Wow! I am speechless.

Good for her. I am not sure if there is an actual conflict of interest or not. But there is at a minimum appearance of conflict of interest.

There goes Moore tax dollars
Grant is good at spending other people's money
I'm tired of the stupidity In this town
She changes zoning board members for no reason now lawyers
All to control this town So just keep voting for her and her crew
There messing up this town And you can't see it !!!!

Frank hit the nail on the "Hedy" Last week we waste taxpayer money on a meaningless resolution, now the taxpayers foot the bill on what is nothing more than senseless politics..unless of course Ms Grant is paying for this
for this out of her own pocket. Maybe it is time to file a lawsuit to recall Ms Grant on the basis of her wasting taxpayer money.

I think grant needs to get out
She keeps causing trouble and waisting tax dollars that can go to seniors citizens that cant pay bills and fixing up high school but no she likes to waist time
This town needs a lot of fixing and she is worried about changing lawyers !!!! really!!!!

the amount of grandstanding that is coming out of this councilwoman is sickening. how about we toss her! isn't she going against her own Dem councilman? infighting is just what the town needs on our council. and let us guess, the editor had the story before the mayor or austin no doubt.

Editor's note: The complaint was filed in Superior Court in Hackensack on January 31, 2013 and is a public record. In the course of my job as editor, I routinely check the courts to follow-up on stories I'm working on and to see what lawsuits have been filed that may affect the towns I cover. Anyone can go on the Court's website and put in a search to see what cases come up. This morning I searched New Milford and up this lawsuit came with the docket number. I went to the courthouse, I filed a request for a copy of the complaint, paid $3.75 to have a copy made, read the complaint and called the respective parties for comment. It was then that I was informed that they had not yet been served. That is in the control of the courts, not in the hands of this editor.

Wow. Some one is looking out for NM's best interests and she gets attacked. I can imagine if it was the other way around and the D&D boys wanted to challenge Liebman's appointment. Then it would be OK. So Ashley couldn't vote on the rezoning but he can vote on this?? Seems absurd. Thanks, Ms. Grant for looking out for us. I sincerely mean that.

Waisting our money yes
that's our best interest
Who are you
What kind of name is that

If Ashley can prove he paid Mr. Liebman for representing him at the Zoning Board hearings, against the development of the United Water property, he has nothing to worry about. If he can't, then this is exactly what Councilwoman is arguing 'quid pro quo' or 'pay to play' and the law is on her side of this argument.

Editor: yeah ok, there's this bridge your readership may be interested in too. Nmhonestmom, sorry still laughing at you. Not with you. Looking out for one side maybe. But that's the press it's the rules right? I tend to think D&D aren't about wasting taxpayer money & time. But if they ever do we can be guaranteed it will be covered fully and unbiased. Nice bridge.

BEAUTIFUL MOMENT!

We in town will be marching in the St. Patrick's parade March 10th in Bergenfield. I was delivering the formal invite's to different locations and along the way, I stopped at David E. Owens school. When I spoke to the lovely lady at the principal's office, I mentioned that the last time I was in the school was when I was an adult monitor for their student's dance. My son was in the fifth grade I believe. The subject came up as to what he is doing now and I simply said:

He is the President of The New Milford Board of Education.

Please forgive the schmaltz, but I just had to share this wonderful moment.

ulises, Liebmann was representing Ashley long before novembers elections. I don't think quid pro quo could apply when neither liebmann or Ashley had any reasonable knowledge of what a future election outcome would be. Lets look at the other attorney who was nominated for the post though. The wife of the river edge mayor who happens to be a former borough attorney. What exactly made her qualified? With all the attorneys around, we couldn't find one that didn't represent a council member or wasn't married to the former attorney? Here is what gets me...how much is this mess going to cost taxpayers? I'm positive Austin and Ann will be represented on the boroughs dime, and I can't imagine that Hedy will not. All while our kids are playing on fields with geese feces. This is about a power struggle within the dem party that goes up to the county. This is a preliminary bout, and new Milford is paying for it. It is disgraceful.

I may not have personally filed a law suit on this but i must say when one looks at the facts and circumstances surrounding this appointment it does appear to be a pay to play situation. Even if it turns out that there was nothing unethical about this appointment it sure left the appearance of inpropriaty. I still agree that time spent on gun control resolution was a waste of time and inappropriate at local level. So i guess we agree some of the time and disagree some of the time.

Joe, I get all the politics and that's why I told you once we need an Independent movement in town - to unite us all. One, that puts New Milford first before party...
My previous comment was on my opinion on the legality and the ethics of it all, not the cost - which we can do without.

On January 28th I posted that I would refrain from commenting on the Patch in the future. Little more than a week has passed and yet I feel compelled to share my thoughts.
I know both of these people. Austin has been a friend to SOD and still is. He has helped bring the plight of senior citizen tenants to the light of day and to the town council. He has been a diligent protector of people’s tax dollars. I have campaigned for him more than once and every campaign promise he made to me, he kept. He is my friend. I care for him. How does one try to convince his stubborn friend to change his mind?
Hedy is also a friend, she is an individual who insists that every i be dotted and t be crossed. She is meticulous about the rule of law and has clear sense of right and wrong. There is no doubt in my mind that she is doing what she believes is right and what is best for the town. She sees what at the very least can be perceived as a conflict of interest and is trying to correct it.
When a person is elected to office he or she has been given one of the most precious gifts that any of us have to give, our vote, our trust. Any decision or action the elected official makes must be principled, above board and honest. If that is not the way of things then we are lost to an endless cycle of corruption and unethical politics. Maintaining credibility should be paramount in the minds of our leaders.
Contiued......

I would suggest that another motion be made to rescind the town attorney. That Austin recuse himself from that vote. That would remove any cloud of impropriety from Austin. That Hedy withdraw her law suit thereby saving the town the expense of such an endeavor. That every council person regardless of party vote to rescind, knowing that by doing so the action would be in the best interest of the town, that the council vote to reinstate the attorney of 2012 for the remainder of 2013. He was acceptable then and should be now.
I would also suggest the public attend Monday’s council meeting and watch our elected officials closely. Anyone of them who does not choose a solution that puts this debacle behind us with little or no expense and get back to the business of the town is not looking out for your interest, they would have some ulterior motive.

Well said, John!
PS. Joe, why do our kids have to play on geese feces laden fields? Can't the fields be properly maintained by our town or the bd. of ed workers??

Less than 3 weeks since the democrats take control of the town and ALREADY therr is a corruption charge being leveled at one of them FROM the other!! Congratulations SOD, you picked some real winners in the council, when does your quid pro quo kick in? Before or after the attorney's?

The more things change the more they stay the same sometimes.

So Austin is this the lesser or the greater of 2 evils...

John, your solution has merit. The problem with it, is the solution lands a borough attorney who is married to a former borough attorney. I dont know if her husband ever donated any money to DEMS on council because I havent checked elec reports, but would you agree if her husband has donated money to any sitting council members campaigns, they too should abstain from voting? Here is my solution. Have everyone agree to make Scott Sproviero take over as borough attorney. He has experience in the position and is well aware of the entire UW application before the zoning board.

Joe, would that mean the UW application would be held up while a new attorney familiarizes himself with the UW proposal?

Hello Joe,
Either you misunderstood what I was suggesting or I didn’t state it clear enough. I am not suggesting that the choice of the other three Democrats be voted in as attorney. What I am suggesting is that the attorney of last year, Mark Madiao (not sure of the spelling), be reappointed as borough attorney. He is familiar with all that has transpired over the past year and is certainly qualified. Scott would also be a good choice. The truth is there are plenty of good attorneys. What is important is to select one who is not involved with this debacle.

Yes, I second it, John for mayor!

Hello Joe,
Either you misunderstood what I was suggesting or I didn’t state it clear enough. What I am suggesting is that the attorney of last year, Mark Madiao (not sure of the spelling), be reappointed as borough attorney. He is familiar with all that has transpired over the past year and is certainly qualified. Scott would also be a good choice. The truth is there are plenty of good attorneys. What is important is to select one who is not involved with this debacle.
The purpose of my original comment was to challenge the council to do what is right for the town, not what benefits their respective political parties. In my suggested solution I tried to give each of them something to encourage them to agree with my proposal. I offered Austin a way to clear any suspicion surrounding his decision to nominate Mark Leibman. I offered Hedy and the other two Democrats partially what they wanted, a yes vote on rescinding Leibman, but not the attorney of their choice. I offered the Republicans the attorney that they chose last year. Some might say that the Republicans would vote to keep Leibman just to continue the rift that exists between the Democrats. Having their choice as attorney might persuade them from choosing that path and instead do what’s best for the town. I believe it is very difficult for all of them, Democrats and Republicans, to avoid playing party politics.

Sorry that I partially repeated myself it took a long time for the comment to appear.

John, you have suggested a very reasonable solution to this situation. All parties involved can walk away with their dignity intact.

So let me get this straight, either SOD, a 501c3, accepts willingly a donation from someone accused of corruption or they allowed them into the fundraiser for free, which would invalidate their not for profit status...
Your call SOD, will you give back money from someone that has corruption around their neck or accept that you are in the dems pocket by allowing them in for free.

You can't have it both ways...

Hey people lets take a look at the real issue! It seems as though one of the council people didnt get her way ...TWICE..... or what she was asked for or to do ... TWICE!!! So .........being an attonrey she filed suit ! THATS REAL PROFESSIONAL !!!!! If I cant play...I will take my ball and go home. Lets look at what she is claiming; (i) Pay to Play..........I suggest one looks up the defination. (ii) Leibman no good.....CONFLICT ....... but mayors wife good ??? (iiI) Mayors wife didnt even apply for the job (iv) If the issue is with Austin then why did they drag the poor mayor into it ????? HELLO.............Because she didnt vote the way Heidi and Co. wanted them too !!! OPEN POLITICAL SYSTEM ??????? I think the real conflict here seems to be in those hiding behind the law suit...........the only winners are the lawyers...........The only losers are those like Austin trying to do the right thing and the taxpayers of New Milford. Ones opinion may suggest that there seems to be more deep rooted issues here than choosing Leibman as an attorney.........Maybe there is resentment for Austin standing up against development ?????

Miriam,

It isn't going to happen. It should, but it isn't. As far as the application before the zoning board goes, my suggestion, (if Sproviero became borough attorney) would be to ask Mr Sproviero to reccomend a few attorneys he thinks would be able to jump right in. I am sure he would bring them up to date rather quickly...but again, its conjecture, it isn't going to happen.

John- I stand corrected, I did misinterpret. However, there is zero chance Mark would get 3 votes. I have said for 15 years I wish New Milford would convert to a system where it isn't dem or rep. There are only a few towns in Bergen County that operate in such a manner. My own personal political views on state and national issues should have zero to do with who I think can provide services and simultaneously keep my taxes in check in little New Milford. The zoning board, for instance, is a perfect example of how hiring professionals should work. Mr Sproviero has represented the board for years. He has been hired by boards consisting of members appointed predominantly by Democrat controlled councils as well as Republican controlled councils; because he does a good job in representing the members of the board as well as the people of New Milford.

I've known Hedy a long time and she has more integrity than just about anybody else I've ever met. If she says Mr. Ashley did the wrong thing, he did the wrong thing. No question in my mind. Leibman should resign and Ashley should apologize to the people of NM for causing so much trouble. Bring back Mr. Madaio until a new Boro attorney can be selected.

I have never understood why our small town elected council members based on party affiliation. It makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Hello Joe,
I can’t speak for her, but I do believe at this point Hedy would vote for Mark just to put this issue to rest. Scott Sproviero would also be an excellent choice, not only a good attorney, but also entertaining. I would be concerned however about changing attorneys at the zoning board in the middle of the hearings concerning the UW property, but I am sure that any difficulties that arose from changing could be overcome. There are a lot of good attorneys out there. What is important now is to select one who is capable and doesn’t cause a controversy. I tried to suggest a course of action that could have this matter settled in the first ten minutes of the next council meeting and we could be done with it.

The follwing is something folks might consider.

52:13D-12. Legislative findings

The Legislature finds and declares:

(a) In our representative form of government, it is essential that the conduct of public officials and employees shall hold the respect and confidence of the people. Public officials must, therefore, avoid conduct which is in violation of their public trust or which creates a justifiable impression among the public that such trust is being violated.

John, If Liebmann would step aside, and Hedy would vote for Madaio, that would be a wonderful solution. I believe the appt is essentially a contract though, and I'd be surprised if any attorney would simply give up the work. If he is willing to, great, but I'd hate to be sued by liebmann next. But let's say that Liebmann agrees, I would be even more surprised if Hedy went along with it. If you can broker, it, I will volunteer to work on your campaign this fall, even if you are a socialist candidate!

Hello Joe,
I don’t believe Leibman would just step aside. I think it would take another motion and vote to rescind him. When you comment on the patch Joe, you do so rationally, without a lot of ranting or off the wall comments. You are a perfect example of how this forum should be used. I would like to suggest something to you, to just think about. Hedy has taken some serious abuse and criticism for initiating this law suit. What would you do Joe if you believed that a fellow board member had done something unethical in connection with the office or position that he held? That he received payment in one form or another for making a motion and voting for a political appointment. What would you do? You would probably first talk to him and try to convince him to adjust his questionable behavior. Then you might attempt to convince your colleagues on the board to help you correct the situation, you might try that a couple times. When all that fails and yet you are still convinced that some sort of wrong doing has occurred, what would you do? Do you walk away and give up on righting the wrong? Do you let the unethical behavior pass? Or do you suck up your guts and take it to the next level? These are the questions that Hedy had to ask herself. continued....

Hedy had to know that filing this suit would result in her receiving the wrath of many. Yet she mustered up the courage and did it anyway because she believes that some sort of collusion has taken place. Hedy is a stickler for the rule of law. She is not going to turn her back when she feels that someone has violated a law or code of ethics. She believes it is her duty and responsibility to right a wrong, to protect the public from unscrupulous acts. What would you do?
I don’t know what transpired between Austin and his attorney. Only Austin and Leibman know for sure. I do know this; the appearance of possible wrong doing is there. As a public official and an attorney they both should have known and seen this fact. When the question was first raised Austin should have recused himself and Leibman should have declined the position. Austin could put an end to this now. The council could put an end to this now by selecting a different attorney. You tell me Joe, Why is it so damn important that Leibman to be the borough attorney?
One final note Joe, you said you would be surprised if Hedy would vote for Madaio. The simple truth is it was Hedy who first suggested it to me.

Since I too am refraining from weighing in on these issues, all I have to say is, if we lose Sproviero from sitting at our ZB hearings, though I would wish him well, I would cry. A lot. : (

John, I take you at your word that Hedy suggested rehiring Mark. I am surprised, but I have no reason to doubt you. As far as Liebmann potentially stepping aside goes, if he doesnt, its all the same. He potentially sues the town and the taxpayers foot the bill for two borough attorneys. Perhaps, he even goes after the town for harming his reputation, and it gets even more fiscally damaging.
Here is how I see it from the sidelines:
The dems were set to all back Liebmann. Someone pushed for Sandy's wife at the last minute, after Liebmann had been told its his job. Austin refused to go along with it for whatever reason. When given two choices, Colucci and Robalino
voted for which of the two they had more faith in and Subrizi broke the tie. Now we have a mess that regardless of who cleans up, you and I pay for.
I dont believe for a second that He dy is doing this because she feels compelled to assume the roll of dudley do right. I firmly believe this is politically motivated and she would rather have a Rep atty in town than someone from Kaufmanns circle. Just my opinion. what I would do? I would have never gotten into this mess. I wouldnt have hired a guy who was an objector for a sitting councilman, and I wouldnt have tried to hire the River Edge mayors wife. I would have hired soneone with zero political ties who only cared about doing a great job for the people of NM.

Darlene, the next meeting is Monday night. I have a feeling that the discussion of Hedy's lawsuit will be closed.

Hey Mark:

I take it you retired. Now you're really gonna go nuts with all that time on your hands..I say Thank God you made it through all those rough years you had on your job.

What's my nephew gonna do without you now? LOL

God bless Mark and Thanks for your years of service!

This just making our little town look bad.

Pitiful is more like it dad of 3. And we are all going to pay for this internal fight because the democrats couldn't get their appointments straight. And what will our town have to lose to fight this embarrassing battle created by Frank and his minions? What services will the town lose? Will that two year old tree at DEO ever get picked up? What will it be?