News Alert
Montclair Man Admits to Stealing $82K From Glen…

Susswein's Campaign Manager Questions Turner's Support For Pre-K

David Grill says he's worried about the institution's future


Another 24 hours brings another avalanche of emails and press releases from the various candidates and slates running for office in Tuesday's local election.

From David Grill, campaign manager for mayoral candidate Harvey Susswein, who is leading the For Montclair slate, comes a letter sent out to friends and supporters related to the Montclair Community Pre-K.

An Open Letter to all Montclair Community Pre-K Parents, past and present:

As one of the founding board members of Montclair Community Pre-K and its first board president, I am distressed that one of our mayoral candidates still doesn’t ‘get it’ about the program.

Karen Turner, who in the past has proposed closing the Montclair Community Pre-K and proposed issuing vouchers to attend underprivileged children, still plays fast and loose with the facts about the program and builds a totally misleading narrative about it. 

As recently as May 2 she said that MCPK is the most expensive program in town. This is totally false. In fact MCPK tuition is in middle of the pack. Moreover, none of the others have a sliding scale tuition based on income, and working families often find MCPK to be the LEAST expensive alternative in town. Plus MCPK deliberately caters to working parents and their hours and its cost per hour is below most if not all other programs in town. 

Ms. Turner, speaking of scholarships, was also quoted as saying “They’re all our kids. You can’t just hand pick a few.”, implying that kids needing scholarships are turned away. This is also totally false and misleading. MCPK is a Montclair program for Montclair kids, coordinated with the Montclair Public Schools. Montclair families get priority over others and scholarship subsidies go ONLY to Montclair children and they are offered to ANY Montclair family with limited means. No child gets turned away, period! No other program in town can say this.

Can someone who can’t or won’t stick to the facts about the Community Pre-K be trusted to be the ‘strong supporter’ she now claims to be?

I fear for the future of Montclair Community Pre-K in a Turner administration. One of the reasons I am supporting the For Montclair slate and volunteered to be Treasurer and Campaign Manager is that I trust these candidates with the future of the program. I trust them to keep their word that they will support the program while looking for a stable, multi-year source of funding, including the possibility of rolling it back under the Board of Education.

I urge you, on May 8, to cast your ballots for Line C, For Montclair.  Susswein, Barr, Hurlock, Springer, and Jacobson.


David Grill

OMG Montclair May 05, 2012 at 04:32 PM
I was at a 2010 council meeting that Turner was demanding that the town foreclose on the P-K Debt, now she wants to restore funding to the same Pre-K? Which Turner should we vote for? CCM Turner or Candidate Turner?
Know It All May 05, 2012 at 04:58 PM
You can't trust her.
A. Gideon May 05, 2012 at 05:13 PM
As silly as it first seemed, I am now wondering if - as Know it All once claimed in another post - these anonymous attack-identities that have been created for this election are in fact being funded by a slate. ...Andrew
Tell it Straight May 05, 2012 at 05:53 PM
Pay me now or pay me later, If Montclair votes her in, they will pay later. She is the Mitt Romney of Montclair politics. She has changed her stance on issues more times than Newt Gingrich has changed wives. She has left her slate open for constant criticisim and damage control due to choices they have made in the way they have comported themselves. They have made every promise under the sun and have taken a public stance on every issue to every group in town, trying to please them all. In the end, they can't possibly fulfill every empty, gratuatous, pandering, desperate and empty promise that they have made. Hopefully, the voters [what few of them there are] won't be conned by their transparant game of cards
A. Gideon May 05, 2012 at 06:14 PM
The reference to Romney reminds me of how similar this anonymous attack-identity wave is to what our current President has been forced to endure. Called by some a fascist, and by others a socialist, he receives attacks that are divorced from any real complaint about his actual actions or policy choices. It's disheartening to see similar tactics applied here. The only good news, I suppose, is that all these various attack-identities created for this campaign might (1) only be one person (2) that might not even be from Montclair. I noticed that Montclair 2012 is spending some money with Veracity Media (spelled incorrectly in the Montclair 2012 filing, interestingly enough), for example. Perhaps this is part of the "digital strategy". Frankly, I hope it is something like this. Unfortunately, it is also reminding me of the campaign in which Mr. Susswein engaged during the "elect the board" debate. That included claims that people such as myself - with two young children in our schools - were looking to defund our schools. ...Andrew
montclairgurl May 05, 2012 at 08:07 PM
It's easy to look into the posting history of all these new names that have shown up recently, Andrew. If you just click on the name you can see the history of what's been posted here on Patch by each name. You are correct, they showed up for the election and will undoubtedly disappear when it's over. And since they all attack Turner personally, it's pretty obvious it's a smear tactic driven primarily by one of the slates. I was fairly undecided a while back, but these posts have helped sway me to vote for anyone other than a group that resorts to this "strategy".
little e May 05, 2012 at 08:59 PM
Montcalrigulr, that may be true, but I don't know if that's an accurate way to determine who is "behind" whatever posts. You posted this comment on Baristanet as well. I read The Patch and Baristanet thoroughly every day, but I rarely post. I am not supporting any slate and haven't decided who will receive my vote for mayor.
A. Gideon May 05, 2012 at 10:30 PM
"I am not supporting any slate and haven't decided who will receive my vote for mayor." I hope, each election cycle, that more people will engage in online media. That's a Good Thing, though I'm not especially enamored by anonymity in these discussions. I can see the import of this when we're speaking of something like whistle-blowing, for example, but that's not generally the discourse we see here (though one can always hope {8^). If someone wants to express, for example, why they value MPL over Pre-K (to pick just one recent example), he or she should have the ability to stand behind the opinion. If a posted doesn't value his or her own opinion enough to stand behind it, what value should we readers of that opinion assign to it? Still, these anonymous but honest identities aren't the real issue. That some of these new identities have appeared and immediately started attacking does suggest that at least some are sock-puppets of one or another campaign. ...Andrew
montclairgurl May 05, 2012 at 10:33 PM
It may not be "accurate" but one has to suspect that a half dozen or more new names suddenly appearing in time for the election - ALL of them bashing, not discussing issues, but bashing, one slate can make it easy for one to strongly suspect this is coming from one of the other slates. I'll bet by next Thursday you won't see anymore posts from them.
Tell it Straight May 06, 2012 at 01:41 AM
montclair gurl, I really don't have an alliance with any slate and that is the god's honest truth. You are correct, when you say, that i will most likely stop posting once the election is done. The only reason i started posting was because i was completly astonished at some of the tactics that the RPM slate has taken to get themselves elected. You and others seem ok with anything and everything they have done. I know many people in town who are just as upset as i am and who also know some of the candiates on the slate and are very wary of them. Regardless, I truely believe in my heart of hearts that some of them are unethical. That is my only motivation. Obviously, you and others on this blog don't agree. But, one thing i will remind you of in four years, your taxes will only be higher, The pre k will still be on the skids in terms of staying afloat, as will the library and you will be looking for a new mayor and council just as vigorously as you are now. Guaranteed
Meg Beattie Patrick May 06, 2012 at 01:54 AM
It's not one person hiding behind pseudonyms like you do. You'd like to think so. Election Day results will speak for itself. Believe it or not, people in Montclair see right through the blanket of lies presented by RPM and the Turner crew. Enough so that it was worth the effort to come on these sites and comment. Just because they don't banter with you all day every day 365 days a year as you do for your hobby, doesn't mean these posters aren't real. Don't be afraid of the new commenters that you go on and on about every day, suspecting they're not real. Election Day is almost here. Robert Jackson will be the next Mayor of Montclair.
A. Gideon May 06, 2012 at 02:01 AM
"The only reason i started posting" Let's look at when you started posting. In one of your early postings, you wrote: "I heard first hand that it was a complete setup and RPM walked out with contributions [from Steven Plofker]." Documentation shows that Mr. Plofker donated the same amount to each of the three slates. Yet it was a setup only for RPM? You took offense in another post that Ms. Turner had met with people from MSU. How horrid. How could she have thought to get ahead of herself? That's as bad as Ms. Carlson's audacious research into what other towns are doing and how we might replicate their successes. People giving of their time to the town, even if they might not win an election, must be an anathema to you. You were apparently also offended that Ms. Emling thanked RPM candidates that contribute. Online media is no place for politeness, I suppose. Never mind that Ms. Emling carefully thanks all candidates. Apparently you've also repeatedly stated that some RPM supporter sent an email to all members of some club despite another member of the same club pointing out that he or she never received such a letter. BTW my company still receives Montclair 2012 spam on a distribution address. If you were disturbed at tactics, there's plenty of fodder from the two slates you seem to be ignoring. RPM seems to be the special - dare I say "assigned" - target of your ire. That's telling. ...Andrew
montclairgurl May 06, 2012 at 02:49 AM
"Enough so that it was worth the effort to come on these sites and comment. Just because they don't banter with you all day every day 365 days a year as you do for your hobby, doesn't mean these posters aren't real." Ah. I see. People suddenly became so concerned that RPM was telling lies they all made up anonymous names and started posting here. Got it. So far, I haven't seen any "lies". So far, the fact that RPM is the only target makes me wonder about the fabricated issues and which slate is actually behind them. I have my suspicions. I don't know who will win, but I do hope CCM and OBAC will continue to try to keep things in the open.
OMG Montclair May 06, 2012 at 05:04 AM
Andrew, Why don't you come clean and admit that you are working for the Turner Slate, you never, ever find anything wrong with RPM , yet the other two slates you write reams of copy on all the issues you have with both of them
A. Gideon May 06, 2012 at 01:45 PM
"you never, ever find anything wrong with RPM" That's false. I was one of the first to raise a concern about Ms. Turner's lack of children in the public schools. That might have been before you were hired to participate here, though. FWIW, I don't work for any slate. More, I've been posting here (and elsewhere) under my own name for quite a while (probably too long {8^). I also appear - under my own name again - regularly at BOE meetings and occasionally at council meetings. I've spoken at both. Do you participate where ever you live? I'm also a member of two PTAs, which is something I'm permitted to say because it violates zero PTA or IRS rules despite certain claims otherwise. I mention this because, in retrospect, it was the attacks on my volunteer peers that participated in that ad that got me annoyed about the antics in this campaign season. That annoyance may be what you're sensing, along with my disdain for hired posters. ...Andrew
Peter Simon May 06, 2012 at 02:08 PM
Count me among those who dislike anonymous commenting in local blogs. I'm with Andrew on that point. I have my own concerns about the RPM slate, but I don't really appreciate (or factor into my deliberations) the negative comments that have little or nothing to do with the substance of their policy declarations.
Tell it Straight May 06, 2012 at 02:38 PM
Andrew, Like i mentioned to you in an earlier post, when your kids need some community service points for entry into the National honor Society, send them over to clean out my basement and i will sign their forms, just like RPM was going to do for delivering their mail. Terry Gorman adamently stated that no e-mail was ever sent out to MGC members asking them to back karen Turner. Bold face lie, I presented the letter, which was given to me, by someone who doesn't even live in Montclair or know the person who sent the e-mail. That would indicate to any logical thinking person, that it went out to anyone and everyone possible. Karen Turner announcing to the audience that she has already begun to meet with officials from Montclair state is not only a bit premature, but it is obnoxious. The Plofker event was a set up [direct from the mouth of someone who attended] and just because he gave equally to each slate means nothing. His power is derived from their wealth and he uses it.
A. Gideon May 06, 2012 at 03:19 PM
"Like i mentioned to you in an earlier post, when your kids need some community service points for entry into the National honor Society, send them over to clean out my basement and i will sign their forms" You see that as analogous to working for a campaign? I won't argue that a campaign (or most any organized effort, I expect) doesn't include a lot of "grunt work", but it is for a cause much larger than someone's basement. You cannot see that? Perhaps you cannot see the difference between cleaning the basement of a church, school, or other public building and your own personal basement? Fortunately, I don't believe our middle school or high school students are this limited. My own kids - still in elementary school - recognize the difference come to think of it; the last lemonade stand the kids on the block - pre-K through 4th grade - ran was for charity. [Though I admit this was the brainchild of a 2nd grader that's not one of mine.] I think these kids could teach you something. ...Andrew
A. Gideon May 06, 2012 at 03:28 PM
"Bold face lie, I presented the letter" You presented a letter. Even if we're to accept the letter as something other than a complete fabrication - and your credibility isn't stellar given some of your postings that I've cited above, even if we're to ignore your apparent interest in nothing but attacking your employers' opponents - you've failed to counter that a member of this club in question indicates that he or she didn't receive it. That is, even if the letter exists your claim that it was sent to all members is apparently false. ...Andrew


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something