Now you see it, now you don't. Now you see it, again.

As you know, the budget committee of Trenton’s City Council has been meeting with department directors to go over the proposed numbers for this fiscal year (which btw is half over).

Did you know that there is still a line item for a Director of Recreation, Natural Resources and Culture?

There is.

Why can’t the administration figure out what it wants to do with regards to this department?

Mayor Jackson’s transition team took the position that the city might be best served by reorganizing city government and doing away with the department altogether. This would be accomplished by dividing up the work of that department amongst the remaining departments. It is an idea that has beenfloated here and elsewhere for the past few years.

Last month, the preliminary budget included money for hiring a director of DRNRC and three staff people in seeming conflict with the transition report. Then, in a November 21, 2014 article by Times reporter Jenna Pizzi, city spokesman Michael Walker stated the idea was scrapped.

"The mayor is not moving ahead with the department of recreation," Walker said. "He is rethinking the way the city is moving forward with recreation." 

Or so we thought.

Turns out, page three of the budget reviewed at the Monday, December 22 hearing included the line items for salaries of a recreation director's and staff. (See image above). This completely contradicts Walker's statement made last month. 

Sources say the administration doesn't know yet how it wishes to proceed with the recreation department but wants the money in place just the same. 

Sounds indefinite and undecided. Kind of like the guy who was running things a year ago this month. 

Consider this

Imagine you are department director for a small Northeastern city. Imagine that city is Trenton.

Let's say you have a problem employee. He's been disciplined at least once, very recently, for failing to properly carry out his duties. His job will be in jeopardy if he has any more problems. He knows it. You know. The whole department knows it.

One day you find out that he is accused of violating the very rules as a private citizen that he, as an employee, is charged with enforcing on every other citizen.

What would you do to that employee, if you judge the accusations are true?

Would you mete out a more severe punishment?

Would you suspend the employee? Would you fire him?

Whatever action you took, how would you feel if your decision was overruled by your boss against your objection?

That seems to be the core issue at last month’s dismissal of the city’s inspections director, Cleveland Thompson.

Sources indicated at the time that Thompson’s departure was brought on by his insistence that an employee in his department should be terminated and the administration, for whatever reason, did not agree.

Thompson, who has since been brought back to his old title of electrical sub code official, reportedly either quit or was fired by the Jackson administration over a disagreement on the handling of a disciplinary matter concerning housing inspector Ken Bullock.

Citing the usual “we don’t comment on personnel matters”; the Jackson administration has refrained from providing any details. There are some things we do know via the results of some requests for public information.

• Kenneth Bullock, a barber since 1978, was hired by the city of Trenton in July, 2006. He was known to be an avid supporter of Doug Palmer who had just started his fifth and final term at the time Bullock was hired. In fact, Palmer was one of three references listed on Bullock’s employment application. The others were Palmer Public Information Officer Kent Ashworth and then East Ward Councilman Gino Melone.
• In September of 2011, Bullock apparently was laid off along with many other city employees. He was rehired in July of 2013. 
• In March of 2014, Bullock issued a Certificate of Occupancy to a house on Bayard Street that was being sold. Work was being done in the house that required permits yet Bullock failed to cite the seller or buyer and issued the C of O.
• Payroll records show that Bullock was not paid for two days in April of this year. This corresponds with a disciplinary suspension Bullock served for failing to perform his duties in that case. 
• Also in March, Bullock inspected 216 Rusling and approved a rental and sale final C of O. Due to complaints received a re-inspection was conducted on May 9 and several violations were discovered.
• Bullock granted a rental C of O for an apartment on Grand Street on April 29. On May 5, another inspector responding to a complaint by the tenant, inspected the apartment and discovered a dozen violations that were not included in Bullock's inspection report. Included in the overlooked violations was the lack of carbon monoxide detector and access to the electric panel box. 
• On May 13, inspectors acting on an anonymous tip went to 218 and 220 Dickinson Street to investigate the dumping of construction debris in the former lot after the installation of a deck and stairs on the back of the house at the latter address. Indeed, there was evidence that a deck had recently been built on the rear of 220 Dickinson and there was debris from that job in the lot next door. 
• The 220 Dickinson property is owned by Kenneth Bullock. He bought it from the city for $15,000 at an auction in May, 2010. When the inspectors approached the house they noticed a recently added deck and stairs and the debris on the property next door. When they went to the front door of the home, they were confronted by Bullock who allegedly told them to “tell Cleveland that he needs to stop this” The report by Inspectors Joe Pratico and Ray Bucchi states Bullock also said: “Listen to me carefully. I have reached my boiling point. Do you understand what I am saying? I’ve reached my boiling point and I will go back to prison.”
• Bullock was issued a summons for allowing the dumping of the construction debris leftover from the construction of the deck on the adjacent (218 Dickson) vacant property. The matter has been transferred to Ewing Township out of Trenton Municipal court because of potential conflicts of interest. 
• Bullock paid $900 for not taking out a permit for the construction of the deck. The initial violation of not having a permit cost him $500 and there was an additional $50 fine per week for eight weeks until he got the permit. 
• Once the permit was issued and the deck inspected, violations were noted. They were to be corrected by September 12, 2014. We currently have no information on the status of those violations. 

As a result of all of this, we are told that a disciplinary hearing was held.

Reportedly, Director Thompson felt strongly that Bullock’s cumulative actions should result in immediate termination.

The administration, on the other hand, wanted to suspend rather than terminate Bullock.

Thompson is alleged to have refused to sign the suspension paperwork which resulted in him no longer being the Director of Inspections.

What would you do?

You have an employee with a record of failing to perform his duties. He’s already served one suspension. He obviously disregarded the very construction code he is employed to enforce by not obtaining a permit for work on his own property. It certainly appears he allowed construction debris from the project to be dumped on an adjoining property.

What would you do?

A tip of the cap to Kevin Moriarty for his input on shaping the opening of this piece. 

We have all been here before

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

---George Santayana 

This week, Trenton's city council is scheduled to vote on the approval of a proposed contract with Long Marmero and Associates of Woodbury, NJ. Resolution 14-490 would award a contract "not to exceed $20,000" to the firm for work on "general municipal and defense litigation matters."

This is the same contract that was pulled from the August 7 docket after questions were raised about whether or not the Long Marmero firm violated the city's pay-to-play ordinance.

(For background on this matter, we refer you to Kevin Moriarty's blog entries for August 4, August 5 and August 7.  You can also read stories in the Times and the Trentonian.) 

Here's a synopsis of the facts of the matter:

• The Initiate Civic Empowerment Political Action Committee was formed by members/employees of the Long Marmero firm. 
• The ICE PAC shares its business address with that that of the Long Marmero firm
• The ICE PAC had somehow neglected to file the required reports with the NJ Election Law Enforcement Commission from 2012 until June of this year. Those reports were filed exactly one day AFTER Kevin Moriarty blogged about the failure to file.
• The ICE PAC recently changed its designated treasurer from Albert Marmero, one of the partners of the Long Marmero firm, to a "scheduling secretary" who is an employee of the firm.  
• The ICE PAC has contributed money to and paid consulting fees to the Mayor of Delran, who in turn chose the Long Marmero firm to serve as the township's solicitor. 
• Doug Long, a partner in the Long Marmero firm, is a Cumberland County Freeholder who has received contributions and reimbursements from the ICE PAC that Long alleges his law firm does not control. 

The resolution is back on the docket after the DCA declared that the Long Marmero firm was "qualified to perform the services and their price is reasonable." 

The DCA has NOT ruled on whether or not the firm violated the city's pay to play ordinance.

So, it is up to Trenton's governing body to decide if they want to approve this contract or not.

We remind everyone of a similar situation that arose in late 2010 and early 2011. The administration of the now incarcerated Tony Mack lobbied extensively to have the city council...essentially the same city council minus newcomer Councilman At Large Duncan Harrison...to go with a new provider of IT consulting services.

Ignoring the obvious shortcomings of Lynx Technology Partner's low bid in response to the city's RFP for IT services, the governing body voted in favor of the newcomer.  In explaining his January 2011 vote in favor of the Lynx contract, Councilman Zachary Chester cited a "letter" from the DCA approving this choice. That "letter" was in fact merely a form from DCA signifying that indeed Lynx had submitted the lowest bid. It stated nothing about the firms qualifications.

The choice of Lynx Technology Partners was later challenged in court and tossed out in favor of the city's long time IT services provider, ADPC, Inc. 

The governing body was advised by many to NOT approve the contract with Lynx Technology Partners. Yet they did and the city ended up fighting and losing a court battle over it.

Many are now urging essentially that same body to NOT approve the contract with the firm of Long Marmero and Associates. Whether or not the firm has found an actual loophole in the city's pay-to-play ordinance, the appearance of a violation is enough to taint any contract with Long Marmero.

We hope they do not repeat the past. 

We're (still) waiting

On February 7, 2014, Trenton’s then mayor, Tony Mack, was found guilty of six federal counts of corruption. Due to a quirk in New Jersey state law, Mack was able to hold onto his office for nearly three more weeks until Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson heard a motion brought by acting State Attorney General John Hoffman. 

Indeed, Mack had actually continued in office for a year and half after the FBI had raided his home and city hall; 16 months after he was officially arrested and charged; and 14 months after he was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury.

On February 21, 2014, the Times of Trenton ran a guest Op Ed by Jim Carlucciand Kevin Moriarty.

In that piece, they wrote:

“Mack’s criminal odyssey highlights critical problems with New Jersey law that the Legislature must address if other communities — or the state as a whole — are to avoid an experience similar to Trenton’s and retain trust in their public officials.”

“Public officials need to be reminded that if they act appropriately and conduct themselves ethically, they won’t find themselves indicted or convicted.”

The writers understand that, as Americans, we are innocent until proven guilty. They also argue that, “without making pre-judgments about guilt or innocence, it can be safely said a criminal indictment, at best, is a major distraction to the execution of an official’s duties.”

To date, nothing has been done to change the law in New Jersey that allows these indicted officials from continuing in office.



Many saw where the Mack administration was heading simply by reviewing his election reports. In fact, there are still open “reviews” of his reports even while he is currently a resident of a federal prison.

The February Op-Ed included a recommendation to increase the resources of the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission so they could better stay on top of the questionable practices too often employed in the state’s political theater.

“Illuminating and correcting wrongdoing on the campaign trail could help reduce the number of indicted officials down the road. The Legislature needs to allocate more resources to the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission. Regular users of the ELEC website know that it is down as much as it is up. The problems, reported in the minutes of the November 2013 meeting of the commission, are an outdated and overtaxed computer system and a lack of funds to make the necessary upgrades.”

This matter has come to light again with recent questions about potential violations of the city of Trenton’s Pay-to-Play ordinance by contributors to newly elected mayor Eric Jackson’s campaign.

 

On March 10th, 2014 Moriarty blogged about Jackson’s long overdue reporting on the 2010 campaign for Mayor. In a follow up piece from April 22  Moriarty noted that Jackson had updated some of his reports but raised some other questions about excessive contributions from former senator Robert Torricelli. On June 3 and yet again this month on August 4,  August 5,  and August 7, Jackson's campaign reporting was called into question on Moriarty's blog. 

Picking up where Moriarty left off, none other than Jeffrey Brindle, theExecutive Director of NJ ELEC has stated that the state needs to clarify,simplify and standardize its Pay-to-Play laws. 

The legislative response to all of this has been…crickets.

Another point made in the February Op-Ed by Carlucci and Moriarty was the need to rework the recall process in the state.

“A practical and effective recall process will allow New Jersey voters to exercise greater control over elected officials and must be considered a weapon to fight future public corruption.”

The legislature needs to take a serious look at these issues and pass amendments to our current laws that will eliminate the “wiggle room” that allows corruption to continue.  Yes, some have made noise about this but nothing has gotten any traction.

Again quoting the February Op-Ed:

“In 2012, Assemblymen Wayne DeAngelo and Dan Benson introduced a bill which would automatically suspend, without pay, public officials upon indictment. If convicted, the official forfeits his or her office, pay and pension credits from date of indictment. If found not guilty, the official would be reinstated, and back pay and pension would be granted upon successful petition. State Sen. Linda Greenstein followed with a companion bill. The assemblymen pre-filed their bill for the new legislative term (A1024).”

“In October 2012, Sen. Shirley Turner proposed amending the state constitution to achieve the same goal. Nothing has become of that.”

“Assemblyman Reed Gusciora has stated he will seek to change state law to allow automatic forfeiture of political office upon criminal conviction, regardless of where the conviction occurs.”

The people of New Jersey are still waiting. 

Alice doesn’t (have to) live here anymore.

Shortly after taking the oath of office on Tuesday, July 1, Trenton Mayor Eric Jackson announced four appointments to his cabinet. Three of the four appointees are NOT city residents and are therefore, technically, not able to hold the positions on a permanent basis.

Now we have learned that the state, through the Division of Local Government Services oversight of the Transitional Aid, has made changing the city’s residency law a requirement in the recently signed MOU for the current fiscal year.

This is not new. The state has suggested these changes before but the governing body has been reluctant to go along.

Instead of following the law we get out of town people who, at best, rent apartments or homes in the city in an effort to feign compliance, while escaping home to Maryland or North Jersey or wherever on weekends and holidays.

Since 1972, the City of Trenton has had an ordinance requiring all cityemployees except police, fire and teachers to be bona fide residents. After 15 years of continuous service, employees could move out of the city without losing their jobs. The idea, of course, was to help retain a middle class by making residence in the city mandatory for anyone seeking employment with the city. The rule applies from directors down to the maintenance people.

In 1987, the ordinance was amended to allow for a waiver to be granted to give individuals who were not residents at the time of hire a defined window in which to become bona fide residents of the capital city.

The ordinance was increasingly applied in a haphazard manner. There were numerous examples of people who maintained a Trenton address merely to appear to comply with the law while the administration “turned its head” to look the other way.

The ordinance was also at times used to punish those who had fallen out of favor with the administration. There are various individuals who were railroaded out of their city job for “non-residency” that actually were residents. Some fought and retained their positions; others took the hint and walked away.

We cannot continue to ignore the law when it is convenient to do so and apply it selectively when it suits the whim of the administration. We either have to live with it, and the consequences, or we must change the law.

We’ve been here before.

As recently as April of this year an ordinance was brought forth for council approval that would have allowed the Trenton Water Works to recruit and hire non-Trenton residents to fill key vacancies at the utility. 

The state Department of Environmental Protection has ordered TWW to bolster its staff of licensed technicians. The fact is that there just aren’t that many in the state, let alone Trenton proper.

While it is a great idea to train current employees and residents for the positions, the process is a long one and, per TWW Superintendent Joe McIntyre, there have been few if any people willing to take the required courses.

Hence, the request to amend the residency requirement to allow TWW to recruit from beyond the city borders.

The ordinance passed its first reading but was tabled before the second because members of council were concerned about shutting Trentonians out of good paying jobs at TWW. Even then candidate, now councilman Duncan Harrison was against revising the ordinance.

Residency or rather the lack thereof was what finally caused controversial police director Joe Santiago to leave the city of Trenton’s employ.

It really isn’t much of a surprise that any attempt to find the “best and brightest” candidates to stock any administration’s cabinet or fill vacancies in various departments must reach beyond Trenton’s 7.5 square miles.

In April 2011, the city wanted to amend the residency ordinance so that former State Treasurer David Rousseau could be appointed Trenton’s chief financial officer. Council balked and a year later Mayor Mack decided not to renew Rousseau’s consulting contract. This came on the heels of Rousseau showing the governing body the path by which it was able to cut the funding for and eliminate the Mayoral Aides. Had the ordinance been changed a year earlier and Rousseau actually appointed to the Mayor’s cabinet, the council could have (and we guess probably would have) overruled his dismissal by the petty tyrant Tony Mack.  

The sad fact is that as Trenton’s fortunes have flagged, the supply of residents with the requisite “world class” abilities and qualifications has decreased. Additionally and to be brutally honest, the city’s long decline makes it unattractive for individuals with the desired skill set to relocate here to take a job that could vanish with the next round of layoffs or at the whim of some elected official.

So what is the water works superintendent or new mayor supposed to do when they are looking for capable and qualified candidates to fill positions?

The Times editorial board has gone on record suggesting a rethinking of the residency requirement. Civic activist Dan Dodson and others have raised their voices in concert with this line of thought.

Certainly the Division of Local Government Services in its role as recruiter for cabinet level appointees has sought candidates from beyond the city. Recently departed Business Administrator Sam Hutchinson and Police Director Ralph Rivera are but two examples.

If we truly want to turn Trenton around and need to go outside the boundaries to get the kind of personnel needed to do so, then fine.

We just caution the new mayor and the new (old) council to do it legally. If we are going to hire from outside the city, than lets craft and adopt a proper ordinance that allows us to do so.

Further investigation required

We really were not that surprised to learn that the now convicted former occupant of the office of Mayor somehow managed to create a“secret” bank account. After all, it fits the mold and methods of a man who used the city treasury as his own.

The revelation does leave many unanswered questions:

How was it accomplished without the knowledge of or approval from anyone in the finance department? If the auditor could find it, shouldn’t the checks and balances in the financial systems have picked it up sooner?

How much money was involved? Is there any left in the account? What was the money spent on?

Most importantly, will the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office open a full investigation into this? Will they bring the matter to a grand jury?

We should not concern ourselves with the fact that Mr. Mack has already been tried and convicted on Federal Corruption charges. This is about making someone fully accountable for the wrong they have done…at all levels. It is doubtful that Mr. Mack acted alone in this and anyone else who aided and abetted this deception needs to be charged accordingly. It is also about showing others that this kind of corruption will not be tolerated…at any level.

The above referenced article also revealed that there have been some issues with personnel working “out of title” and lack of controls over authorized overtime.

The audit covered the period of SFY2013 (July 1, 2012 – June 30, 2013). The report is just being made public to the city council. Sam Hutchinson, the city Business Administrator, admitted there were issues due to the massive layoffs but that things had been corrected “now.”

State statute 40:69A-44 describes the qualifications, powers and duties of the Business Administrator.

The department of administration shall be headed by a director who shall be known and

designated as business administrator. He shall be chosen solely on the basis of his

executive and administrative qualifications with special reference to his actual experience

in, or his knowledge of, accepted practice in respect to the duties of his office as

hereinafter set forth. At the time of his appointment, he need not be a resident of the

municipality or State, but during his tenure of office he may reside outside the

municipality only with the approval of council. He shall have, exercise and discharge the

functions, powers and duties of the department. The department, under the direction and

supervision of the mayor shall:

(a) Assist in the preparation of the budget;

(b) Administer a centralized purchasing system;

(c) Be responsible for the development and administration of a sound

personnel system; and

(d) Perform such other duties as council may prescribe.

(e) The governing body of the municipality may provide, by ordinance, that

the business administrator also shall, subject to the direction of the mayor,

supervise the administration of each of the departments established by ordinance.

For this purpose, he shall have power to investigate the organization and

operation of any and all departments, to prescribe standards and rules of

administrative practice and procedure, and to consult with the heads of the

departments under his jurisdiction; provided that with respect to any department

of law or department of audit, accounts or control, the authority of the business

administrator under this subsection shall extend only to matters of budgeting,

personnel and purchasing.

 L.1950, c. 210, p. 476, s. 3-14. Amended by L.1954, c. 68, p. 422, s. 2; L.1981, c. 462, s. 40; L.1981, c. 465, s. 19, eff. Jan. 9, 1982.

While it is true that Mr. Hutchinson did not come on board until April of 2012, “the development and administration of a sound personnel system” is one of the BA’s duties as enumerated in the state statute. 

When did Mr. Hutchinson become aware of these issues? How and when did he address them? Was the governing body made aware of the problems and corrections prior to the auditor’s report? (It certainly doesn't seem like it from the newspaper account)

In August of 2006 Mercer County Prosecutor Joe Bocchini removed former chief financial director and comptroller Christine Stankiewicz from city hall amid allegations of payroll fraud.

Has the prosecutor’s office been notified of the auditor’s recent findings as outlined above? If not, why not?

We hope and hereby suggest that the Mercer County Prosecutor open a full investigation into both of the matters outlined in the Mercadien report immediately. 

Recycling redux

Just when you thought you had heard the last of Tony Mack, Charlie Hall, and others, they pop up again in this latest story of unpaid debts incurred due to poor management.

For years there have been rumors of an expensive piece of equipment purchased by the city of Trenton for its long defunct recycling program that sits somewhere. It was, so the stories went, ordered and paid for but never installed or used. No one seemed to be able to say where the equipment went or cared to find out.

Through some online searches and requests for public records, here’s what we have come to find out.

The City of Trenton ran its own recycling program and from 1992 until 2004, Tony Mack was the head of the recycling bureau.

The recycling bureau was disbanded when the city joined the county wide program run by the Mercer County Improve Authority in 2004.

Tony Mack was dismissed from his position with the city at that time.

That dismissal became the subject of legal action as Mack claimed his dismissal was politically motivated because he was going to challenge then Mayor Douglas H. Palmer in the May 2006 election.  A copy of the Appeals Court decision in the matter of Tony Mack vs. the City of Trenton can be found here.

In that document the following passage can be found:

Eric Jackson, the Director of Public Works, testified that in mid-2001, Mack recommended the purchase of a new sorting machine for recyclables. Mack claimed that the sale of unsorted recyclables would generate $40 a ton, while the sale of sorted recyclables could bring $200-250 per ton. He asserted that the new system "would have reduced [Trenton's] solid waste landfill budget by another million or $2 million. This was the overall objective of the conveyor system, to reduce the amount of money we pay for landfill costs." The sorting machine, which Trenton purchased for over $200,000, was never put into operation and remained with the manufacturer for resale.

The sorting machine, which Trenton purchased for over $200,000, was never put into operation.

Further along in the document there is mention of a December 19, 2002 email from Budget Officer Elana Chan to Eric Jackson that reads in part:

In the last five months, the Recycling division has charged 3 big items against this old Trust:

(1) Recycler Box Truck $59,900

(2) 10% deposit with Mayfran Sorting System $21,810

(3) 40% deposit with Mayfran Sorting System $87,239

Items (2) and (3) represent a 50% payment towards a $218,098 system, meaning you still owe the company another $149,049. Let me ask you, how do you plan to pay for it? Upon full payment of this system, there won't be much money left in FY 2004 to absorb part of the salary cost towards city positions (estimated to be $80,000 annually), then what do you plan with the staff situation in Recycling?

So, the city appeared to have ordered a $218,098 piece of equipment and by December of 2002, half of the purchase price had been paid. That much of the rumor was true.

Was it ever delivered? Did the city pay the balance? What happened to the machine after the city got out of the recycling business?

In response to an Open Public Records request submitted to the city we found out that, indeed, Trenton’s City Council had approved the contract for purchase of the sorting machine on June 20, 2002.

We also have a letter from Dan Odenwelder of BE Equipment to the City of Trenton dated November 21,2002.  In that letter, Mr. Odenwelder details change orders and delays that are increasing the costs of the project. He asks for help in moving things along.

With the information obtained from the OPRA request, we were able to contact the equipment vendor, BE Equipment of Quakertown, PA. We received a brief letter from Mr. Scott Davis, the company president.

Mr. Davis reiterated the timeline that we were already aware of: contract approved in June, 2002, letter re: change orders and such, November, 2002 (unsigned copy provided).

Mr. Davis also provided an unsigned copy of an August, 2004 letter sent to the City of Trenton. In that letter, he summarizes a phone conversation he had with the Public Works Director. Apparently, the City had asked to cancel the contract but the manufacturer would not accept that because the equipment had been custom made to fit the city’s building in which it was to be installed. The letter notes that the city agreed to pay the balance due on the purchase price plus the amount of two change orders.

The letter was apparently obtained from a computer file and the invoice mentioned was not included in what was sent to us.

We followed up with an email asking Mr. Davis what the amount that was owed was. In response, he asked that we call him.

Over the course of a 35 minute phone call, Mr. Davis graciously and calmly recounted the history of this equipment contract and his dealings with the city since. He spoke warmly of his dealings with Tony Mack and just about everyone he ever dealt with at the city. Without complaining, he mentioned that his company had paid the manufacturer of the equipment, in full, ten years ago.

Mr. Davis recalled being contacted at least twice since the August 2004 letter by someone from the city asking about the equipment. Each time all contact fell off once the whole story was laid out for them. 

He related a story of being contacted by Charles Hall about the possible reboot of the city recycling program and doing work on repairing the baler only to have problems getting paid by the city. Only after a protracted and persistent effort did he get the city to pay for the work Hall had authorized. 

Those invoices and payments were included in the response to our OPRA request that also yielded the November 21, 2002 letter from Mr. Odenwelder. It did not include a copy of the August 2004 letter provided by Mr. Davis. 

Davis remains genuinely sorry that the professional relationship he and company had with the city has fallen apart over this situation.

During the conversation, Mr. Davis stated that he honestly did not know exactly how much the city owes BE Equipment. He figured the storage costs alone could run between $30,000 and $36,000 for the 10 years he has been holding the equipment ($250 to $300 per month). He would have to pull out the files to find out what the balance owed on the original equipment purchase. We know from the court records that could be as much as $149,049 (half of the original $218,098 cost). And there are the costs of the change orders.

So, it is true. The city purchased equipment a decade ago that sits, unused and unpaid for, in storage. The Palmer administration felt they could just waltz out of town without paying what was due. The Mack administration was only interested in the equipment for the short time it considered restarting the city recycling program.

This is how our elected leaders honor their commitments? How much longer is the city going to let this situation continue?

{Mr. Davis contacted us to clarify a point. Components of the system are in storage at his facility as the manufacturing process was stopped when Trenton cancelled the order. However, BE Equipment did pay the manufacturer IN FULL for the system and the city has yet to fulfill their spoken obligation to pay for the full order plus the change orders.} 

You can take your endorsements and ...

In the Times of Trenton’s Thursday, February 27, 2014 edition, local consultant Irwin Stoolmacher offered up an opinion on how to elect better candidates in Trenton’s local elections.

Under the headline “Trenton residents need endorsements and voting records to guide election of next mayor”, Stoolmacher advises that endorsements are similar to campaign war chests. He implies that the more of either a candidate receives raises them to higher level than their opponents.

“However, endorsements, like campaign money raised, are significant as they can help to separate the top-tier from the bottom-tier candidates in a race with many candidates, such as the eight at present: Wiley Fuller, Jim Golden, Patrick Hall, Eric Jackson, Oliver ‘Bucky’ Leggett, Kathy McBride, Paul Perez and Walker Worthy.”

Stoolmacher asserts that sorting “can be helpful to the electorate” and requests many local officials to issue endorsements.

“For this reason, I’d strongly urge County Executive Brian Hughes, Rep. Rush Holt, Sen. Shirley Turner, Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman, county clerk Paula Sollami-Covello, county surrogate Diane Gerofsky and the freeholders not to sit on the sidelines in the upcoming race for mayor. They should each make their views known as to which candidate they believe is best equipped to lead the city into the future and the reasons for their assessments.”

We suggest that Mr. Stoolmacher has not been paying attention. If he has, he would certainly know that Mercer County Deputy Clerk Walker Worthy has been endorsed by many of the very people he has named.

Endorsements are, indeed, coveted by candidates. Unfortunately, they really don’t give any evidence of a candidate’s qualifications or likelihood of getting elected. Nor are endorsements any kind of indication of how the successful candidate will perform in office. We only have to look at those who endorsed our recently convicted and removed from office mayor, Tony Mack.

The fact is elected officials offering up endorsements only give the electorate an excuse to not do their homework on the candidates.

Stoolmacher as much as admits this when he tries to place the weight of endorsements on the continuum of candidates’ qualifications for the office sought.

“I’m not suggesting that endorsements are more important than a candidate’s experience, position on key issues or performance in debates but, because they often garner significant press coverage, they can be significant.”

Because they often garner significant press coverage, they can be significant.

There you have it. Endorsements are a PR tool. Nothing more. Nothing less. And they let the electorate off of the hook by providing a shortcut to choosing who to vote for.

The voter’s thinking might be something along the lines of “Oh. If the newspaper/county executive/assemblywoman etc. thinks so-and-so is good, that’s all I need!”

To his credit, Stoolmacher does state that when elected officials endorse a candidate they should explain why. He says the endorsements should include the candidate’s skill set, experience, temperament, education, etc.

What about the candidate’s plans? What about who they associate with; surround themselves with; take contributions from?

These are important things to know. Why doesn’t Stoolmacher encourage the electorate to access the public information available via campaign report filings? Why doesn’t he suggest ways and means for the voters to research and evaluate for themselves? Better informed voters will get us the best choices.

The second suggestion in Stoolmacher’s opinion piece is for Trenton City Council to provide voters with objective information that would help them decide whom to vote for.

“I’d suggest it consider making candidates’ voter participation records available. Voting is a clear indicator of concern and interest in government. If a person believes in government, other than incapacitating illness, there is no good explanation for not voting.”

Stoolmacher’s reasoning is that “It takes a lot of chutzpah to ask constituents to vote for you when you have not taken the time to vote in the past.”

Agreed, but why is it up to the city council to provide this information to voters?

It is public information available from the county board of elections. It comes as part of the data set when you purchase the list of registered voters in the city. The data is extremely easy import into and manipulate with a spreadsheet program.

Yes, there is a cost associated with obtaining it, but any individual or group can purchase it, parse it, and publish it. Why does it have to be the city council? It is not in their job description. Or is the author suggesting that each candidate provide their own voting history as part of their campaign resume?

This doesn’t make a lot of sense and it really doesn’t matter.

We need an engaged, enlightened electorate. We do not need more spoon-fed, “show-up-at-the-polls-and-push-the-buttons-I’m-told-to-push”voters.

If, as Stoolmacher closes out with, the Mayor Tony Mack fiasco has taught us anything, it’s that who is elected really matters.

Relying on the same elected officials to tout their favorites, as they have done in the past, is not going to improve our outcome. Choosing based on somebody else’s recommendation is how the city of Trenton got to where it is today.

Looking at and critically evaluating what a candidate proposes, what they’ve done, and who they choose to surround themselves with is what the voters need to do.

He's gone!

As of 12:32 pm (by the clock in the court room), February 26, 2014, Tony Mack is the convicted, former mayor of the city of Trenton.

Contrast

The news spread quickly yesterday. Representative Rush Holt will not seek reelection this year.

Representative Holt has been a rarity in any elected office. He is incredibly intelligent, soft spoken, and more than competent. And there has never been a whiff of any scandal about him or the way he conducts his business.

Regardless of your partisan beliefs or opinions of his positions, Rep. Holt has been a model politician. His term of service is the kind that you almost wish would continue forever.

While part of us wishes he would stay on, we applaud his decision to not become one of those elected office holders who chooses to hold onto their seat forever simply because they can.

Contrast that with the man who holds the title of mayor of the city of Trenton even though he was convicted in a federal corruption trial over a week and a half ago.

Here’s an individual who is not bright, is not competent and whose every move carried the heavy stench of abuse of power and worse. He should have been removed from office long before the FBI came knocking on his door in the middle of a July night in 2012.

Incompetent. Convicted. Yet still holds the title of mayor.  He’s the one who should be announcing that he is leaving office. Immediately.

There are no clearer examples of the two extremes of American politics.

If only we had more Rush Holts.

Here's the thing

Here are six things you need to know regarding the status of Trenton Mayor Tony Mack now that a federal jury has found him guilty in the corruption case. Some of this information we have posted before but it bears repeating.

# 1:  He is still mayor unless and until he resigns OR the office is deemed vacant. The state law covering this is as follows:

§ 40A:16-3. When office deemed vacant

The office of a mayor or a member of the governing body of a municipality shall be deemed vacant:

a. Upon its being so declared by virtue of a judicial determination;

b. Upon the death of the mayor or a member of a governing body;

c. Upon a determination of the other members of the governing body that the mayor or a member of a governing body no longer resides within the corporate limits of a municipality or ward from which he was elected;

d. Upon the refusal of the mayor or member of a governing body to qualify or serve;

e. Upon a judicial determination that the mayor or member of a governing body shall have become physically or mentally incapable of serving;

f. Upon the filing of a written resignation with the municipal clerk by the mayor or a member of the governing body, except a resignation filed following the filing of a recall petition;

g. Whenever the mayor, when required by law to attend meetings of the governing body, or a member of the governing body, fails to attend and participate in any meetings of the governing body for a period of 8 consecutive weeks without being excused from attendance by a majority of the members of the governing body, at the conclusion of such period; provided, however, that the governing body may refuse to excuse only with respect to those failure to attend and participate which are not due to legitimate illness; or,

h. Upon a determination that the office comes within the purview of R.S. 19:3-25.

Got it? In this particular matter, Tony Mack must resign or a STATE judge, upon petition from the NJ Attorney General or the (Mercer County) Prosecutor sign an order vacating the office. Otherwise, Mack is mayor until Judge Shipp declares the office vacant upon sentencing.  

(NOTE: when we say the office is vacated, that refers to a permanent situation, not a temporary absence. Temporary absences can not continue beyond 60 days and would lead to a possible declaration of the office being vacant).

Currently, both the Trentonian and the Times are reporting the order is not likely to be signed until sometime Monday. So, we wait.

# 2: Who becomes the mayor upon the office being vacated?

§ 40A:9-131. Acting mayor 

In every municipality, unless otherwise provided by law, if a vacancy occurs in the office of mayor, by reason of death, resignation or otherwise, the presiding officer of the governing body shall become the acting mayor until a successor is elected and qualified.

So, South Ward Councilman George Muschal, would become the acting mayor upon the vacation of the office.

# 3: How long does the Council President serve as acting mayor?

§ 40A:16-12. Appointment to fill vacancy where incumbent was not nominee of a political party; time to fill vacancy 

If the incumbent whose office has become vacant was not elected to office as the nominee of a political party, the governing body may, within 30 days of the occurrence of the vacancy, appoint a successor to fill the vacancy without regard to party.

The governing body has 30 days to appoint a successor to fill the vacancy.

# 4:  How many votes does it take to fill a vacancy in the office of mayor?

§ 40A:16-6. Vote required to fill vacancy in office of mayor

An appointment to fill a vacancy in the office of mayor shall be by a majority vote of the entire membership of the governing body.

There are seven members of council. A majority is four. The “nominee” can vote for him or her self.  

# 5: What happens if council fails to appoint someone to fill the vacancy in the office of mayor within that 30 day time span?

§ 40A:16-14. Special election to fill vacancy in the office of mayor; limitation on authority to appoint

If a governing body shall fail to fill a vacancy in the office of mayor as provided in N.J.S. 40A:16-4a or 40A:16-5a within the 30-day period prescribed by N.J.S. 40A:16-11 or 40A:16-12, the municipal clerk shall forthwith fix the date for a special election to fill the vacancy to be held not less than 45 days nor more than 50 days after the expiration of the time fixed for the filling of the vacancy. If the date fixed for a special election shall fall within 20 days prior to the holding of any general election, regular municipal election or any other election within the municipality, the vacancy shall be filled at that election. If the date fixed for a special election shall fall within 20 days after the holding of any general election, regular municipal election or any other election within the municipality, then the special election to fill the vacancy shall be held not less than 20 days nor more than 25 days from the date of that election.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a vacancy in the office of mayor occurs in the final 6 months of the term of the mayor, no special election shall be held to fill the vacancy.

No appointment shall be made by a governing body to fill a vacancy occurring in the office of a mayor after the fixing of a date for a special election to fill the vacancy pursuant to this section.

So, if the governing body fails to appoint someone to the vacancy within the 30 day window, the council president remains as the acting mayor because we are within the final 6 months of the term.

# 6: What happens to the council president’s seat on the governing body when he becomes the acting mayor?

To answer that, we look at the following court case:

DeSoto v. Smith, 383 N.J. Super. 384, 891 A.2d 1241, 2006 N.J. Super. LEXIS 54 (App. Div. 2006)

As the result of applying Section 40A:9-131, a municipal attorney was terminated by the Council President who became acting mayor and council president temporarily pursuant to N.J. Stat. Ann. § 40A:9-131. In an effort to defeat the acting mayor’s dismissal, it was argued that section 131, which allowed the council president to serve as both acting mayor and council president, violated the “separation of powers” doctrine. However the Court ruled that the doctrine of separation of powers was not generally applicable to a Faulkner Act mayor-council government, because the design of the Faulkner Act provided for checks and balances which would enable the Council by a 2/3 majority vote to nullify the acting mayor’s dismissal under N.J. Stat. Ann. § 40:69A-43(c).

So, the succession in office law (40A:16-12) provides 30 days within which the council is to select an acting mayor pending the holding of an election (or for the unexpired balance of the term of the former mayor, depending on the time of the vacancy). Pending that, the Council President becomes acting Mayor as well as Council President.

Muschal would serve as both acting mayor and south ward councilman/council president.

Think!

On Monday, February 3 2014, the prosecution and the defense will make their closing arguments before a jury charged with determining the guilt of Trenton Mayor Tony Mack and his brother Ralphiel in the alleged scheme to accept cash bribes from a would be developer of a downtown parking garage.

This is the end result of an FBI sting investigation that fronted the fake development deal to see if the Macks and their friends JoJo Giorgianni and Charles Hall III would take the bait.  Giorgianni and Hall have already entered guilty pleas, leaving the Macks to stand alone.

Some still wonder if this “sting” was actually “entrapment” and/or if this was part of some greater vendetta against the woefully underperforming mayor and his clique of unruly and ill-mannered friends.

We personally think the prosecution has made its case that there was a conspiracy and that the Mack brothers were not only aware of it but participated in it.  The law does not require that either one of them be caught actually taking the bribes, although Ralphiel was found to be in possession of some of the currency that the FBI used in the investigation.

One can never know for sure how a jury will vote. It only takes one reasonable doubt for the whole case to crumble and the defendants set free.

It is significant that this trial will end, however it ends, just as the municipal election campaign season warms up. Just three months after the verdict is delivered Trentonians will go to the polls to select a mayor and city council for the next four years.

Candidates and voters alike need to take some time to reflect on the past three and one half years of the hands down worst administration this city has seen in its over 300 year history.  We all need to review not only what was done but how it was done.

Before casting one vote in the May 13^th municipal election, the public needs to thoroughly and thoughtfully review their choices.  The candidates cannot be judged solely on the cut of their suit or the church they attend.

We need to examine who they associate with; where their campaign money is coming from and how they have conducted themselves in their public and, yes, private lives up to this point.

Engaged citizens must review the information that is available to them via New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission reports.  Does the candidate file complete and accurate reports on time? Are they reporting proper expenditures?

Trentonians must also ask direct questions of those seeking office and not accept the typical, non-committal political double-speak designed to win voter approval but containing no substance.

Mayoral candidates must present measurable, realistic goals and define a plan that they will follow to achieve them.

City council candidates must demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the governing body’s role in city government; its authority and power.

Pay attention to not only what candidates are saying but how they communicate.

We all say we want the best for Trenton, let’s not lower our standards just because we have a personal affinity for an individual who is running for office. 

If we want elected leaders who can think critically, than we must be critical in how we choose them.

The 2010-2014 term has been a waste for the city of Trenton. Corruption scandal aside, we have seen more waste and ineffective, often non-existent, government. It is well documented and openly recognized that the city’s woes did not start at noon on July 1, 2010.  What has transpired since has dragged Trenton down to the lowest point in our memory.

Despite what may be said during the campaign, whoever takes the oath of office on July 1, 2014 will not be able to flip a switch and immediately make everything “OK” again.

So choose wisely, Trenton. Or be prepared for an even rockier next four years.

No time for cheers

The Trentonian is reporting this morning that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and his newly appointed executive director of the Schools Development Authority, Charles McKenna, have promised Assemblyman Reed Gusciora that Trenton will get a new high school.

This is just the latest in a long series of promises and hoped for starts on remedying a situation where students and staff are forced to endure conditions that in any other district would not be tolerated.

The situation with the 82 year old high school is not new. It has been punted back and forth for over a decade pitting the state against that school board against the preservationists against the state and so on.

Everyone wants to point the finger and no one wants to accept any blame. That has to stop. Now.

Let’s start at the very beginning: the Trenton school district let the building deteriorate.  Undoubtedly, defenders of our board of education will say it was a money problem, but let’s be real. It is a management problem.

Yes, it is an older building and proper repairs and upkeep cost more than temporary, slap-dash fixes. So budget and plan. Trenton’s funding for its infrastructure (like that of the county and the state) is woefully inadequate. We have no problem pumping up salaries for administrators and the like but we won’t invest in maintaining and improving what we have.

When the courts determined that New Jersey was required to allocate some $8 billion for fixing up the dilapidated schools in the state’s poorest districts, it got everybody excited.  With all of the money in play, could scandal be far behind?

After only five years in existence, the Schools Construction Corporation created to oversee the investment in school improvements was abolished in 2007 by then Governor Corzine. Audits showed that hundreds of millions of dollars were wasted in the gold rush to get new schools built. The SDA was formed to “put an end to the wasteand mismanagement of the past”, Corzine was quoted as saying in August of 2007.

The reorganization of the funding and management authority meant all projects would be reevaluated. This put the Trenton Central High School plans back into play and set the stage for more delays.

Alumni and preservationists felt, and we believe rightly so, that a properly managed restoration and updating of the existing school would actually be less expensive than totally new construction. Princeton’s high school, the same vintage and similar design as Trenton’s, had undergone just such a renovation and no one complained about their building as being inadequate.

There is an unfortunate bias that “new” is better and will solve our problems.  It is an attitude that is a holdover from the first couple of centuries of this country, when resources were seemingly unlimited and we could just expand and build a new whenever and wherever we wanted.

A new school building, made of concrete block and drywall instead of brick and plaster is not going improve test scores and raise graduation rates.

That was the popular position and one that the SDA (and its predecessor, the SCC) played to. Building new was cheaper, they said.

And so it went, back and forth; Build New! Restore and Renovate!

The ineffective, mayor appointed school boards and school administrators (with a few exceptions) collectively fell in with the community cry for all new construction. The preservationists made enough noise to give the SDA political cover for its own inadequacies, indecision and political posturing.

Nothing got done.  Conditions in the building worsened.

In the run up to last November’s gubernatorial election, a lot of attention was given to the school. It became just another pawn in the political chess game. Media tours, protests, candidate visits and the incumbent’s reported refusal to tour the building were reported and remarked upon constantly.

Now that Governor Christie is ensconced in his second and final term, and regardless of his aspirations and success in moving to the White House in 2016, he’s promising “a new school.”

We continue to hope that the plans call for mostly renovating and restoring the existing structure, but we realize that is unlikely at this point. It’s a shame.

What is a bigger shame is that it has taken this long to get something done (if, indeed, the promise comes to fruition).

There should be no self-congratulations; no high-fives; no cheers.

The powers that be (and were) created this mess. They prolonged the agony and contributed to the destruction of a once beautiful and quite serviceable school building.

Instead of demonstrating the value and worth of taking care of the things we have, the school district, the board of education, the elected leaders at all levels let us down. They morphed maintenance and management issues into political posturing. They all said “It’s for the children” and for more than a decade, an entire generation of students has gone without.

There is no cause for celebration and no reason for further blame shifting.

Just sit down and get to work.

“It’s for the children.”

Now what?

Is the defense team for Tony and Ralphiel Mack trying to stifle coverage of their trial on corruption charges?

{edited at 9 pm, 1/10/14 to include notes about and from the Times article on the matter}

On the same day that jurors and the public heard a recording of JoJo Giorgianni complain about Trentonian columnist LA Parker constantly writing stories picking on Trenton Mayor Tony Mack, the defense team appears to have subpoenaed another Trenton reporter.

On Friday evening, the Times of Trenton published a story online noting that Thursday morning, January 9, Times of Trenton reporter Alex Zdan was served with a subpoeana asking for "all notes pertaining to coverage of the Mack et al matter."

According to the article by Jenna Pizzi,
“Attorneys for The Times have notified the judge and the defense attorney of our intent to fight the subpoena," said Matt Dowling, editor of The Times. "Courts have long-recognized a privilege deeply rooted in the First Amendment that protects reporters from being compelled to provide evidence in judicial proceedings.”

Just after Judge Michael Shipp called a one hour recess for lunch on Thursday, Times reporter Alex Zdan was approached by Robert Haney, attorney for Ralphiel Mack.

Haney, accompanied by private investigator Buddy Wright, walked over to where Zdan was speaking with colleague Jenna Pizzi.

Haney and Wright stood slightly apart for a moment and were largely ignored by the reporters. After politely waiting for a pause in the conversation, Haney asked Zdan if he had been “served.”

There was a very tense pause while Zdan just stared at Haney. Finally, Zdan told Haney that he would not and probably should not speak with him, at least not without a lawyer present. The reporter’s tone was calm and measured but there was unmistakable tension in the words.

Haney nodded and stated that was why he had approached Zdan. He asked that any legal representative of the reporter’s please contact him.

This happened the same day that a lengthy article based upon an interview Zdan did with Giorgianni appeared in the Times. Whether that article was the catalyst for the legal action against Zdan is not known.

Zdan’s reporting on the entire investigation from the time of the FBI raids of the homes of the Mack brothers and Giorgianni has been intensive. He has uncovered the reasons why search warrants were issued for certain individuals.

We hope the defense is not unfairly trying to silence the press or discourage further investigative reporting as part of its trial strategy.

And we hope the defense team is a zealous in pursuing  and preventing possible witnesses from sitting in the courtroom during proceedings, such as Rodney Washington did on Thursday.

R.I.P. Mrs. Stewart

Patricia H. Stewart

5/17/1944 – 12/31/2013

 

The passing of Pat Stewart on New Year’s Eve is a sad event.  Our deepest sympathy is extended to her son, Nicholas, and the rest of her family.

Like many of her friends have already said, the loss is huge.

Mrs. Stewart, as most knew and addressed her, was an indefatigable defender and supporter of Trenton. She was an active member of several community groups, held appointed positions on the Zoning and Ethics boards, and was a member of Trenton’s historic St. Michael’s Episcopal Church.

Pithy, sharp of wit…and tongue, Pat Stewart was a tireless advocate for a better Trenton. Even as her health waxed and waned, her love for and belief in her adopted hometown never wavered.

Pat was old school, but not old fashioned. She believed in doing your homework, forming an opinion and expressing it with proper grammar and spelling.

She believed in right and wrong and in speaking her mind.

Pat Stewart was not born in Trenton; she did not grow up in Trenton or attend Trenton schools. Those minor facts did not make her any less of a Trentonian.

As the new year dawns and the campaigns for municipal office begin , candidates and voters alike would do well to ask themselves “What would Mrs. Stewart do” before acting on something or speaking on something.  Candidates and voters should not invoke their “Trenton roots” unless and until they can demonstrate the common sense, big hearted and sincere expression of their citizenship as Pat did.

It’s going to take everyone working together to fill the gap left in Trenton’s civic life by Pat’s passing.