"And this ordinance has been properly adopted."

Edited on February 22 to include the response from the Municipal Clerk (see end of post)

Or has it?

At the January 16, 2018 meeting of Trenton's city council Ordinance 17-80 was up for it's second reading and public hearing. There were only four members of council present when the ordinance came up and the vote was three to one in favor. (Audio here)
Trenton's Municipal Clerk, Dwayne Harris, can clearly be heard saying after the vote, "And this ordinance has been properly adopted."  (Audio here)

Except that is wasn't.

The exact same ordinance came up for reintroduction (first reading) on Thursday, February 15. How can this be?

Recap

From the moment that it first appeared on the council docket in early December of 2017, we argued against giving Mr. Torricelli more tax breaks for his project. Not surprisingly, the ordinance passed first reading at the December 7 meeting. The council members voting in favor of the introduction of Ordinance 17-80 were Mr. Bethea, Ms. Caldwell-Wilson, Mr. Chester, Mr. Harrison, and Ms. Reynolds-Jackson. Ms. Holly-Ward and Mr. Muschal were apparently absent as no vote was recorded from either of them.

The second reading was postponed from December 21 and rescheduled for January.

At the January 16 meeting, the ordinance was brought up for it's second reading. According to the audio (provided courtesy of Kevin Moriarty) of the meeting, there was no one present who wished to speak on the matter so the public hearing portion was closed. The ordinance was then brought forth for a vote. Council members Caldwell-Wilson, Chester and Holly-Ward voted in favor of granting the 10 year tax abatement. Councilman Muschal voted against. Council members Bethea, Harrison and Reynolds-Jackson were absent.  The Clerk declared the ordinance adopted.

A couple of weeks later, we started hearing murmurings that something was up and the ordinance hadn't passed. Then, sure enough, Kevin Moriarty spotted an item on the docket for February 15.

How could this be?

We submitted an Open Public Records request to the municipal clerk asking for the ordinance, its effective date, any communications regarding why it may not have gone into effect, minutes of the meeting where it was adopted, etc.

What we got back was a copy of the ordinance with a large stamp across the front page noting that it had failed to be adopted on January 16.

While we received a copy of the minutes of the December 7 meeting at which Ordinance 17-80 was introduced, were not provided with the minutes of the January 16 meeting because (per the Deputy Clerk's note) they "have not been prepared."

We asked for information on exactly why the ordinance failed on January 16. Trenton's Municipal Clerk, Dwayne Harris, sent along the following information regarding why the ordinance was NOT adopted on January 16:

"Ordinance 17-80 failed upon second reading because it failed to obtain the affirmative vote of a majority of all the members of the council, which would be four, as required by NJSA 40:69A-180." 

For those interested, here's the relevant part of the cited statute:

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. 

The key phrase being "but no ordinance shall be adopted by the council without the affirmative vote of a majority of all members of the council".

On January 16, only four members were present for the vote. Three of them voted in the affirmative, one against. Three is less than a majority of the total membership of the governing body. The ordinance was therefore not adopted.

Mr. Harris notified Council of his error on January 17th and made a public announcement during the February 15th council meeting.

It's probably all moot as the matter will likely succeed in its second go around. But Trenton again experiences a procedural fail.

Just vote NO!

Tonight, Thursday, December 21, 2017, the Trenton City Council will meet. On the docket is the second reading and public hearing of Ordinance 17-80. If passed, this ordinance authorizes Mayor Eric Jackson to enter into an agreement with Woodrose Properties Golden Swan Urban Renewal LLC for a long term (10 years) tax abatement.

Woodrose Properties Golden Swan Urban Renewal LLC is one of several property holding companies owned by former Senator Robert Torricelli. We've covered this before (most recently here) but we feel it is important to recap the matter once again before tonight's vote.

The property in question is located at the corner of Front and S. Warren Streets in downtown Trenton. Formerly known as "the Caola properties", the city acquired it in 2001 through condemnation for $164,000. Woodrose then acquired it from the city for $1 in 2005. 

Interestingly, in a Trentonian newspaper report from January 2005, then Mayor Doug Palmer told reporter Charles Webster that...

"Torricelli told us he's not looking at state leases, AND HE DOESN'T WANT ANY CITY MONEY OR TAX ABATEMENTS." {emphasis mine}

That very same article reports that the city of Trenton "will replace the roof and provide other upgrades." Additionally, it was stated that "a back portion of the building was removed" to stabilize the structure.

By March of 2005, the city was in negotiations with Torricelli about a possible tax abatement. In a March 4, 2005 article in the Times, Eva Loayza wrote:

"[City Assistant Business Administrator Dennis] Gonzalez said the city is still negotiating whether to give Woodrose a short-term tax abatement or start tax payments right away."

As it turns out, the city did grant the developer a five year tax abatement where it would only pay 15 percent of gross revenues rather than the full taxes. (We estimate that the tax abatement ran for five years from as early as October of 2007 until the end of 2012).

The city also awarded $202,425 in Urban Enterprise Zone (UEZ) funds to cover "cost overruns". Both were reported in a December 8, 2007 article in the Times.  (The city also granted $89,000 UEZ funds to another Torricelli project around the corner on W. State Street that same year).

Now, Torricelli wants to convert the office space in the building to more residential and he wants to make improvements to the HVAC system. The total project cost is estimated at about $230,500 and should take about four months.

Other than the short-term construction jobs, there will be no increase in employment associated with this project. The developer claims there is a demand for residential space downtown but the information provided with the proposed ordinance shows nothing to back that up.

And the council, so far, has not asked any probing questions about the application. In fact, when it was discussed at the council conference session on Tuesday, December 5, 2017, only Councilman Bethea asked about it. He wanted to know how long the abatement would be for (10 years) and how much the city would get.

Director of Housing and Economic Development Diana Rogers gave bare bones answers, merely explaining that the taxes paid would be based on a formula. The exchange between the two of them took an entire two and half minutes.(about 21:33 in the audio linked above) Two and one half minutes to discuss a 10 year tax abatement! (Compare that to the 15 minutes or so spent talking about an proposed BUT TABLED ordinance that would revise how the city towing contracts are handled!).

The formula, per the developer's application would be a 10 year tax abatement based on 10% of the annual revenue of the finished project minus a deduction for a vacancy rate. As proposed, the annual net income of the project would be $13,404.80 and if the abatement is granted, the city would receive $14,340 per year in taxes for the life of the abatement. If income on the project doesn't meet that projection, the taxes paid to the city would be less; if the income is higher, the taxes paid would be more.

If we were sitting on council, our vote would be an emphatic "NO".  The developer has utilized the generosity of the taxpayers in the city of Trenton for over a decade. In fact, in his little address to the council on December 5, Mr. Torricelli touted how he hopes there will be more tax credits coming so he can do other development projects in the city (specifically his now surface parking lot across from the Transit Center).

Mr. Torricelli knows very well how to play the system. He'd adept at using other people's money to meet his ends. It's time for him to pay his own way.

Tag! You're IT!

Tonight, Trenton's governing body will, yet again, vote on a contract for IT Consulting services. It has become every bit as hot button an issue this year as it was five years ago under the Mack administration.

There have been a few articles in the local press, some good blogging by Kevin Moriarty, plus some extended commentary on social media. Here are three points that we think must be kept in mind when discussing this situation and deciding the best direction from here.

1) The shortcomings of the City of Trenton's IT system should not be blamed solely (if at all) on the current consultant, Associated Data Processing. ADPC is a vendor hired to support the city's various departments and their IT needs.

Over the years, many have commented on how the city has lagged in effectively using technology to increase the efficacy of its many operations. We've begged for more modern, up to date, services.

Is it the fault of the vendor supporting the existing systems that the city has not drafted a plan to improve the technology used or committed the resources necessary to execute a plan (if there was one)? NO!

If you know your car needs new tires, a transmission rebuild and a tune up but don't direct your mechanic to do the work and authorize the cost of same, is it the mechanic's fault that you can't get up to speed on Rte 1? NO!

If you talk about wanting to lose weight, quit smoking and get in shape with your personal physician but don't follow her suggestions on how to achieve those goals, is it her fault? NO!

Why are so many so quick to blame ADPC for the shortcomings of the Trenton's IT infrastructure?

Just read the documents included with the RFP and you'll see that in the past five years there has been few substantive discussions with either the past or current administrations about upgrading the city's IT system. Contained within in that RFP is an assessment report done, at the City's request, by the (then) current contractor, ADPC. Or we should say, a part of the report is included.

The RFP only contained 36 pages, about half, of the full assessment report. The parts that were omitted were the recommendations, evaluations of ADPCs performance, and lists of aborted or stalled projects, etc. The full report can be found here.



One example...stretching back to the Palmer administration, the city has been "ready" to implement a new computer based system for issuing parking permits and passes. This started when the current Mayor was the Director of Public Works (under whose supervision falls the Division of Transportation) and has been talked about through the Mack years and into the present.The city has yet to commit the resources (funding) to get this system up and running. That is hardly the fault of ADPC.

Another example, the city has failed to update and maintain its GIS system, rendering it somewhat less than useful.

In the full IT Assessment report, various departments rated ADPC's performance. We'll let the document speak for itself here.

2) The RFP process has, by all accounts, been seriously flawed. Flawed to the point where it certainly appears, at least superficially, that it was done in an attempt to manipulate the outcome. Let's start with the simple fact that the city's purchasing agent is not certified (nor does she have to be, by state statute, but she hasn't been able to pass the test). So how credible is the bidding process for anything when it is overseen by someone who cannot meet the requirements for certification set by the state?

With regards to the IT contract, the members of the scoring committee are somewhat suspect. Are they qualified to evaluate IT matters? Are they free of conflicts of interest and totally objective? Was the hired "professional" really able to evaluate a dozen responses from bidders in only the two hours he was paid for?

The mere fact that the administration only published part of the IT Assessment report, leaving out the solid recommendations and lack of commitment to upgrades and improvements is a pretty good indication to us that they were trying to push their shortcomings (and those of their predecessors) off on someone else.



3) It is very doubtful that FCC Consulting is truly the best firm out of all the companies that responded to the RFP. A simple review of the websites of all the companies shows a notable lack of professionalism in FCC's site when compared to the competitors. All of the other firms show at least a small staff and multi-person leadership. FCC's is obviously a one person show at the moment, run out of the principal's rented home. Not very confidence instilling.

What happens if FCC gets the contract? How quickly can he staff up to meet the demands of the work? Can he recruit people with the right skills and experience to serve what will surely be FCC's biggest client?

Does FCC have the financial wherewithal to manage this contract? Doubtful.

Mr. Carothers' business history is rather checkered. There are two judgments from 2008 and 2009 totaling almost $70,000 that are listed on the state judiciary website as still being open. Why hasn't he been able to pay these off?

The business registration for the various LLC's Mr. Carothers has created have all been suspended at one time or another for failure to file annual reports. Filing is a simple process, done online. And if your company goes out of business, you are supposed to file that as well.

Then there is Mr. Carother's personal history of bankruptcy and such. Again, not a lot to build confidence in his ability to successfully perform the important work that the city so badly needs.

So, what to do?

It is possible that there is a better company out there that can help Trenton move ahead in the IT game. There is really no way of knowing until the administration maps out a plan, on its own or with the help of a consultant, as to what it wants to achieve, when it wants to achieve it by and earmarking the funds and human resources to get it done.

For the long term, a plan must be drawn up and a timetable for implementation adopted.

In the short term, the city needs a capable IT consultant. Why not keep ADPC at least through the process of developing a strategy for moving ahead? And if not ADPC, then at least obtain the services of a truly experienced, financially stable vendor to handle the current needs.

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.

Disappointed

Trenton City Council held a special meeting Tuesday night. The purpose of the meeting was to present publicly the legal process for filling any vacant elected offices (council or mayor).

The meeting was relatively brief, under an hour. The information was presented, council was provided an opportunity to raise any questions (they had none) and then members of the audience were invited to ask questions.

Despite reports last week of errors in the way the city legal department described the process to council in advance of the meeting, the information provided tonight was correct.

In short:

• If a vacancy occurs in a council position, the remainder of the governing body appoints a replacement by a majority vote. 
• If a vacancy occurs in the office of mayor, the council president becomes the acting mayor until the body appoints a replacement.
• In either case, if the vacancy occurs prior to September 1 of the final year of the term, a special election is scheduled for the next general or municipal election, whichever comes first.
• If a vacancy occurs after September 1, the appointee completes the term; no special election is required.

There were some good questions raised by members of the public tonight.

 

Q: Who can be appointed? A: Anyone who is legally qualified to hold the seat. Not just a member of council or the administration.

Q. What constitutes a majority vote on an appointment? A. Four votes out of the seven possible (in the case of a tie in voting for a replacement council member, the mayor may vote).

A little trickier question was about whether there would be an open process of soliciting names and resumes of those interested in filling any future vacancies and just how that process might be handled.

The council president promised as open and transparent a process as the law allows and an open call for submissions from interested parties. The law director rightfully pointed out that criteria for evaluating the submissions would need to be agreed upon by the governing body and made known to the public.

All well and good. Moreover, the proceedings went better, largely, than one might have expected after reading of the earlier confusion over the actual process.

What was unsettling, though, were questions raised about whether or not members of city council had been approached about securing their votes for one particular individual or another to be appointed mayor in case of a vacancy.

The reason for the line of questioning was a obvious belief that some sort of back room deal had already been made on just who council would appoint to fill a vacancy in the office of mayor.

The political climate in Trenton has long fostered an abundance of conspiracy theories. One could suppose it is a natural by-product of politics.

However, if this is the tone the upcoming campaign is going to take than we have a big problem.

Trenton is in crisis. We need competent, steady leadership. We do not need another thin-skinned, suspicious, administration. We need to build coalitions and to include all segments of the population. We can no longer afford to discount or disparage others simply because they are rivals or challengers.

It is a given that candidates cannot absolutely control what their supporters say and do, but they can make an effort or distance themselves from those who won’t behave civilly.

There is no room for the accusatory challenges launched from the podium tonight. Nor is there cause for the commentary passed between various members of the audience. That kind of behavior is not going to save Trenton. It is only going to send us further along the road to dysfunction and divisiveness.

If you are going to campaign through innuendo and rumor, you are not going to win a lot of votes. And you are not going to help Trenton.

It would benefit us all if candidates and their supporters would keep their conspiracy theories to themselves unless and until they have very credible evidence to back up their assertions. Failing to do so will not only hurt their chances of obtaining the goal they seek, it will severely inhibit the city’s ability to move out of these troubled times and onto recovery.

Isn't the whole idea for us to be better, do better than our recent history indicates we are?

Take a longer view

On January 11, the city administration announced it was ready to make a deal with Thomas Edison State College for the Glen Cairn Arms site.

That announcement took many by surprise.

The swiftness with which the proposal was dropped on the public and the city council, which must approve the deal, raised eyebrows. Specifically, the proposed one time fee of $300,000 in lieu of any property taxes going forward has generated some pretty stiff resistance.

There has been lots of discussion, most of it online, over the merits of this proposal. Some of it has been enlightening; some has been sarcastic and/or snarky.

Some of us feel that the TESC proposal may not be the highest and best use of the parcel at 301 West State Street. It would be more palatable if there were some sort of structured annual payment in lieu of property taxes built into the package. This just seems to be common sense in a city that is drowning in a sea of tax-exempt properties.

Those who favor the proposal as is, say we should not let the minimal, one-time payment stand in the way of what will be a highly visible project.

"Get something done," is their mantra, "and other development projects will follow."

The implication is that by treating the TESC project as a "loss leader" it will drive other developers to the city looking to do deals.  The supporters of the project also tout the secondary benefits of spin off jobs and revenues for existing local businesses.

It is an old argument. It has been tried. It has not been successful.

Getting into the game

We can readily point to the Baseball Park and Arena as examples of big-ticket projects that involved public money and have yet to generate any significant economic development.

Yes, people attend events at both venues. However, the self-contained nature of both facilities makes it unnecessary and unusual for patrons to visit other businesses before or after attending games and concerts. People may come into Trenton to participate in these events, but they do not, as a rule, spend money at other businesses in the city.

This is not just the reality here, studies from around the nation have shown little proof that these public facilities stimulate the local economy. Ken Belson wrote about this in an article published in the New York Times on September 7, 2010.

James Joyner wrote about the faux benefits of publicly financed private sports stadiums in his "Outside the Beltway" blog last May.

The Taxpayers League of Minnesota sums up the fallacy in eight points in this document.

There may be some jobs created that are filled by Trenton residents but most are part-time and or seasonal.

Similarly, those that provide supplies and services to either facility are not necessarily or predominately Trenton-based.

It is a pretty safe bet that no one moved to the city because of the ballpark or arena. Government funded sports venues simply do not spur economic development.

Checking in

The city owned Marriott Hotel on Lafayette Street is another example. We were "assured" by the Palmer administration that a top-notch hotel located just steps from the seat of state government would be just the thing to spark an explosion of economic opportunity downtown.

The hotel has yet to turn a profit. Not only is the city (read: taxpayers) on the hook for the bond debt used to finance the construction of the building, it is also required to make up any operational deficits.

Last year, we footed the bill for a $500,000 cash infusion to keep the doors open and lights on. This year, we may very likely be asked for another round of funding to cover operating expenses.

Many of us told then Mayor Palmer this would happen when he proposed it, but he did not want to hear it. He forced his way on the city and we are paying the price, litereally, for his arrogance.

One way out of this is to just sell the hotel outright. For whatever price. It would, at the very least, free up the taxpayers from having to fund anymore operating deficits and put the property on the tax rolls. Even with likely abatements, the city might actually see some revenue from the property at last.

If a private owner cannot make the hotel work, that would be sad, but at least the city will only be dealing with the "fixed" cost of the bond debt (principal and interest). The city (and state) put out the money to build this and there have been no real returns on that investment. It certainly has not generated any real development downtown or increased ratables in the city.

Around the corner and up the block

To go along with the construction and opening of the hotel, the city looked for ways to jump start development in the immediate vicinity. As early as 2000, with the planning for the hotel under way, the city looked around and decided they needed to purchase the long vacant "Caola property" at S. Warren and W. Front streets. The city paid $162,863.69 for the property and began to market it. (Bear in mind, at the same time the city had taken possession of the Glen Cairn Arms four years earlier but was by then embroiled in a dispute over the final value of the property).

In 2002, not quite a year after the city settled on the Caola property, they had a well known and respected developer, Enterprise Real Estate Services, interested in doing a project there. Enterprise, an arm of the highly successful Rouse Company, planned to spend $4,000,000 on the project. Despite the fact that Enterprise was not looking for any tax breaks for the project, the deal never went through.

At the time, there were murmurings that Enterprise requested the city kick in some money to help with the asbestos and lead paint situations on the site, as well as partial demolition. The city said "No." Enterprise walked.

Then along came former Senator Robert Torricelli and his Woodrose Properties. They made a proposal to the city and were designated the developer. Woodrose got the property for $1 and a tax abatement. The city did the demo work, removed the asbestos and stabilized the building. Trenton threw some Urban Enterprise Zone money at the project as well.

Was it worth it?

The "restaurant" that was envisioned for the site is a Subway sandwich shop (and not a new business...just one that relocated from around the corner on State Street).

One of the retail spaces just recently became a yoga studio. Another retail space appears to remain vacant.

Has it helped revitalize the downtown? Not really.

We will leave the discussion of how much favoritism might have been shown this particular developer, and why, for another time. (Read here and here for previous posts on this).

Enter the Matrix

Just a block from the Woodrose property is another development project that was hailed as a turning point for the city. That would be the office building at 32 East Front Street that currently houses the regional offices of Wells Fargo (nee, Wachovia) bank.

Originally undertaken by the Economic Development Corporation for Trenton, the project encompassed taking a former two level parking lot and building a parking garage and office building on the site. The garage would be turned over to the Trenton Parking Authority to operate as a replacement for the surface lot. The office building was to house the offices of the Hill Wallack law firm along with other commercial/retail space.

The EDCT was another initiative of the Palmer administration. For sizable contributions, local institutions received seats on the non-profit development corporation's board. In simple terms, the idea was the seed money would fund the development of the buildings. The monies realized from the successful completion of the initial project would be rolled back into the EDCT's fund so it could do other projects.

The short version of a long story is that the EDCT failed to complete the project. It was taken over by an experienced, professional developer and finished. The original anchor tenant, Hill Wallack, opted out of the deal. Finally, Wachovia (now Wells Fargo) moved their offices from Ewing to the building.

The building was never fully rented out. When the current lease is up sometime later this year, Wells Fargo will apparently be vacating the space downtown for quarters in West Windsor.

If the past is an indication

The point of all this is to give the proponents of TESC project some perspective.

Economic development in Trenton is not easy. It is complicated by the politics one has to play. Good deals (like the Enterprise Real Estate proposal for the Caola building) are shunted aside for less desirable ones (Woodrose's version) that end up costing the city more and have marginal effect (like the hotel).

In the end, we, the taxpayers, lose.

Development has been and continues to be more about the political connections and the well-being of the principals and government officials. Your run of the mill, tax paying resident is the ultimate pawn in these deals because, when the promised benefits fail to materialize, we pick up the slack. And the tab.

There has never been a long view of what was best for the city. Our leaders have never looked much past the current or next election cycle when it comes to making development deals.

Former Mayor Doug Palmer said it himself. In an article by Tom Hester, Jr. published in the Times, March 21, 2000, Palmer explains just how long his vision is.

''I don't look at the city today,'' Palmer said. ''I look three, four, five years down the road and what we are doing and what possibly can be.''

Our economic development plans need to look further down the road than the current administration or the next election. We need a policy and process in place that guides our decisions past what is best at the moment and toward that goal of sustainable revenue growth.

It is long past time for this city to move beyond the "loss leader" mentality and favored nations deals and work towards the creation of a comprehensive development strategy that is fair to all proposals. Moreover, fair to the taxpayers as well.

The TESC proposal, as it stands at this writing, simply does not help us towards a financially secure future.

TWW redux

The Times this morning ran an article about the many vacancies at the Trenton Water Works. The jobs run the gamut from laborer to licensed technicians.

Part of the article discusses the difficulty in filling the technical positions with qualified city residents.

Unfortunately, the story didn’t mention that some of the vacancies were created by the demotion and then subsequent dismissal of qualified technicians in apparent retribution for their testimony against Stanley “Muscles” Davis, the half-brother of Tony Mack.

Davis, you will recall, is now serving time for his role in a scam where he did “side jobs” for TWW customers using TWW materials and equipment on TWW time while pocketing the cash payments for the work.

TWW, a money making city asset that many of us fought hard to keep intact, has been abused and ignored under the current and past administrations. It has been used as a source of patronage jobs.  One just has to look at the hires made after July 1, 2010 to see that.

Names like Terrance Bailey, Dave Briegle, Charles Hall, Henry Page (now out on disability we understand), Rodney Washington and, later, Paul Harris and Linda Gundy were all added to the payroll under the current CO. Briegle and Hall were recently laid off in a corrective action because they should have gone in the September 2011 layoffs but were passed over so the administration could target the technicians mentioned above. Hall, as we now know, did precious little work for TWW. Instead he was “loaned” to the city to oversee multi-million dollar projects in the parks and is alleged to have been involved in the federal case against Mack et al.

Paul Harris, at first an “intern” with the city was moved to TWW earlier this year although he still seems to spend most of his time in and around city hall and not the utility supply shed where he is supposedly assigned.

This is the kind of inept and inappropriate management that needs to stop. While we understand that patronage is a time honored political tradition, it is costly and it serves no one well…except those getting the jobs.

As quoted in the article, Councilman Muschal certainly supports an increased effort to fill the jobs with residents.

“There’s a lot of job opportunities we can put out there. I would certainly like to see priority put toward the vacancies in the water utility.”

There are some simple, straightforward steps that can be taken to attract, develop and retain and qualified workforce for TWW.

1. Promote and execute a job fair specifically for the utility. Tap into the local trade associations, chambers of commerce, tech schools and such to seek out candidates for the vacancies.
2. Institute a training and development program for TWW employees to help them become more proficient at their jobs.
3. Encourage those with interest and aptitude to get appropriate certifications so they can advance. Consider holding training and coaching sessions to help them prepare for the required tests. Reimburse those who successfully obtain certification for the fees involved in return for a commitment to remain with the utility for a set number of years.
4. Consider settling the pending lawsuit by rehiring the employees who claim they were wrongfully dismissed because of their testimony in the Davis case.

And we cannot ignore the fact that we need to reorganize the city departments to put water and sewer in their own department. Councilman Chester reportedly brought this up again at the recent budget meeting.

We wrote about this previously and how easy it would be to achieve.

It only takes five votes, council. Five votes.

 

 

A lesson to be learned

The recent bribery trial of Hamilton Mayor John Bencivengo continues to send ripples through the normally placid pond of township politics.  Bencivengo rightfully resigned one day after a federal jury convicted him on all counts of accepting money in exchange for offering his political influence. 

Filling the vacancy created by the resignation has caused lawyers to examine and re-examine state law to ensure proper process is followed. At the same time, it has generated its own set of controversy and questions.

Under the Mayor/Council form of government the presiding officer of the municipal governing body (council president) assumes the duties of mayor immediately upon the vacancy of the office.

The governing body then has 30 days to appoint an acting mayor to hold the office until a special election can be held to choose a replacement to complete the term. If the vacancy comes after a certain point in the final year of the term, the acting mayor chosen by the governing body completes the remainder of the term (no special election held).

In the case of municipalities with partisan elections, such as Hamilton, the party whose nominee held the vacated seat (the GOP in the current example) has 15 days from the creation of the vacancy to submit three names to the governing body to consider for the appointment as acting mayor. In municipalities with non-partisan elections, the governing body selects the individuals for consideration.

Watching the second act of this political soap opera is not just about the entertainment value. Sure, it offers us lots of opportunity for sarcasm and snarky comments. It also provides a valuable lesson in why we must all get involved in carefully vetting and choosing our elected leaders.

For Trentonians who have already learned the hardships of making poor choices in leadership it provides a very real case study of what we may ourselves be going through in a few months time.  Should Mayor Mack be indicted, go to trial and be convicted, our city will be faced with the very same scenario, but with some complicating twists of our own making.

The elevation of the council president to acting mayor upon the vacancy of the office will most likely set off a pyrotechnic display not witnessed in Trenton since Dec. 26, 1776. Any decision made by the person assuming the mayor’s chair is likely to be questioned/challenged by the governing body, the members of which can rarely agree on what day of the week it is let alone actions to be taken. (Example from Hamilton: the dismissal of Business Administrator John Ricci by acting Mayor Kevin Mears is generating comments and criticisms according to press reports).

Complicating matters will be the oversight on hiring and firing granted the DCA via the state aid MOU. No mayor of Trenton, acting or elected, currently enjoys a free hand in making key personnel decisions such as department directors and the business administrator. There are, however, other appointed (non-contractual) employees who could be, and probably should be, immediately dismissed by any acting mayor.

The selection of a replacement mayor, whether temporarily until a special election is held or to complete the remainder of the current term, will be the real battle.

Who will guide the process?

Our governing body is short on experience and, in some individual cases, completely void of comprehension of their rights and responsibilities.

The legal department, also short on knowledge and experience with municipal law, has to date not been particular assertive in matters of technicalities.

The deliberation over who should be appointed acting mayor will likely be a comedy of errors and omissions. With no local party committee to winnow down the choices to three, any and all interested and legally qualified parties will have to be given their due before a group of finalists are put up to a vote.

There are already two individuals who have filed with NJ ELEC to run for the office of mayor in 2014, a third has announced an exploratory committee and at least a fourth who has previously expressed an interest in running. That list does not include any sitting council members who may be eyeing “the big chair.”  

How many more names might be tossed into the hat? How will individual loyalties and personal plans of members of council figure in the decision making?

Can we expect a smooth, orderly and proper decision to be made by at least five members of a governing body that has been largely stalemated on any major initiative over the past 27 months?

What will happen to the “business” of the city while the above battle is fought? For over two years the city has been adrift due to the incompetency of the Mack administration, the inexperience of the governing body and the inability of the two branches of government to get the simplest things done (remember the toilet paper crisis of last spring?)

The events of the past couple of years in Trenton and Hamilton show just why it is so important for all voters to actively participate in the election process. Researching the background, experience and qualifications of all candidates before heading into the voting booth is the beginning. Keeping elected officials accountable and our government transparent is equally important.

If we want better government, we all need to be better citizens. Otherwise, we are likely to see repeats of the disasters we are living through right now.

 

Here's your timeline.

This morning, Trenton Mayor Tony Mack had a press release posted on the city website villifying those "rogue coalition" of members of city council who voted "No Confidence" in his leadership and want to cut his salary by 52%.

Over the course of three pages, the paranoid, delusional and obviously stressed out man that Kevin Moriarty has dubbed the "Current Occupant" (CO for short) of the mayor's office lays out a timeline of  quotes and actions of members of council that he is upset with.

"Their efforts to denigrate the Office of Mayor will not succeed. Our roots of commitment remain firmly planted and we are more than prepared to deal with the winds of political theater," stated Mayor Tony F. Mack.

 

Obviously, the CO (and/or his writer) have no more talent for written communication than he does for leading a city.

 

While he fumes and mumbles and mutters to himself about those plotting against him, let us take a look (yet again) at a timeline of the CO's focus "on moving the City of Trenton forward".

 

• July, 2010 -- The CO dismisses all of the department directors of the previous administration, thus losing the institutional knowledge and experience required to keep the city moving along. He also nominates a convicted felon to his director of Housing and Economic Development. He also hires a man with a criminal past to be the director of the municipal courts and appoints as head municipal judge a woman with financial problems, a history of writing bad checks, and who refused to submit to the required background check. A an experienced and knowledgable volunteer Business Administrator quits before the month is out because the CO "doesn't believe in good government."
• July-August 2010 -- Even though it is a known fact that the city is facing a huge budget deficit, the CO hires a full compliment of mayoral aides and puts other friends and allies on the payroll at places like the Trenton Water Works. Speaking of the TWW, the CO also saw to it that his half-brother was put in charge of the on call scheduling at the utility.
• September 2010 -- The CO cuts the appropriation to the the Trenton Free Public Library but demands they maintain full hours at the main building and four branches. He later blames the decision to close the branches on the TFPL board and not his lack of funding.
• October 2010 -- Heavy rains raise the turbidty and level of the Delaware river forcing the TWW filtration plant to go offline. Because of inadequate supervision by experienced personnel the switching from pump to reservoire and back results in several days of boil water advisories for the utility's customers. For the first two days, the communication from the city regarding the situation is infrequent and no clearer than the brown water coming from the taps.
• November 2010--At a press conference, the CO announces that he "saved public safety" by NOT laying off any police personnel. The fact that he didn't reduce the force at that time most likely figured into the city losing a federal COPS grant early the following year, putting those "saved" jobs at risk.  The chief municipal judge the CO appointed was told to resign by the presiding judge of the Mercer vicinage because of the ethical questions surrounding the appointment.
• December 2010 -- The CO's half-brother and accomplices were arrested for doing side jobs on TWW time using TWW materials and pocketing the payments for the work done.
• January-February 2011 --- A controversy arose over a contract given to the Cooper Levenson law firm to do work for the city because of a sizable campaign contribution made to the mayor. The contributions were passed through a political action committee to the CO's campaign in violation of the city's pay-to-play ordinance. At about the same time it was discovered that a Pennsylvania developer had made an excessive contribution to the CO's campaign and was in-line to receive some three dozne city properties for $1 each. Unfortunatley, most of those properties were NOT located in redevelopment areas and could only be sold via public auction.
• March 2011 --- A superior court judge strikes down a controversial contract issued to an IT consulting company citing the mayoral aide who made the decision on the vendor as "unqualified" to do so.
• April 2011 --- Paul Sigmund, hired in March as the city's Chief of Staff (Deputy Mayor), is caught speeding in a city vehicle. Sigmund's driving privilege had been suspended in California where he lived prior to taking the Trenton job and had not been reinstated at the time of the traffic stop. The Mack administration was made aware of the suspended driving privileges but issued a city vehicle to Sigmund none the less.
• May 2011 --- Chief of Staff Paul Sigmund was arrested after making a heroin purchase just blocks from city hall. The CO refused to dismiss Sigmund immediately, waiting instead for the Chief of Staff to resign. It was also revealed that there were payroll irregularities with some of the park rangers hired by the CO, including payment for time not worked, payment before the state approved the hires, handwritten time cards, etc.  In addition, it came to light that director of Public Property Harold Hall, a salaried, appointed position, was receiving overtime and paid comp time that he wasn't legally entitled to.
• June 2011 --- Against long odds and a very high standard for participation, a recall effort against the CO was launched by five citizens who had already had enough of the CO's foibles. Law Director Marc McKithen resigns rather than cooperate with the CO's administration in its attempts to avoid responding to Open Public Records requests.
• August 2011 --- A superior court judge finds that the Mack administration did not comply with the law regarding OPRA requests filed by two civic activists.
• September 2011 --- The CO proceeds with massive layoffs of city employees, including over 100 police officers. His friends and supporters who were hired last and should have gone first were left on the payroll (with the exception of one of his aides).  By the end of the month, the Mack administration is on its fourth Police Director in 14 months, its seventh (or was it eighth?) Business Administrator, its fourth Housing and Economic Development director. Two of his allies, Harold Hall and Carmen Melendez were elevated to acting director status over the objections of the NJ Department of Community Affairs. Reports surfaced of Ms. Melendez having been paid for unearned sick and holiday time and a very troubled business history that included having lost her realtor's license at one point, defaulted loans and unpaid taxes on her properties.
• October 2011 --- Former Recreation division employee Maria Richardson files a complaint alleging she was wrongfully dismissed because she wouldn't go along with the CO's improper procedures for purchasing, etc. Information surfaces about the "splintering" of contracts in order to circumvent the state public bidding laws. The CO jeopardizes a part of the state financial aid to the city by at first not agreeing to some of the terms of the MOU. He later agrees to modified terms but gives up recruitment and hiring authority to the state.
• November 2011 --- The recall committee gathers some 8,500 signatures on petitions to recall the CO. While that was short of the 9,000 or so that was needed, it was more than voted for Tony Mack in the runoff election of June 2010.
• December 2011 --- It is revealed that the CO refuses to entertain an offer to from a non-profit to lease, renovate and reopen one of the closed and vacant library branches as a community center with a small learning resource component.
• January 2012 --- The Mack administration attempts to get the city council to pass a salary increase for the Mayor and Department Director positions. The CO announces grand plans for a "Commission" on international business affairs that is immediately downgraded to "committee" status and does nothing except hold a reception. He also announces a "Comprehensive Crime Initiative" that is neither comprehensive or much of an initiative. It is a document listing some vague ideas of ways to increase the city's crime fighting tactics, none of which were ever implemented.
• February 2012 --- The city council takes a scalpel to the CO's proposed budget, including reducing the salary line for all of the remaining mayoral aides. The CO's request for increased state aide is denied because of a lack of fiscally sound management. An impasse between the administration and council over the approval of a "stale" contract for paper supplies leaves city buildings without paper towels and toilet paper. The story makes international news. A second complaint alleging violation of the state Open Public Records Act is filed against the Mack administration. A group of citizens drafts an ordinance that would reduce the salary for the office of mayor and asks the city council to introduce it. It stalls after the first reading.
• March 2012 --- The CO incorrectly accuses the council of overstepping their legal bounds by cutting the salary budget for his staff. He alleges this will jeopardize the safety and security of the citizens. He was wrong on both counts. In his state of the city address, he announces plans to start reopening the closed library branches as "Learning Centers".
• April 2012 --- The first of the four Learning Centers is opened. The CO gives varying cost estimates for what it will take to operate these centers.  He also inappropriately spent general maintenance funds to repair and equip these buildings.  A boxing/martial arts program running out of a city owned building and funded by a county grant of state money is shut down based on allegations of "drug use." This results in the discovery that the entire TMAC grant was not being properly administered per the terms of the contract with Mercer County. The County takes back some of the control of the grant funds.
• May 2012 --- The CO continues to open his "Learning Centers." Two state legislators introduce a bill that would make recalling an elected official somewhat less difficult. (They must be part of a "rogue coalition" as well.)
• June 2012 --- The CO insists on spending approximately $75,000 on the poorly promoted and sparsely attended Heritage Days Festival. Some of the fees included paying people to "organize" the event, paying a city employee to perform at the event (against state law), and paying a sound and light company in full in advance for this festival and a later music festival that was ultimately cancelled and (at last check no refund had been received.)
• July 2012 --- The CO runs through a toll booth in Delaware while driving his city issued vehicle on a weekend. It is presumed he is using it for personal business since his son was playing in a baseball tournament in Delaware that weekend yet the city paid the delinquent toll and service charge. The FBI stages early morning raids of the CO's home and the residence of his brother Ralphiel, and campaign contributor/supporter JoJo Giorgianni. The next day, the FBI swarms city hall and removes files, computers, etc.
• August 2012 --- More information starts to surface about the investigation into the Tony Mack administration. All of the rumors of questionable business dealings and improper procedures start to make sense.
• September 2012 --- The CO is arrested, along with his brother and Mr. Giorgianni are arrested by the FBI on a criminal complaint alleging a conspiracy to use the CO's public office for personal gain. Mr. Giorgianni is also arrested on a complaint of running a drug distribution ring that has no relation to the activities of the CO.
• October 2012 --- a newly organized group called "Majority for a Better Trenton" drafted a resolution of "No Confidence" and asking the CO to resign and asked the city council to place it on the docket. Council approved the citizen initiated measure 4 - 3.  At the same time, the council introduced its own ordinance reducing the salary for the office of Mayor. It passed the first reading, 5 -2.  The CO told the council and the people gathered in chambers that reducing his salary was illegal and violated the MOU with the state of NJ. Neither was true. At the very end of the month, the city was hit by hurricane Sandy leaving many residents without power and such for two or three days. The CO stayed home, never venturing out to meet with the emergency management team, tour the city, etc.
• November 2012 --- The CO was absent from city hall while the BA and other directors gave reports to council about the implementation of the city's emergency plan. The CO knew the salary ordinance was up for second reading and was not present to defend against it. Four of the six individuals who spoke publicly about the ordinance before the vote were in favor reducing the salary. The ordinance passed on the second reading, 4 - 3. It is not veto proof, so the CO vetoed it and then posted the screed referenced above.

So, Mayor Mack, after reading through the timeline above, just who is engaging in "political theater?"

Just the facts

We here at the editorial department of the Front Stoop wanted to take a few (three) minutes (180 seconds) to set the facts straight on a couple of points from last night’s Trenton city council meeting.

Mayor Mack does not have “binders full of people” wanting to meet with him. Well, not if you exclude his attorney, his creditors and the FBI.

It is true that Mayor Mack was “saved” from the mean streets of Wilbur by recreation programs; recreation programs that were largely run by the Trenton PAL, not the city.  Was there some city money involved? Probably. Were they city run and staffed programs? No.

There is no “Master Plan” for the city as the Mayor stated last night. At least not that we have seen. If he was indeed referring to his annual “report” and/or state of the city speeches, it has been pointed out repeatedly that they are not plans. Plans have defined goals and measurable outcomes.

The city council does have the authority to reduce the salary for the Mayor. Under the Faulkner Act N.J.S.A. 40:69A-43a., 40:69A-180 and general municipal law, N.J.S.A. 40A:9-165, the power to fix the compensation for the offices of Mayor, City Clerk, Business Administrator, Department Directors, and City Council Members is exercised by the adoption of an ordinance.  Nothing we have seen in the MOU with the state supersedes the statutes. (Btw, Rahway City Council cut their Mayor’s salary last year, no problem).

And, if you remember, Mayor Mack made similarly erroneous statements last spring when the council amended his budget and he didn’t like it.

He was wrong then, he is wrong now.

Finally, if the city council is going to have a time limit on public comment, then it should be enforced on all speakers and all speakers must adhere to it. Period.

Our city government is stuck in neutral and the non-stop ramblings of people, no matter how pithy, inspirational, or amusing does not move us forward.

Ok. Times up.

Who is minding the store?

Mayor Mack continues to do what he pleases when it comes to city resources.

Besides the costly, sparsely attended and almost completely un-advertised or promoted so-called Heritage Days Festival held this past weekend, two other items have come to light.

Yesterday afternoon, this unbelievably unfitting and inappropriate sign was erected over the main entrance to Cadwalader Park. (written about so well here by Kevin Moriarty).  Notice, that, ugly as this sign is, it is graced with a completely out of context "Mayor Tony F. Mack" sign dangling beneath. 

Photo by Kevin Moriarty

Were all the proper sign-offs and approvals granted for this work?

Who gave our mayor's the right to "tag" every piece of city property possible with their name?

Yes, Doug Palmer did it too. And we didn't like it then. For a man who purports to want to be everything Doug Palmer wasn't, Mayor Mack sure likes to emulate his former boss.

Maybe it is time for the governing body (that is you, City Council), to introduce and pass an ordinance banning this kind of "naming" of city property, vehicles and such. It will be a cost saving measure because signs won't need the extra verbiage and we won't have to change them each time the mayor changes (no matter how infrequent that has been in the recent past).

Another abuse we're noticing is the mayor's seeming arbitrary policies with regards to who can use city buildings, when and how. 

If you remember, the Mack administration sent consultant/volunteer Lisa Whitaker around to various city buildings to collect the keys and kick out the non-profits who were using them under agreement with the city.

Shortly thereafter came the big controversy over the Team Hope boxing program that was using the old fire house at S. Broad and Bridge Streets.  Mayor Mack had the program removed from the building in response to unfounded allegations of drug use/dealing on the premises. 

Now, two months after the building was emptied and the program relocated, we suddenly find boxing equipment has again been installed in the building.

 

A conversation we had with former Trenton police officer and Team Hope manager, Bill McLaughlin revealed it doesn't belong to him. 

So who does this equipment belong to? And how did it get into the building? Has the administration issued another lease or use agreement to another entity? Has city council had the opportunity to approve of any agreement to use this facility as outlined under state statute N.J.S.A. 40:69A-36:

N.J.S.A. 40:69A-36 Legislative power
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.
The mayor does as he pleases. The council is not acting as the governing body. Once again, there is nobody left minding the store.

Animal House Redux

Trenton's City Council is poised to have a second reading and public hearing of the amended business license ordinance at the Thursday, March 1 meeting.  Local business owner John McManimon has these thoughts about the ongoing follies in city hall.

Once again Trenton’s City Hall and City Council are running true to form.

Council recently missed a golden opportunity to portray itself and the City as business-friendly by passing a poorly thought out ordinance put forward by the City Clerk’s office raising business license fees astronomically, some by as much as 500%.           

Acknowledging the inadequacies of the ordinance beforehand, Council passed it anyway. They assumed they could change it later.

And they did.

A week after license applications were due, Council, with the assistance of the Clerk’s office, introduced a new ordinance that would rescind the previous ordinance and push the filing deadline back two months to April 1. It would also lower the fee increases to a more reasonable 100% in most cases.

Unfortunately, there is no provision in the new ordinance to reimburse those who actually obeyed the law and paid on time at the higher rate. The City Clerk, Leona Baylor, when questioned about this aspect of the ordinance stated that”… most people pay their bills late anyway.” So not only is the City encouraging people to pay their bills late it is actually punishing those that pay on time.

Kind of reminds you of the scene in “Animal House” when D-Day turns to Flounder after having wrecked his brother’s car and says “Hey, you f---ed up. You trusted us.”

It makes one wonder. Is this really some kind of frat house competition with one camp trying to continuously embarrass the other? One Councilperson’s rationale for increasing license fees in a stagnant economy was that property taxpayers couldn’t afford an increase. Don’t business owners pay property taxes, too?

Dean Wormer, put the Councilwoman on double secret probation!

The imbecility can’t just be contained in City Hall. All the voters of Trenton deserve a nod for electing people who have kept everyone in surrounding communities in stitches and late night talk show hosts rife with ready one-liners.                                                                                                                        

While residents decried the fact (almost daily) that public safety employees take thousands of dollars in paychecks back to their homes in the suburbs instead of living in the town they protect, the City of Trenton responded by laying a third of the police force off.             

These same aggrieved residents don’t seem to mind that absentee landlords funnel millions of dollars out of town the first of every month or that asking them to comply with building codes might actually result in not just improved housing but in jobs for city residents. The message we’re sending has resulted in tumbleweeds blowing through the gutted Inspections Department.

Of course every now and then a breeze of self-righteous indignation sweeps through the Council chambers and they pass an ordinance to rein in the rapacious owners. Unfortunately, passing strict laws and then laying off inspectors pretty much guarantees that only irresponsible and feckless landlords will be left. The responsible law abiding ones will have moved on.                                                   

The summer is coming and it promises to be a long and a hot one. Let’s see whose turn it is to lead the band down the dead end alley. If worse comes to worse we could always hope for some royalties from Letterman’s jokes and use them to hire a couple more cops. Or inspectors.                                                                                                              

Hang in there, Trentonians. Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Heck, no!

Eric Stratton would be proud of us.                       

From the inbox

The following arrived in our inbox several times overnight:

Citizens for Appropriate Mayoral Compensation

Somewhere the question arose. And now it is moving thru out the City,” Why are we paying Mayor Mack so much, to do so little?” People are saying that he is excessively over paid. His results are simply not worth the $126,460, annual salary we pay him.

A committee of citizens in favor of appropriate mayoral compensation has formed. Their goal is to build citizen support to move City Council to enact an ordinance reducing Mayor Mack’s compensation to an amount more appropriate for his disappointing level of performance.

Upon taking office, Tony Mack fired every Director in the City administration. He then proceeded to appoint family and friends with little or no experience to these leadership positions: Hardly meritorious performance on his part.

After cooperatively approving his initial appointments against their better judgment, City Council refused to continue approving ill chosen new appointments to those same positions. Tony Mack side-stepped the permanent appointment process by using Acting Director status appointments. We are almost half way thru Mack’s four year term of office. And we have Acting Directors, open positions: Scandalous time keeping for pay purposes, and incompetent employees in many positions. This is not why we pay Tony Mack $126,000 a year.

City Council needs to pass a new ordinance reducing his honor’s pay to something like $80,000 a year, or less. Here is the ordinance.

AN ORDINANCE TO FIX THE COMPENSATION FOR THE OFFICE OF MAYOR,

PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLICATION OF COMPENSATION ORDINANCES FOR

CERTAIN OFFICERS AND REPEALING ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH.

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Faulkner Act, N.J.S.A.

40:69A-43a.,40:69A-180 and general municipal law, N.J.S.A. 40A:9-

165, the power to fix the compensation for the offices of Mayor,

City Clerk, Business Administrator, Department Directors, and

City Council Members is required to be exercised by the adoption

of an ordinance; and

WHEREAS the City Council finds that it is in the public interest

That the compensation of the office of Mayor be adjusted and

Fixed at an amount commensurate with the current economic

Circumstances of the City of Trenton and that it and all other

Compensation ordinances shall be restored to published status

along with all published ordinances of the City of Trenton and be

readily accessible by the public; now therefore, be it

ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Trenton as Follows:

1. Effective January 1, 2012, the annual monetary

compensation for the office of the Mayor shall be $80,000.00.

2. Any other provision of the Administrative Code or other

ordinance or instrument which provides for any monetary

compensation other than the amount of money set forth in Section

1. above or is otherwise inconsistent with the provisions of this

ordinance is hereby abrogated, repealed and superseded to the

extent of such inconsistency.

3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to provide for the

inclusion of the foregoing amendment of the Administrative Code

to become published along with the other published portions of

the City of Trenton Ordinances along with any and all future

revisions thereof and to respond to public inquiry with regard

thereto without requiring the formality of a written request for

access to public information.

4. Effective Date. An emergency having been declared with

respect to the effective date of hereof, this ordinance shall

become effective upon final approval and publication.

If you agree that Mayor Mack is over-paid, you should e-mail your Council Person and tell him to introduce and vote for this ordinance. Send your e-mail to Linda Kelsey, Council Aid,

lkelsey@trentonnj.org , and ask her to distribute it to each Council member.

You should also call your Council person and urge him to introduce and vote for this ordinance. All of them can be reached at their office telephone, 609-989-3146 .

And finally, you need to attend City Council meetings and ask them to introduce and pass this ordinance.

Please plan to attend the next Council meeting Thursday, February 16, at 5:30. If each of you do that, Council will be compelled to do your will, and will enact this ordinance. Then the Mayor will be paid a salary more appropriate for his level of performance in these poor economic times.

Please feel free to share this wonderful request with your friends and relatives. Encourage them to make a difference by joining this effort for more appropriate Mayoral compensation.

From your committee of Citizens for Appropriate Mayoral Compensation.