I do agree with some things you stated Rick, not all. You know I was happy to sit down with you as well and we did that. I would be happy to meet with you again anytime. I am willing to walk around the fields with you and share my insight and experience with you as well. I have just lost patience with certain individuals and their motives. I have no issue with anyone who opposes this for whatever reason who has acted responsibly. People disagree all the time but remain civil. I also know there are people who oppose this but agree that the facilities are in desperate need of attention. They oppose the funding source and the town usage. I have no problem with varying opinions. However, I do have issue with people who loudly preach that "all is well". This particular tour was a media campaign with a predetermined message that would once again leave our students on the short end of the stick. I have yet to hear a productive alternative that addresses the issue, provides solutions and has a foundation. So far it has seemed to be business as usual with quick fixes and patchwork that has been proven to fail. My question is, what is "common ground"?

Chris,

I have to agree with TJ on this - the walk brought up a lot more questions with regard to why the BOE let it go this far. That fencing at the Hills was laughable for a town like ours. I see your point completely there and I also do think its fair that on a relatively dry Spring Day in March the field is going to look a lot better than late on a rainy Saturday afternoon in the Fall. The High was in a bit better shape - but there were a lot of puzzling drainage issues and other questions that no one could seem to figure out. One of the most puzzling was pointed out by BOE member Gary Martin. The picture above are not selective - they are pretty fair. The fencing was atrocious and interesting I never noticed even as much having attended games.

That all said - as a person who hasn't been shy about problems I've had with our current leadership (items that stretch far deeper and more significantly than this project that I'm not going to get into here - as it's off topic) - I really have to disagree that the point of this was staged just to say that "all's well". It was very informative and definitely was not where we left it. And for those you're suspicious of (i.e. "self-proclaimed leaders") I think you would have been very happy with commentary and we could have used your voice as well. OK - so maybe it's not your style as you prefer private conversation - but we're all at a loss in this community when anyone withdraws from the dialogue.

Tom,
I have not withdrawn from the conversation. I have met gladly with people who oppose this. I would be happy to sit down with you and others. I would be happy to walk around and have conversation about things with you. I know you know where I'm coming from and why I made the decision not to join. I don't approve of certain tactics that have been taken by a few. I won't engage it, I won't be a part of it. There is a problem here. I have spoken publicly about the problem. As of right now there is a possible solution. I have yet to hear another one that addresses the issues or provides a foundation for the execution. That's why I've asked Rick, what is the "common ground"? This has been at the forefront at town meetings and BOE meetings for 4 months. Why has an alternative approach not been presented by the opposition that is real and has teeth? I've said this before, we can blame somebody or we can move forward and take action. We are all accountable.

“I don't approve of certain tactics that have been taken by a few. I won't engage it, I won't be a part of it.”
Can you be more specific about tactics? Organizing a “walk-around” of the fields in which everyone that wanted to participate could in a respectful discussion – seeing the issue right in front of them? Asking specific questions as to the logical assessment that the fields are ‘in need of a full package of $4.5 million dollar renovation’? What clouds this issue IMHO is that you can’t ask a critical question at all from the current leadership without being branded as a political hack or being told that “you’re full of it” (as the mayor publicly retorted to me two weeks ago).

“There is a problem here. I have spoken publicly about the problem.”
(And I applaud you for that as …believe me – it’s a hard thing to put yourself out there on anything. Try being on the critical end of the Town Council or Mayor and you’ll really know how hard it is.)

“As of right now there is a possible solution. I have yet to hear another one that addresses the issues or provides a foundation for the execution.” For one – none of the citizens against the proposal have a groundskeeper (Walsh – tax dollar paid), a lawyer (Inglesino – tax dollar paid vs. one obtained on a pass-the-hat basis) at our beck and call. And forgive us Chris – 4 months is a bit of a head start you have on this as opposed to 12-18 months of discussion FOD had with all the aforementioned municipal resources available to you.

“That's why I've asked Rick, what is the "common ground"?
Well – on Sunday – I heard a lot of them but since Rick and TJ are literally closest. My main question is below – but I’m sure it’ll get ignored in the whole mess.

“I've said this before, we can blame somebody or we can move forward and take action. We are all accountable. “
Great – so that means that the Mayor will stop blaming Mr. Crawford for his tenure on the grounds committee whenever Mr. Crawford brings up the logical question as to the assessment of the fields or whether the Mayor also thinks that Mr. Seitz is “full of it” as well in saying the fields are adequate.

And at some point I’ll get my question answered – anyone chime in at any time – Do you think the OSTF is just “found money”?

BTW – the overarching sentiment on Sunday was this at the end of the day – this is likely a done deal and if you oppose it – too bad. That’s the way things go these days – so don’t sweat it so much Chris.

Tom, you know very well what I mean by "tactics" as we have discussed it before. I was basically one of the original 2 people to plan this tour, but you probably know that already as well. I have simply lost faith in someone and now do not believe there can be constructive reasoning based on what I heard stated at the Town Council meeting last Tuesday night. I won't "engage" in divisive dialogue that attempts to cast doubt on good people's motives. What possible or personal motive is there in someone trying to find a way to get our schools better facilities. You and others may not agree or approve of that particular way and that is fine. But let's stick to the reasons why you don't agree and raise some areas for "common ground" I have heard people say, "I have not made a decision on this yet" when those people clearly have. You state, "Great – so that means that the Mayor will stop blaming Mr. Crawford for his tenure on the grounds committee whenever Mr. Crawford brings up the logical question as to the assessment of the fields or whether the Mayor also thinks that Mr. Seitz is “full of it” as well in saying the fields are adequate." A perfect example of a "tactic". When I watch and listen with an open mind it seems to me that the Mayor is responding to accusations and firing back when fired upon. It shouldn't get to that point.

Tom, Question..if Mr. Crawford was head of buildings and grounds, why would he need to tour the facilities now? Shouldn't he know them inside and out. Why is he just finding things out now. That raises some questions in my mind. I am certainly not "blaming" him for the current state of affairs. He is but one voice, however, he should already be aware and informed based on his years of service.

Tom, one more thing...just for a little fun...watch the video...there is no smoking on school grounds.... :)

Chris - OK. I was having a hard time following you - but I read your post a second time and it's clear you're mistaking "tactics" for "logic". Bob's trying to make a clear - unobscured logical point (condition of the fields? "good or bad?") - it knocks a hole in the whole "plan" - and the mayor gets testy and attacks him back (his BOE responsibilities). BTW - you're already casting doubt on a good person's motives (Crawford) - IMHO - and I'm getting just as tired of it as you're getting about attacks on Mike P. Fair enough? Like I said - you can't question the mayor's choice of ties (or other blatantly poor decisions - e.g. infomercials) without getting attacked. Really sad. And really bad for the community in the near and distant future.

"What possible or personal motive is there in someone trying to find a way to get our schools better facilities?" Nothing Chris - unless that person (Mike or the Mayor) have become so myopic and obsessed with one solution to crowd out all other concerns or considerations (flat out logical ones - or concerns from other people).

So ...... I guess there's no room for logic in this discussion anymore? Guess I'm not going to get an answer to my big question - Is the OSTF "found money"? Guess I'll stop waiting for it.

Tom, OK fair enough. I didn't realize that you were directing your question towards me about the OSF being "found money". I'll be happy to answer that as I see it. The OSF is a tax that already exists and we are all paying our share currently. Hence the emphasis on "NO NEW TAXES". It is meant to be used to purchase open space land, maintain or upgrade rec facilities and preserve historical properties. There are many guidelines to how and when the money can be used. We have used it most recently to purchase the Baldwin House. Last year almost $500,000 was spent out of the fund for Craftsman Farms. It has made improvements to many of our parks. Now many support using it for making capital improvements to the HS fields. If it falls within the guidelines of using it then it is not found money. I guess we'll know that when the State AG renders his opinion. I have no problem with using it to purchase the Baldwin House, continually funding Craftsman Farms, the Littleton School house and others, but why can't it be used for this project as well. This is one that will impact so many more of our residents than all the ones I mentioned combined. I may be off base but it just seems to me like a small group of people are saying..hey, stay out of my sand box.

It's everyone sandbox Chris. unfortunately not all folks care about the acquiring the sand. "Open Space" to me (and maybe I'm just crazy) is land up for grabs. Generally we're taking private parcels off the open market and reserving it for public use or environmental purposes (the term pervious is top of mind obviously). Last time I checked no one was threatening to build a condo farm on the school football fields. We are however designating some beautiful "zones of redevelopment" off the already flood prone Edwards Road - thanks to our clever, sharp, developer-friendly attorney rather than talking more acquisition. And I might add - Down stream from where the devastating flooding already occured. Maybe it's not related but it certainly calls into question our priorities. And that's precisely why a lot of us look at this whole thing as a legal perversion of the OST itself. Are you seeing my point yet? I could go on a little further about a specific lot near my home that effects my family's well being - but I don't have all the facts on that one yet. Once again - If the BOE asked me for another $20-30 a year or so in taxes - I'll gladly allow them to fulfill their responsibilities to our kids and turf all you want - at a minimum fix the damn fields anyhow. But that's me - right? The "Democrap" (as Mr. Brown calls me). The "tax and spend" liberal that others would spout.

Robyn, some fair points, however, keep in mind that what you are advocating maintains the status quo. Those fields are only for football games. Yes, we can improve the grass if they stay on top of it, no doubt. But that means that the boys and girls soccer, field hockey, band and gym classes continue to use lower lying fields that get very swampy very quickly. That means the football team practices in the outfield areas of both baseball fields so the baseball fields have dirt in left and right fields respectively. There is a domino effect to all other sports that these fields are under utilized. I'm just saying that turf resolves those issues. You may still be opposed to it and that is fine. I just want the complete picture presented here. I realize you don't care that our neighbors provide their students with the best playing facilities and we don't but I ask you, why don't you care?

Robyn - Chris (and Mr. Crawford on Sunday) pointed out the inadequacy of the foundaition (soil) at the Hills to sustain the grass - but I'm not an expert on grass or the seed use etc. mentioned above. Point taken Chris on the juggling act with regard to usage (we have the same problem at the Smith/PAL complex). Has there ever been a discussion (Chris?) of holding games at Jannerone for the price of bigger grandstands there?

Chris - we don't live in Mountain Lakes. Anyone looking for "the best" should consider buying there-they have a lot of upscale amenities.The rest of us who picked Parsippany, because it was somewhat affordable can stay here and make do. It's a crappy economy, it's not time to throw out the Ford and buy the Ferrari. Many people are not getting raises or worse are unemployed. We have real problems to deal with here and drainage is a big one-we need more open space, more trees, more grass and more landscape that sucks up water, not plastic grass. Sports are important. I played them, too and my kids do, too. But, to me, I a) don't believe in poisoning the earth with any more plastic, chemical-filled junk than I have to b) generally believe that elbow grease (i.e. fixing the fields in this case) is often the best solution. c) think it's laughable that we're talking about improving playing games when our academic scores are not stellar d) Open space is about preserving land, not fixing a school field.Rutgers has an incredible agriculture department and offers expertise free of charge-have an expert come, evaluate the soil and present some solutions that don't require resorting to Rubbermaid.

I'm embarrassed to say I live in this town. The Seitz fiasco. The mayor writing a letter to support a druggie. And, now plastic fields used with OPEN SPACE money.

I feel like I've landed on a strange planet where people walk on their heads!

My thoughts exactly. We have hired people all along, who were there to maintain these things (maintenance people, people in charge of maintenance people). What happened? When the fence first starts to rust, you do a touch up, so it doesn't get worse. When a little section breaks you repair that piece. Immediately.

Is this how people maintain their homes? Wait until it all completely falls apart, then hire someone else to fix it?

@ Enough already

I don't know who you are but I am TJ Ritter and you can reach out to me at tj_ritter@yahoo.com if you wish.

You stated "We can all agree that Mr. Crawford Sunday parade was a charade." That is an ad hominem attack and is unwarranted. We are trying to have civil discourse here and keep with facts. The discourse on Sunday's walk was very civil and you can ask the gentleman from the Patch who was there. He is unbiased and he also wanted to have pull quotes from FOD Committee members as well.

Were you aware that there was a shared services agreement between the BOE and Town that lasted for approximately ten years? We will include the OPRAed docs on the website

www.parsippanyunite.com

We believe the town was to perform a certain amount and type of maintenance for all school fields to include cutting of the grass. The SSA ended this past December I believe.

You also said the project "that requires no new taxes!!!" That is actually not the case. Based upon the current proposal the fields will have to be returfed during the time the bond is still being paid. There will have to be taxes raised to pay for that.

And to use your verbiage "we can all agree" that when a politician sayd "no new taxes" or "this will not result in a tax increase" it is a sure bet that it is untrue.

Please reach out to me so we can affect positive change.

Wishing you the best.

I disagree. I have no vested interest in the game, not a staunch democrat nor republican. The right thing to do is go out with a clipboard and take inventory to see what needs to be done in a logical and detailed manner. To me, the school board was never really responsible for maintenance-that's like saying Obama is in charge of the White House garden. We have maintenance people who are there every day staring at these things, they have bosses and their bosses have bosses. As things break, they need to be fixed, bit by bit. Why didn't they?

Julia - I've read your columns before and I appreciate your insight. I have read positive and negative things about turf. What are your thoughts in terms of health impacts and ecological impacts (especially in light of our specific landscape)? Are there any?

Enough A. - ask the Mayor. My understanding is that there was to be storage onsite of vehicles (EMS?) and public meeting rooms in the house as well as offices for a particular department. As far as public meeting rooms - as a former Scout Den leader and generally involved citizen - when the library is so booked - it's great to have more meeting space. It's really a shame that you find out about this so far after the fact - if you wanted to chime in.

TJ..fyi..Denville doesn't even have 1 HS. They are a K-8 district only. They're kids go to Morris Knolls, a regional HS.

Just curious how our towns compare to the same surrounding towns on walking and biking trails. Can I see the link to that analysis too?

Beth - these are beautiful shots - and something to look forward to - but can a caption be added on the method of financing? That's the biggest issue.

I don't have any website to show pictures but I could easily link trail maps for you if you have any doubt to the facts I present.
Here are the towns (fields) you present on that website as a comparison:
Dover - no town maintained trails,
Boonton - maintained trails in Tourne, Pyramid Mountain, Johanson Park, Griffith Park, Maser Park and Oak Rd Woods
Hackettstown - Allamuchy SP, Stevens SP, Pequest WMA, Morris Canal,
Roxbury - full listing here, http://www.roxburynj.us/documents/31/ROXBURY%20TRAILS%20PLAN.pdf
Morristown - Jockey Hollow, Morristown NP, Lewis Morris, Loantaka, Sherman Hoffan Sanctuaries, Patriots Path, Frelinghuysen Arboretum, Washington Valley, Fort Nonsense, Speedwell and Deer Haven Park
Mendham - 17 different parks with designated hikes, http://hikemendham.org/
Delbarton - private school, no comparison
Chatham - they play at Cougar Field, a town field, it would be the same as us playing at Jannerone. But for comparison of trails The Great Swamp, Passaic River Park
Livingston - 15 township properties with maintained trails in addition to 11 other properties with maintained trails by other entities
Madison - Madison Rec Center, Memorial Park, Zuck Arboetum
DePaul - private school
Morris Catholic - private school
Randolph - 7 specific parks with a full trail system that encompasses the entire town. http://www.randolphnj.org/parks_and_recreation/trail_system/

ALL OF THESE ARE NOT INCLUDING BIKING TRAILS OR BIKING LANES THROUGH THESE TOWNS.

Parsippany has 1 (ONE) township owned park with trails. There is also one county park with blazed trails.
We are the largest town in Morris County and it is a shame and an embarrassment that a town of our size does not have any biking lanes, bike trails or many more miles of hiking trails for the residents.

Beth,
I can understand your frustration and sarcasm, it may not be best placed towards me but that is fine. I do not think I have ever been rude or sarcastic to you or others either here or in person. It is possible I have and I am sorry if that is the case.
With that being said your point is well made. I can see the way people try to twist events to try to make their point.

My issue is with the financing of the fields. Not the installation of turf, the size of the lights, the brightness of the lights, the volume of the children, or even who knew what and when they knew it. I personally do not feel we need to use Open Space Funds to finance new turf fields.

Beth,
I addressed this a bit differently in another thread. Without getting into too much detail - I love to tell you a little story how I politely asked the mayor 3 times (when he was a councilman) to support an anti-corruption measure that I was promoting with a statewide good government organization back in 2009, and how the mayor ignored me until I walked into Town Hall with 1300 signatures - forcing the issue to be voted on, and that he disingenously voted for it prior to the election - then after he was elected - summarily dismantled it with the help of Mr. Inglesino for purely partisan reasons (but that's ancient history ;-) The difference was that the only "backdoor" advance I made on this was a polite phone call to Mr. Cesaro to ask for support (ironically who also voted for then dismantled it after his election). All else was done in public - which oddly enough - is some sort of anathma to these people. They literally take offense to having a public debate. But I'll stand by that strategy forever - as I think building a consensus publicly is always preferable to something prepped and launched from behind a closed door. I'm not sure who it was in the FOD group that first said "don't tell anyone about this yet" and ingrained it as the prepartory strategy - but I think that culture handicapped this effort in a bad way. It bred a lot of resentment from those on the outside looking in.

Jennifer - it's not sarcasm; it's reality. I have always listened politely, been receptive to peoples concerns, and tried to be as polite as possible on these forums and at meetings while watching some great people get attacked and dragged through the mud.

When you say you haven't been rude or sarcastic then what did you mean by? "Also, I think we should look at what cars our neighbors are driving and make sure we have exactly the same cars (or better). It is all about comparing ourselves to our neighbors. Great lessons for our children." To me you are sarcastically implying that the proponents of the FOD are not teaching their children good life lessons. Again, can you see how easily your words got twisted?

On a more peaceful note, I appreciate where you are coming from in regards to the funding and, on this, we will have to agree to disagree. For me, personally, it's still my tax dollars whether it comes from here or there.

Beth, I used those words to try to make a point but can see your side. In addition the written word in either emails or forums can be twisted easily.

I will use this analogy for the funding.

If I needed a new car I would not raid my 401K to pay for it. Though it is all my revenue that pays either for my 401K or a new car there are certain budgets and funds that are to be used for certain projects. If I took all my retirement money just to pay for things that I want today then me and my family would be in worse shape when we want to retire.

As you stated, I would much rather have peaceful conversations and exchange of ideas. More information can be shared through intelligent dialogue than insults, sarcasm and lies.

I would be very willing to help at any time in either trying to fix the current field or come up with other financing options that do not include giving up control of the fields and using Open Space Fund monies. As I think you know I have 2 children currently at the Hills and will continue to have athletes going through the Hills for many years to come.

Rick - obviously you don't know me, so you shouldn't say you know when I am being sarcastic. I was simply pointing out how someone with good intentions can get accused of wrong doing in the blink of an eye.