Quantcast
Channel: Hefkervelt
Viewing all 12600 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

Veteran's Day -Lakewood Municipal Offices Closed

November 11, 2016, 2:40 am
$
0
0
Today is Veteran's Day - Municipal Offices Closed. Lakewood Public Schools are closed as well because of the NJEA convention
↧
Search

Lakewood shabbaton- Experience Lakewood; 'A City Built On Altruism'

November 11, 2016, 5:41 am
$
0
0
Ohr Sameach mentors mission is hosting a Shabbaton in Lakewood this week for 50 students who will Spend an unforgettable weekend in Lakewood, New Jersey; home to the largest Jewish Yeshivah in North America where more than six thousand students engage in all day Talmud study. 
Tentative Weekend Schedule HERE 



Thursday Nov. 10
7:00pmOpening Dinner & Volunteer Food Packing Activity @ Bikur Cholim of Lakewood
Welcome by OS Rabbi & Rabbi Yehudah Kaszirer
10:00pmDiscussion Groups at Rabbi Avi Cassel’s home
11:15pmStudents Check In To Hosts

Friday Nov. 11
7:55amShachris-(morning prayer service)
8:45amBus departs to Madison Title
9:00amMadison Title – breakfast/executive discussion groups
10:10amBus departs to BMG
10:30amWelcome by Rabbi Yeruchom Olshin-Dean of BMG, Tour of BMG by Rabbi Leibel Karmel
11:30amLecture by OS Rabbi
12:15pmBus departs BMG
12:30pmTour of SCHI
1:45pmPizza & Tour of Hatzalah Emergency Responders Headquarters By Committeeman Meir Lichtenstein. Address by Mayor Menashe Miller
2:45pmBus departs Hatzalah
3:00pmDown Time, Check-in to hosts to prepare for Shabbat

Friday Night
4:05pmMincha (afternoon prayer service). Intro to Shabbat-by OS Rabbi. Festive Kabbalat Shabbat service followed by Maariv (evening prayer service)
4:28pmCandle Lighting
4:43pmSunset
Friday evening meal at "Super Hosts."
8:30pmOneg Shabbos Tisch with OS Rabbi and Rabbi Friedman. Enjoy singing, story-telling, delicious food and inspiring discussions

Shabbat Nov. 12
8:30amShachris (morning prayer service)
9:30amPrayer Workshop given by OS Rabbi
10:40amKiddush (refreshments)
11:10amLearning session students/mentors
12:00pmDepart to hosts for Shabbos day meal
3:10pmClass by OS Rabbi
4:10pmMincha (afternoon prayer service) followed by Festive Third Meal with OS Rabbi and Rabbi
Simcha Bunim Cohen followed by Maariv (evening prayer service) and Carlebach style Havdalah

Motzei Shabbos/ Saturday Evening
7:45pmBus Departs to Melava Malka From TBD
8:15pmGala Melava Malka Event hosted by Ner Avrohom
Address by Dr. Rich Roberts, Former Chairman and CEO of URL Pharma
11:00pmThe ‘Kosher Gym’-pool, hot tub, exercise machines
1:00amReturn To Hosts

Sunday Nov. 13
7:55amShachris (morning prayer service) Say goodbye to your host & bring luggage with you
8:45ambus departs to Lakewood Cheder
9:00amBreakfast with the CEO’s & Tour of Lakewood Cheder
10:30amBus leaves Lakewood Cheder
11:00amTour of Tiferes Devorah L’Kallah
12:00pmbus leaves to BMG
12:30pmLearning Session students/mentors
1:45pmDepart BMG
2:00pmFarewell Banquet-TBD
Farewell Address-Rebbe Hill
4:00pmGourmet Glatt Plaza
5:00pmBuses To The Airports

↧
↧

You dont need the Shabbos project to invite someone

November 11, 2016, 8:02 am
$
0
0
Even without a official Shabbos project in Lakewood, there are still individuals and mishpachos in our midst that can use a friendly invite for a shabbos meal. There are kiruv opportunities right in our own backyard. They may not look like it but there are many people and families living locally who are waiting for someone to reach out to them to acknowledge and accept them. There are yeshiva bochurim, singles working in local stores, single parents, and others if you just reach out will be more than happy to join you for a meal.Next week is the parsha of Hachnosas Orchim if you really want perhaps guest will show up at your door.
↧

Zmanim for Lakewood ערב שבת פרשת לך לך

November 11, 2016, 10:01 am
$
0
0
Friday, November 11, 2016 / י'חשון תשע"ז
Shabbos is early
Licht Bentching 4:25 pm
Shkiah 4:43
Aisle 9 open up to 1 hr before shabbos

weather high of 52°  low of 34° mainly sunny skies
↧

Melava Malka Parshas Lech Lecha Lakewood

November 12, 2016, 3:44 pm
$
0
0
-Rav Basch of Torah Temima will be speaking this Motzei shabbos  7:15 upstairs   in the Bais Horaah  4th and madison.
- Carlbach Kumzitz Melava Malka DR. Rothkopf 34 Caranetta 8:30 pm
-Melava Malka Veretzky Rebbe at B'M Shemen Lemincha 2 Milano drive 9:00 pm
-Vort Hachoson shmuel Leib Dick ben Rav Mordechai to Kallah bas Rav Yisroel Bentzion Schustal at Yeshiva Kneses Bais Levi 831 Coral Avenue
- Yeshiva Ohr Samayach Shabbaton  Chavrusa Program 9:00 pm followed by Melava Malka at KNA Roberts shul
↧
↧

Video: Lakewood township committee meeting 11/10/16

November 12, 2016, 4:44 pm
$
0
0
Tough questions asked Public has had enough!
12:24 Why is the zoning board looking to restrict First amendment activist form recording the meetings
24:15 conflicts of interests- replace zoning board members
48:10 Dont blame only the developers, The Govt should enforce the laws
55:25 why do private citizens have to pay for attorneys to uphold the law 
59:20 HH "Its killing the town" Get off the committee
↧

PHOTOS: Lakewood Chaveirim members help family retrieve diamond ring that went missing in a kitchen.

November 13, 2016, 6:15 am
↧

Lakewood tops list of top 25 Trumpiest town in NJ

November 13, 2016, 11:14 am
$
0
0
A study by NJ advance media of nj towns with a population of 10,000 or more shows, Lakewood, Voted for Donald Trump by the highest victory margin over 50%. NJ.com reports Lakewood which is also the town with over 10,000 residents that voted for Trump by the highest margin, is home to a large Orthodox Jewish population which has historically been solidly Republican.
Trump towns also have low percentages of foreign-born populations, according to Census figures. Lakewood and Clark Township in Union, with an Hispanic population of about 10 percent, are the towns with the highest foreign-born
populations to make the list. Read more at NJ. com
↧
Search

Oif Simchas Lkwd Nov 13 2016

November 13, 2016, 4:09 pm
$
0
0
-Vort: Hachosson Moshe Bernstein (Monsey) to Hakallah Shannie Grunwald at Ateres Yeshaya hall, earlier today. 
-Chasunah- Halberg- Kleinbard at Ateres Chana hall Bais Faiga
-Wedding- Frei- Nussbaum at Lake Terrace hall Lakewood
↧
↧

LHA anouncement

November 14, 2016, 3:00 am
$
0
0
Please be advised that the Lakewood Housing Authority is no longer accepting applications for, or administering the family housing program formerly known as the JFK Apartments. If you applied for family housing with the LHA prior to October 1, 2016 and were on our waiting list, your information has been forwarded to Chambers Crescent, LLC, the new administrators of the program.  Please contact them to find out your status on the waiting list, application changes or any other information.

Chambers Crescent, LLC.
C/O CIS Management, LLC
1970 Brunswick Avenue, Suite 100
Lawrenceville, NJ 08648
609-656-4205
↧

Shiva info

November 14, 2016, 6:21 am
$
0
0
Shiva for R' Aron Krawiec z"l- 
Mishpachas Krawiac is sitting Shiva at 2 Dove Lane in Pine River village Lakewood
Shachris 7:15  mincha 4:20 Maariv 8:30 
They will be getting up from shiva Thursday morning

Shiva for R' Chaim Eluzer Zelcer z"l- 
Mishpachas Zelcer is sitting Shiva at 1 Engelberg Terrace off Brook rd
Shachris 7:00 and 8:00
Mincha-Marriv 5:15
Getting up Thursday morning
↧

LFD Board meeting Nov 14

November 14, 2016, 7:30 am
$
0
0
 Board of Fire Commissioners Fire District No. 1
316 River Avenue Lakewood, New Jersey 08701
MEETING AGENDA November 14, 2016 7:30 p.m.



1. Call to Order
9. Correspondence:
 10. Building and Equipment
 12. Fire Chiefs Report:
 13. Fire District Administrator Report
 14. Standing Committees:
15. Old Business
16. New Business:

1. Motion to authorize HGAC Procurement
2. Motion to retain the services of a Website Administrator
3. Motion to enroll in Deferred Compensation Plan with AXA
4. Motion to hire Administrative Clerk (Provisionally)
17. Solicitor’s Report- Jay C. Sendzik, Esq.
 18. Chairman’s Report- David Mizrahi
↧

Lakewood Zoning Board to restrict and limit recordings at Meetings

November 14, 2016, 8:30 am
$
0
0
While mayor Miller said that he has no problem with the microphones or cameras at township meetings, the zoning board is attempting to stop the public from hearing what they are doing. A Letter sent to First amendment activist from the Zoning Board attorney was posted on politicsoc website. In the letter the attorney says he will recommend guidelines for public recording such as, only one video apparatus that must be in the back of the room in order to "protect attorney client privacy".
 Following up on last zoning board meeting meeting where an attorney claimed that a microphone at the podium violates his attorney client privilege. The Lakewood zoning board will adopt an ordinance at this Monday's meeting to tighten the rules on the pubic recordings of the proceedings. These new rules will make it more difficult to film at public zoning board meetings. More so its looking like an attempt to curb First amendment activist who provides a wonderful service to the Lakewood community by recording township meetings and uploading the videos to YouTube. Read more at Politicsoc.com



Letter from Board attorney sent to First Amendment Activist posted on Politicsoc.com
Add caption

↧
↧

Response from First Amendment Activist to Lakewood zoning board attorney

November 14, 2016, 12:06 pm
$
0
0
First Amendment activist responds to the Zoning board attorney regarding new guidelines to limit recordings at board meetings letter posted on the Politicsoc website. HERE
Dear Mr. Dasti,
In your letter dated 11/7/2016 referred to as Lakewood ZB – Video and taping issues GL-25368 you refer to the issue that arose at the 10/31/16 zoning board meeting. At that meeting, Abraham Penzer cited concerns regarding the precision of my microphone causing interference with communications with his client. He claimed that this would cause a violation of attorney client privilege.
Mr. Penzer incorrectly cited U.S. v Schenck to support his argument that my first amendment rights to record are somehow limited to the extent that they limit his ability to talk to his client within close proximity of the podium. Notwithstanding the fact that the township has a microphone on the podium as well, Mr. Penzer’s attempt to apply U.S. v Schenck is incorrect. In U.S. v Schenck, the ruling provided limitation to the first amendment in a case where “the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent”. It is obvious that there is no clear and present danger to anyone in this case and that the application of case law was incorrect. Additionally, in 1969, Brandenburg v. Ohio established that the “clear and present danger” metric be replaced with an “imminent lawless action’ test. The current standard based on the Supreme Court of the United States Brandenburg v. Ohio required “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”.
Furthermore, Mr. Penzer could easily step a few feet away from the podium where the microphone would not detect anything that he says. Mr. Penzer claimed – “He has a right to protected speech to repeat anything as a first amendment right, but I have a right to talk to my client alone”. Since these meetings are usually crowded and there are many people seated all around the room, by Mr. Penzer’s claim for a need to talk alone he should need to anyway leave the room or retreat to a private corner to protect his clients rights especially considering that the township microphone is located on the podium. As a matter of fact, at the 10/31/16 meeting he was asked precisely that by the sergeant on scene – “So you can’t just step away from the podium and talk to your client?”
In NJ, Taurus v. Borough of Pine Hill and Maurice River case both supported the right of citizens to film at public meetings provided that those filming do not interrupt the conduct of the meeting.
It’s very clear that in the 10/31/16 incident, there was no valid claim to Mr. Penzer’s argument to limit my right to record considering that there is no existing ordinance from the board pertaining to video recording restrictions. As a matter of fact, it’s fair to say that any interruption of the conduct of the meeting was caused by Mr. Penzer – my cameras are quiet, unobtrusive, and usually cause no issues. In this case is was Mr. Penzer who used a poor argument with no legal standing to cause a scene leading to the letter that you penned to me on 11/7/16 regarding this matter.
Now that Mr. Penzer’s argument is out of the way, let’s discuss Taurus v. Borough of Pine Hill. Several possible negative consequences are mentioned regarding distracting judges or jurors etc. but no mention is made of any possible issues with the microphone recording conversations held in the middle of a public meeting hall.
Some key quotes from that ruling are:
The common law therefore has evolved to embrace additional means for documenting public proceedings not fewer….(finding that common law is flexible and can be adapted to advancing technology)… (“The essence of the common law is its adaptability to changing circumstances”). Sudol, supra, *1044 emphasized the need for the law to adapt to that recording evolution, and, in doing so, illustrated how the common law applies common sense:
Suppose, for example, that the [local public body] had attempted to prohibit the use of pen, or pencil and paper, at the sessions held by them; such a measure would at once strike anyone as being
an improper means of exerting official power, and the surprise and dissatisfaction generated by such an arbitrary rule would undoubtedly lead to a prohibition by the courts of such a foolish attempt to exercise governmental power. “The plain and simple truth is that in today’s modern world, the state of the art is such that has become a part of the very fabric of modern life. To foreclose its use where the democratic process is complete, as at a public meeting, would not only be unrealistic but irrational.”
Although some citizens may be fearful of video cameras, we find that consideration insufficient to deny the right to videotape. “Further, no right of privacy protects a citizen’s public comments. “Those who attend [public] meetings . . . fully realize that their comments and remarks are being made in a public forum.” Mitchell v. Bd. ofEduc, 113 A.D.2d 924, 925, 493 N. KS. 2d 826 (1985). As such, “[t]he argument that members of the public should be protected from the use of their words, and that they have [a] privacy interest in their own comments, is therefore wholly specious.” Ibid. Taken as a whole, the benefits of video recording far outweigh the perceived drawbacks, and the modern use of video cameras buttresses the common law right to videotape.”
The Appellate Division correctly noted that the common law right to videotape is “neither absolute nor unqualified.” Tarus, supra, 381 N.J.Super. at 424, 886 A.2d 1056. Citizens are not permitted to disrupt meetings with their recording * 1048 equipment. Accordingly, public bodies may impose reasonable guidelines to ensure that the recording of meetings does not disrupt the business of the body or other citizens’ right of access. Cf Nevens, supra, 44 Cal. Rptr. at 52 (finding that city council’s restrictions on common law right to videotape were “too arbitrary and capricious, too restrictive and unreasonable”). In Maurice River 11, supra, the Appellate Division held that a public body could implement “guidelines designed to regulate and control reasonably the videotaping of its public proceedings.” 193 NJ Super. at 494, 475 A.2d 59. In all circumstances, such guidelines must be neutrally adopted and administered, and limited in scope to the stated purpose of preventing disruption. Ibid.; see, e. g., Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 39, § 23B (conferring right to videotape public meetings to any person in attendance “provided[] that in such recording there is no active interference with the conduct of the meeting”); Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 15.263 (stating that right to videotape is subject to “reasonable rules and regulations in order to minimize the possibility of disrupting the meeting”).
The guidelines can “include the number and type of cameras permitted, the positioning of the cameras, the activity and location of the operator, lighting and other items deemed necessary to maintain order and to prevent unnecessary intrusion into the proceedings.” Maurice River 11, supra, 193 NJSuper. at 493, 475 A.2d 59.
Reasonable restrictions may also include those designed “to preserve the orderly conduct of a meeting by controlling noise levels [and] spatial requirements . . . L] to safeguard public facilities against damage . . . to the meeting hall’s electrical system…
Therefore, we’ve established that Mr. Penzer’s concern is irrelevant and inconsequential in regard to any matter related to microphones. Any guidelines passed by the board in an attempt to satisfy his particular concerns or mannerisms in client interaction would not meet the litmus test of being “neutrally adopted and administered, and limited in scope to the stated purpose of preventing disruption” nor would it be warranted as the camera and microphones unobtrusive presence in no way causes “the possibility of disrupting the meeting” or “to disrupt meetings with their recording”.
Furthermore, attempt to limit the number of devices to one are unreasonable considering that my 2 cameras are both necessary to accomplish the goal of unobtrusively capturing both the lectern and the board members and while satisfying “embrace additional means for documenting public proceedings not fewer”. My cameras are small and do not present any disruption whatsoever other than that caused by Mr. Penzer’s attempt to use a fallacious argument to stall an application that had an opposing lawyer.
My microphone is no more sensitive than any other. Feel free to inspect it at the Nov 14th meeting. It is a standard recording device arguably not proven to be any more sensitive than the township microphone. Additionally, a restriction of one microphone per person would not preclude a second individual either connected or unconnected with me to set up their own personal camera in lieu of my 2nd camera thus negating any benefit that this ordinance would seek to derive for the proceedings. Additionally, I or any individual would be free to sit in any of the number of seats near the podium and use a microphone on my body to record the proceedings (and according to Mr. Penzer violating his right to have private conversations in a public setting). In the event that the board would chose to pass such ordinances, it would clearly be aimed at restricting my access to properly record the public proceedings without using other such means to accomplish the same goals thus negating any perceived benefit to be derived from the ordinances.
Your letter states an intent to recommend an ordinance that would require any and all video cameras to be placed only in the rear of the room. The room is large and noisy and the townships PA system is poor. This would only allow viewers to have a view of the backs of the people presenting at the podium which is where the majority of minutes of the meeting are generated. This would also not allow for a proper audio recording of the proceedings. This would clearly not meet the metric of “embrace additional means for documenting public proceedings not fewer” nor is it in line with the growing technological age where the public desires more views, angles and higher resolution so as to fully appreciate and review the content of the public meetings.
Please consider this when creating proposed guidelines that you intend to forward to me before 11/14/16 for my review and comment. The same way you took Mr. Penzer’s argument seriously, I urge you to strongly consider whether or not my 2 small cameras really represent a disruption to the meeting and whether or not the board has actual legal standing to place an unreasonable restriction that limits my ability to use modern technology to properly capture the proceedings. While it is clearly reasonable to restrict 5-10 obtrusively placed cameras that people are tripping over, my 2 small cameras and my one microphone cause no reasonable disruptions to the meeting and should clearly be allowed.
Very truly yours,
S. Klein
↧

Tonight: Lakewood Zoning board meetinng

November 14, 2016, 12:31 pm
$
0
0
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT  NOVEMBER 14, 2016  AGENDA  7:00 pm   
TBL Agenda HERE                  
Appeal # 3989 – 155 Somerset LLC, 155 Somerset Avenue, Block 189 Lot 142, R-10 zone. To construct a duplex requiring variances. Zero lot line subdivision requested.
Appeal # 3991 – Aaron Finkelstein, 121 Somerset Avenue. Block 189.05 Lot 148, R-10 zone. To construct a duplex on 10,145 square feet where 12,000 is required.
Appeal # 3993 – Forest Haven, New Central Avenue & Hillside Blvd. Block 11.12 Lots 1-3 & Block 11.13 Lot 1, R-15 zone.  Use variance to construct 10-2 story multi- family dwellings with basements.

Appeal # 3967 – Cong. Maalos Hatorah, Block 1159 Lots 35-38, 86 & 89, Block 1159.04 Lots
                            25,26, 28, 29 & 30. R-20 zone. Use variance for duplexes.

Appeal # 3996 – Congregation Maalos Hatorah, Inc. Block 1159 &1159.04, R-20 zone.
                            Preliminary and final major subdivision with Use variance for mixed use
                            housing project.

Appeal # 3997 – Casa Nova Today, LLC, 323 Second Street, Block 91 Lot 14 R-OP zone. To
                             construct a retail/office building.

Appeal # 3998 – David Holtz, Block 338 Lot 3, James Street & Grantwood Avenue, R-12 zone
                             Subdivision and use variance for 2 duplexes and 4 zero lot line lots.

Appeal # 3999 – Mordechai Kreitman, 5 Buttell Avenue, Block 418 Lot 2, R-10 zone.  Duplex
                            on an undersized lot required 12,000 – proposed 10,600.

Appeal # 4002 –Block 458 LLC, Cross Street & Nassau Street – Block 457, 458, 466, 467, 468,
                           469, R-20C.  Use variance to allow duplex housing and an educational campus.

Appeal # 4000 – Faraday Estates, West Cross Street & Faraday Ave, Block 508 Lots 2 & 3
                R-20 zone. To construct 30 single family homes on undersized lot.

Appeal # 4003 – Drake Development, 1101 West Cross Street & 54 Drake Rd Block 25l.02
                            Lots 90 & 98.  To construct single family homes on undersized lots.

Appeal # 4004 – Mark Properties, Pine Blvd, Block 429 Lot 2, R-12 zone.  To construct a
                             single family home on an undersized lot.

Appeal # 4005 – Mark Properties, New Hampshire Ave, Block 1248.19, 1248.20, 1248.24,
                            1248.22 Lots 224, 226, Block 1248.21, Lots 194, 223. R-20 zone.  Use
                            variance for duplexes.

Resolutions

Appeal # 3947A – Elad Gebus , Cherry St & No. Oakland, Bl 189 Lots 128, 180 & 181 R-10 zone. Requesting amended resolution to include 35% lot coverage where 30% is required.
Appeal # 3988 – Elyon Capital LLC, 110 E. Harvard Street, Block 227 Lot 3.01 R-10 zone. Resolution to approve single family home with variances.
Appeal # 3994 – Barry Schreiber, 1417 Tanglewood Lane, Block 25.08 Lot 3, R-12 zone.
Resolution to approve variance to construct a single family home with 10 foot side setbacks.
Appeal # 3940A – Yosef Weiss, Clover Street, Block 536 Lot 181, R-40 zone. Subdivision to
create 3 fee simple semi-attached lots.
Appeal # 3977 – Bostonia Equity, LLC. Massachusetts & Cross Street, Block 440 Lots 6, 7.01
& 7.02, R-20/12 zone.  Resolution to deny a use variance for duplexes.

↧
Search

LUAC meeting tonight

November 14, 2016, 2:27 pm
$
0
0
Lakewood Utilities Advisory Committee (LUAC) Meeting tonight Mon, November 14, 7:15pm – 8:15pm at the Municipal Building - Room A.

↧

Oif Simches Lakewood Nov 14 2016

November 14, 2016, 5:54 pm
$
0
0
Chasunah- Kanarek- Zeilberger at Neemas Hachaim hall
Chasunah: Kaplan- Jacobovits at Ateres Reva hall 
Wedding: Sayagh- Amoyelle Lake Terrace hall
Wedding:: Eisenberg- Wolf at Ateres Chana hall in Bais Faiga

Video: At a wedding in Lakewood last night
      
↧
↧

Kosherfest 2016 Opens Today

November 15, 2016, 4:48 am
$
0
0
Secaucus NJ – When the 28th edition of Kosherfest opens Tuesday November 15th for its annual two-day showcase of the best and newest in kosher foods, there will be a great deal of innovation and change at the show. To begin with, there will be more than 90 new exhibitors who will add to the impressive product mix already displayed at the Meadowlands Exposition Center
355 Plaza Dr, Secaucus, New Jersey 07094 . Of note will be the many new pavilions and booths from overseas, including Spain, Japan, Israel, Canada, the Czech Republic, Korea, South Africa, Bulgaria, Chile, Turkey, the UK, and
Mexico. Judging by the response to the New Product Competition, an estimated 300 new items will be introduced at the show. Even before the doors open Tuesday, there will be the Keynote address by Menachem Lubinsky on “Kosher’s Transition to the Digital Age.”   This will be followed by a special breakfast and presentation by the Israel Export Institute, attended by prominent Israeli representatives. Awards will be distributed to the New Product Winners, led by Parvella from Italy that won the Best in Show. Also generating quite a bit of excitement is the New Kosher Masters Competition with the finals taking place at 1 p.m. on Wednesday, the second day of the show. More than 6000 people are expected to be at the show as either exhibitors or visitors in what will be the largest show in Kosherfest’s 28-year history.
↧

Lakewood Zoning board backs off imposing recording guidelines, leaves it up to the township committee to decide

November 15, 2016, 7:21 am
$
0
0
At last nights ZB meeting/TBL
At the zoning board last night the ZB attorney and board chairman reiterated they are not camera shy and have nothing against anyone recording the meetings, they understand its anyone's right to come and record either with a video or microphone and anyone is invited to do so including First amendment activist. Originally the board was going to adopt new recording guidelines that will allow taping of meetings while at the same time protecting attorney client privilege which is the opinion of the board attorney.  
The board backed off at the end after discussing (was contacted) the issue with the Lakewood township attorney and decided to let the matter be dealt with by the township committee. If the committee feels the need to set guidelines it can adopt an ordnance to implement guidelines and restrictions.
HT-via comment.

↧

Video: Ocean county board of Elections

November 15, 2016, 10:00 am
$
0
0
-3:05- Some Lakewood votes not counted because of issues with ballots placed in the wrong bag in a red supply bag or not properly sealed, Bored worker error causes ballots not to be counted.
- 46:05- Lakewood BOE 2 year term- election committee will count the votes but up to a judge to decide on it.
↧
Viewing all 12600 articles
Browse latest View live
Search