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!

The blame game

"It's not my fault. I didn't cause it." --- the late George Carlin, comedian

Trenton’s lame duck city council took a double-barreled blast in the Trentonian yesterday.

In his Thursday column, Trentonian scribe L.A. Parker claimed that the five members of council who voted against the city budget demonstrated a lack of “accountability.” Parker did give the South Ward Councilman, George Muschal, a pass for only having come on board after November’s special election. He chided the other four “No” votes (Bethea, Lartigue, Melone and Segura) for passing the responsibility determining the city’s tax increase to the state Division of Local Services. Parker claims the four did not own up to their part in helping “put Trenton in this position” of begging the State for money.

It comes as no surprise that Parker did not mention at all the irresponsible and spendthrift ways of the Doug Palmer administration that for the past two years has waited until the fiscal year was more than half over before submitting a budget to city council.

Instead, Parker wrote a companion piece in which Palmer “blasts” city council’s alleged irresponsibility in the matter.

“I introduced a budget to City Council and then it was up to them to schedule meetings or hold budget workshops. The ball was in their court. I don’t want to hear anything about my Plan B,” Palmer said earlier today.

“But now we have five city council members who are attempting to point the finger at me. I made my decisions. People elected me to be a leader and that’s what I have done. Being a leader is not for the weak of heart.”

Palmer praised President Paul Pintella and at large Councilwoman Cordelia Staton for “having the guts to take responsibility for the budget.

Both Parker and Palmer seem to ignore the fact that Council cannot act on the budget until it is submitted by the administration. And Palmer should have submitted a “worst case” budget months ago and not relied upon the Supreme Court to bail him out by allowing the TWW water sale to go through without the chance of a referendum, which it didn't do.

It is just too bad Parker doesn’t decry Palmer for not accepting his share of accountability in the matter.

Waiting

In a less than an hour, Doug Palmer will kick off his special meeting to deal with the city of Trenton’s budget crisis.


He’s no doubt spent the past day or two seriously preparing for this meeting.

Kent Ashworth, Palmer’s Public Relations flack, will have shaped a presentation out of familiar themes:

• The state has not paid its fair share; the city needs to redevelop the parking lots around the state buildings
• The people trying to stop the sale of the suburban part of the Trenton Water Works have helped bring us to the brink of fiscal ruin.
• Along the way Palmer will no doubt pause to give praise to his departing (but not soon enough) acting Business Administrator, Dennis Gonzalez.

 After running through this litany of cause and effect (none of which will reflect badly on his administration’s obvious failures over the past two decades), Palmer will point the verbal finger towards the State House and demand that Governor Christie give back all the funds he’s said he will cut and more.

Doug Palmer will do his best to level criticism and attach blame to anyone and everyone else but himself. He will not admit that he has driven the city’s fiscal ship up onto the rocks and that the sea of red ink is flooding us beyond repair.

 

He hopes that by doing this, he can stir up the emotions of city residents enough to lead them on a march from East to West State Street in a display of public outrage over the Governor’s heavy handed budget cuts.

 

But what good is there such a protest? Walking five blocks west on State Street will not restore the state’s charity funding for our foundering city.

 

 

 

***

While the clock ticks down on the Palmer “Reign of Error,” the wannabe successors have been largely quiet about their plans to deal with the city’s impending bankruptcy. Considering that three of the Mayoral candidates (Lartigue, Pintella, and Segura) have sat on city council for at least the past eight years, their respective silence is not surprising. They can and must take partial blame for the city’s current financial crisis because they consistently yielded their power and responsibility for the budget matters to Palmer and his staff.

 

Similarly, Public Works Director Eric Jackson has been a part of the current administration’s fiscal fumbling. Whether by design or directive, it doesn’t matter. He’s been a part of the Palmer team and must shoulder some of the responsibility for our broken budget.

 

Alex Brown, a member of the seriously flawed and mayor-appointed school board, has not proven his worth as a steward of the school system. Why would we trust him with running the city?

 

Of the other Mayoral candidates, none have yet come forward with solid plans for dealing with the looming deficits even though members of the voting public have strongly suggested they do so.

 

We’d expect Frank Weeden or John Harmon to demonstrate their business background and offer some concrete ideas for dealing with the city’s finances. So far, nothing has come forward from their respective camps.

 

Emmanuel Shahid Watson ben Avraham has demonstrated a knack for scamming the state for money, but it is not likely he can revamp the con game he ran on the state department of corrections into a program that will get funding for the city of Trenton.

 

Tony Mack has some business administration credentials of his own, but he’s not yet put out a definitive plan for dealing with the city’s finances going forward.

 

Keith Hamilton has proven to be the “quiet man” amongst the candidates, saying little other than pointing to holding the line on taxes in Mercer County during his tenure as a Freeholder. And this point, valid or not, he must share with Mack who sat on the Freeholder board for much of the same time frame as Hamilton.

 

We’ll see how many of these candidates stand up to be counted at today’s session in City Hall.

 

The early line

Interesting twists and turns on the road to the May 11 Trenton elections.

Wednesday marked the formal announcements of Freeholder Keith Hamilton for Mayor and South Ward resident Christine Donahue for Council At Large.

Hamilton, who apparently moved back into Trenton specifically to run for Mayor, has had a relatively undistinguished tenure as a County Freeholder.

Donahue is little known outside of the South Ward where she worked to help get George Muschal elected in November’s special election to fill the vacancy left by Jim Coston. She was also involved in some of the work to halt the sell off of part of the Trenton Water Works to NJ American Water.

At the same time as Hamilton is officially adding his name to the list of Mayoral wannabes, Wiley Fuller has dropped out of that race and opted to run for one of the three Council At large seats. Fuller ran for Mayor in 2006 and had a rather poor showing.

These moves bring the total of candidates to ten for Mayor and eight for the three Council At Large seats.

Doug Palmer has not signed up to endorse any candidate yet. He's no doubt waiting so he can play the role of "king maker."

The Trentonian reported yesterday that there is a move afoot to reduce the number of black candidates in the mayoral race. We here at the stoop are wondering why only the black candidates for mayor are being scrutinized when they all need serious vetting.

Some early handicapping

Let’s face it; this year’s cohort of candidates is pretty weak in the qualification department.

We have two current council people (Pintella and Segura), both of whom were elected largely due to outgoing Mayor Doug Palmer’s long coat tails and fat checkbook.

To be fair, Segura did have some strong financial support from North Jersey businessmen and his Dominican ancestry garnered political help from Democratic Party bosses who are salivating at the specter of getting a Hispanic mayor elected in Trenton. (Anyone remember the roll call of Dem biggies from then Senator Bob Torricelli, Representative Rush Holt, and on down through State Senator Shirley Turner, Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman, Assemblyman Reed Gusciora and various elected county officials present at Segura’s 2002 headquarters opening?)

Pintella has always been Doug’s water carrier on council and Segura has played along for all but the last 18 – 24 months of his two terms. Why would we want either of them to serve as Mayor? They should both drop out, now.

Outgoing West Ward Councilwoman Annette Lartigue has long had her eye on the mayor’s office. Now she’s making her move. As a member of council for the past 12 years, she shares some accountability for the many blunders of the current administration (not to mention a few of her own…anyone remember “Stand down officer!”?). She has no business thinking she’s qualified to run this city and should herself, stand down. But she won’t. So the people will decide for her.

Local businessman Frank Weeden is running again. It’s a shame. Frank would probably make an ok councilman. He’s been an outspoken critic of the waste and excesses of the current administration. But that doesn’t mean he’s up to the Mayor thing. This run could cost him his business, ANA Design candles, and that would be a shame for all concerned. Ego is an expensive mistress, Frank.

Right there, we’ve eliminated four of the contenders, one woman, one Hispanic, one white and two blacks. And we have only just begun.

John Harmon, the charismatic former head of the Metropolitan Trenton African American Chamber of Commerce (MTAACC) is running again. His professional demeanor and business credentials had a lot of people pulling for him four years ago. Harmon’s campaign seemed to be overcome with inertia; he never moved it past his opening position, came in a distant third in 2006 and has hardly been heard from since.

Emmanuel Shahid Watson ben Avraham has changed names and persona more times than Brett Farve has come out of retirement. He was also revealed to be at the center of a questionable state contract that paid his company millions of dollars with little oversight or measured effect. We can cut him from the list for his perpetual posing and hazy ethics.

Two more off the list. Now we’re down to four: Tony Mack, Eric Jackson, Keith Hamilton, and Alexander Brown.

Hamilton, as noted above, is virtually undistinguished in his political career. And his perception as a carpetbagger who moved back into Trenton specifically to run for Mayor isn’t giving him any positive points. Hamilton’s done nothing neither egregiously wrong nor wonderfully outstanding as an elected county official. He’s a non-starter.

Alexander Brown has been on and off and on the school board a few times. He’s headed up the schools’ Facilities Advisory Board which, along with the Schools Development Authority (SDA) and its predecessor the School’s Construction Corporation (SCC), has fumbled the entire high school financing deal. Further, as an appointee of the current administration he shares in culpability for the mismanagement of our failing school system.

Considering Alexander Brown as a viable candidate for Mayor is like saying Shirley Turner should be made a member of the board of directors of Garden State Equality.

This leaves Mack and Jackson, who (along with Segura) are most likely among the top three vote getters.* But placing first, second or third in the race doesn’t mean they are what the city needs.

Jackson is gentlemanly and soft-spoken. He’s overseen the massive Public Works Department and took the reins of the Library Board of Trustees after Mrs. Hayling resigned. Is he Mayoral material? Depends upon whether or not you believe the failings of his department were his fault or predicated by the actions and demands of the vengeful administration troika of Palmer, Gonzalez and Haynes.

Tony Mack is a scrappy fighter who came within a few hundred votes of getting in a runoff with Palmer in 2006. Tony has held responsible positions in city government, union leadership and was a multi-term freeholder (until he fell from favor with the County Dem machine---itself a mismanaged and ineffective organization). Mack’s reticence to readily accept the outcome of the last election and the issue of some bad checks are haunting him about now.

None of the candidates except Mack have yet to put forth any real concrete platform pieces. It is also early in the campaign and most likely the candidates will wait for the policy arguments to be framed by public opinion before going out on a limb and expressing themselves in detail on any topic.

The newspapers are right…there are too many people running for office. And too few real candidates.

*At this time. As with all contests, the betting line will most likely change overtime as the campaign progresses. Stay tuned for updates.

State of the City

Palmer heads to Chicago to meet with Team Obama while Trenton slides deeper into depression.

Picking up with last week's denied rumors of an early departure, the Trentonian's L.A. Parker reports Doug Palmer is winging to Chicago to talk urban policy with the President-elect's transition team.

Palmer is quoted in the article as saying, "This is not a job interview."

At the same time, West Ward Councilwoman Annette Lartigue is rumored to be ready to announce her intention to run for the Mayor's seat. Council President Paul Pintella is also allegedly eyeing a run for Mayor. Which makes it hard to believe Palmer's consistent denials that he's job hunting and hoping for an early out from his fifth term as Trenton's mayor.

But such denials are not out of character for the sultan of spin. For years, we've been treated to rosy portraits of Trenton's rebirth in Palmer's annual state of the city addresses which always include promises of great development projects and (last year) more cops on the street.

However, this year's fiscal mess; the layoffs and demotions of city employees (none from the Mayor's office!); and the loss of the Santiago residency case seem to have made Palmer fore go the pomp and irrelevance of the big State of City show and reception afterwards.

Instead, the Palmer machine has tried to place the blame for the city's shortcomings elsewhere while dressing up the Mayoral resume.

We said it last week and we say it again and will continue to say it. While Palmer cannot take sole blame for each and everyone of Trenton's woes, his failed policies and increasing arrogance have contributed significantly to the city's problems. He is not capable of serving in a higher capacity in any elected or appointed position and he certainly is not welcome to continue on here in Trenton.

That, friends, is the true state of the city.

And they wonder why people are disgusted

Apparently Ringling Brothers isn't the only circus in town this week. The antics at Tuesday night's City Council conference session regarding the proposal to spend $200,000 for new police guns were truly equivalent to a three ring circus.

For the details according to the Times, check out Andrew Kitchenman's article.

The Trentonian's L.A. Parker wrote it up this way.

On his blog, Broad Street Bank Building resident Greg Forester gave his own account of the meeting.

The anger and frustration at what should be a very simple decision to not spend money that doesn't have to be spent is completely irrational and irresponsible.

The behavior of former Police Director Santiago and West Ward Councilwoman Lartigue is beyond embarrassing.

Santiago's emotional outburst was unprofessional to say the least. His "calling out" of Council was not only immature and full of false bravado, it is but another example of why the man is not fit to lead Trenton's or any other Police Department.

Strangely, no one on Council saw fit to have the former Director removed from the meeting. Unlike last week when Frank Weeden let loose the "F-Bomb" and Councilwoman Lartigue immediately demanded security remove him from the room, no one even thought to admonish Santiago for his ill-behavior let alone ask to have him removed from the room. Just another example of how the public is treated differently than the Mayor's inner circle!

For her part, Councilwoman Lartigue's assertion that the city would be sued for breech of contract for not accepting the Springfield bid seems somewhat off target.

Since Council has yet to vote on awarding the contract, how can it be in effect and therefore, how can it be breached by not voting to approve it.

Also, the comment that the "free offer" from Glock might be illegal seems as though it may be off base if not totally incorrect.

And where, during all of this, is the City Attorney and the well-paid, outside consultant "Special Counsel?" Why haven't they weighed in on the proceedings with expert opinions on the legalities involved?

"Anonymous" poster "SportyJoe" very nicely framed the problems and challenged the two local newspaper reporters to answer some good questions in this post on the Trenton Speaks forum. He makes some raises some good points that should be answered and reported on to the public at large as well as to the Council members and their "legal representation."

Interestingly, the former Police Director is quoted as challenging Council about heeding information provided through "anonymous" commentary on the Internet as opposed to what the administration was spoon feeding them.

This clearly demonstrates the prevailing attitude that council should just be quiet and do the administration's bidding; and that the public should just be quiet. Period.

Council's recent history shows that a close majority is more interested in thinking for themselves...and presumably for the good of Trenton residents...than following the Palmer line. This is a good thing.

But for those who insist on carrying Palmer's water (Pintella and Staton, to be sure), they need to understand that this "anonymous" Internet chatter is what is forcing Trenton's City Government to operate in a more open and responsible fashion.

They should embrace it or relinquish their positions as erstwhile "representatives" of the people.

Civil is as civil does

Fear and loathing at the conference table.

The grapevine and the Internet were alive with chatter over last night's City Council conference session where Frank Weeden hurled the "F-bomb" at Council President Paul Pintella. Click here to read L.A. Parker's telling of the tale.

Now Mr. Weeden's remark was uncalled for and rude, but he did immediately apologize to his target (Pintella) and remove himself from the proceedings. Weeden's quick recognition of his faux paux does count for something in our book.

But what of the "target" himself? What role did he have in this that prompted such an outburst from a citizen?

If you've never attended a City Council meeting you wouldn't know it from the reporting, but the Council President can be quite rude to the public and his colleagues alike. Last night was a particularly blatant example.

Mr. Pintella was argumentative towards and dismissive of everyone and anyone who voiced an opinion that differed from his. This is troubling.

No Councilperson...especially the presiding officer, should argue and debate a citizen during the public comment portion of a public meeting. Mr. Pintella does this regularly...berating and arrogantly challenging the very people he took an oath to serve. This happened repeatedly last night and has happened regularly over the course of Mr. Pintella's tenure on Council.

Pintella debated and dismissed comments about the proposed gun purchase for the Trenton Police; he argued against a citizen's concern for preserving two grand buildings in the Greenwood-Hamilton Historic District in the face of having them razed to build a 25 story office building; and he was sharp with and critical of other speakers when they had difficulty making clear their points/questions to the Council.

The Council President also debated West Ward Councilwoman Lartigue when she asked to pull the second reading of the ordinance that would essentially strip the landmarks protection from the Greenwood Avenue buildings. Responding to the concerns raised by a citizen, she wanted to slow the process until there could be further discussion that such a move was in the best interest of the city. Pintella wanted to bulldoze ahead (and we all know his history when it comes to preservation issues---"new bricks" being better than "old bricks," "the train of progress" etc.).

Discussion and the expressing of different points of view with an eye towards forming a consensus is the backbone of our democratic process. And even if a consensus isn't reached, if the parties can agree to disagree and move forward its OK. What is not OK is the arrogance and condescension exhibited in Mr. Pintella's remarks toward citizen and colleague alike.

Another problem with the Council President's deportment is that we cannot think of a single time that he hasn't taken the Administration's side in one of these "discussions." Now he is entitled to his opinions on matters and they may just happen to coincide with that of the Mayor and his other minions. But it seems unlikely that a truly thinking individual would side 100% of the time with anyone on every issue. To us, this demonstrates a lack of cognitive ability on Pintella's part and/or an unwillingness to go against his "master," the Mayor.

That is a problem for the person who presides over the legislative body and therefor is supposed to provide the checks and balances to the administration. And it is but one more sign of the contempt has for the residents of Trenton.

Interesting that, even though his contempt and disdain for his colleagues is regularly on display, they were the ones who voted him into the position.

The final point we'd like to make about Mr.Pintella's pitiful performance as a presiding officer is that he breaks all of the rules governing the chair of a body.

It is our understanding that under proper and normal rules of procedure it is the presiding officer's duty to maintain order and move the agenda along. The chair is not supposed to express personal opinions on matters without first relinquishing the gavel. Certainly, they may clarify points, cite facts or ask/answer questions of a member of the board (in this case, Council) or body (the public).

Discussion and debate are to be moderated by the chair. The Council President's frequent blathering of personal opinions and beliefs on the matters before the group are inappropriate and out of line.

We're pretty certain Mr. Pintella has not studied or even familiarized himself with Robert's Rules of Order. If he had, he would know that his opinions are more properly kept to himself and expressed through his vote on the matter at the proper time.

It's a shame that neither the City Attorney or the highly compensated "Special Counsel" seem able or willing to correct and corral the Council President.

And it's a sad testament to the failed leadership of this city that a person "elected" to represent the city at large and then "chosen" by his colleagues to chair the council is such an incompetent.

Mr. Weeden apologized to the Councilman.

Councilman Pintella should apologize to the people of Trenton for failing to correctly uphold the duties of his office.