funded first the only one who is getting hurt is the public school students.

    January 14, 2016 3:43 pm at 3:43 pm #1133284
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    I’m not certain what the point of your post is (of the following).

    They probably won’t bother bringing the monitor bill to the assembly floor.

    The state is not offering additional money (and they should, even though public school children won’t see it).

    The public school children will suffer before special ed or busing.

    Public school children and parents with any sense will move out of East Ramapo, selling their homes to Chassidish developers who will build complexes, with both making huge profits.

    Other areas (such as Ocean Twp. NJ) will have a good excuse for their refusal to allow religious Jews in (with perhaps some soft “antisemitism”).

    So which one?

    January 14, 2016 9:57 pm at 9:57 pm #1133285
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Gavra

    You think this bill wouldn’t be brought up in the Assembly, I do.

    Right now in Lakewood the monitor has asked for another $6.2 million for courtesy busing even though he negotiated a deal where by if the yeshiva staggered their starting and ending times courtesy busing would be approved for those living .6 miles from their school for the school year.

    As far as public school parents moving out of the district, I think most of them are renters.

    As far as other areas refusing to allow religious Jews in, you do know that that it is against the law.

    January 15, 2016 2:24 pm at 2:24 pm #1133286
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Abba_S:

    1: Lakewood is not East Ramapo!

    2: So only the developers will make money.

    3: Was referring to this:

    http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/375947/nj-yeshiva-suing-zoning-board-for-repeatedly-refusing-boarding-school-application.html

    January 15, 2016 2:46 pm at 2:46 pm #1133287
    zahavasdad
    Participant

    As far as other areas refusing to allow religious Jews in, you do know that that it is against the law.

    It is against the law for a realtor to discriminate against certain groups

    It is NOT against the law for an individual seller to discriminate and refuse to sell or rent to people (As long as you have less than 3 apartments in a building)

    If a realtor brings to a seller a legitimate buyer with a legitimate offer, the seller has the right to refuse for any reason

    January 15, 2016 3:06 pm at 3:06 pm #1133288
    Joseph
    Participant

    ZD: The individual homeowners and property owners are very happy to sell to the Jews and take their Jewish money when it is the highest offer. It is the municipality government that doesn’t like the fact that the Jews are successfully buying and moving in thus enacting their anti-Jewish governmental regulations.

    January 15, 2016 3:20 pm at 3:20 pm #1133289
    zahavasdad
    Participant

    Sometimes people dont sell to the highest bidder, they sell to whom they want to, And do you really think Jews are always willing to overpay for real estate?

    January 15, 2016 7:55 pm at 7:55 pm #1133290
    Abba_S
    Participant

    In this day and age unless it’s a private sale it is listed by a realtor and is usually on the internet. Who by law must show the house to all qualified buyers. If it’s found that the realtor discriminated against anyone because of race or religion they can be sued and lose their license.

    That being said the buyer doesn’t have to accept the offer and can take a lower offer. In the Catskills where Satmar wanted to buy an abandon school house and went to contract. When the community found out about the sale they voted down the sale. Now there stuck with a building they have no use for but have to maintain.

    Many of the homeowner around Lakewood are seniors who will need to get the best price or may need to sell because they can no longer stay in the house or they may have past away and the heirs want a quick sale. These houses were bought when they were cheap, likewise there are houses in for closure so you can find bargains in this area. Even if a owner wouldn’t sell to a Jew if it’s cheap enough an investor will buy it and flip it.

    January 17, 2016 11:10 am at 11:10 am #1133291
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Correction to my prior post as it was posted before Shabbos and I didn’t proof read it properly:

    1) That Being said the buyer… should read the seller doesn’t have to accept the offer.

    2) likewise there are houses in for closure should be foreclosure.

    As far as sellers not wanting to sell to Jews in order to prevent the takeover of the town by Jews. This is what happened in Bloomingburg NY. The same judge who ruled that Hasidic votes were not to be counted presided on the case when the county admitted that they were wrong in denying the Hasidim the right to vote. The judge that revoked the building permit was the same one that approved the issuance of the certificate of occupancy.

    If they don’t want to sell to Jews, Jews may not want to buy their house period. I know someone who bought a house that was a bargain but when he tried to sell it or even rent it he couldn’t.

    January 17, 2016 1:23 pm at 1:23 pm #1133292
    zahavasdad
    Participant

    Bloomonsburg was Open land which is not the same as individual houses

    A developer tried to buy the land in Blomingsburg and could almost immediatly transform the town by building high density housing.

    If a person buys just and individual ready made house it takes alot longer to transform a community as some houses rarely if ever go up for sale

    January 17, 2016 4:24 pm at 4:24 pm #1133293
    Ex-CTLawyer
    Participant

    “If a realtor brings to a seller a legitimate buyer with a legitimate offer, the seller has the right to refuse for any reason”

    If a realtor presents a bonafide offer from a ready, willing and able buyer that meets the terms of the listing (full price, no contingencies, etc.) and the seller refuses, the seller may find him/herself liable for the full commission to the realtor on a house not sold.

    January 17, 2016 5:40 pm at 5:40 pm #1133294
    Joseph
    Participant

    CTL: Even if the owner decided after the offer that he doesn’t want to sell and will continue residing there?

    January 19, 2016 10:11 am at 10:11 am #1133295
    Abba_S
    Participant

    If a seller keeps refusing legitimate offers realtors will stop trying to sell the house. I assume that if he is selling he either needs the money or he needs to move. As a rule the longer a house is on the market the lower the price is.

    January 19, 2016 8:52 pm at 8:52 pm #1133296
    karlbenmarx
    Participant

    Agudath Israel is well respected in Albany and the FJCC though outside of its jurisdiction is involved as well so we got it all covered. no need to worry about monitors.

    January 25, 2016 2:01 am at 2:01 am #1133297
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Karlbenmarx

    This has nothing to do with Agudath Israel & FJCC being well respected, a few public school parents are suing the state demanding action. East Ramapo is in Rockland County which is run by the Democratic Party, the assembly is run by the Democratic Party, the Governor is a Democrat so there is a good chance that the school monitor bill will pass. The only thing stopping it’s passage is the NY Senate which is run by the Republicans and must also pass the bill in order for it to become law. Simicha Felder a Senate Democrat who is also an Orthodox Jew votes with the Republican and is against the bill,so it’s not in the parties best interest to approve the bill. Likewise, the Republicans gain nothing by approving the bill.

    January 25, 2016 4:07 am at 4:07 am #1133298
    MRS PLONY
    Participant

    It’s maaleh min ha teivah that the bill for a monitor with veto power got proposed in the first place. It definitely violates the most basic principals of democracy by proposing to override a duly elected board and to illegally impose property tax increases. The members of the ERCSD board were all incredulous that Walcott made such a proposal. I was incredulous, and I’m just a citizen.

    Thank you, Abba_S for keeping us posted.

    Everybody, daven for the geulah. That’s the only way this is gonna end.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.