Indicative

It's the little things that matter

On Thursday, March 8, Mayoral Candidate and current At Large Councilman Alex Bethea opened his Campaign Headquarters at 201 Mulberry Street.

This seemed like an odd decision.

Mulberry Street is in the far northeast corner of the city. It's busy but not what we would consider a main artery and certainly not centrally located. In our long experience with Trenton municipal elections, Mayoral Campaign Headquarters were normally situated somewhere in or very nearby downtown, not some two miles away.

If the location isn't odd enough, here's another tidbit. Mr. Bethea chose a building where the landlord has been cited for various code violations.  As recently as March 6, the property owner was issued summonses for violating the city housing code.

From documents obtained via OPRA request from the city, it appears as though an inspection was conducted by the city on March 5, 2018. At that time, the 2nd floor apartment was found to be occupied but there were no certificates of occupancy on file. The property also had a new electrical service that no permits had been issued for; and there were a variety of other violations.

And this isn't the only time the property owner has been cited. Back in July of 2017...just last summer...the city sent a letter instructing the property owner to remove the high vegetation and junk from the property.

One other thing we noticed when reviewing the documents...the non-occupant owner registration form shows the owner as an individual, Ms. Peggy Bellamy. However, public records indicate that the property is actually owned by her LLC, B & S Properties. Ms. Bellamy either failed to register the property correctly OR to record the transfer of title to from her LLC to her name. (And we won't comment on the couple of tax liens that have been issued on the property...one of which may still be active)

Good choice for a campaign headquarters, councilman.

Indicative of your thought processes.

Is past performance indicative of future results?

Four years ago, then mayoral candidate Eric Jackson's campaign reporting irregularities were being pointed out. At that time, Jackson had failed to file his ELEC reports for the time period between the end of his 2010 campaign and the start of his 2014 run for office. It wasn't until it became a campaign issue that candidate Jackson played catch up and filed the back reports.

Unfortunately, his compliance was short lived. After winning the 2014 run off against Paul Perez, the newly elected mayor soon fell behind in his reporting. Even though he's been repeatedly reminded publicly, mostly by Kevin Moriarty through his blog, Jackson has continued to ignore the reporting requirements. As things turned out, non-compliance and lack of follow through are the hallmarks of Jackson's one term in office.

Looking ahead to this years municipal elections, we decided to review the ELEC filings of those candidates who have run before to see how compliant they are with the requirements. Sadly, it appears that some of the candidates are just as negligent as Jackson.

Let's start with some background. On page 48 of the Compliance Manual for Candidates you can find this chart.

It breaks things down pretty clearly as to what spending amount triggers which required forms to be filed. (For the sake of this article, when we say "candidate" we are speaking of a candidate for city council or mayor.}

1. A candidate spending nothing must still file an A-1 form. 
2. A candidate spending up to $5,100 (note: the amount of this threshold has risen over the last couple of cycles) must file the A-1 and a D-1. Other forms may be required.
3. A candidate spending more than $5,100 must file the D-1 and the R-1. Other forms may be required. 

In this review we are most concerned with the A-1, D-1 and R-1 forms. (NOTE: the forms for each candidate that are referenced can be found in a folder at this link or via the NJ ELEC website's searchable database.)

The A-1 form is a candidate's certification that the amount spent on the campaign will be $0 or not more than the threshold of $5,100. Any amount of money spent on a campaign (or even on pre-election or "testing the waters" activities) must be paid from a campaign account. Even if a candidate only spends his or her own money, they must open a campaign account, deposit the money in it and make all campaign related expenditures from it.

When a candidate creates a committee and opens a treasury (bank account), the D-1 form is filed. Records of all contributions and expenditures must be maintained. While the designated Treasurer or deputy treasurer of a campaign committee is required to make and maintain written records of all funds received and expended, it is the responsibility of the candidate to insure that proper record keeping and reporting are done. In other words, a candidate is not without blame for poorly maintained or improperly reported records or missing filings.

The R-1 form is used to detail contributions and expenditures on a quarterly and cumulative basis for those

Campaign reporting is done by election cycle. Page 10 of the manual explains it this way: For reporting purposes and for the purpose of computing contribution limits, an “election” begins with the receipt of the first contribution or the making of the first expenditure and concludes on the 17th day following the election.

At the end of an election cycle, the candidate is supposed to zero out their accounts and file a finalized report with ELEC. If there are funds leftover, the candidate is supposed to roll them over into the next election cycle, thus filing any required forms and quarterly reports until such a time as the funds are spent down, the account zeroed out and a final report filed. (See pages 12 - 13 of the candidate reporting manual)

Executive Summary

Looking over the field of candidates, we see that five of the announced mayoral candidates have run for municipal office before: Alex Bethea, Darren Green, Annette Lartigue, Paul Perez and Walker Worthy. Assemblyman Reed Gusciora obviously has run for office before and currently maintains his reporting for his Assembly campaigns as well as having filed a D-1 for his Mayoral campaign.

Lartigue and Worthy each had a little a money left, but stopped filing reports. Perez had money left in his 2014 account that has not been accounted for in his 2018  reports so far. Bethea and Gusciora are basically up to date, although Bethea seems to be missing some pages on his initial report for the 2018 election. Green had filed an A-1 in 2010 certifying he would spend under the then threshold of $4000 and we assume he spent what he had raised and closed the account. (The ELEC manual is not clear on how that kind of situation should be handled. As concerned citizens, we would prefer a candidate file a final R-1 closing the depository just to be clear.)

Three of the candidates for council at large have run before: Sherwood Brown, incumbent Duncan Harrison and Lee Ingram.

Mr. Brown closed out his 2014 depository and has filed nothing for the 2018 cycle as yet. Harrison did not formally close out his 2014 filings but he did carry the balance forward into his reporting for 2018.  Ingram filed an A-1 certification in 2014 and no D-1. That would indicate that he never opened a campaign depository and thus spent $0 on his campaign. That is unusual but possible. He has filed a D-1 this time, an indication he plans to raise and spend at least a little money.

The four incumbent ward council persons are were all running again: Marge Caldwell Wilson, George Muschal, Verlina Reynolds Jackson, and Zac Chester. (As we were preparing this report, Verlina Reynolds Jackson was tapped to fill the Assembly seat vacated by Liz Muoio. Because of the prohibition of dual office holding, Verlina has to resign her council seat. This DOES NOT exempt her from having to file the reports correctly.)

Marge Caldwell-Wilson's 2014 accounts were properly closed. Her initial R-1 for 2018 has errors. George Muschal's filings are complete and up to date. Reynolds Jackson's last 2014 report showed a balance that is less than the starting balance of her first 2018 report. There is no recorded carry over from a prior campaign. Zac Chester's balance in his last 2014 report is the same as his starting balance in his 2018 report but, again, they don't show it as being carried over from a prior campaign.

Mayor

Sitting councilman at large Alex Bethea filed his final report for his council reporting on 1/17/18. The filing only contains the last page and shows a balance of $2,999.56  He has not filed a new D1 for the 2018 election cycle. His treasurer, his wife Gloria, did note on the summary page the correct starting balance for the new cycle and that it was transferred from a prior election. Not perfect but at least there is an accounting of some sort for the funds.

Candidate Darren Green last ran for a council at large seat in 2010. He filed an A-1 form certifying he would not spend over the reporting threshold ($4,000 at that time). He has filed a D-1 for the current election cycle.

Assemblyman Gusciora has a zero balance in his Assembly campaign committee and filed his new D-1 for the 2019 primary (the next election cycle for that seat). He has also filed his D-1 for the mayoral campaign in Trenton.

Former West Ward councilwoman Annette Horton Lartigue ran for Mayor in 2010. Her last report on file is from June of that year and shows a balance of $3,527.01. It was not marked as a final filing and there have been no subsequent quarterly reports filed detailing what has happened with that money. She has filed her D-1 for the 2018 Mayoral race but doesn't show a bank account or name a treasurer yet.

Paul Perez lost the runoff election to Eric Jackson in June of 2014. He last filed a report for that campaign account in July 11 of that year and showed a balance of  $1,421.49. It was not marked as his final report. Perez filed his D-1 and two R-1s for the 2018 mayoral run in October of 2017. He has a new treasurer and a new campaign account at a different branch of the same bank.

The first Perez R-1 for the 2018 election cycle does not indicate what happened to the prior balance of $1,421.49. The new reporting starts with a $200.00 contribution on the first page and shows no money transferred from the prior election. On the Schedule A, it shows that the $200 was a cash contribution from the candidate dated May 15 of last year, presumably to open the bank account.

The manual states that contributions must be deposited in the campaign depository within 10 days of receipt. (Page 17). If the money was received and deposited in May, there should have been a D-1 filed within 10 days of the receipt of the contribution and an R-1 filed by July 15. On the summary page it states that the starting balance was zero and that the only money received was the $200. This leaves open the question of "what happened to the $1,421.49 in the old account?"

Rounding out the mayoral candidates is Walker Worthy. Worthy also ran for mayor in 2014. The last report his campaign filed was on January 14, 2016. It showed a balance in the account of $384.00 and was not marked as his final report. Nothing has been filed since, which is a little disheartening considering the candidate is the Deputy County Clerk and should know better.

Council At Large

Sherwood Brown ran for the West Ward seat in 2014. He filed his final report for that election cycle in June of that year and had a zero balance. He has yet to file anything with NJ ELEC for the 2018 election cycle.

Duncan Harrison is an incumbent at large council member. His report filed in November of 2017 showed a balance of $2,331.19 in his campaign depository and the R-1 was not marked as final. His February 2, 2018 filing did not indicate any carry over from the prior campaign in the proper places but it did show the starting balance the same as the ending balance of the previous report so at least the funds were somewhat accounted for. Harrison has also filed for an auxiliary campaign depository, perhaps related to his rumored consideration to change his mind and run for mayor instead of council at large.

Lee Ingram ran for an at large seat on council in 2014. He filed an A-1 certifying he would spend less than the $4,500 quarterly reporting threshold for the election. He never filed a D-1 designating a treasurer or a depository. This indicates he spent no money on his campaign or, if he did, he didn't understand the filing requirement of the D-1. He has filed a D-1 for the 2018 election.

Ward Council

North Ward councilwoman Marge Caldwell-Wilson has changed treasurers with each election cycle. Her 2014 election cycle reporting was wrapped up on June 22, 2016 with a final report showing a zero balance. Her D-1 for the 2018 election cycle was filed in July of 2016 but her first quarterly report that cycle doesn't appear to have been filed until October of 2017.

That report shows one deposit of $200.00 but it doesn't give any indication of who contributed or when. The line where one would report any transfer from a prior campaign shows zero on both the first and last pages. On the final page, it is stated that there was an opening balance of $4594.54 and the $200 contribution. There are two disbursements reported totaling $3,168.49. When you subtract those disbursements from the $4,794.54 on hand, the remaining balance should be $1,626.05. However, the report shows an ending balance of $3,368.49. It appears as though the Treasurer erroneously added the deposited contribution to the disbursement total.

Long-time South Ward councilman George Muschal is unique in that he and his wife completely fund his campaign themselves. He filed an A-1 in July, 2009 certifying that he would not spend over the then threshold of $4,000 and thus he doesn't have to report back on the details of any expenditures. Technically, he could probably just file a new A-1 with each election cycle and be done with it. Instead, he files quarterly R-1s showing his cash on hand...more than is required.

As noted above, Verlina Reynolds Jackson will be leaving her East Ward council seat a few months early to move to the NJ Assembly representing the 15th district. The last report she filed for the 2014 election cycle was in May of that year. She showed a balance of $2,085.05 and it was not marked as her final report for that cycle. The next report she filed was in October of 2014 and it was marked for the 2018 election cycle. She did not indicate any money carried over from the prior election cycle on the report but she noted a starting balance of $3,418.35, $660.17 in expenditures and a closing balance of $2,758.68. We're not sure why, but Reynolds Jackson filed successive D-1s for the 2018 election cycle.

Council President and West Ward councilman Zac Chester has left the date of the election cycle of some reports. His last 2014 R-1 appears to have been filed in July of 2017. It was not marked final and it showed a balance of $3,038.19. His next R-1, filed in October of 2017, was marked for the 2018 election cycle. It's staring balance was the same $3,038.19 but there was no indication of money carried over from a prior election.

If you've made it this far through this exercise, we applaud you.  You have shown more diligence than some of the candidates.

It is disturbing to us that individuals seeking positions of responsibility and oversight for the budget of the city of Trenton seem to have trouble with reporting their own campaign finances.  Any of the errors and omissions outlined above are rectifiable by the filing of amended or missing reports. 

Voters have to ask themselves if they want to or should support candidates who don't seem to have a problem failing to get the details of campaign reporting correct, if they bother to file at all.

As recent history has shown us, the inability and/or unwillingness of those seeking (and in many cases, holding) public office to pay attention and adhere to the reporting requirements might just be an indicator of poor performance on the job.

Caveat emptor!

Back to the future

Trenton's city council voted Thursday night to restore South Ward Councilman George Muschal to the position of president of the governing body.

This was accomplished after a long day of scrambling, huddling, researching, caucusing and planning because as the fiscal year draws to a close, certain members of the city council were expecting a reorganization meeting resulting in, probably, a new president being chosen along with a council vice president.

There were multiple problems with the expected scenario above.

1. The council's own rules of procedure as stated in the city code do not allow for the annual reshuffling of the deck as has been practiced by this body.
2. State law does not indicate that there would be an annual reorganization of the governing body.
3. Nothing in the rules of procedure or the state statutes creates the position of vice president.

What has happened is that this council has been operating out of compliance with its own rules. (It should be noted that the ersatz vice president position was instituted under the previous council and somehow got carried through to this one. An example of the poor performance of the the city law department, the municipal clerk's office and the governing body itself for not recognizing and correcting the deficiencies in their process).

On Tuesday night, East Ward Councilwoman Verlina Reynolds-Jackson wanted to introduce an ordinance to amend the rules of procedure to accommodate the errors in executed over the past several years. Even that move was a mistake as the council need not, indeed should not, amend its rules of procedure via ordinance because an ordinance requires the signature of the mayor. This adds a layer of oversight and inter-branch cooperation that state law does not require.

N.J.S.A. 40-69A:36 clearly gives the governing body the authority to set its own rules of procedure by resolution. The fact that Ms. Reynolds-Jackson attempted to use an ordinance to change the rules of procedure indicates a) lack of comprehension of and familiarity with her powers as a council member and b) a similar ignorance of the law on the part of whomever was advising her.

Besides going about amending the rules of procedure in a more complicated and unnecessary way, the council woman's proposed changes seem to conflict with the intent of state law.

The proposed ordinance was pulled and in its place, West Ward councilman Zachary Chester proposed a resolution amending the resolution naming Councilwoman Phyllis Holly-Ward president for the 2012-2013 year and extending her term through June 30, 2014.

This, of course, met with great resistance by Ms. Reynolds-Jackson, Councilwoman McBride and Councilman Bethea.

These three, who have generally been understood to stand with the administration of indicted Mayor Tony Mack in all matters, appeared to be fearful of having Ms.Holly-Ward continue as president. So concerned, they were adamant about continuing to violate the body's own rules of procedure just to ensure one of their own could obtain the chair of presiding officer.

Mr. Chester's resolution was tabled until Thursday's meeting so that everyone would have the opportunity to review what was being proposed (compliance with the law).

All accounts indicate that Thursday was spent hammering out a new plan...to restore Councilman Muschal to the presidency. Actually, this was a reasonable and workable solution.

Unfortunately, the internecine workings and innate mistrust amongst members of the council indicated the need to do some maneuvering to ensure that matters were conducted fairly and transparently.

This caused another flap when Councilwoman Reynolds-Jackson balked at a change in the voting order that would make her vote first rather than last. She objected that this was not the normal way they did things (the council generally votes in alphabetical order by last name, the same order they sit in on the dais). There is not set rule about this and, further, Ms. Reynolds-Jackson has expressed no problem with her colleague, Kathy McBride, sitting (out of order) at the far end of the dais just to make the point that she doesn't wish to sit next to Ms. Holly-Ward.

The double standard is obvious to all and it was generally conceded that, had she voted last, Ms. Reynolds-Jackson may very well have voted against her own proposal to restore Mr. Muschal to the presidency.

This is the painfully exemplary of how this governing body fails to work, as a whole, for the good of the city. Some members are more concerned with their perceived position and effectiveness than with doing the job they were elected to do.

With less than a year before the next election, we hope that the electorate of this city will awaken and deny the poseurs (in office or wannabes) the opportunity to mire the city in personal politics to the detriment of the greater good.

We've seen the way this body has conducted itself. We can, and must, do better.

Some people just don't get it

And apparently never will.

The depth of the ignorance of some members of the city’s governing body never ceases to astound us.

 

Last night, East Ward Councilwoman tried to introduce an ordinance amending the Rules of Procedure for City Council.

 

Her proposed amendments would have called for a reorganization of the body each year, rather than once every four years as it is now. Her ordinance also referenced the position of Vice President of Council.

 

This proposal is fraught with errors.

 

The first error is that amending the rules of procedure does not and should not require an ordinance when a resolution works just fine.

 

By utilizing an ordinance to make the changes, the governing body inadvertently drags the mayor into the mix. Ordinances, once passed, go to the mayor for signing.

 

Why would the governing body do such a thing when state law clearly gives them the authority to set their own rules by resolution? The following citation (our emphasis) is pretty clear on the matter.

 

N.J.S.A. 40:69A-36. Legislative power

 

1. The legislative power of the municipality shall be exercised by the municipal council, subject to the procedures set forth in this plan of government. Legislative powers shall be exercised by ordinance, except for the exercise of those powers that, under this plan of government or general law, do not require action by the mayor as a condition of approval for the exercise thereof, and may, therefore, be exercised by resolution, including, but not limited to:

 

a. The override of a veto of the mayor;
b. The exercise of advice and consent to actions of the mayor;
c. The conduct of a legislative inquiry or investigation;
d. The expression of disapproval of the removal by the mayor of officers or employees;
e. The removal of any municipal officer for cause;
f. The adoption of rules for the council;
g. The establishment of times and places for council meetings;
h.The establishment of the council as a committee of the whole and the delegation of any number of  its members as an ad hoc committee;
i. The declaration of emergencies respecting the passage of ordinances;
j. The election, appointment, setting of salaries and removal of officers and employees of the council, subject to any pertinent civil service requirements and any pertinent contractual obligations, and within the general limits of the municipal budget;
k. Designation of official newspapers;
l. Approval of contracts presented by the mayor;
m. Actions specified as resolutions in the “Local Budget Law” (N.J.S. 40A:4-1 et seq.) and the “Local Fiscal Affairs Law” (N.J.S. 40A:5-1 et seq.); and
n. The expression of council policies or opinions which require no formal action by the mayor

So, Ms. Reynolds-Jackson was ready to yield the body’s power to the mayor, for what purpose?

 

The East Ward councilwoman, along with her colleagues, at large councilpersons Kathy McBride and Alex Bethea have been chomping at the bit to take the gavel from the hands of current president, Phyllis Holly-Ward. They also wish to continue the non-conforming process of having a designated council vice president. This has come up before.

 

During Tuesday night’s proceedings, Councilwoman McBride asserted that there has been a council vice president “as long as {she} could remember.” If that is the case, the councilwoman must not have a very long memory.

 

The council vice president title was bestowed upon former West Ward councilwoman Annette Lartigue in the July 2006 reorganization of the body. Before that, if the designated presiding officer was not in attendance at a meeting, the body selected a president pro tem as proscribed in state statute and the existing rules of procedure. The council never formally or properly changed their rules to create the position of vice president. The current council, not knowing any better, carried on that erroneous for the first two years of this term. They never amended the rules of procedure and so current president Holly-Ward would not allow a nomination of someone to the non-existent post of vice president.

 

This has not sat well with Ms. Reynolds-Jackson who wanted, badly, to be the VP.

 

Compounding the problem was this body’s initial plan to rotate the presidency amongst its members by holding a reorganization meeting each year. This was done, we suspect, in large part to quiet the outrage expressed by Councilman Bethea and Councilwoman McBride when, in 2010, SouthWard councilman George Muschal was made the council president.

 

In a nice gesture towards his colleagues, Councilman Muschal decided he would serve for one year and then the council would reorganize and choose a new president. This opportunity to rotate the presidency was never formalized by amending the rules of procedure.

 

And they may not be empowered to make such a change.

 

In the state statutes there doesn't appear any power granted to Council to organize every year, or to limit the term of its president to one year or less than four years. There is no authority to elect a Vice President of Council. The law allows for a President and in the absence of a presence at a meeting, provides for the election of a temporary president to conduct the meeting. See subsection c below:

 

40:69A-180. Rules of procedure; quorum; ordinances and resolutions; presiding officer; compensation

 

(a) Council shall determine its own rules of procedure, not inconsistent with ordinance or statute. A majority of the whole number of members of the council shall constitute a quorum, but no ordinance shall be adopted by the council without the affirmative vote of a majority of all the members of the council.

(b) Each ordinance or resolution shall be introduced in written or typewritten form and shall be read and considered as provided by general law. The vote upon every motion, resolution or ordinance shall be taken by roll call and the yeas and nays shall be entered on the minutes. The minutes of each meeting shall be signed by the officer presiding at such meeting and by the municipal clerk.

(c) The council at its organization meeting shall elect a president of the council from among the members thereof and the president shall preside at its meetings and perform such other duties as the council may prescribe. In the absence of the president, the council shall elect a temporary presiding officer. The compensation of the mayor, council members and department heads shall be fixed by the council immediately after its organization. (our emphasis)

 

Just as current council president Holly-Ward has attempted to bring the body back into compliance by refusing to allow the designation of a vice president, Councilman Zachary Chester made a motion to amend last year’s resolution naming Holly-Ward president for one year and extending her term through June 30, 2014.

 

This action was greeted with great resistance from the axis of Bethea, McBride and Reynolds-Jackson. They sputtered and spit; claiming outrage and seeking legal advice from the city attorney (who actually seemed rather bewildered by the proceedings).

 

In the end, councilman Chester’s motion was held to be added to Thursday night’s docket. Leaving matters, once again, unresolved.

 

To be continued...

 

 

 

 

 

Read this!

Last night during the ongoing soap opera that Trenton’s city government has become, we were treated to yet another attempt to elect a council vice president.

Councilman at large Alex Bethea wanted to introduce a motion to nominate and vote on someone to hold the gavel should the president not be present at a council meeting.

Council president Phyllis Holly-Ward was having no part of it.

And for good reason.

The existing rules of procedure do not call for the election of a vice president of council.

Mr. Bethea is obviously ignorant of the rules. He complained, loudly and forcefully that he had never belonged to any organization that did not have rules providing for some one to preside over a meeting in the absence of the designated chair.

I would refer Mr. Bethea to the following section of the Rulesof Procedure as found in the Trenton city code:

RULE VI

Call to Order; President Pro Tem

The President shall take the Chair at the hour appointed for the meeting, and shall immediately call the Council to order. In the absence of the President, the Clerk or his/her designee shall call the Council to order. The Clerk shall then determine whether a quorum is present and in that event shall call for the election of a temporary President. Upon the arrival of the President, the temporary President shall forthwith relinquish the Chair upon the conclusion of the business immediately before the Council.

Voila!

Not a single mention of the existence of an elected vice president.

It should also be pointed out that the current rules of order do not call for the election of a new president each year of the for year terms. This is something that was started by this council without consulting or conforming to the current rules of order.

RULE IV The Presiding Officer

A.

Election and duties. The presiding officer of the Council shall be the President, who shall be elected at the organization meeting. The presiding officer shall preserve strict order and decorum at all regular and special meetings of the Council. He/She shall state every question coming before the Council and announce the decision of the Council on all matters coming before it. He/She shall appoint special committees of the Council. The President may vote on all questions, his/her name being called last. The President shall sign all ordinances and resolutions adopted by the Council during his/her presence. In the event of the absence of the President, such ordinances and resolutions shall be signed by the presiding officer.

Council president Holly-Ward is aware of this and has said that she wants to have a document drawn up and submitted for passage that would amend the rules to make sure the body is in compliance and vice/versa. We hope that this is accomplished sooner rather than later.

Mr. Bethea needs to read and familiarize himself with these rules and stop wasting the council’s time

She said, He said

On May 17, 2012, Councilwoman Phyllis Holly-Ward introduced a resolution stating that in an attempt to bring the governing body into compliance with the city code, they would vote on whether or not to extend the status of any acting directors who had been serving in that capacity beyond the 90 day limit.  This vote would take place at the June 7 meeting, giving the administration and/or those acting directors adequate notice to prepare to come before the council and make their case for continuing in the acting capacity.

The resolution passed, 6 – 0 with one abstention…Councilman Alex Bethea.

You may find a copy of the audio recording of the introduction, discussion and vote upon that resolution here.

Apparently, members of council and the administration have problems with short term memory. Listening to the proceedings a mere three weeks later makes one think that Councilman Bethea and Council President McBride had just flown in from some extended time away. They seemed to not recall the prior discussion and vote.

Worse, the Mayor, the Business Administrator and the acting department directors all seemed to forget (ignore is more likely) what was supposed to transpire on Thursday, June 7.

That day, Mayor Mack appeared before the city council to give a brief status update on the general state of affairs in the city and to take questions from the members. Councilwoman was somewhat surprised to find out the Mayor appeared to have no clue of what was about to take place:

Councilwoman Holly-Ward: …and then the other one was, you do know that we are having that 90 day review today?

Mayor Mack: Which one is that?

H-W: That the directors are coming before us for their review

MM: Yes. I ‘m hopeful that we will have that resolved before that time comes. When is that date?

H-W: It’s today.

MM: Today?

H-W: Today.

MM: Ok. Are the directors aware of that?

H-W: You’re business administrator, the clerk…

MM: Is that on the agenda?

H-W: Yes.

MM: Ok.

Later, after the Mayor had left and the governing body reached that point in the agenda:

Municipal Clerk Leona Baylor: The next item on our agenda is regarding 90 day review for acting directors.

Council President McBride then yielded to Councilwoman Holly-Ward. She in turn asked if the resolutions had been prepared.  The Clerk explained that she had drafts, but nothing that had yet been reviewed by the law department. Copies of the draft resolutions are passed around.

Council President McBride: And so, Mr. Denson, I just want to know the legal status as far as the resolutions are concerned.

Acting Law Director Walter Denson: Thank you Madame President. The city code section 2 – 4 it provides for  90 days for temporary appointments. It simply says those positions terminate after 90 days unless council passes a resolution to extend the time period.

H-W: For one, I wanted to say that just for us, as a body, this was done way back on May 17 which gave us more than enough time to have this together. And I know I put in a specific request which is almost two and half weeks ago for these to be individual resolutions and to state the language. So I will just say I am truly disappointed that we are at this juncture.

I guess it would take us to read them individually and not to mention we don’t even know if all the directors are here and once again the mayor obviously didn’t even know that they were coming before us to even have this issue addressed. He’s not here so once again for me it just takes it as another time where since nobody cares why should we?

Once again, McBride asks for Denson’s input. He just repeats what he has already stated, that the acting positions terminate after 90 days unless extended by council resolution.

Business Administrator Sam Hutchinson arrives and Ms. Holly-Ward addresses him:

H-W: I’m glad Mr. Hutchinson is here so we can ask Mr. Hutchinson what happened. He was here when we did it so what happened between him and the Clerk. Something didn’t connect.

Sam Hutchinson: Relative to what? Excuse me.

H-W: Why the resolutions for the acting directors weren’t presented....

SH: I was not aware of that either. My understanding was that at the last council meeting what council was asking was for an opinion from legal with respect to the Mayor’s 90 day appointment authority. That was my understanding.

H-W: No. We took a vote to have them come before us.

There was more discussion on how to proceed. Then Councilwoman Holly-Ward addressed Mr. Hutchinson again.

H-W: Mr. Hutchinson, do you want to do a presentation as to why they should stay as acting directors? Do you want to tell us what a wonderful job they are doing?

SH: What I will do a presentation on is the authority of the mayor to make appointments even in an acting capacity. I don’t think it is appropriate to discuss before council each individual unless of course you are going to “rice” them. And I certainly don’t think it is appropriate in a public session.

At this point Alex Bethea chimes in and the pitch is made for delaying, yet again, the action.

There was a lot more back and forth but a motion to reschedule the vote for a week later was defeated 5 – 2 (Bethea and McBride voting for it). McBride left and Council Vice President took the chair. All five resolutions were introduced and voted on. They passed 5 – 0 with Bethea abstaining.

You can download the full audio of the 35 minute discussion and vote on this matter as well as Mayor Mack’s surprise at finding out the 90 day review was scheduled for that day at this link.

Dead from the neck up

Trenton mayor and two council members prove they are fools.

The state of New Jersey has announced its transitional aid aware for Trenton for the current fiscal year (FY2012).  Rather, we should say the state of New Jersey has announced a choice in transitional aid amounts that Trenton can receive.  (Of course this is all pending the approval of the legislature to release the transitional aid funds but that is another story).

Mayor Tony Mack has a choice before him. He can select between receiving $22 million in state aid for the city or $16 million.

No brainer, right?

Not quite.

There are, after all, some strings attached to that $22 million.

In order for the city to get the higher amount of aid, the mayor must sign an MOU with the state wherein he agrees to the creation of a three person committee to oversee the process of hiring people to fill key spots in the administration.  The DCA would appoint one member, the mayor, would appoint one member and city council would appoint one member.

Considering the Mack administration’s track record in selecting qualified candidates for BA and department heads, it is not really a bad idea to have an oversight committee. Just a quick recap: over a half dozen business administrators (one who pleaded guilty to stealing campaign funds); one Housing and Economic Development nominee who is a convicted felon and another who has a history of failed businesses, judgments and tax liens against her; a municipal judge appointee with her own financial problems; a municipal court director with a police record (who, by the way, has been enjoying a six week and counting paid vacation while a superior court judge determines if he is qualified for the position); serious turnover in the law department. 

So, leaving the question of the personnel committee aside what are the scenarios for the two aid amounts? 

1. $22 million --- balanced budget, possible tax decrease, probable re-hiring of some police
2. $16 million --- balanced budget, probable tax increase, no additional police

Yet the mayor can’t decide.  What does that say about his ability to lead this city?

If the mayor’s apparent indecision isn’t bad enough how about this comment in today’s Times from Councilman At Large Alex Bethea:

“We certainly need the money, but I wouldn’t want to give away the whole house for an extra $6 million. You have to maintain some control, notwithstanding that we’ve made some mistakes in the past,” he said.

“If he decides that, ‘Okay, that’s okay, we’ll take the $22 million,’ then I’ll sign off. If he says this is going a little too far, then I would have to support the mayor on that decision as well,” Bethea said.

This is it Trenton? This is the best you can do? A prideful mayor who would flush away $6 million in state aid is not fit to lead and a councilman who cannot think for himself.

But wait, there's more.

Council President Kathy McBride, in the same Times article, says she’s waiting to speak to the mayor before making any more comments on the choice of aid packages.  In other words, she is waiting for Mayor Mack to tell her what to think and say as well.

At least East Ward Councilwoman Reynolds-Jackson is keeping her mouth shut on the subject...for now. Someone must have whispered in her ear that old adage about it being better to keep quiet and be thought a fool than to speak and prove it.

A report from the scene

Last night (Thursday, September 1, 2011) Trenton City Council held a marathon session.  After more than two hours of public comment, the Mayor arrived and Council went into executive session to grill Mr. Mack on several issues.

The meeting resumed quite late and went until a bit after 2:00 a.m.

Here is one eyewitness account of the "highlights" of the evening.

...council did not end until 2:15!!!! 

They passed almost all of the resolutions.

The ordinance on the water department was a TOTAL fiasco. Councilman Bethea was so confused. Council President McBride claimed she didn't have enough information until Councilwoman Caldwell-Wilson reminded her that Sewer came in to talk to them several months ago and this ordinance was originally presented in February.  Councilwoman McBride still claimed it wasn't enough. 

Edmund {Johnson...of the Water Utility} got up there and freaked out on Councilman Bethea after trying to explain it over and over again. It was horrific.

Councilwoman McBride tried to vote to have the ordinance removed. Council members Phyllis Holly-Ward, George Muschal, Zachery Chester, and Marge Caldwell-Wilson denied it then they voted to pass the ordinance. That passed by the same four votes. Then like a magician Councilman Chester pulled out an already done resolution to make it effective immediately and it passed by the power of four. It was an amazing display of effective government. I was really proud of them.

Councilwomen Reynolds-Jackson and Holly-Ward got into a fight and they started cursing at each other.  Muschal and McBride yelled at them. Then Caldwell-Wilson and McBride got into a fight. It was a hot ghetto mess.

They also did not pass the preliminary budget. Rousseau explained that it will affect the application for state aid.  Councilman Chester reminded Rousseau that he had asked for information from the administration at the meeitng where the budget was introduced and Rousseau admitted that he didn't address those issues. They are going to have a special meeting before September 9 so it doesn't affect the transitional aid application.

So there you have it, folks. Our city government in action.

Hello! Is there anyone in there?

Less than two months before a recall effort can be initiated about our sitting city council members or mayor, and all is quiet?

No rumblings of a committee or committees being formed to rid City Hall of the incompetence, ignorance and arrogance that has prevented us from making any progress towards solving the fiscal problems facing us.

No outrage at the repeated failings of the administration to follow the laws of the land, let alone use common sense in managing the city day to day.

No outrage at the repeated failings of members of the governing body (city council) to grasp the most basic concepts of proper process and procedure even when it is pointed out to them in plain English.  Repeatedly.

Nearly nine months into this administration and we don't have a budget; we are on the last few months of an IT consulting contract and no IT Director; taxes are up, services are down.

Nod if you can hear me.

Send in the clowns

Don't bother, they're here.

When we were younger one of the hallmarks of summer was the seemingly endless series of carnivals held on the grounds of area churches. Each week there were amusement rides, “games of skill” (as opposed to games of chance) like ring toss, softball throw, shooting gallery, and food available to one and all.

It was like going to the boardwalk or the midway at the state fair only in a church/church school parking lot. Every week, one carnival would close and another would open just down the road. We were never at a loss for entertainment.

So it appears to be with Trenton’s City Council-elect.

The outgoing council hasn’t quite left the building, but the replacements have already taken the stage and begun to amuse us.

This morning’s Trentonian reports South Ward Councilman and sole holdover George Muschal invited his colleagues-elect to a “get-to-know-you” dinner at Amici Milano Monday night. The story states that two of the new council people, Kathy McBride and Alex Bethea did not attend. McBride and Bethea are alleged to be balking at the fact that in a non-binding straw poll the five members present agreed to elect Mr. Muschal as Council President and Councilwoman-elect Phyllis Holly-Ward as Vice President.

“Muschal said all seven members had been invited, and that each received the same phone call from him asking that they attend a get-to-know-you get-together at the restaurant — “That’s a blatant lie!” said McBride, councilwoman-at-large — but that Bethea claimed not to know where the restaurant is, then called Muschal at 4 p.m. Monday to say he wasn’t coming.”

Great! McBride, known to be difficult to reach at times and a no show at some candidate forums seems to be inclined to remain elusive. Her choice but it is not a good trait for an elected official and she shouldn't criticize others for taking action in her self-imposed absence.

And Mr. Bethea, who has campaigned city-wide in the last three elections for a Council At Large seat should know where Amici Milano’s is by now. If he doesn't...what about searching the phone book or the internet or just asking someone where this place is.

Is this the overture to the soap opera that will be Trenton’s City Council for the next four years?