Just the Facts Please Ma’am – The “Bolger Gifts” Controversy

In Uncategorized on May 7, 2008 at 1:16 pm

2/13/2008 – Village Council Resolution #08-35 – Accept Donation from Bolger Foundation – Installation of Security System in Central Business District, Parking Garage and Other Locations – Estimated worth = $450K+

Roll Call Vote Results:

Councilman Harlow – No

Councilman Mancuso – Yes

Councilwoman RIngler-Shagin – No

Deputy Mayor Wiest – Yes

Mayor Pfund – Yes

Resolution #08-35 was approved
4/28/2008 – Village Council Resolution #08-103 – Accept Donation from Bolger Foundation – Renovation of Pease Library Building Including New Parking Lot – Estimated worth = $750K+

Roll Call Vote Results:

Councilman Harlow – Yes

Councilman Mancuso – Yes

Councilwoman RIngler-Shagin – Yes

Deputy Mayor Wiest – Yes

Mayor Pfund – Yes

Resolution #08-103 was unanimously approved

Total Accepted Gifts From Bolger Foundation YTD 2008 = $1,200,000+

4/29/2008 – Zoning Board of Adjustment Site Plan approval permitting demolition of an existing motor vehicle inspection station and for building of a four-story self storage facility with a floor area of approximately 91,000 square feet and related site amenities. Variances include floor area ratio of 167% where 45% is the maximum permitted, impervious coverage of 95% where 90% is the maximum permitted, 21 parking spaces where 364 spaces are required and a use variance for a self storage facility which is not a permitted use in the C zone at 156 Chestnut Street, Block 2005 Lot 3. Property owner: Bolger and Company.

One roll “no” vote recorded, from Mr. David Larsen.


  1. The facts speak for themselves.

  2. At least Harlow had the balls to cast a “no” vote on the cameras; Wiest voted “yes” to accept both gifts.

    Regardless of Harlow’s resolve, vote “no” for both incumbents on May 13.

  3. It’s time to sweep this council and it’s cronies out of office!

  4. Love the FOR SALE sign, PJ! Can we hang it in front of the Village Hall?

  5. Hey 12:41 Aronsohn, the smart move would be to lay back… did you learn nothing during your days as McGreevey’s spokesman?

    Don’t worry, the mindless in town will deliver our heads for you to step on, on your way to greener pastures (maybe 3rd times a 5th district charm, eh?). Although with your abysmal record of failed election campaigns (surprising for such a highly regarded inside member of the Democratic Party machine in this state), I am fearful that you will never be able to rise above Ridgewood Council Member and we will be forever stuck with the politician that nobody else wants! All is not lost… you can siphon off money and prestige from Ridgewood for you and your pals and perhaps one day even become mayor of our quaint little village.

  6. While I am always leery of real estate developers bearing gifts, “the facts don’t speak for themselves” here. It doesnt necessarily follow that variance relief by the BOA for re-development of the DMV site was a quid pro quo. The site needed re-development and a storage site is not a bad use for that area. Storage requires way less parking than most other uses. I think it would probably have been approved anyway without Bolger’s name or ostensible bribe attached.

  7. A regular one man pay to play machine. No compunctions get in the way of getting what he wants. The money man wins again!

  8. The storage place is okay if Citizen Kane gets rid of the copper mailman….

  9. Not for nothing but I would not take our Village if they gave it to me. I am seriously thinking about moving.

  10. Why can’t Bolger get some class and make his “gifts” anonymously?

    Will the Pease building be renamed the Bolger building?

  11. I like the mailman and the boy and his dog…

  12. Ummm…

    7:48 –

    Why was the Pease Building named “The Pease Building” in the first place?

    Why are you “OK” with one philanthopist’s name being on a building (Pease) but not another’s (Bolger)?

    This is not the same as the storage facility variances and the pay-to-play stink that is on it.

    Look all around the world, philanthropists, developers, etc put their names on buildings.
    It may not be the most elegant way to give, but it is very acceptable.

    It is up to the Village to know what gifts to accept and what ones to respectfully decline.

  13. Maybe just maybe it was a good use that will generate tax money, but not require services. would you rather a row of low income housing? How bout another office building? How bout a warehouse that could run 24 hours a day, thats an approved use…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: