DeFonzo on the Hot Seat

[admin]

newstranscript.gmnews.com/news/2009/0506/letters/024.html

I would like to commend the Freehold Borough Board of Education for their preparation of a lean, yet responsible budget in these uncertain economic times. It appears that a majority of the board truly understands the importance to the town in providing a cost-effective, yet thorough and efficient education.

Unfortunately, not all of the board members have exercised common sense and responsible decision making practices. The preparation and adoption of the school budget is arguably the most important task that a school board member has to perform.

Yet, board member Andrew De- Fonzo has not shown his ability to make a decision in the best interest of the children and the district.

In 2008 he retreated from his role as a board member by abstaining on the budget. What is the point of abstaining?

This year, after the school board and the administration struggled long and hard to present a responsible budget, Mr. DeFonzo voted against it.



I could understand if there are philosophical differences of opinion.

In fact, honest debate often produces compromises. However, Mr. DeFonzo chose to offer no viable alternatives or specific areas where he thought further reductions could be made.

This is another example of his retreat from his responsibility to the public which placed its trust and confidence in him. He sought the position and asked for the responsibility, yet shrinks from it at a time when leadership is most needed.

Now I see that Mr. DeFonzo wishes to run for a seat on the Freehold Borough governing body. What does he propose to bring to the table other than a lack of conviction and an abdication of his responsibility?

At a minimum, Mr. DeFonzo must explain his irresponsible actions as a school board member.

At a maximum, he should resign from the school board and withdraw from the Borough Council race until he can show the voters that he has the strength and courage of his conviction and is willing and able to do the job for which he was elected.

[admin]

Well, Andrew gets a challenge with this one. The author of this letter would be far more credible if she also mentioned that Frank Gill voted against the budget as well. Could this be a partisan attack because Andrew has his name on the council ticket? All's fair in love and war.

Andrew, is it a fair bet that you will write a nice rebuttal to the News Transcript as you tactfully open up a can of whoop arse on this letter?

[admin]

The more I think about this letter, the more I think the author is kind of nutty and something is a little Stinky here.

Again, no mention of Frank Gill who also voted against the budget. That would mean that Andrew specific is the target. That would have to be because he is on the GOP ticket. That is interesting considering that it has not been in the papers nor talked about much. There are two conclusions, The author is partisan and has simply lobbed a pre-emptive attack.

The funny thing is, I believe she made Andrew look better. First point, she shows that Andrew is not a rubber stamp. Voters will like that - alot- considering we have one party rule.

An the other hand, maybe Andrew and Frank were onto something with their vote? Remember, the voters approved the budget by a very slim margin. On top of that, all the incumbents got bounced. All the "yes men " lost.

The fact that the budget was approved tells me that just enough parents came out in support. It also tell me that it was the parents who bounced the incumbents. There has to be reason.

I also have to wonder, does the author of the letter ever go to BOE meetings? to ask Andrew the questions she airs out? A look at past meeting minutes can reveal that. Does she even have kids in the schools?

The author makes a number of baseless claims. Andrew has hardly backed away from any of his responsibilities. He has stood out in a good way.

[adefonzo]

May 6, 2009 4:52:38 GMT -5 admin said:

newstranscript.gmnews.com/news/2009/0506/letters/024.html

I would like to commend the Freehold Borough Board of Education for their preparation of a lean, yet responsible budget in these uncertain economic times. It appears that a majority of the board truly understands the importance to the town in providing a cost-effective, yet thorough and efficient education.

Unfortunately, not all of the board members have exercised common sense and responsible decision making practices. The preparation and adoption of the school budget is arguably the most important task that a school board member has to perform.

Yet, board member Andrew De- Fonzo has not shown his ability to make a decision in the best interest of the children and the district.

In 2008 he retreated from his role as a board member by abstaining on the budget. What is the point of abstaining?

This year, after the school board and the administration struggled long and hard to present a responsible budget, Mr. DeFonzo voted against it.



I could understand if there are philosophical differences of opinion.

In fact, honest debate often produces compromises. However, Mr. DeFonzo chose to offer no viable alternatives or specific areas where he thought further reductions could be made.

This is another example of his retreat from his responsibility to the public which placed its trust and confidence in him. He sought the position and asked for the responsibility, yet shrinks from it at a time when leadership is most needed.

Now I see that Mr. DeFonzo wishes to run for a seat on the Freehold Borough governing body. What does he propose to bring to the table other than a lack of conviction and an abdication of his responsibility?

At a minimum, Mr. DeFonzo must explain his irresponsible actions as a school board member.

At a maximum, he should resign from the school board and withdraw from the Borough Council race until he can show the voters that he has the strength and courage of his conviction and is willing and able to do the job for which he was elected.

I don't want to disappoint Arlene Amtzis (author of the letter), so I will be responding with a letter to the Transcript (already started it, just needs some finishing touches).

I just hope she's not expecting the same type of evasive and non informative answers people normally get from elected officials...that's just not my style. ;D

[novillero]

I guess you won't be patronizing Ms. Amtzis' store any time soon!

[admin]

May 6, 2009 14:49:10 GMT -5 adefonzo said:

May 6, 2009 4:52:38 GMT -5 admin said:

newstranscript.gmnews.com/news/2009/0506/letters/024.html

I would like to commend the Freehold Borough Board of Education for their preparation of a lean, yet responsible budget in these uncertain economic times. It appears that a majority of the board truly understands the importance to the town in providing a cost-effective, yet thorough and efficient education.

Unfortunately, not all of the board members have exercised common sense and responsible decision making practices. The preparation and adoption of the school budget is arguably the most important task that a school board member has to perform.

Yet, board member Andrew De- Fonzo has not shown his ability to make a decision in the best interest of the children and the district.

In 2008 he retreated from his role as a board member by abstaining on the budget. What is the point of abstaining?

This year, after the school board and the administration struggled long and hard to present a responsible budget, Mr. DeFonzo voted against it.



I could understand if there are philosophical differences of opinion.

In fact, honest debate often produces compromises. However, Mr. DeFonzo chose to offer no viable alternatives or specific areas where he thought further reductions could be made.

This is another example of his retreat from his responsibility to the public which placed its trust and confidence in him. He sought the position and asked for the responsibility, yet shrinks from it at a time when leadership is most needed.

Now I see that Mr. DeFonzo wishes to run for a seat on the Freehold Borough governing body. What does he propose to bring to the table other than a lack of conviction and an abdication of his responsibility?

At a minimum, Mr. DeFonzo must explain his irresponsible actions as a school board member.

At a maximum, he should resign from the school board and withdraw from the Borough Council race until he can show the voters that he has the strength and courage of his conviction and is willing and able to do the job for which he was elected.

I don't want to disappoint Arlene Amtzis (author of the letter), so I will be responding with a letter to the Transcript (already started it, just needs some finishing touches).

I just hope she's not expecting the same type of evasive and non informative answers people normally get from elected officials...that's just not my style. ;D

Just make sure it is a good letter. It appears that someone is starting the campaign season for you. I am sure you will do well with the letter.

[admin]

May 6, 2009 15:11:17 GMT -5 novillero said:

I guess you won't be patronizing Ms. Amtzis' store any time soon!

Store?

[novillero]

store/shop. whatever.

[richardkelsey]

Awesome machine politics. Organized and targeted letter writing are a critical component of a politcal operation. Getting the negatives out, putting the prospective candidate on the defensive, and calling into question character and leadership -- while noting a vote against the children. That's good poltical stuff.

i'm sure it was out of the blue.

[adefonzo]

newstranscript.gmnews.com/news/2009/0513/letters/022.html

Board member wanted state funds used for tax relief

In a recent letter to the editor ("School Board Member Owes An Explanation," News Transcript, May 6), Arlene Amtzis expressed some concern over a recent decision I made as a Board of Education member here in Freehold Borough. Ms. Amtzis has requested an explanation and as an elected official, I feel I must respond.

First, it is important that I point out that nothing I say is in any way a statement for the Freehold Borough Board of Education. I do not speak for the board at all; these are simply my own viewpoints and statements.

Let me state straight away, I will not get into the details to defend my vote on the budget, since space is limited. Essentially it boiled down to my feeling that the district could have used funds we received from the state, which we were not expecting to receive, to offset the amount that we were seeking through raising the local tax levy yet again (especially in such uncertain economic times).

I invite Ms. Amtzis to come down to a board meeting (minutes do not show her at any meetings over the last couple of years) and I will gladly discuss in more detail my reasoning. This invitation is of course open to anyone who disagrees with my vote on this or any matter. Please feel free to question me. As an elected official in town, it is your absolute right to do so, and it is my responsibility to answer your questions. I think those that have approached me would say that I have been considerate and honest in my answers to them.

Allow me now to set some facts straight that Ms. Amtzis got wrong. In 2008 (last year), I did not abstain from the budget vote. When the board voted on the budget, I voted yes. Perhaps Ms. Amtzis was referring to 2007 when I voted against the budget? Or perhaps she was referring to this year, when I abstained from implementation of the budget that I voted against? Either way, I just wanted to make sure the facts were accurate.

Next, just to set the record straight, I was not the only board member to vote against the budget. Two years ago, there were two other board members who joined in my dissent, and this year, there was one other board member who again voted against the budget with me. Quite frankly, I find it curious that Ms. Amtzis chose to single me out.

Also, Ms. Amtzis says I did not offer any specific areas where cuts could be made. The fact is I never asked that additional cuts be made, simply that we take the additional state funding that we received and use it to supplement the raising of the local tax levy. Again, I just want to make sure the facts are clear, I was not looking to cut any programs or positions.

As I stated at the public hearings on the budget both in 2007 and again this year, my vote was by no means an assumption that our administrative staff did a lackluster job of preparing a budget. In my three years on the board, I have seen firsthand the time and effort that they all put into preparing a budget that will provide our students with the best education we can offer.

This all boils down to the question of, "Was my decision the right one?" In some folks' eyes, yes, it was. In some folks' opinions (like Ms. Amtzis), obviously it was not. Some would say that my standing out in opposition to the budget, despite knowing we would be defeated, shows the very conviction that Ms. Amtzis says I lack.

Some might even say that opposing raising taxes on the public to offset Trenton's shortcomings when it comes to school funding for our district shows that I am living up to my responsibility to represent the taxpayers of our town, not abdicating my responsibilities as Ms. Amtzis feels I am.

It's all a matter of opinion, and Ms. Amtzis is certainly entitled to hers. It is important for us all to understand, though, that none of us (myself included) represent all of the people in Freehold Borough. The position I hold is an elected one. Ms, Amtzis is welcome to vote against me and even run against me next year if she so chooses. That is the beauty of our system.

Andrew DeFonzo
member
Board of Education
Freehold Borough

[admin]

Andrew,

Putting aside the differing opinions people may have on the issues at hand, your response was very good. You were respectful toward your critic and you still answered in an open and fair way. You did not go on the defense, yet, you were not offensive either. Just open and honest.

Few elected leaders would respond as well as you did. Good job!

[novillero]

I agree with Brian. An excellent response, respectful with a tone that you do not often get from these sorts of responses.

And it was consistent with one of Andrew's recurring themes... people have the power to vote people in or out of office. (anyone check Ms. Amatzis voting record for school elections?)

To me, it is absolutely clear that Ms. Amtzis was not the real author of this letter. As noted by Andrew, she does not attend Board of Education meetings and some research has shown that she has never written a letter to the editor (at least been published) - and that includes the transcript, the APP, the Star Ledger, Bergen Record, Trenton Times, NY Times, etc.

It is a shame that she got roped into signing this letter. It was poor thinking on her part. I'll go to other shops to buy my b____s.

[novillero]

p.s. for those of you who may not have noticed it, Andrew's character was anonymously maligned on another website. This was strangely timed when the rumors that Andrew might run for boro council began.

Now that the rumors were confirmed this letter appears in the APP.

It just seems a bit strange to me. For those people that don't believe in the "machine" - perhaps it's time to start re-thinking that position. There has definitely been rumors in the past of some underhanded tactics in the world of local politics.

[richardkelsey]

May 13, 2009 8:59:40 GMT -5 novillero said:

p.s. for those of you who may not have noticed it, Andrew's character was anonymously maligned on another website. This was strangely timed when the rumors that Andrew might run for boro council began.

Now that the rumors were confirmed this letter appears in the APP.

It just seems a bit strange to me. For those people that don't believe in the "machine" - perhaps it's time to start re-thinking that position. There has definitely been rumors in the past of some underhanded tactics in the world of local politics.

From Pink Floyd -- welcome to the Machine

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCfVFxRsKQc

[admin]

May 13, 2009 8:59:40 GMT -5 novillero said:

p.s. for those of you who may not have noticed it, Andrew's character was anonymously maligned on another website. This was strangely timed when the rumors that Andrew might run for boro council began.

Now that the rumors were confirmed this letter appears in the APP.

It just seems a bit strange to me. For those people that don't believe in the "machine" - perhaps it's time to start re-thinking that position. There has definitely been rumors in the past of some underhanded tactics in the world of local politics.

Good points. The reason for the other site activity is because it is allowed to go on. I am proud to say that we would never allow that nonsense on this site be it directed at the current governing body or any aspiring council persons. This site may have had a couple of low moments, but all in all, we do carry ourselves well here and still welcome all. That is why the FV is a real community site and why so many participants and readers are people who care about this town. The other site and their bottom feeding participants cannot say that.

[admin]

May 13, 2009 13:44:35 GMT -5 richardkelsey said:

May 13, 2009 8:59:40 GMT -5 novillero said:

p.s. for those of you who may not have noticed it, Andrew's character was anonymously maligned on another website. This was strangely timed when the rumors that Andrew might run for boro council began.

Now that the rumors were confirmed this letter appears in the APP.

It just seems a bit strange to me. For those people that don't believe in the "machine" - perhaps it's time to start re-thinking that position. There has definitely been rumors in the past of some underhanded tactics in the world of local politics.

From Pink Floyd -- welcome to the Machine

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCfVFxRsKQc

That is a good one! I haven't heard that song in years.

[adefonzo]

May 13, 2009 15:25:54 GMT -5 admin said:

May 13, 2009 8:59:40 GMT -5 novillero said:

p.s. for those of you who may not have noticed it, Andrew's character was anonymously maligned on another website. This was strangely timed when the rumors that Andrew might run for boro council began.

Now that the rumors were confirmed this letter appears in the APP.

It just seems a bit strange to me. For those people that don't believe in the "machine" - perhaps it's time to start re-thinking that position. There has definitely been rumors in the past of some underhanded tactics in the world of local politics.

Good points. The reason for the other site activity is because it is allowed to go on. I am proud to say that we would never allow that nonsense on this site be it directed at the current governing body or any aspiring council persons. This site may have had a couple of low moments, but all in all, we do carry ourselves well here and still welcome all. That is why the FV is a real community site and why so many participants and readers are people who care about this town. The other site and their bottom feeding participants cannot say that.

I have to admit...I was very close to posting a response on that site...but I decided to hold off.

Something told me that there would be no use trying to ask for any facts to back up their claims of my being a "racist" a "bigot" or the idea that "He hates to educate the Mexicans, but does absolutely nothing on the BOE to stop it."

Really...I was close to asking for anything....anything to back up their statements...but then I remembered that's not the game they play. The folks who made those types of statements aren't interested in facts...just slander...so why bother even trying to deal with folks like that?

It's funny...in her rant on MSNBC last month, Janeane Garofalo said "you know, you can tell these type of right wingers anything and they'll believe it, except the truth. You tell them the truth and they become -- it's like showing Frankenstein's monster fire. They become confused, and angry and highly volatile. " Seems to me it's not just the "right wingers" that get confused and angry with the truth.

It really is a shame that we have gotten to a point in this country where we don't want to deal with facts anymore, it's more about who can out slander and out denigrate their opponent.

I know the question has been asked before, but what the heck has happened to us as a society when we're willing to hold people accountable to false accusations, but we don't hold those who made the false accusations accountable for their statements?

Remember this quote, "I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration" Makes sense, right? Remember who said it? That's right...Hillary Clinton...of course at the time, she was talking about the Bush Administration. Have the rules now changed??

How about this one..."It's a very Archie Bunker, anti-intellectual, unfair way to treat dissent...I'm in favor of any citizen talking if they want to. I'm in favor of any citizen talking if they want to."? Sounds like a fair point of view, right? Remember who said it? That's right again...Janeane Garofalo back in 2003, talking about fellow Hollywood star Johnny Depp and his anti-America remarks. Yeah...the same Janeane Garofalo who called the protestors on tax day...well, we all know about her ridiculous rant, no need to repeat that nonsense.

I can deal with dissent, different opinions, different viewpoints...I really can. But have some facts to back up what you're saying, and remember, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If we can find a way back to that simple formula, maybe we can start to turn this society around.

[admin]

May 14, 2009 11:15:27 GMT -5 adefonzo said:

May 13, 2009 15:25:54 GMT -5 admin said:

Good points. The reason for the other site activity is because it is allowed to go on. I am proud to say that we would never allow that nonsense on this site be it directed at the current governing body or any aspiring council persons. This site may have had a couple of low moments, but all in all, we do carry ourselves well here and still welcome all. That is why the FV is a real community site and why so many participants and readers are people who care about this town. The other site and their bottom feeding participants cannot say that.

I have to admit...I was very close to posting a response on that site...but I decided to hold off.

Something told me that there would be no use trying to ask for any facts to back up their claims of my being a "racist" a "bigot" or the idea that "He hates to educate the Mexicans, but does absolutely nothing on the BOE to stop it."

Really...I was close to asking for anything....anything to back up their statements...but then I remembered that's not the game they play. The folks who made those types of statements aren't interested in facts...just slander...so why bother even trying to deal with folks like that?

It's funny...in her rant on MSNBC last month, Janeane Garofalo said "you know, you can tell these type of right wingers anything and they'll believe it, except the truth. You tell them the truth and they become -- it's like showing Frankenstein's monster fire. They become confused, and angry and highly volatile. " Seems to me it's not just the "right wingers" that get confused and angry with the truth.

It really is a shame that we have gotten to a point in this country where we don't want to deal with facts anymore, it's more about who can out slander and out denigrate their opponent.

I know the question has been asked before, but what the heck has happened to us as a society when we're willing to hold people accountable to false accusations, but we don't hold those who made the false accusations accountable for their statements?

Remember this quote, "I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration" Makes sense, right? Remember who said it? That's right...Hillary Clinton...of course at the time, she was talking about the Bush Administration. Have the rules now changed??

How about this one..."It's a very Archie Bunker, anti-intellectual, unfair way to treat dissent...I'm in favor of any citizen talking if they want to. I'm in favor of any citizen talking if they want to."? Sounds like a fair point of view, right? Remember who said it? That's right again...Janeane Garofalo back in 2003, talking about fellow Hollywood star Johnny Depp and his anti-America remarks. Yeah...the same Janeane Garofalo who called the protestors on tax day...well, we all know about her ridiculous rant, no need to repeat that nonsense.

I can deal with dissent, different opinions, different viewpoints...I really can. But have some facts to back up what you're saying, and remember, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If we can find a way back to that simple formula, maybe we can start to turn this society around.

You were right to not waste your time on that site. As it is, we have given them too much time here. A long time ago I posted there. I stopped when it turned into a place for the rejects who could not handle themselves in this civil and decent site. It is a shame because that is a public site that does not reflect our town well. Those idiots with an agenda have marred the good name of our town.

On the same topic, you will likely be on the receiving end of more letters etc. Especially if you are viewed as a threat by the machine. This last letter was a softball pitch that you were able to whack. But, pick your battles wisely and never go on the defense.

[admin]

Andrew,,
I am curious, what kind of feedback have you received about this letter exchange between you and Ms. Amtzis? It will be interesting to see if there is any continuation in this weeks News Transcript.

[adefonzo]

May 24, 2009 7:30:42 GMT -5 admin said:

Andrew,,
I am curious, what kind of feedback have you received about this letter exchange between you and Ms. Amtzis? It will be interesting to see if there is any continuation in this weeks News Transcript.

I have heard absolutely nothing beyond what you have read on this site, and one other email from someone in town (also through this site).

Of course, that is always the case...everytime I have written a letter to the paper, I get little to no response. Perhaps this time will be different? Who knows...