Abstain – To abstain from participation or voting must not be confused with recusing oneself. To abstain means that an individual chooses not to participate in a discussion or a vote. It is a personal choice. An example: Joe felt he did not know enough about the issue to vote either yes or know. So he decided to abstain from voting.

In relatively small municipalities like Teaneck with approximately 39,000 residents, it is necessary for elected and appointed officials to be extremely aware of the potential for conflicts of interest. Local business owners landlords, employers, employees, doctors, lawyers – just about anyone or earns money, borrows money, pays money, has family or even close friendship relationships may decide to run for election to the Council or the Board of Education or may apply to serve on a commission or advisory board. If they win election or are appointed, they must be acutely aware of any activity or relationship that may conflict with a decision they are asked to make in their official position.

The Teaneck Planning Board and Council have been debating, arguing, voting and then going back and doing it all over again about one specific ordinance. Here is the story:

Will Planning Board reverse its Outdoor Cafes rejection?

On August 25, the Planning Board held a meeting at which the six attending members carefully considered again whether the introduced Ordinance 20-2022 to approve Outdoor Cafes & Parklets was consistent with the Township Masterplan. Review of Ordinance 20-2022 was literally the only item on that meeting’s agenda. In contrast to every other PB meeting where the PB has evaluated consistency with the Master Plan no Planner was present and the ordinance was introduced/explained to the Board by Councilman Kaplan.

As the meeting proceeded, it became abundantly clear that the Board viewed the ordinance very negatively. A if not the primary reason was Board’s concern that the Ordinance as drafted would likely apply to only one block in the Township. That block of retail on W. Englewood is largely owned and/or operated by Deputy Mayor Elie Katz.

In the end, the Planning Board adopted by vote of 4-1-1 (4 yes, 1 no, 1 abstention) a resolution explicitly stating that the introduced Ordinance is inconsistent with the Master Plan.

Every Voices reader deserves to watch/listen to the 6-minute video where the PB sharpens its focus on how the ordinance is too location-specific and not applicable town-wide and then follows Chair Bodner in deciding that the entire proposed ordinance it is not consistent with the Master Plan Click Here.

The Council, at its next meeting (9/20), apparently agreed to table – not vote – on Ordinance 20-2022, the Cafes ordinance! That, at least, is what the website’s “ordinances archive” reports (Click Here)– although the draft minutes reflect no vote whatsoever on any of the introduced ordinances that night. Here is what the website’s ordinance archive says happened to the ordinance to which the PB said no! So – Bye-Bye Ordinance 20-2022?

In the meantime, the agenda for Thursday’s (12/8) Planning Board meeting will include another PB round to review the “new” ordinance’s consistency with the Master Plan. Will the PB stand by its convictions – or will it be pulled as so many recent PB agenda items have been?

In any event, readers, do spend 6 minutes (again Click Here) with the earlier PB video – because the 57-2022 Outdoor Cafes Ordinance will surely, as scheduled, be on the Council’s 12/13 agenda for a public hearing and final vote to accept or reject.

In future issues Teaneck Voices will discuss further conflicts of interest that are occurring and that might occur in out township government. Like why does DM Elie Katz abstain or just not vote on the township’s Bill List? What is his connection to the money that the township pays to it vendors and other accounts receivable? Hint: do the identities of the election contributors suggest an answer. We residents deserve to know!