Thanks for your concise report Ann. I just hope you don't suffer the wrath that so many others have.

Thank you so much Mrs. Picirillo. I thought I would never read this Patch again, but your report has shown the actual truth for once.

Thank you Thank you Thank you.

To think how many people were hurt in so many ways.

and now we find out it was all not true.

For shame.

Great article but the only person commenting is really the Mayor.  Ms. Casey is waiting for January 14th's M&C meeting to answer questions on the record. SOD was not asked any questions on this piece and everything mentioned in the article about SOD are based off comments people left here on the Patch. 

COAH landed on this property by an amended Master Plan in 2004.  If we move COAH out of this property we wouldn't have to worry about a builder's remedy lawsuit and the Mayor wouldn't have to worry about rezoning this property to commercial.  I'm no expert in this matter but if it was so easy to amend the town's master plan in 2004, why is it so difficult to undue it now and place COAH somewhere else in town? This type of action will unite many town and I hope our newly elected officials will look into doing this.

Puck:

Captain Bill is still wondering why "the man with no party" never called him back.

Funny - some of the apocalyptic words of the Mayans did come through - in New Milford anyway. {yes, I do think through is correct as opposed to true}.

Merry Christmas all.

keyword being "revelation".

I cannot understand the push to rezone. The developer is "downsizing" from his first ridiculous request but the mega ShopRite is still in the picture. If we rezone, we give the developer exactly what he wants. If we don't rezone and we "lose," the developer gets exactly what he wants. If we see this through and we win, we are rid of this horrendous proposal. Especially since Hekemian realizes that the original proposal was going nowhere, we are in the driver's seat now. And that is due to the pressure exerted by this community. I say we keep up the pressure and wait till January to hear from Mrs. Casey. I am certain that what she will say will have a tremendous impact. Happy Holidays to all and let's hope for a very GREEN New Year!!

Please pardon my ignorance, and this might not be the correct forum for this question, but here it goes anyway. There has been much speculation (from both sides) of what the "people" of New Milford want to happen on this property, but I still don't think we have a definite consensus. Why was there no referendum on this last election to find out exactly what "we the people" want? Granted, it is a moot point at this time, but when and if the property were to become available, wouldn't it be wise to know what is actually wanted by the constituency? Like it or not, agree with it or not, we now know the consensus on the FOD question. Why was THIS question not asked?

Yes, I agree with a.s. otero. Why wasn't the united water property put on november's ballot? We need a general consensus in this town about this issue. Maybe there are people in this town that don't want our tax $ being spent on this and if the town could pull it off getting grant money, who will pay for whatever will be put on it. Fod proved that the majority of us don't want 2 spend $ on an athletic field. My newly assessed property is down $100,000. What can be done about shrinking property values in this town???

Robin,as it is now, it is still a possible private sale. So, government is not involved & no need for a ballot question. We had a chance to look into the sale but w/NO GUARANTEE of grants being approved, Annie put the issue on a WAY BACK burner. It would have never been blown way out of proportion as it is now except for election and 5 or 6 loud, obsessed activists.

Annie thought we homeowners would never want the burden of possibly paying $70.00 a month more taxes for the next ten years just for a fence enclosed swamp.

I'm sure you know the a & p kids never put one word in writing with the deal. Although they were congratulated profusely by SOD. Now, they who are against ANY development are HOPING that the a & p kids will make sure the swamp stays a swamp. I am not sure if UW will keep the property one way or the other.

I've spoken to homeowners, business owners, renters etc., and the overwhelming results (anecdotally of course) have been:

UNINFORMED homeowners - "NO development - leave our pristine nature alone!" - INFORMED homeowners "NO WAY !!! MY FAMILY HAS TO MAYBE PAY HOW MUCH FOR HOW LONG!!?? AND FOR WHAT???"

Uninformed tenants - "Oh, leave nature alone".
Informed tenants - "Gee, that's a shame homeowners have to pay that much."

Business owners - "It's about time I get a little break with other businesses coming in. These taxes are killing me."

as Lilly Tomlin used to say on Laugh In - "and that's the truth".

Merry Christmas.

Yes, a very merry Christmas to you too! Thanks for the input, Jimmy. It is a shame that a possible private sale can cause so much aggravation for our town. I wish for a peaceful new year!
Ps. I agree with Annie

Yes my son, my wife and I were at the Shoprite (WHICH by the way, we arranged). Except for Lori's relief and a few moments from John, NO other SOD person was there at all! It was too hot! But we stayed in that 90 + heat for two hours because our friends needed us and we all volunteered again for Sunday which did not occur! I never did nor could deny I was a part of SOD, matter of fact with all the abuse I've been through here lately, I welcome your naivety. Thank you for pointing out my son was not only at shop rite, but at the march with me also. My wife and my election (which we won with NO help from SOD) was 4 months BEFORE the march and our day at shop rite was I believe was one month AFTER our election.. So get your facts straight. You seem to have an agenda as is usual with someone who who uses a phony name. My son was the only candidate for the B o E at the march because he honored the fact that the B o E was against the 221 unit application and he was there to show support for the Stop OVER Development movement as was I. As far as him being an opportunist, he received a recommendation here and the TBN from an official of SOD because of the fact that she had worked with him for two years on the Bd of Ed and knows his commitment to our town and his own personal integrity. He got NOTHING from SOD itself anywhere from endorsement to Congratulations. In complete candor, if SOD exposure got him 15 votes out of about 1200, I would be surprised appreciative, but surprised.

Wow - what a compliment. Than You "I am all the reasons why this town is divided".
(pssst ANOTHER phony name).

If you are actually looking for truth (which I doubt) go back in the archives & LQQK at the words in the initial stages of Comments regarding the SOD situation. Initially, most all were with the idea of not allowing 221 COAH units, a mega corporate environment and Rt 17 type traffic day in and day out. Then as time went by, personal allegations were logged in, then when anonymous cowards saw what others got away with it, a lynch mob developed. Soon it became a matter of NO MATTER WHO intimated ANYthing against SOD, they were immediately lied about, distorted, abused and spit out as trash and their families now had to suffer the wrath of an individual simply giving an opinion.

If I may in the next Comment ask a few questions since i'm catching it here?

No, that's Ok I changed my mind..

As I told members of SOD management, this whole "hate and destroy everyone against SOD" progrom has turned me completely away from the issue.

and as an odd coincidence, I had received an email with a cartoon of a grumpy old Ebeneezer Scrooge type man sitting at one end of a bench - away from a "Maxine" type lady sitting at the other end of the bench . Obviously they were not on speaking terms at the very least.

yet he STILL held the one umbrella over her head to protect her from the rain.

Too bad this simple little cartoon is so poignant regarding the SOD progrom .

Friendships, families, careers and reputations have been ruined and for what?

you tell me.

@Jimmy, I took your advice since you seem like Mr. Anti-SOD on the Patch. I looked up SOD comments and I went on SOD's website and their message is pretty consistent and their website mission hasn't changed, "SOD strongly opposes the development of the United Water property adjacent to New Milford High School.
We believe that the best interests of New Milford regarding this property is that it remain undeveloped to protect our flood-prone areas and the residential nature of this part of New Milford. Compromise is not an option!".

You are calling them liars now. You are now implying a group of people ruined careers here on the patch. Comments on the Patch ruined careers and it's SOD fault, really? For a group who had no impact to your son's election, as you claim, you are now portraying them as very influential. You are portraying a group, up against all odds, as the problem in town. It seems like you are part of the same spin campaign the Mayor has engaged here since that group started letting the cat out of the bag. Why doesn't the Mayor say I want to see a Shop Rite there, period! Instead she blames everyone else for the reason to rezone and is on the Patch every other week blogging about it.

I look forward to hearing what the grant writer will publically disclose on the record. I could only imagine what your spin and the Mayor's spin will be once the truth is out about what really happened last year.

Good morning A.S.Otero. Merry Christmas and hopefully a better, less terrible weather & a wonderful New Year. I'll try to answer your questions as best as I (a nobody) can. Please keep in mind, at this point, I might prefer to discuss a puppy being slowly eaten by a snake rather than this neighbor & friend devouring quicksand.

1.I am not a councilperson & never did want to be, although I did Primary the Dems in 2010 when anti DeBariville sentiments first started.,I'm really not much into sitting by and just watching. So I don't know how they think or feel at closed M & C meetings although I do know that my head gets & has been knocked off by both sides., but I digress - the mere fact of it being a private sale & the ever so slow wheels of progress where politics is concerned, causes politicians to wait until something HAS to be done. Some times they just can't help it, they HAVE to wait. I believe allocating multiple thousands of dollars of TOWN money for a POssible purchase would not be appreciated by homeowners who would have to pay for that professional poll, since SOD did not put it on the ballot as FOD did.

if an opportunity was missed it should have been SOD's place to take that opportunity. FOD did.

SOD's true plans revealed later...

**see you on the inside ;)

Again, I don't know WHY Annie put it on a back burner - probably because she figured the homeowners would never want to have to pay for it if the non guaranteed grants did not come through.

I have known and worked Mike and Austin on different committees for at least 5 or 6 years and I get a kick out of needling their youth. Talking about respect, have you seen what has been said about Annie, Diego, Peter and Dominic? As far as age = less to offer, if I may ask - What has austin offered other than refusal of cop's raises, talk of evil is evil no matter how big and his attorney's statements? Mike on the other hand has always worked his butt off.

Pssst I AM against OVERdevelopment. I am NOT against ANY development.

There are no petitions being circulated FOR development because I believe most of the town doesn't even know what's going on. They're just pissed off that home values went down 25 % and their taxes are going up. I don't think too many homeowners would welcome another $70.00 a month for 10 years in order to pay for nothing more than a swamp that no one can use.

Mr. Drake, you need to get a lot of your facts straight. The M&C decides what goes on a referendum and the M&C puts it on the ballot. Independent groups don't decide what questions or referendums appear on election ballots, so there were no missed opportunity as you mentioned. Many have asked the M&C for a referendum, way before SOD's inception. When I asked back in Aprill 2011 the Mayor said no because its a private sale.

and two last Comments, I hope your use of the word "conjecture" meets with approval.

and instead of asking me, a nobody here on The Patch, do as I did - GO to the Mayor, GO to Inserra, Go to The Riverkeeper . you might have some interesting revelations as I did.

and now we wait for Marlene to testify, under oath, bible in hand........

Funniest thing is - - I remember dancing with a Marlene in a Weehawken dance way back in 1959.

Hope this helped.

While SOD would have you believe that the mayor is working clandestinely with the developer and perpatrating an evil against this town, you are all blind to the real truth. Democrats rule SOD and are working to get democrats elected. Once that is complete, they will have the judge decide in hekemians favor and allow him to put up an apartment complex which will vote 65/35 democrat, forever insuring their reign going forward. Mr. Drake has asked in the past why Mike and Austin never comment...my answer is because they never need to.

I am the Person that sits quietly at all of these meetings, both private and public, and never is noticed or makes a comment. However that time has changed.

** See you on the inside ;)

Insider, your needle was cute, but there are no SOD surprises to come. They want as little (hopefully NO) development at all in the swamp. Period.

Maybe homeowners in the more elite areas of town have money to spend on looking at a pristine swamp that no one can enter. (they do have swamps in the south that nobody with a clear head would ever enter, but i'm pretty sure we have no gators).

I do believe that if this issue were to be put on a ballot and the ACTUAL REAL as in NO PHONY BALONEY woulda shoulda coulda rhetoric, cost of the purchase were made known to EVERY homeowner in town, the answer would be to pass on the purchase.

and for the last time, It has been the spiraling insults, lies, character assassinations, embarrassments, distortions and hatred that has developed with this issue that has turned me away.

Good bye.

Jimmy,

Thanks for the response, I can certainly appreciate the sentiment of being tired of this issue.

On the first 2 points we'll just have to agree to disagree.
On the 3rd, I'd have to agree that NO ONE regardless of position, title, or opinion should be the subject of belittling, abuse, or bullying. These are hardly conducive to progress or coming to any lasting agreement.
Lastly, my use of the word conjecture was meant in the simplest of terms - an unproven statement or proposition. The statement that the electorate is for OR against, the development in any form; or the purchase of the same, if/when the opportunity arises, is conjecture BECAUSE there was no referendum. Whereas the statement that electorate DOES NOT want the FOD is no longer conjecture due to the referendum concerning the FOD.

My Christmas wish would've been to have a referendum on the UW property...

Anyway, may everyone have Merry Christmas!!

That needle about "conjecture" was not at all meant for or to you. Others were put in their place for use of that word.

LQQKING forward to NORAD alerts with the sled and the guy in the red suit.

don't forget about midnight Mass!

Good one heather.

now get the mud out of your blood and go see The Riverkeeper yourself.

But, that'll never happen.

Dear Mr. Drake, this is my first post here because I will be one of the people hurt by this development and you seem to be so cavalierly advocating for it. I have been following Patch, and I would like to echo the sentiments of those who ask “what will happen to the people who will be hurt by this?” I am waiting with a fearful heart for that answer. This seems to matter to SOD, but that doesn’t seem to matter to you politicians. Please don’t tell me you’re not a politician because I read back over your posts and all you seem to talk about is the Democrats and the Republicans, things that shouldn’t even matter. I question whether you are motivated by public interest or by personal interest.

I want you to realize when you are attacking SOD, you are irresponsibly attacking hundreds of NM residents, many of whom are being hurt by your hateful comments. Who is going to protect us against your wrath? Your personality does not seem to be protective, it seems to be bent on destroying.

I got up to page 14 so far in your comments, and here are things you have said:

“Hekemian is trying to buy it with his idea of what would be good for him - apartments, mini mall maybe and a new Shop Rite. Our neighbors (SOD) are doing everything possible to keep him from turning our town into a Camden, Paterson or some such similar neighborhood.”

“I've been pleading for a ballot slot regarding this issue for the past three years. I believe that something like this which will affect the whole town should be decided by the whole town.”

“Hey NM resident - who appointed you the moderator? If Mary wants to yell and scream, it's her prerogative. You seem to declare yourself spokesperson for multiples of readers.”

“a Forum worth it's salt does have emotion, does have very strong opinions and does have angry words - otherwise you'd be reading directions on how to grow corn. THAT is a laugh, someone is afraid to post something (even anonymously) because someone else would lace into them. So, in other words it's Ok to lambaste someone anonymously, but not Ok to retort.”

“I think sometimes a poster may simply feel that their post is innocuous & fleeting, but the printed word stays forever no matter who is humiliated, scorned or perhaps at the slightest made to look a fool.” (you may need to take your own advice......)

“As far as I'm concerned you are just someone trying to start a problem where there is none.”

Christina, great point! I'm glad you figured him out. Many in town hate him because he's turning the Patch into NJ.com. I wish the editor would just ban him all together from here, he's evil and vindictive. If you notice in this exchange he used the word "cute" and made all political references exactly like Insider_07646 did, it's obviously him. Get a life Jimmy!

Time for some editorial intervention. Again, there is great passion on both sides of the development/rezoning issue and I encourage, heartily encourage, debate on the issue, but let us all keep focused on the issue and keep from straying elsewhere. My understanding is that because the property is in a private sale, it cannot be placed on a referendum. Should that change, and the land become available for the town to purchase, then it can go to referendum.

Hi Ann, thank you for your excellent writing and attention to New Milford. Could they have placed a question on the ballot that said, "Should the United Water property become available, would the public like to see the town make an effort to purchase the property through grants."

Robert, I asked the M&C the same question and I was told no, it's a private sale. Unfortunately, boroughs, such as New Milford, don't governor under the Faulkner Act and only a willing M&C would put your/our question up on a ballot like they did with the Field of Dreams. When I initially asked I told the M&C this will remove all politics out of the equation and put the decision in the hands of the citizens of New Milford. I feel their refusal to not do this has driven this divide in town and has forced the M&C to defend their various positions on the Patch, which I feel their outspokenness can influence the outcome in the Zoning Board decision on this application and on the Planning Board’s decision to rezone.

Here's what we would be able to do if our Borough was governed under the Faulkner Act:
"...In all Faulkner Act municipalities, regardless of the particular form, citizens enjoy the right of Initiative and referendum, meaning that proposed ordinances can be introduced directly by the people without action by the local governing body. This right is exercised by preparing a conforming petition signed by 10% of the registered voters who turned out in the last general election in an odd-numbered year (i.e., the most recent General Assembly election). Once the petition is submitted, the local governing body can vote to pass the requested ordinance, and if they refuse, it is then submitted directly to the voters."

Taxpayingnewmilfordresident,since you brought it up,

Nov 28,2012 @ 4:17 PM Hack Riverkeeper Supports Development etc. Her last sentence "I'd love to see some kind of investigation into who IS paying him off". At 4:38 I warned her about libel. At 4:53 she logged in " I never said he was paid off - I said I'd like to see an investigation into it IF he was paid off" at 5:40 PM I told her "I see no IF in her sentence". Please look for yourself.

"The week ahead" on Dec 17th.after the horror that befell those children at Newtown, everyone was on edge with the safety of our children. I thought of a child walking home through the UW property and being molested since we did have a lurer at that point here in New Milford. She mocked me at 10:56 using the exact same words you are using now. hoot and a half. She then denies the mocking at 9:04 Pm the next day.

If she is what you think makes a good Mayor, I say let her put her name on the ballot.