The United States government is now requiring people who wish to travel via airplane to submit to radioactive photography that exposes their nude body, or alternatively submit to a full body pat down.
Here for their first reading, I offer the fourth amendment to the U.S. Constitution to the editorial board of the Neptune Nudniks:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
What is the probable cause that justifies every airline traveler to be compelled to submit to these searches?
If you are selected for secondary screening after you go through the metal detector and it does not go off, and “sss” is not written on your boarding pass, ask the TSA officer if the reason you are being selected is because of your head scarf.
In this situation, you may be asked to submit to a pat-down or to go through a full body scanner. If you are selected for the scanner, you may ask to go through a pat-down instead.
Before you are patted down, you should remind the TSA officer that they are only supposed to pat down the area in question, in this scenario, your head and neck. They SHOULD NOT subject you to a full-body or partial-body pat-down.
You may ask to be taken to a private room for the pat-down procedure.
Instead of the pat-down, you can always request to pat down your own scarf, including head and neck area, and have the officers perform a chemical swipe of your hands.
If you encounter any issues, ask to speak to a supervisor immediately. They are there to assist you.
I don’t have a daughter, but I will be adding hijab to my Christmas shopping list for my wife, mother, sister and nieces. You can buy them online here.
The Legislators from Monmouth County would like to see further discussions take place before the latest recommendations on horseracing from the Governor’s Advisory Commission on Gaming, Sports and Entertainment are implemented.
Among the recommendations are calls for all racing that currently takes place at the Meadowlands Racetrack to be moved to Monmouth Park, the sale of Monmouth Park to a private entity, and drastically decreasing the number of live racing days for both standard- and thoroughbred tracks, below the current legal minimum.
The decrease of racing days, especially in the face of a lack of additional purse dollars, is a source of contention with this proposal, because racetracks earn their revenue through their live racing days. By cutting the number of days by 2/3 for both breeds, it limits the opportunity for the tracks to earn money.
“There is no disagreement that horseracing in New Jersey is in need of serious change at this time,” said Senator Jennifer Beck (District 12), “but what Mr. Hanson has recommended jeopardizes the future of the entire sport in the State. There is no feasible way that all of the racing that is currently taking place at the Meadowlands can be moved to Monmouth Park by 2011. The infrastructure does not exist at Monmouth Park to house harness racing, since it is, and always has been a thoroughbred park. Also, New Jersey State Law regulates the number of racing days at each of the racetracks, and any action to reduce the number of racing days will have to be done through legislative action. As far as I am concerned, after speaking with a number of experts in this area, the reduction called for in the report will severely damage the viability of maintaining any racing in the Garden State.”
“Horseracing in New Jersey was a sustainable, and even profitable, industry, right up until 2007 when competition began appearing on our borders,” said Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande (District 12). “It can be sustainable again, if given the opportunity. The recommendations from Mr. Hanson’s panel do not afford this opportunity. By forcing a sudden and drastic change, instead of one that takes into consideration, not only the logistics of preparing a thoroughbred track for an entirely different kind of racing, but the implications a change of this sort will have on the rest of the equine and equine-related industries in New Jersey, the report is inherently flawed. Further discussion and negotiations are needed.”
“The report is correct in saying that ‘the horseracing industry is at a crossroads, and didn’t arrive there overnight,’” said Assemblyman O’Scanlon (District 12). “Likewise, the solution to the challenges facing the racing industry can also not be expected to take place overnight. Expecting the significant changes that the Commission’s report calls for to take place in 2011 is unrealistic. The problems facing the horseracing industry are going to take a more measured approach to resolve.”
The Commission states its purpose as “to propose an economically sustainable model for the horseracing industry, without state subsidies,” and “to propose a plan that preserves the possibility of live standardbred and thoroughbred racing in the State.” The Monmouth County Legislators are not convinced that the plan that has been presented will accomplish either of these objectives and will continue to reach out to the Governor with alternatives.
“The recommendations of the addendum to the Hanson Report,” said Assemblyman Ronald Dancer (District 30), “will require legislative approval, and it is very important that the legislature be partners in the process to ensure that we preserve and enhance the horseracing industry, thus protecting jobs and open space. Unfortunately, the report fails to meet its own goal of preserving the racing industry. I look forward to working with the administration to draft legislation that will meet that goal by providing a sustainable business model for one of New Jersey’s most important job creating and open space preserving industries.”
“I am absolutely disgusted with the supplemental Hanson Report,” said Assemblyman Joseph Malone (District 30). “It totally disrespects the horseracing industry in New Jersey. It turns its back on thousands of working men and women in the State, and we need to do better.”
“I agree with the stated conclusion of the Hanson report that ‘the status quo is simply unsustainable’,” said Assemblyman Samuel Thompson (District 13). “There are some recommendations within the report that I agree with. Others I find very troublesome. I do feel we must take actions that will both preserve the horseracing industry in New Jersey and simultaneously reduce the drain on the states’ taxpayers. The proposals submitted require further work and modification to achieve these twin objectives.”
“Before the Hanson report proposals are enacted, we need to have a debate on how it will impact thoroughbred and harness racing—including looking at job loss and the negative economic repercussions,” said Senator Sean T. Kean (District 11). “Part of this debate should include opportunities for interested parties to weigh in on the proposals. In addition, during these deliberations we have to be mindful of how the horse racing industry preserves open space in Monmouth County and statewide. I am confident that the Christie Administration will work to find sustainable options for the horse racing industry in New Jersey.”
“The entire issue needs more examination before any rush to judgment occurs,” said Assemblywoman Amy Handlin (District 13).
Senator Joe Kyrillos told the Wall Street Jounral’s David Feith that he will introduce legislation this month that will legally empower parents to force administrative changes in failing schools.
“Parent Trigger” became law in California in January of this year. Under the California law, if 51% of parents in a failing school sign a petition they can force administrative changes in the school, convert the school to charter status or shut down the school entirely.
The idea was first proposed by the “liberal activists group,” Parent Revolution. Liberal or not, the idea enjoys bi-partisan support in California but is being proposed mostly by Republicans elsewhere in the country, according to the WSJ article.
Kyrillos is confident is bill will become law. He told Feith:
“If it can pass in California, it can pass anywhere,” says New Jersey State Sen. Joe Kyrillos, who plans to introduce his parent-trigger bill as soon as this month. Mr. Kyrillos is confident his bill will pass, especially since Gov. Chris Christie, a fellow Republican, committed in September to supporting the kind of parent-empowering reform that “was recently done in California.”
The Asbury Park Press reported yesterday that the Monmouth County Board of Freeholders balked at appointing Freeholder Director Lillian Burry’s choice to replace Jim Gray as Clerk of the Board.
Gray retired at the end of October. His salary was $109,748. Burry wants to replace Gray with James Stuart of Colts Neck, a semi-retired real estate appraiser, who would start the job at $60,000 if appointed.
Stuart served on the Colts Neck Township Committee with Burry. He served the township for nine years through 2008. He also had a real estate sales license that hung in Burry’s Colts Neck Realty brokerage office.
Freeholder Amy Mallet (D) slammed Burry for political patronage in proposing Stuart. That is ironic coming from Mallet, whose unsuccessful running mate, Glenn Mason, was appointed the county Emergency Management Coordinator shortly after the Democrats took control of the Freeholder Board in 2009.
Freeholder John Curley (R) raised questions about Burry’s business relationship with Stuart which were echoed by Freeholder John D’Amico (D). Freeholder Rob Clifton (R) told the APP that we would wait and see what happens.
Sources tell MMM that Clifton and D’Amico are expected to join Burry in appointing Stuart at the next Freeholder meeting on November 23 over the bi-partisan objections of Mallet and Curley.
In these times of fiscal austerity, I think it is worth questioning this appointment and all appointments. Let me emphasis that I am not taking a position, pro or con, on this appointment, at least not yet. I’m simply raising questions and encouraging others to do the same.
The first question should be “Is the position necessary?” Even if the position is required by legislation, and I don’t know if the clerk of the board position is required, the question should be asked, at all levels of government.
The Monmouth County website describes the Clerk of the Board function as follows:
The Office of the Clerk of the Board of Chosen Freeholders provides the Board with the necessary information and background material on those matters requiring its attention.
The principal activities of the Clerk of the Board are to keep a book of the minutes and a record of the orders and proceedings of the Board. The Clerk of the Board has custody of the official seal of the County and all records, documents and other official papers relating to the property and business of the County.
The functions performed by the Clerk of the Board include:
recording the official minutes of the Board
handling Board correspondence
preparing meeting agendas
processing, filing and advertising ordinances, resolutions and the county budget
serving as a liaison between the public and the Board
administering and recording oaths of office
signing official documents
attesting the signatures of officers and officials
maintaining a receipt of service of legal documents;
acting as custodian for several county departments with regard to the Open Public Records Act (OPRA)
directing correspondence and inquiries for action to various county departments
conducting business with other county departments as directed by the Board
Monmouth County’s Clerk of the Board’s office has a Deputy Clerk and three staffers. When the new clerk is hired that will be five full time people working to fulfill the prescribed functions. Record keeping and correspondence is important, but are all of those people necessary? Would there be a savings by promoting the Deputy Clerk and freezing or reducing the staff? Would the functions suffer? Does technology make record keeping and correspondence more efficient?
Another question, and this is not meant to single out Stuart, but to address widespread abuses. Is Stuart’s appointment a pension pad/grab? Does he have pension credits from his service on the Colts Neck Township Committee that would count towards years of service should he be appointed to this job. I don’t know in Stuart’s case. However such pension padding by part time elected officials has been so rampant over the years that the pension system, and abuse thereof, has obviously been a consideration when making such appointments in the past. It should also be a consideration, on the other side of the equation, going forward. If two people are equally qualified for a necessary position but one would add substantial pension costs if hired, those costs should be carefully considered in a hiring decision.
After a detente that lasted through the general election, the battle between CD-6 GOP rivals Anna Little and Diane Gooch seems to be heating up again. Little bested Gooch by 83 votes in the 6th district Republican primary last spring and went on to lose to incumbent Congressman Frank Pallone by 11%, which is the closest any Republican has come to Pallone since 1994.
Gooch didn’t exactly fade into the background after the primary, as is the custom for defeated primary candidates not named Lonegan. She stepped up her editorial writing in the TwoRiversTimes, the weekly newspaper she and her husband Mickey own. She formed Strong New Jersey, an issue advocacy organization that ran ads against John Adler in CD-3 and she funded an anti-Pallone ad for Voice for My Child.
Gooch returned the volley during this week’s edition of NJN’s On The Record with Michael Aron. She told Aron that if she felt she was the best candidate against Frank Pallone after the congressional districts are redrawn that she would run for the seat again. While praising the Tea Parties for the energy they brought to the campaign, Gooch said they made mistakes in some of the candidates they choose. She mentioned Delaware’s “I’m not a witch” Christine O’Donnell and Little as two of those mistakes.
Gooch’s appearance On the Record was broadcast this morning at 9 and 11. It will be broadcast again tomorrow at 6:30 am. As of this posting the program has not been posted on NJN’s website. If NJN’s webmaster follows the usual schedule, it will be posted here tomorrow after the final broadcast.
I wish it wasn’t necessary to keep bashing the Asbury Park Press. The Neptune Nudniks are just that bad lately. I wish Gannett would put some competent people over there. We need a good newspaper in the region. In the meantime I’ll just take my chances that Assemblywoman Mary Pat Angelini won’t accuse me of cyberbullying.
I’ll give the nudniks this much. Today’s paper must have been printed on recycled material. Recycled birdcage liner to be more precise. The editorial pages are full of bird bleep.
The two items I take issue with are the editorial board’s grossly inaccurate editorial, Constitutional? Not a prayer and Angelini’s OpEd touting her anti-bullying legislation.
The nudniks first. Apparently they fancy themselves experts on the Constitution and prayer. In their nudniktorial today the APP editorial board argues that prayer at public meetings violates the U.S and New Jersey Constitutions and that the ACLU should pursue their suit against the Borough of Point Pleasant Beach “vigorously” because the borough’s council has been opening meetings with a prayer with the blessing of the borough attorney.
I know I’m not an expert on the Constitution or on prayer (the APP even has the gall to say what “most religions” consider appropriate prayer). I was taught constitutional law at a Jesuit university. This much I do know. If the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, the NJ Senate and the NJ Assembly all start their sessions with a prayer, which they all do, then prayer at public meetings is either not unconstitutional or the ACLU lawyers are bullies that don’t have the balls to take on the U.S. Justice Department and/or the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office. They would rather take on tiny Point Pleasant Beach and other small governmental agencies who’s leaders are more likely to cave to the ACLU’s litigious bullybleep than to inflict the pain of legal fees on their already overburdened property taxpayers.
The arrogance of the editorial board is appalling. Not only do they presume to be more expert on the First Amendment than Point Pleasant Beach’s attorney, they have the audacity to judge the sincerity of the Point officials’ prayers and to use the name of the Lord to condemn the prayer. I won’t even get into their questioning whether or not the Lord really authored the Lord’s Prayer. This from the nudniks who know so much about Jesus and prayer that they invoked the Sacred Heart to praise Asbury Park’s Upstage Club, Bruce Springsteen and Southside Johnny.
As a service to the nudniks, I publish the text of the 1st amendment to the U.S. Constitution, for what I suspect will be their first reading:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I hope they can find someone other than ACLU bullies to explain it to them.
Regarding the nudniks’ infuriating habit of writing about religion as if they know what they are talking about, the reprobates on the editorial board should leave such writing, if they must write about it at all, to Pastor Michael Riley who is on their staff. At least Riley has a relationship with the Big Guy. If they can’t do that, they should start using Islamic rather than Christian references in their editorials. That could solve the problem permanently.
Now, about Mary Pat Angelini’s Anti-Bullying Bill; Angelini is not a nudnik nor is she a reprobate. However, her bill, as well intended as it may be, is a bad idea. Its not that bullying is not a problem, it is. It is a problem that all of us have had to deal with as part of growing up and that all children will have to learn to deal with in the future. Legislation will not change human nature and government can not solve all of our problems. Nor should it.
I’m not an expert on child development. However the lessons my father taught me about dealing with bullies, both physical and psychological lessons, prepared me for the rough and tumble of the business world and Monmouth County politics. The lesson I taught to the bully who was picking on my sister endures to this day. His nose was never the same. Growing up in the 70’s that made me a hero and gave my sister a confident sense of security throughout her adolescent years. No one ever picked on her again. Today, it would probably land an older brother a stay in the Middlesex County Youth Detention Center.
Schools administrators and faculty should not tolerate bullying. We need legislation for that? The red tape and additional personnel Angelini’s bill calls will be a waste and a burden on property taxpayers. The kids who have been victimized should be trained to be “anti-bully specialists”, like my father trained me. If parents won’t teach kids how to defend themselves, or brothers how to defend their sisters, the schools can teach the kids the art of a kick in the cogliones and how to break a nose right after the class where they learn to put a condom on a cucumber.
Another problem with the bill…how long will it take for the evil manipulative adolescents to figure out that they can cause a whole lot a grief to both their school administration and to an unfriendly teen rival by falsely claiming they’re being bullied. Ever know or hear of a kid threatening their parents with a call to DYFS?
Legislation is never going to control adolescents’ uncontrollable and natural behavior. Making school personnel responsible for managing that behavior is ludicrous. Outlawing teen suicide would be just as effective. Cheaper to enforce too.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and state that I don’t believe bullying causes teen suicide. I was bullied and I didn’t kill myself.
I don’t mean to minimize the problem of teen suicide. I’m not an expert and I don’t know the answer. I do know that legislation that is a knee jerk reaction to a tragic and highly publicized suicide is not the answer. The answer lies in things that can’t be legislated. In families, churches, with health care professionals and even in schools. I don’t have any statistics to back this up, but I bet there was less teen suicide when there was prayer in schools. But that’s not likely to happen because no one has the cogliones to stand up to the ACLU.
On Wednesday I made the casethat the Neptune Nudniks are unfair, biased, dishonest and incompetent based upon the amount of ink that gave the news of Mayor Gerry Scharfenberger’s job as Director of the Office for Planning Advocacy and the fact that he did not want his job to be an issue in his reelection campaign, vis-à-vis other stories of more consequence that they chose to ignore or bury.
Today I make the case that the APP’s coverage of the Scharfenberger story itself is unfair, biased, dishonest and incompetent.
In Kevin Penton’s article, Planners question credentials of Middletown committeeman coordinating N.J. policy, and in the editorial the same daythe nudniks question Scharfenberger’s qualifications for the Director of the Office of Planning Advocacy job because he is not a certified planner. Had they done their homework, rather than go out and seek quotes from representatives of special interests, they would know that the job is an executive/administrative job, not a planning job. ” Says who?,” you might ask. Governor Jim Florio’s Attorney General’s Office. If I can find that information, why didn’t the Asbury Park Press, you should ask.
Not in the job three months yet, Scharfenberger has already saved the State $386,000, more that his annual salary X 4, according to the APP’s own account. Why are they questioning Gerry’s qualifications?
In their editorial on the matter, the nudniks argue that Governor Christie is not serious about eliminate double dipping. They use Scharfenberger’s appointment and Jackson Mayor Mike Reina’s appointment to a job at the Department of Transportation as examples. To use the APP’s own words, they are being “disingenuous at best and downright dishonest at worst.” It is also possible that they are just plain incompetent. I don’t know which is worse, disingenuousness or incompetent…you decide.
Christie’s proposed reforms call for the end of dual office holding, i.e. the same person holding two elected offices AND prohibition of one person earning more than one government salary. Christie was clear on the campaign trail last year and has been clear in town hall meetings this year that he has no problem with government employees serving their communities in elected office, so long as they do so as volunteers. Scharfenberger was a volunteer as a member of the Middletown Township Committee before he got his new appointment. Reina gave up his salary as Mayor of Jackson after he was appointed to his job at DOT. (Though, to the APP’s credit, Reina did not give up his Jackson salary until after the nudniks brought it up…more on that and the culture of trough swillers in a soon to follow post about “greed and arrogance”).
There is no question that Scharfenberger did not want his new job to be an issue in the Middletown campaign. The APP say their reporter asked Gerry about his employer and he didn’t mention it. Scharfenberger denies this and Penton, the APP reporter who wrote two articles about the job since the election has not responded to inquiries from MMM. I believe Gerry because he was honest with me when I asked him specifically about the job over the summer. Penton either asked the wrong question or is being disingenuous at best in his reporting.
The APP says Scharfenberger not announcing the job with great fanfare was mendacity. I say it was clever and good politics. The APP’s coverage of the story and the Middletown Democrats reaction to it, since I broke it, demonstrates that Scharfenberger’s political instincts were spot on. The Dems, and the APP at their behest, have distorted the issue and misreported the facts. To his credit, Sean Byrnes, Scharfenberger’s opponent in the election told The Independent that the issue of Gerry’s job would not have changed the outcome of the election, “its not a 2000 vote issue,” Byrnes said. However, as we have seen since I broke the news of the job, the issue would have changed the tenor of the Middletown campaign. The Dems and the APP would have very likely distorted the issue, like they have since, and made the campaign about Gerry’s job, rather than about the issues pertinent to Middletown.
The nudniks conclude their editorial with a call for Scharfenberger to resign one of his positions or for Christie to either insist upon a resignation or explain why he has changed his thinking on public servants holding more than one job. That was never Christie’s thinking, and the nudniks call for Gerry’s resignation from one of the jobs is thoughtless and irresponsible given his record in Middletown and his performance in the new job so far.
Scharfenberger won re-election by a large plurality in a year with strong anti-incumbent sentiment and the local Democrats conducting a yearlong smear campaign that included stealing, smashing and defacing his campaign signs. The reason he won so big? He is clearly one of the best, most effective elected officials in the state. The residents admire his down to earth, no nonsense style and his reputation for personally contacting people who call or write to his office. Under his leadership, Middletown has one of the lowest municipal tax rates in the region, one of the smallest work forces per capita and most importantly, one of the lowest spending per capita in the state. Middletown has also been named one of the top 100 places to live in the country by Money Magazine for three years in a row of eligibility. His innovative ideas include devising one of the first municipal Green Initiatives in the state and the first municipal Veterans Affairs Committee in the state. He was also the first mayor in the state to sign his town up for the Adopt-A-Unit program, which collected tons of supplies and well wishes to our troops overseas. He has also been a tireless advocate on behalf of Middletown in fighting COAH, unfunded mandates, and excessive union contracts, among other harmful policies.
Scharfenberger is also a career volunteer who currently serves on the Middletown Landmarks Commission, the Open Space Committee, the Middletown Drug and Alcohol Alliance, and the Monmouth County Greenhouse Gas Reduction Committee. He even serves on the Township Committee as a volunteer, foregoing his salary out of respect for the taxpayers. He was recognized for his service by the Northern Monmouth Chamber of Commerce with the Public Servant of the Year award in 2009, an honor given to Governor Christie in 2008 and Lt. Governor Guadagno in 2010.
His appointment to the position of Director of the Office For Planning Advocacy (OPA) was a brilliant move on the part of the Christie Administration. Scharfenberger brings a unique combination of municipal and professional experience to the position. Prior to serving on the Township Committee, he served on the Zoning Board of Adjustment and has served as a Landmarks Commissioner for over 14 years. As mayor, he has been involved in several major redevelopment, brownfields mitigation and development projects. He was also integral in the aquaculture study to revitalize the Bayshore and the NPP grant to revitalize North Middletown. Professionally, he is a Ph.D. with numerous professional publications who has worked on hundreds of land use projects in every county in the state for such diverse entities as the NJDOT, NPS, NJDEP, SCC, NJ Transit and dozens of private organizations. Of the past 10 directors of the OPA, Scharfenberger’s overall credentials put him at or near the top. Even with his state position, he has shown his consideration for the taxpayers of New Jersey by waiving taxpayer funded health benefits and retaining his own at a cost of $6,000 per year. He has also enrolled in the deferred compensation program, the state’s 401K which he contributes to himself.
This is who the APP wants to drive out of public service.
New Jersey – The Central Jersey Chapter of the National Association of Women Business Owners (NAWBO-CJ) is pleased to announce the program for their November Dinner Meeting and Networking, to be held on November 17, 6:00 p.m. at the Crown Palace, Marlboro, NJ. Annette Nathan, Senior Partner with Mark Kamin and Associates, Inc. will speak on the topic “Women and Wealth; Our time for Global Leadership.”
Ms. Nathan has been delivering training and development for over twenty-five years. She specializes in teamwork, communication and leadership training, and she has developed a new “wealth education” for working women, women business owners and family owned businesses. Many of clients employ her as an executive coach at the highest levels of their organization. Her engagements have ranged across a wide spectrum of businesses, communities and organizations.
Annette’s methodology focuses on cultural transformation within the institution. Using a refined and reliable methodology, Annette works with her clients to undergo a process that has the clients themselves invent new futures that are inspiring and challenging. The power of these new futures is expressed in the culture of the institution not as feelings or words alone but as action and aligned intent.
Ms. Nathan’s personal style is direct, challenging and compassionate. She is both an acute listener and a penetrating analyst of business culture. Her balance of humor and rigor enables clients to tackle and transform the most challenging aspects of their organization.
She leads a highly innovative time management and productivity workshop that “Human Resource Executive Magazine” awarded “Top Training Program of the Year” in 2003. Working inside a general framework Ms. Nathan customizes the delivery of her consulting products for the individual needs of particular clients.
Annette has traveled the world and delivered her consulting to leaders in business, education and government specifically in the countries of China, Honduras and Nigeria. She has worked with non-profit organizations committed to human development including inner-city youth, a relief organization rebuilding preschools destroyed in Bosnia and the tribal leadership of a Native American community in Pine Ridge, South Dakota. Annette has served on the boards of several non-profit organizations engaged in international relief work affecting children.
Annette graduated with honors in Asian History from Duke University in 1978. She lives in Princeton, New Jersey with her husband and three children.
Registration for this event is requested by November 15. The cost to attend is $38 for members and $43 for non-members, and $5 additional will be charged for walk-ins. Visit our website at www.nawbocentraljersey to register.
The mission of the Central Jersey Chapter of NAWBO is to educate and enable women business owners to reach their full potential, to strengthen the wealth of our members, to build strategic alliances, to provide access to NAWBO’s resources for greater visibility and profitability, and to influence public policy. For more information about NAWBO Central Jersey, visit the chapter’s website at www.nawbocentraljersey.org.
Posted: November 12th, 2010 | Author:Art Gallagher | Filed under:Press Release | Tags:Annette Nathan, NAWBO, Press Release | Comments Off on National Association of Women Business Owners (NAWBO) Central Jersey Chapter Announces Program for November Dinner Meeting and Networking Event
