Moderator please add two questions to all the candidates. "Would you encourage at least two more seats on BOE"? and "If so, Why"?

And if not, why not?

Bye Bob!

Vince you stole my ideas but I don't believe you can do the necessary job. Bye, bye.

Gina great point on cost benefit analysis maybe you can teach the outdated BA how to perform one.

Vince is a puppet! OUT!!!!

Mr.Loncto has obviously researched and prepared for this evening. Mr. Hutton clearly speaks of what he knows based on his experience. Ms. Damasco and Mr. Morgan do not appear to have any specific knowledge or ideas. Granted, they are new to the game but why didn't they prepare or research before the meeting? Frankly Ms. Damasco scares me for her laid back, very general way of addressing the questions. Correct me if I am wrong, she is the only one running with school age kids AND a full time job...... where will she find the time to do all that it takes to be an effective BOE member?

Ridgewood Residents: If you are not watching now please turn it on now.
This is the future of our schools and our tax dollars!!

I hope everyone saw the Candidate's Night forum. It was well attended; definitely more than the one I attended last year. I'd guesstimate 30+ people.

Anyway, I'll have a full recap for the morning. But definitely feel welcome to use this as an open forum of sorts for the time being.

How do you think the respective candidates performed?

Thanks to the LOWV for offering voters such an opportunity. I was there tonight for the entire event and benefited enormously from hearing the candidates speak in a live forum such as this. Can't wait until the Candidates' Night for Village Council candidates!

AMAMOM,
I am sorry that you felt that way. As none of the other candidates posed any questions to me (except for Mr. Loncto, who rather asked Mr. Hutton to question me), it had not occurred to me those answers would have been perceived as general. We were limited in our time and my interest was mainly to answer the questions we were asked, not to use it as a vehicle to push any particular platform. It was an open forum, so it is unfortunate you did not attend and raise your specific questions to me at that time so that I could have allayed your concerns. Further, in my experience, I have done a number of group presentations on the laws my office enforces and have appeared before hearing officers, judges and in other fora without having the benefit of reading verbatim from a prepared statement as others may have done; perhaps the ease with which I have learned to speak publicly may have given you the impression that I was too laid back? Finally, while I appreciate your concern for my free time, perhaps it might be abated if I said that, prior to my current 40-hour per week job, I worked as a school board attorney for a law firm that had a minimum 2,000 annual billable hour requirement - which did not include the non-billable activities, pro-bono legal requirements, volunteering, attending legal education seminars, etc. Compared to that, I find that I have enjoyed a considerable amount of free time that I am glad to volunteer to my own community in this position. -Gina

Joe,
I understand your characterization that I evidenced a lack of preparation, and again I ask in what regard specifically? Perhaps the knowledge and skills required of a school board attorney are beyond that which you are fully familiar? I again point out that I was seated next to the candidates you felt were well prepared - two of them (including my opponent) are currently seated on the school board and thus presumably knowledgeable enough to promptly and resoundingly challenge someone who is purportedly as unprepared and lacking in understanding as you assert. If this was truly the case, why then did neither of those candidates raise something at the time when presented with ample opportunity during crosstalk? I would assume that would have afforded the best and, in fact, most contextually appropriate opportunity to do so - and certainly preferable than waiting for such challenges to be first raised anonymously and after-the-fact in this forum. And, I should again point out that the event was open to the public, and thus you were free to raise questions directly at that time. Sills, Cummis and Gross, the firm I worked for, represented numerous school boards and other public entities around the state. The determinations for some cases I handled while at Sills have been published and include a reference to me by name. Also a matter of public record, that firm represented Ridgewood BOE.

@CPA, they ALL received the questions in advance. The BOE already has a law firm that reviews contracts, there is much more that a BOE member needs to do. I really don't see Vince as a "puppet." Have you listened him at meetings over the past few months? He is asking questions that show like he is going through the financials in detail, and he is getting more info released to the public the budget process.

Now that I have had a chance to see today's newspaper, I would like to know why Ms. Demasco did not respond to the newspaper's request, and chose not to share her platform with the public? Does this not worry you even a little bit? Hello? We don't need a lawyer who hides behind vague legal language, does not answer questions posed for the benefit of voters/taxpayers and as I understand it, has not attended other events to which she was invited to meet taxpayers. Am I missing something here? It is dismissive and disrespectful of the community. Just what we DON'T need more of in the BOE.

Thank you, Boyd for your kind words and to Gina, I think you're terrific.

Thank you, Boyd for your kind words and to Gina, I think you're terrific.

The most shocking moment of the evening, after which I'm not sure I heard much else, was hearing that it would even be considered for one second to put the historic Board of Ed building, the first public school in Ridgewood, on the block. Please, please, BOE, or whoever owns the building: do not sell our heritage to the highest bidder while spending millions to turf the town and a quarter of a million, so far, to fix the de-turfed turf. NOT COOL.

@CPA I don't believe anyone on the BOE is related to the people at the Board's law firm. But it's easy enough to find out. That information is required to be disclosed and is available to the public. So why don't you ask instead of tossing out unfounded allegations. And as for a BOE member providing legal advice to the Board, instead of the BOE's attorney of record, there is probably a state law against that. And there is no way the BOE should vacate or sell its historic building on Cottage Place. Will. Never. Happen. (That's not to say they couldn't lease out some office space on one of the floors.)

Gina,
I was actually amazed at your lack of preparation for the debate. For a lawyer to come so unprepared was shocking. If you showed up to a trial that unprepared, it would border on negligence.
Specifically, you didn't answer the first question - whether the school budget should be voted on, since it is at or under the 2% state cap. Why didn't you answer it? I believe it's because you never read the questions or prepared an answer.
On the technology question, you vaguely threw out a suggestion of outsourcing, but you did no research as to how much the district currently spends vs. how much that kind of outsourcing might cost. It's easy to toss out ideas. Anyone can do that. Someone who is serious about running for an elected office should do the research and see if, in fact, that could save money. Also, you never addressed any issue about how technology should be used in our schools. Again, some research would have been nice.
The fields? You lacked even the most rudimentary amount of knowledge to be able to speak coherently about the issue.
And I also wondered why you refused to answer the questions that the Ridgewood News sent you. I think you are dodging these questions, and hoping that people just elect you instead of someone else…good luck with that.
I, for one, will not be voting for you - and I will share my thoughts with everyone else I can. Electing you to the BOE would be a huge mistake.

Oh, and one more thing Gina.
To suggest that the attorney's representing the BOE do not currently read and thoroughly review the contracts that the district engages in, is insulting to your peers. How dare you say that the contracts were not treated correctly...because your statement that if you were on the BOE you would make sure that the contracts were structured in such a way to protect the district is saying that the attorneys who currently do that work are not protecting the district. Do you even know who those attorneys are? Have you contacted them to state that you are not pleased with their work? As a resident, you have every right to do that.
NO, you haven't done that. But, you have complained about them. Good for you.

@CPA I'm actually in agreement with you on the BA and his tech skills. Deplorable. Vince Loncto was correct in the candidates night when he said they need an IT Director. I just think you're barking up a wrong tree about nepotism (like I said before, it's easy to determine and I've never seen evidence of that). It is an easy potshot.

@Joe if this was a public company would we really see this amount of financial mismanagement? In a 3 year IT plan and they went from Macs to Dells to IPads because they couldn't get parts on Macs, ... my head is about to explode. The BA has to be the fall guy. He doesn't have an ounce of business accumen other then to screw us taxpayers. For someone with that much inability to do anything correct he must have something on someone to keep his job.

@Realist, I am assuming you are not an attorney as such a baseless claim that exercising my right to voice my opinions in a school board candidacy was attorney negligence is a very serious charge against a fellow bar member - not to mention inappropriate and intimidatory. That notwithstanding, I am running for school board member not school board attorney. I do not think it is a good use of district money to have a board attorney closely review the hundreds of pages of each RFP, bid specification, contract and change order for all of the various contracts the board approves. That is the job of the school board and administration. Where the board determines that litigation is necessary to pursue a legal remedy to protect the district's interests, such litigation would be handled by a school board attorney (as with a variety of other matters). For example, if you look at the 2009 Bond Referendum Project Costs, part of Ridge School's $5.3 million+ contract included Electrical Upgrade and Distribution. Yet, In the 7/19/11 Referendum Update, the Board approved at least $3,776 for total revised circuitry at Ridge School. The Board and Administration, not the Attorney, is responsible for knowing what it approved and whether this should have been included in what was already part of the original referendum under "Electrical Upgrade and Distribution." It is my position that we don't simply write checks for things we don't know whether we've already paid for.

@Joe it isn't my assertion that Gina would be utilized to handle the Board Attorneys job. My assertion is that Gina could discuss the merits and perils of what the Board is signing off on which is a huge difference. The Board must see the contracts before they go to the Board Attorneys for their review. If a contract needs revision Gina can challenge the wording of the contracts before any hand off. This why Gina would be a benefit over Vince.

"Gina can review the contracts and offer addendums". My exact quote.

Thank you, CPA. Joe, I simply disagree with your assertion that I did not answer the questions. As previously raised, two sitting board members were present and took no issue with my responses despite ample opportunity. Further, one prior board member was present and did raise a direct question to a candidate - and that candidate was not me. I managed to withstand the scrutiny of these gentleman (whom you enthusiastically support), each of whom were unable to find a basis to challenge me in that appropriate forum and outside the cloak of cyber anonymity. Any member of the public can view the video and make their own judgments. As far as this particular discourse, the tone has clearly deviated from productive, salient and appropriate and I will simply conclude my involvement in it by letting the voters judge for themselves - my statements, and those of my fellow candidates, are out there for each to make their own unbiased assessment.

I received a comment from Michele Lenhard, the BOE president, regarding the belief Business Administrator Angelo DeSimone has a relative working in RPS:

"Mr. DeSimone does NOT have a relative employed by RPS," Lenhard said in an e-mail this afternoon.

Fair enough I am not going to split hairs with you...LOL

Wow. So Gina just left. Imagine what would happen if she were actually elected and were questioned by her constituents...I guess she would just ignore us. I'll speak to her anyway, even though she has chosen to ignore us all:
Gina, using big words in your responses does not make those responses more effective. Try doing away with the legal-speak (did you really use the word "intimidatory" in a sentence?). I guess you are running under the platform of "Use all of the words I learned when studying for the SATs when talking to potential voters, so they will be fooled into thinking I actually know what I'm talking about".
Gina, you are fooling no one.
You haven't answered any questions. You say that your fellow candidates "...took no issue..." with your responses. Well, your fellow candidates aren't the ones you need to convince to vote for you in an election. We are. And at that, you have failed.

Joe, thanks for your comments.

CPA - "...splitting hairs..."? Really? You make a false claim against someone, and when you are proven wrong you call it "splitting hairs"? That's wonderful. In your world when you are right you are right, and when you are wrong the other guy is misinformed. Hmmm. That must be a nice world you live in.

Thank you "Long Time Resident".
You have summed all of this up quite neatly...and all without addressing any of the issues that we have been discussing.
Which facts, exactly, have not been cared for?
In what way has reason and logic been negated?
And so it goes, that the fool wins...because in fact, his logic is strongest.
So in the end who really is the fool?
Turns out the fool is the person who runs for elected office, yet refuses to engage in discourse with the voting public.
Smart decision Gina?
Smart decision for us, as you won't be elected...which is truly the best outcome for all.