Page 20 THE VILLADOM TIMES I • April 16, 2014 Ridgewood’s election now has one sure loser Nobody knows which of the three candidates will win the two Ridgewood Council seats in the village’s May 13 elec- tion, but we all know who the real loser is: the person who tried to make sure there would be no choice for voters. Ridgewood elections, unlike those of most other north- west Bergen County towns, are officially non-partisan. Instead of running as Republicans or Democrats, the can- didates file nominating petitions with a pre-determined number of taxpayer signatures, and those who obtain the required number of signatures are placed on the ballot. Candidates may choose to run as members of a slate with a slogan, but they may not run as members of national par- ties. So far, so good: It was a worthwhile idea when it was worked out, and is still a worthwhile idea today when done with honor and integrity. Honor and integrity, however, are words in a picture dic- tionary where at least one Ridgewood resident might not be able to find with his or her photograph as an illustration. March 10 was the deadline for filing this year, and as soon as it became internally certain that Michael Sedon, 32, a newsman for a paper on Staten Island, was a qualified candidate, something odd happened. Someone -- presumably in Ridgewood -- sent an anony- mous e-mail to the newspaper where Sedon worked and tried to convince the editor that having a Staten Island, New York, newsman on a New Jersey local government body represented a conflict of interest. “Whoever sent the e-mail knew who I was, (that) I was certified or close to being certified as a candidate, where I worked (and) they were savvy enough to send my editor a letter convincing him my possibly being a council member would be a conflict of interest with reporting community news on Staten Island,” Sedon wrote in a public statement once he went public on March 25. The local news conglomerate put the news of Sedon’s candidacy on the Web almost instantly. Before he went public, Sedon tried repeatedly to obtain a copy of the unsigned e-mail to his job, but to no avail. The newspaper where he worked -- jobs at daily newspapers, I might add, are at an absolute premium and difficult to obtain unless you are a superstar -- had a lawyer look into the assertion. The lawyer reportedly determined that, while there was no “legal” conflict of interest, there might be a “perceived” conflict of interest. How does a perceived conflict work? If you live in the town you cover, it might be “perceived” that you seek spe- cial favors. If you do not live there, it might be “perceived” that you are preoccupied with other matters, or even hostile to the town you cover. It is not a secret that a lot of towns envy Ridgewood -- mostly, I think, for the school system, which is pretty nearly as good as it is cracked up to be. Once upon a time, as now documented at a show at the Ridgewood School- house Museum, it was “perceived” that people of other ethnic groups would be happier living somewhere besides Ridgewood. Sedon, stuck with living up to other people’s percep- tions, was given until the end of the week to decide whether he wanted to drop out of a council contest in New Jersey or resign from his job in Staten Island. He is no longer employed in Staten Island and is still running for office in Ridgewood. There are no suspects for the anonymous e-mail. If anyone knows who sent the e-mail, no one wants to name that person. Certainly I do not know who did it, or even think I might know. The fact that Sedon’s certification was reported online expands the potential list to several thou- sand people. Let us now address conflict of interest. Conflict of inter- est could be construed to mean that you do business with a town where you are an elected official or an appointed executive. I can easily see the need for that and I think most other people can. If your company gets all the contracts so that nobody else’s company has a chance, there is a real infringement of trade, and a good chance that the taxpayers pay more than they should because the contracts are not really subject to honest competitive bidding. Ridgewood had a case related to this concept when Thomas Riche, a councilman who has since opted not to seek re-election, was faulted after the fact by -- guess what -- another anonymous letter for dealing commercially with Ridgewood. When the story shuffled down to specifics, it appeared that Riche had been asked to get an emergency communications system up and working at a Ridgewood firehouse and he outfitted the firehouse with some com- munications equipment he had on the home office shelf to end a dangerous situation. He was not quite tarred and feathered by one faction, but he was severely criticized. The other faction felt he had done the village a safety-related favor, on request, with no harm done and no intention to violate the law. There was no evidence, and not even a public sugges- tion, that Riche had aimed at an illicit profit or at stifling competition, which, in this instance, was just about non- existent. He simply stepped into the mud somebody else had left in his path. Riche protested the manner in which the investigation of the anonymous charge was handled -- the seated council, in fact, had approved previous transactions since no other company in the vicinity stocked compatible equipment -- and Riche promptly stated that he would never do business with Ridgewood again, even if they asked him. He also decided not to seek re-election. In anonymous notes, the list of suspects is endless. Conflict of interest is an important concept. When I first started in this business, a good many years before Mike Sedon did, in fact a few years before he was born, one of the newspapers just outside this area was notorious for a pecu- liar work-incentive program. Reporters received a meager base salary from the publisher and a similar amount to do “public relations” for the communities they covered. Some of these reporters -- nice enough people on a personal level -- probably did more than re-write press releases and keep all the good stuff for themselves first. My reader may be very sure that these two-salary reporters never engaged in much investigative journalism, despite constant rumors of corruption, and that they reported public meetings in a way that was somewhat more fair to the administration than it was to any protestors who cropped up from the audience, even when they asked good questions. In a nearby county with a splendid view of the New York skyline, public officials would ask younger reporters they had not seen before just how much it would cost to get their names mentioned favorably in the paper. One public official in Bergen County, since deceased, called a notably honest reporter to his office. Let’s call him “Frank.” “Frank, happy New Year to you and your family from the bottom of my heart,” he said, and handed Frank a full case of quality Scotch. “Flub, I don’t want this,” Honest Frank said. “Frank,” Flub said with visibly wounded feelings, “If you wanted cash you should have told me beforehand.” A deceased developer whose name is known to students of local history was once interviewed by a young reporter, liked the rags-to-riches story, and sent the young reporter a check of $80. “Noggins...I’m offended twice,” the reporter said as he handed back the un-cashed check. “Why twice?” Noggins asked. “Once because you thought I’d take a bribe, and once because you thought I’d be dumb enough to take a bribe in the form of a check.” The reporter was not angling for a cash bribe. He actu- ally had standards. He was a big husky guy and he was Phi Beta Kappa at Rutgers and resented the suspicion of stupid- ity rather more pointedly. In fact, there are standards. People who have large con- tracts with towns should not run for office in those towns. People who work in journalism or any other job should not be excluded from running. Most particularly, persons who wish to play gutter politics with anonymous unfounded or dubious charges should know that their presence is not desired among decent men and women. Madison, not Machiavelli, is still the key player in our way of doing things in America. Letters to the Editor Urges support for MaryAlice Hagerty Dear Editor: As long-time residents of Midland Park, we are privi- leged to have known MaryAlice Hagerty her entire life. She has always been honest, industrious, inquisitive, and fair-minded. MaryAlice’s strong educational background makes her an ideal member of the Midland Park Board of Education. Her love of and her concern for Midland Park is second to none. We are lucky to have such a talented person volunteer her time for us. We urge others to re-elect her to another term. Jack and Janet Weis Midland Park Supports BOE incumbents, budget Dear Editor: Our schools are the heart of our community, and the state of our schools is inextricably linked to the value of our homes. What our schools are lacking are not committed educators and board members, but money for upgrades that are sorely needed. Incumbent BOE members, MaryAlice Thomas, Peter Triolo, and James Cannellas have worked tirelessly for years, appealing to the stakeholders in our community to work out ways to get these upgrades accom- plished. They, along with the rest of the board, have man- aged to obtain a $3 million award from the state to offset any taxes raised to improve our school buildings. I pledge my vote to these hard-working, dedicated incumbent BOE members, along with a “yes” vote to pass the school budget. Being a board of education member takes tremendous dedication and is a complicated and often thankless job. I applaud newcomer Mr. Meeks for stepping up if he feels his ideas and positions will strengthen the current BOE. It’s up to the voters to decide if they agree with his positions or not, but as a parent and a taxpayer, I find his unwillingness to face the voting public at the scheduled Candidates Night to be disrespectful to the voters. Why would he not want to expound on the statements he has made on his website? Explain how you plan to “opt out” of the state mandated common core! It’s clear that his ideas and positions are the polar opposite of those of the current board and these same statements leave me feeling that his allegiance lies more heavily with the “Midland Park Taxpayers Alliance” than it does with our children. I urge you to vote “yes” for the school budget, and to re-elect our BOE incumbents, Dr. Thomas, Mr. Triolo, and Mr. Cannellas. Noreen Desbiens Midland Park Supporting Triolo & the school budget Dear Editor: I want to express my support for Peter Triolo, who is running for his first full term on the Midland Park Board of Education. He and his wife, Jennifer, have a proven track record of dedication to the schools and to the community. Two years ago, Pete stepped up to fill a vacancy on the board. He has invested so much time learning about the district, its strengths and weaknesses, the way the board works, and most importantly, the role of the State of New Jersey in shaping what the district must do, what it can do, and what it is not permitted to do. Pete has my complete confidence. We all know the challenges facing the district in terms of facilities improvement. This board and this school administration have won par- tial state funding of nearly $3 million, which will go a long way toward funding the upgrades we need in order to serve our children and maintain our property values. If we do not use the funds we are awarded soon, we will lose them and our children and our town will suffer. We need focus, grit, and cooperation, not political rhetoric -- and Pete is the man to get us there. Please vote “yes” for this year’s school budget and for Pete Triolo. Patricia Fantulin Midland Park