|
|
Post by admin on Jun 15, 2009 7:36:58 GMT -5
Recently I had a good discussion about the new appointment and some good questions came up. I am hoping that Andrew will be willing to answer.
According to news paper reports found elsewhere on this site, the BOE began a search to appoint a new member to the board on May 28th.
The BOE had 60 days to appoint a new member.
By June 8th, there was only one application submitted and that person was appointed. That was only ELEVEN days between the appointment and the opening.
This appears very hasty.
My question, why didn't the BOE give it more time to see if more applications showed up?
Why didn't the BOE leave the seat open for more of those 60 days? Why the rush?
|
|
|
|
Post by richardkelsey on Jun 15, 2009 10:52:02 GMT -5
Recently I had a good discussion about the new appointment and some good questions came up. I am hoping that Andrew will be willing to answer. According to news paper reports found elsewhere on this site, the BOE began a search to appoint a new member to the board on May 28th. The BOE had 60 days to appoint a new member. By June 8th, there was only one application submitted and that person was appointed. That was only ELEVEN days between the appointment and the opening. This appears very hasty. My question, why didn't the BOE give it more time to see if more applications showed up? Why didn't the BOE leave the seat open for more of those 60 days? Why the rush? This is an excellent point -- and it does make one wonder about the transparency of the process. Mr. Reich is certainly "qualified." However, he was specifically voted down -- after a long run in office. The vote was about change, and in a very short window, where "invites" to apply were apparently permitted -- though through no formal, well-advertised, process, Mr. Reich is re-appointed to his old job, with the paper stating that no one else came forward. It's odd -- and at a minimum, the Board should have reached out to the other candidates and asked them to apply. If they did, good for them, and they should make that known. But from an outsider perspective -- and based solely on what was printed in the Transcript, this seemed to be a hastily arranged appointment devoid of any outreach effort. |
|
|
|
Post by richardkelsey on Jun 15, 2009 13:08:29 GMT -5
Okay -- this is pure humor -- for those who just can't find the gap between humor and attack -- but, nonetheless, I couldn't let this past. If his wife serving on Council was the fist Reich, then this would be -- are I say -- the Third Reich? Just a little humor. Ron is a thoroughly capable person -- and I served with him on a committee for the schools many years ago. I don't often agree with him, but he is thoughtful. My only problem with his re-selection is the appearance that it lacked transparency. It may well have been earnest and thoughtful -- but it seems rushed and pre-determined. |
|
|
|
Post by novillero on Jun 15, 2009 14:58:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by novillero on Jun 15, 2009 15:35:14 GMT -5
Sorry to disappoint, this was posted on another thread a week or so ago. I just went back and re-posted the link.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jun 16, 2009 6:55:47 GMT -5
Good catch, and I should have picked this up myself when starting this thread. My boo boo. This explains why the appointment occurred so quick, but the general question for the BOE remains- why so hasty with the process? You have 60 days to fill the slot, but only allowed about nine days for people to make up their minds. Why the rush? Lets face it, we just came out of an election. I doubt that many people are thinking about running at this point. There should have been more time given. To Lisa--- Your humor is good. It always lightens the mood and that is very important. It sparked a nice back and forth between you and Rich that remind me that I need to make another point, if you can put up with that. I intentionally omitted the name of the appointee because he as an individual is not the focus of this thread. My questions go straight to the BOE as a whole. I have no opinion of Ron Reich either way. I could not argue for or against him based on his record. I saw mention of his wife. His son Adam was forgotten and he also serves on the BOE. To their very admirable credit, the Reich family is very dedicated to Freehold Borough. Between the BOE, rec commission, Freehold Beautiful and who knows what else, they give a lot of them selves. Freehold could use a few more like the Reich family. |
|
|
|
Post by ddigler on Jun 16, 2009 15:21:53 GMT -5
I have no problem with reappointing a candidate, no learning on the job.
|
|
ka19
Junior Member
Posts: 356
|
Post by ka19 on Jun 16, 2009 16:22:12 GMT -5
I have no problem with reappointing a candidate, no learning on the job. That's my opinion as well. Anyone who was reading the newspapers (or the Freehold Voice) knew of the vacancy and could have submitted their name for consideration. Only one person applied, and that's a person with experience. I have no problem with it. I'm more annoyed about the fact that only one person applied. |
|
|
|
Post by novillero on Jun 16, 2009 16:47:27 GMT -5
I don't have a problem with the appointment of Mr. Reich.
Without knowing who else would have applied (if anyone at all), it would appear that Mr. Reich would be the major contender regardless. Even though he lost the election, he has the knowledge, experience and desire for the position.
I think the time period is the concern for most, and it seems rather truncated. Is there a reason? If you look at it, it was really less than a week.
There was not even enough time for the Transcript to run an article on the entire matter. The Transcipt of June 3, simply noted that there was 60 days to find a person to fill Sims' slot.
The May 28 APP ran the story of Sims' resignation, but did not mention how the slot was going to be filled. So I do not think there was ample notice in the newspapers. So unless you are a reader of this site, chances are that you probably were unaware of the deadline.
I would also think that it would be interesting to know how many people ran in the most recent years past. Were any recent elections contested? I do not remember any contested races in the past few years (this current year accepted). The point being... there probably was no such person that was planning on submitting an application - other than Mr. Reich. But we will never know that based on the short time period for submitting applications, and the lack of notice.
While I wish the period for applications to have been a lot longer, the best of luck to Mr. Reich. It is less than a one-year term. Anyone dissatisfied can (1) legally contest the system under which he was appointed (which is probably not worth the effort); or (2) run next year and change the system.
|
|
|
|
Post by novillero on Jun 16, 2009 16:49:07 GMT -5
I have no problem with reappointing a candidate, no learning on the job. I would think that this is a very real concern for an appointment for less than one year. Mr. Reich obviously knows the system. |
|
