Cash, lies and videotape

Show me the money, part II

So we have a Political Action Committee (PAC) known as Partners For Progress (PFP) whose stated mission is:

Partners for Progress PAC’s mission is to not only raise money – but also to raise awareness about the political process, educating potential candidates, candidates, and organizations on how to successfully participate in the political process.

Well, PFP seems to have gotten the raising money part right…too bad they are a little shaky on how to successfully participate in the political process.

As was pointed out in the previous post, there are some interesting “problems” with PFP’s required reporting to the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission. The $7200 contribution from the Cooper Levenson law firm that was apparently wheeled to Tony Mack’s mayoral campaign was covered in the prior post.

We will track some other interesting contributions later. This time out let’s look at some of the expenditures that PFP reported.

The first thing that comes up on the expense pages is a listing of payments made to individuals for “community outreach.” This is another term for “street money,” money paid to individuals to get out the vote. By law, these payments must be made by check and reported with each person’s name, address, and the number of the check used to pay them.

PFP reported 79 such payments of $25 each to individuals. That would be a total of $1975 paid for community outreach. Would be…except seven of the reported payments are duplicate entries. So it was really 72 individuals receiving a total of $1800. Guess PFP is somewhat sloppy with their record keeping.

Of the 72 individuals who received payments from PFP, 30 don’t have check numbers listed. That is a violation of state election law. Twelve of the 72 don’t have an address listed. That is also a violation of state election law.

Pretty sloppy record keeping, don’t you think?

Or was this report just hurriedly put together because of the investigation that Politicker NJ reported in December of last year?

Interesting, too, is that PFP paid a Jeff Meyers a $2500 “consulting” fee. One might wonder what kind of consulting Mr. Meyers provided to PFP. The report doesn’t give the required full address for Mr. Meyers, just the fact that his is from Burlington, NJ.

Is it safe to assume, then, that this Mr. Jeff Meyers is the very same Jeff Meyers who stepped down as the Treasurer of the Burlington County Democratic Committee because of questions surrounding some money “wheeling” and pay to play schemes (sound familiar?)

If we are talking about the same Jeff Meyers, is it not reasonable to expect that a former county political committee treasurer would know the rules for proper ELEC reporting? Wouldn’t it have been prudent to seek his advice and counsel in preparing and filing the required reports in a timely manner?

Three other expenditures jump off the page as one peruses this report.

Under the heading of “Itemized Contributions Made to Candidates and Committees” are entries for the $7200 contribution made to Mr. Mack’s campaign, a $250 contribution to Councilwoman At Large Kathy McBride’s campaign, and a $5000 contribution to Juan Martinez’s campaign.

The Mack contribution seems directly related to the now disputed Cooper Levenson contribution to PFP.

The contribution received by Ms. McBride’s campaign falls beneath the $300 threshold for required reporting and so she apparently didn’t. There are additional expenditures listed as “in-kind” on her behalf that would, when paired with the $250 contribution, put her over that limit and require her to report the aggregate contributions. It looks as though PFP may have failed to notify these candidates of these “in-kind” contributions as required by law and the blame, again, lies with them.

Now the $5000 contribution given to Mr. Martinez presents an interesting situation. The date of the contribution is for June 15, the date of the runoff election. Mr. Martinez, who is one of the candidates woefully lacking in compliance with NJ ELEC reporting requirements, had apparently not filed any reports for the runoff part of the election cycle. So we don’t know if he actually received this money or not.

Interestingly, in a videotaped conversation posted on Robert Chilson’s Trenton United Blog, Mr. Martinez states that he never received any money from PFP. He claims that he received a phone call from someone connected with PFP asking if they could put him down as the recipient of a contribution. Martinez admits that he probably shouldn’t have given the go ahead, even with the attached caveat that if the contribution was questioned it would deflect back on PFP.

Is this another indication that PFP hurriedly put together a report in response to the ELEC investigation and “faked” the contribution?

Or did Mr. Martinez actually take a $5000 contribution and not report it?

Again, all it would take is the production of a copy of the cancelled check to show who is telling the truth.

But that seems to be too much to expect from either PFP or Martinez.

Pay attention

Are special interests funding campaigns of Trenton candidates?

While Trenton citizens collect their breath between last week’s municipal elections and the June 15 runoff for Mayor, Council At Large and three of the city’s four Ward council seats, it’s time to catch up on some homework that we should have been doing all along.

In the final hours before last Tuesday’s elections, there was a lot of hand wringing and expressions of shock and dismay as revelations were made about the funding of Tony Mack’s Mayoral campaign.

At issue is this: Mr. Joseph Giorgianni contributed the $2,600 maximum allowable amount for an individual to a candidate committee. Mr.Giorgianni is a long-time Mack supporter. The concern that has been raised is that Mr.Giorgianni has had some legal problems of his own in the past.

This doesn’t sit well with Tony Mack’s detractors. Many question the candidate’s judgment in taking money from a convicted felon. Others are wondering half out loud where the money Mack loaned his campaign ($20,000 according to ELEC reports) really came from. Mack has been essentially unemployed for the past couple of years and is in arrears on his property taxes.

While this is all quiet titillating and sensational, what about the financing of other candidates?

No one has made quite as much fuss about apparent runner up Manny Segura’s campaign funding.

Isn’t it odd that the candidate who used to use the slogan “Segura Para Trenton” (Segura for Trenton) has received the bulk of his campaign donations from politicians and businesses from North Jersey? Sounds to us like Senor Segura is more for himself and his cronies than for Trenton. In his 2006 run for City Council, Segura received 45% of his $53,625 war chest from individuals and entities with addresses in North Jersey. Assemblyman and Union City Mayor Brian Stack alone gave Segura $10,000. Another 7% ($4000.00) of Manny’s money came from unions or union officials. And let’s not forget the $2500 that found its way from former Sen. Torricelli’s wife to the joint candidate’s committee for Segura, Paul Pintella and Cordelia Staton.

All for a city council at large candidate in poor little old Trenton.

In this year’s campaign, Manny again has tapped his “friends” beyond Trenton. He raised some $19,200 in contributions from individuals and businesses in North Jersey. Included in his contributor list are elected officials from Passaic and Newark. One might be able to understand why they might be interested in helping Segura out. But what about the employees of TY Lin International; one who lives in Hackettstown and the other in Oxford, an engineer and a surveyor respectively. What interest might they have in who becomes Mayor of Trenton? Or is this all party money being channeled into Segura’s accounts? How much will he be “for Trenton” if elected and the donors behind these contributions start calling in favors?

Contrast the above with the fact that apparent third place finisher Eric Jackson raised all of his money through modest contributions from local individuals.

The special interest funding is not only going to the Mayoral candidates. Looking at the At-Large race (also in a runoff), we found some interesting items.

Where front runners Kathy McBride, Alex Bethea and Phyllis Holly-Ward all show modest (if any) campaign contributions from locals; T. Missy Balmir shows $2900 in contributions from employees of Washington DC based political consultants Field Strategies, Inc.

Field Strategies is a company used by politicians to design and execute effective campaigns. And who are some of their clients? How about everyone from Senators Lautenberg and Menendez, the New Jersey Democratic Party, and various labor unions.

So tell us, Ms. Balmir, why are five employees of this consulting firm so interested in seeing you get elected in Trenton, NJ when they all live in the D.C. area?

And while you are at it, how about explaining how it is that Mr. Green (Darren “Freedom” Green) appears on so much of your campaign literature and such and yet shows no major fundraising on his part? And you might as well extend your answer to Ms. Reynolds-Jackson who is in the run-off for the East Ward Council seat.

Come clean: are you a slate put up by party bosses to wrest control of poor old Trenton?

Juan Martinez, the 4th place finisher in the At Large race has raised money but we are not sure where it came from as the reports seem a tad incomplete.

At the Ward level, we have the aforementioned Verlina Reynolds-Jackson going up against Joe Harrison in the East Ward runoff. Reynolds-Jackson hasn’t reported any major contributions but did roll over slightly more than $1000 to Missy Balmir’s campaign. Presumably this was for some joint advertising, but wouldn’t that then necessitate the formation of a Joint Candidate’s committee?

Harrison has filed papers stating he will not raise nor spend more than $4000 in his campaign and not more than $300 will come from any one contributor.

In the West Ward, former school board head Joyce Kersey has raised about $8500. Most came from a $6000 loan she made to her campaign and the rest appears to have come from local supporters. Her opponent in the runoff, Capital Health employee Zachary Chester, has had his own issues with fundraising but seems to have built a treasury of over $31,000 from a mix of local friends and distant contributors.

In the North Ward, surprise 2nd place finisher Divine Allah has no reports posted on contributions or expenses, not even a declaration that he would spend less than $4000.00 on his campaign. Contrast that with Marge Caldwell-Wilson’s nearly $19,000 in money raised…more than 35% of which came from union political action committees around the state.

An informed voter is a better voter. Do your homework before you go into the booth and cast your ballot.

Fear and Yawning Campaign 2010

(Apologies to the late Dr. Hunter S. Thompson)

With just under one month until Trenton’s municipal elections, things have been relatively quiet on most fronts.


Last Friday, the Times ran an article about some verbal sparring between former Palmer slate-mates turned Mayoral competitors Paul Pintella and Manny Segura.

More than the rhetorical jabbing from the candidates, we liked the subliminal message sent by whoever at the Times was responsible for choosing the photos. A second look at the pictured labeled “Paul Pintella” reveals that it is actually an older photo of Doug Palmer.

Is that what had people walking around singing softly to themselves, “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”?















And speaking of the reign of King Douglas, did you catch this little love note in this morning’s Trentonian?

In case the image isn’t clear enough, the text of the Letter to the Editor reads as follows:

Four more years
To the editor:Dear Mayor Palmer:
     You are doing a beautiful job with our city. You put up a lot of new homes and buildings, and you’re doing a great job fighting crime
     You did a great job helping senior citizens.
     I went to the peace rally, and you did a beautiful job with that.
     We need you on our team so Trenton can win.
     There are a lot of residents in the city who would like you to reconsider and run for mayor again.
     Please stay the mayor until Obama is out of office, and then you can be the next president.
     God bless you and your family, and keep up the good work.
                                                 Sharon Wilson
                                                                          Trenton

Um, thank you, Ms. Wilson.  You may stop by city hall and pick up your Target gift card at any time now.

The latest Mayoral candidates’ forum was Sunday at the James Kerney Campus of Mercer County Community College and was covered by PolitickerNJ.com. The biggest revelations that occurred seemed to be the absence of Tony Mack who was honoring his previous commitment to coach a baseball game.

Some of the folks over on the Trenton Speaks forum discussed the pros and cons of giving Mr. Mack an excused absence for the event.

We’d like to talk a little about the At-Large Council race but there has been little to report on. The candidates seem to be keeping to themselves.

The one standout to date has been Algernon Ward, Jr. who was one of the petitioners fighting to have a public referendum on the proposed split and sale of the Trenton Water Works. Ward had an op-ed in today’s Times regarding the recent Supreme Court decision upholding the right to have a referendum on the matter.

The other candidates have been largely quiet. We have seen Juan Martinez signs around town…but they are mixed in with ones leftover from last fall’s failed attempt to win the South Ward council seat.

Typical Juan…doesn’t know which office he is seeking or let alone what he stands for.

And the various ward races are just about as quiet. There’s little coming out from most of the candidates. South Ward Councilman George Muschal is continuing the hands on street work that got him the win in November’s special election.

The North Ward campaign has been quiet with the exception of annoying notifications about fundraisers from Marge Caldwell-Wilson. Nothing of substance on policy or positions from any of the contenders to date.

In the West Ward, signs are starting to pop up on lawns along with the crabgrass and dandelions. Early entry Zach Chester has been playing the role of the quiet candidate, as has former school board member Joyce Kersey. Kevin Moriarty has been working the streets as well as the internet with regular blog postings. There are two West Ward candidate forums coming up that should prove to be enlightening for the voters. The first is tonight at the Lighthouse Community Center on Bellevue Ave and next Monday at Covenant Presbyterian Church, Parkside and Parkway.

The East Ward has been equally quiet. We don’t really know anything about the candidates other than Dion Clark has attended a lot of council meetings and spoken frequently about the need for cleaning up the trash (human and other) found along Walnut Avenue and such.

Chambersburg resident Joe Harrison can claim a similar attendance record at city council meetings and has been one of the few candidates in any of the races to utilize video on the internet to make his case to the voters.

If it seems like it has been an underwhelming campaign season...it has been. Whether due to the majority of uninspiring candidates, lack of real press coverage or both, who can say.

Regardless, it will be up to the voter to exercise some real critical thinking when they step into the voting booth on May 11.

'Tis the season

January 4 is the first business day of the New Year and the first opportunity for individuals to “pull the paperwork” and declare their candidacy for the mayor and seven city council seats up for grabs in the May municipal election. The four month period between is often referred to as “silly season” because of the never-ending, ever-escalating stunts and stumbles of the candidates.

The November special election to fill the vacated South Ward council seat was but a tease for what is about to come. Now, just as the year-end holiday season is cranking up, we hear the first rumblings of the political war to come.

Earlier this week, Evites were sent out for a “Warm Holiday Celebration” hosted by Juan Martinez and the Hispanic Democratic Caucus. The event costs $10 per person and should be made payable to “Friends of Juan Martinez.” If you can’t make it, you are asked to consider donating to the same entity.

Gadflies and local political junkies were probably tipped off to Martinez’ intent to run again by his “I didn’t lose, I just didn’t win” letter to the editor published in the Times last week. (Note to Mr. Martinez: there is only one winner and by definition, if you didn’t win, you lost. So your statement to the contrary is just plain incorrect).

The invite to the Holiday Celebration and the designated payee pretty much clinches the deal…Juan hasn’t given up his hope of holding elected office. The only question remaining…which office?

Will Juan be content to try again in the South Ward or is he setting his sights on one of the citywide offices?

And speaking of citywide offices…an interesting note was distributed by intended Mayoral Candidate, Tony Mack. Mr. Mack has advised supporters of a new slogan for his upcoming campaign.

Thank you for being a part of a movement that will bring change to the City of Trenton. The new slogan for the campaign is "Trenton First - That's The Change We Need". I am dedicated to making Trenton First in everything that I do as your mayor. This is a city that I grew up in, raised a family in, and love with all of my heart. Trenton has a storied history and is blessed with an amazing citizenry. Trenton must regain its position as one of America's leading cities and I am committed to doing just that as your Mayor.

I need your help. Join the team to make Trenton First.

Sincerely,

Tony Mack
Trenton First - That's The Change We Need

Do you think it is an intentional use of the phrase “Trenton First,” the name of Doug Palmer’s “foundation?”

‘Tis the season!

“Concerned” clergy endorse Martinez for South Ward Council

But who are they?

A press release dated 10/28 (Wednesday) landed on the stoop this morning.

It tells of a press conference held at city hall wherein "approximately 15" unspecified clergy members are alleged to have given their nod to Juan Martinez as their choice to fill the south ward council seat vacated by Jim Coston this past summer.

The only clergyman identified in the press release is Rev. Wayne Griffith who spoke glowingly about Martinez.

Lest we forget, Reverend Griffith was the spiritual leader of the assault on the south ward known as the Leewood development back in 2003. This was the ill-conceived project that would have leveled some six square blocks of the south ward and displaced the current residents so they would then have the opportunity to purchase new homes built by Leewood in partnership with the Concerned Pastors Economic Development Corporation.

Mr. Martinez was hired by this (and other) ostensibly "concerned" pastors along with Michael Fink to do community outreach for the proposed development.

We would like to know exactly how many clergy were part of this endorsement and who they are (how does one get an endorsement from an approximate number of people?). Or is this some amorphous group, much like Mr. Martinez’s oft mentioned civic group, PROS (People for the Revitalization of South Trenton)?

In all the years we’ve been sitting on the stoop, no one has ever been able to tell us who the membership of this organization is; when and where it meets; or anything else concrete about this entity.

It is our considered opinion that this endorsement and the mystical group who made it are no more substantial than the fantasy civic group PROS; just another figment of his imagination.

Just ignore it and maybe Mr. Martinez, Rev. Griffith and their imaginary playmates will all go away.

Thanks for sharing

Another party heard from.

Juan Martinez sent out what appears to be the second press release of his campaign. Martinez is a candidate for the south ward council seat vacated by Jim Coston.

Sunday, the Times published an announcement listing Martinez’s campaign staffers. The release names a Campaign Manager (Rafael Valentin), Deputy Campaign Manager ( Carmen Melendez) and Second Deputy Campaign Manager (Tina Roach). Six other team members are named in the release.

Previously, Martinez refused to participate in the September 8 candidate forum sponsored by the Jersey Street Community Association because it was held two day before the City Clerk certified all the candidates. Martinez also complained that the forum was unfair because two officers of the organization had, as individuals, already endorsed one of the candidates.

It was noble that, in this latest release, Mr. Martinez didn’t embroil himself in the controversy over rival candidate Paul Harris’s bogus posting on the Trentonian website. But it would have been more beneficial to the voters, not to mention to Mr. Martinez’s campaign to have used the press release to outline some positions.

You would think that at least one of the more than half dozen campaign staffers mentioned in the press release could have advised Juan of that.

Duck Season! Rabbit Season!

Silly season is upon us.

South Ward Council hopeful and professional cry baby Juan Martinez is stirring the pot once again. An article in this morning’s Trentonian airs Martinez’s gripes about upcoming candidate forums.

Mr. Martinez doesn’t feel its right that “debates” should include candidates who have not been certified by the city clerk’s office. The first candidate’s night is scheduled for September 8, two days before the certification deadline of September 10.

Apparently, Martinez has forgotten that once “silly season” opens, every group and collective under the sun puts the call out to candidates to appear before them and state their case for election. In the spring election cycle, candidates are on the stump long before the mid-March certification cutoff.

Further, Mr. Martinez is complaining about the lack of neutrality of the hosting organization for the September 8 forum. He is confusing the official position of the organization, the Jersey Street Community Association, with those of individual members.

As a third complaint, only hinted at in the Trentonian piece but delved into in an email circulated by Mr. Martinez, the issues of the having a candidate’s forum in a licensed liquor establishment has been raised. The Trenton Council of Civic Associations, in conjunction with the League of Women Voters and the NAACP are co-sponsoring a candidate’s night at Katmandu and this somehow worries Mr. Martinez.

He seems to forget that a Latino social club on South Broad Street (licensed premise) hosts candidate forums during the regular election cycle. The Trenton Polish American Democratic Club (TPAD, a licensed premise) on Olden Avenue hosts candidate nights. And the Old Mill Hill Society holds their meetings, and candidate nights, at the Mill Hill Saloon (a licensed premise).

All of this points to one conclusion.

Mr. Martinez has no platform and no credentials supporting him as a valid candidate for South Ward Councilman. Instead, he has to resort to diversionary tactics in order to duck the issues.

Shame on him. And shame on anyone who takes his candidacy seriously.

NOTE: We'll address the brief mention that young Mr. Carlos Avila, former Councilman Coston's handpicked successor, has yet to commit to appearing at the Jersey Street forum later.
And we'll also get back to Mr. Alexander Brown's candidacy for Mayor at some point.

I'd never belong to a club that would have me as a member.

Or a Civic Association of one person.

The recent revelation that Council President Paul Pintella has produced a website for the Paul M. Pintella Civic Association demonstrates that Trenton once again seems to be in the advance guard when it comes to community engagement and activism. We see, too, that the Paul M. Pintella Civic Association is sponsoring some sort of Obama Inaugural event next week. (What happened Paul, didn’t get your ticket to the bash at the Marriot?)

The notion that a person can be a civic association of and unto him or herself is pretty forward thinking.

First, let’s take the term Civic Association. Association by definition has a collective sense about it. Mr. Webster defines an association as “an organization of persons having a common interest.” The key here is the word “persons.” It is plural and that usually denotes more than one.

Other observers have commented on this phenomenon. TrentonKat has an entry about it. Greg Forester has discussed it. And there was some chat about it on the Trenton Speaks forum.

Interestingly, while he may be the first to name a civic association after himself, Paul’s is not the first ‘phantom’ organization to be created in Trenton in recent memory.

Juan Martinez has for years touted himself as the head of the organization “People for the Revitalization Of South Trenton” (PROS). He even launched an unsuccessful bid for the South Ward Council Seat in 2002 from that platform and has trotted out the banner whenever he needed the appearance of a collective in support of his espoused views.

Trouble is, no one that we know of has ever seen a copy of PROS bylaws. No one knows when PROS meets, who the officers of the organization are or who makes up the membership. Rumor has it that at one time membership dues were actually collected from those willing to give them…but no accounting was made of the funds raised or how they were dispersed.

Maybe it occurred at one of the unknown meetings and was reported to the anonymous body by one of the mysterious officers as proscribed in the mythical bylaws.

We fear the Paul M. Pintella Civic Association may operate on the same model.

Trenton rightfully boasts of several active and effective civic associations, not to mention a council of those civic associations, all working for the betterment of their respective neighborhoods and the city as a whole. While they may vary in the formality of their structure and the way they run their meetings, these groups have been successful at stabilizing neighborhoods and keeping city officials accountable…most of the time.

The usurping of the name and/or concept of a “civic association” strictly to further ones personal ambitions is an insult to the people of this city who actually work for positive change. Naming the false association after oneself is the height of conceit and self-aggrandizement. But what else would we expect from the likes of Mr. Pintella.

The members of the Front Stoop Community In Action Coalition for Civic Improvement unanimously vote to repudiate the Paul M. Pintella Civic Association.

A different take

South Trenton resident and Community Activist Juan Martinez sounded off in a recent Trentonian article about the tightening of the laws requiring New Jersey residents to legally register their vehicles within 60 days of moving here.

According to Mr. Martinez, enforcement of the auto registration laws is some sort of veiled, anti-Latino movement supported by certain racist/elitist factions within the community.

Thursday night's City Council meeting was well attended by a group speaking out against this law, (a state law by the way, not a city law) that they claim is unfairly aimed at Latino immigrants.

Before we choose sides and start pointing fingers, let's look at this situation realistically.

The effect of this "new" law is to close some technical loopholes in the prior law. It was already mandated that individuals who establish their principle residence in New Jersey must register their vehicles in this state within a given time frame. There was also somewhat vague language that granted what amounted to an unlimited grace period for people not residing here full-time.

Apparently, the old law was for all intents and purposes unenforceable. And since New Jersey has if not the single highest, one of the highest, automobile insurance rates in the country, many people took advantage of the legal loophole to register their car elsewhere to skirt the rules and save money.

So we got a new law.

The purpose of the old law was to guarantee that automobiles based and principally operated in New Jersey...the most densely populated state of the union, were properly registered, insured and inspected in an effort to increase the safety for all the residents of New Jersey.

Now we have a new law. I don't see that its purpose is any different plus it cleans up some messy language of the prior law.

Another fact: Trenton is a city that grew and was laid out well before the post-world war two advent of the automobile. Houses sit close together on narrow streets that don't provide anywhere near enough parking for the increasing number of cars in each household. It's a problem.

So when a resident comes home late and can't find a parking place convenient to his or her front stoop, he or she gets upset. And when the cars parked nearest his or her front door is registered out of state, he or she gets more upset.

(Convenient in this case would be a generalization referencing those one or two parking spots that are closest to one's own front door. The definition varies...especially for those who live on streets where there is no on-street parking allowed!)

Folks...we live in a city. Parking is at a premium. If you want convenient, plentiful, semi-private parking just footsteps from your front door, maybe an urban neighborhood is not for you.

(We, the people, created this mess. We moved our homes, schools, jobs, stores and amusements ever further into what used to be the state's farmland only to increase our dependency on automobiles to go to work or play. But that's a topic for another time.)

Compounding this issue is the decades of Regional Contribution Agreements (RCA's) that have allowed the suburbs to buy their way out of providing affordable housing within their borders. Jobs move out of the cities but the housing affordable to our lowest wage earners is concentrated more and more in these same cities. So how do these folks get to work?

Cars. Lots of cars.

So, aside from election year "stunting" by incumbents looking to prove they deserve yet another term in the State Legislature, some of the impetus for this tightening of the automobile registration law may have come from those who feel that there are too many vehicles belonging to transients and recent arrivals clogging up our streets.

But this "remedy" is not to be applied exclusively to immigrants. We can probably all count among our acquaintances people who drive out-of-state registered vehicles while their principal domicile is here in the Garden State.

Now let's not make any mistakes here. Anyone who thinks cracking down on the "illegally" registered cars with Pennsy tags is going to free up unlimited amounts of parking for fully compliant residents is delusional.

The majority of those vehicles will ultimately be registered "legally" in New Jersey and the parking shortage will remain.

What we may gain is an increase in compliance with all auto registration laws...including proper insurance and inspection of the vehicles that ply our roads.

Mr. Martinez and his friends fear that the new laws will ultimately rob working people of their mode of transportation to get to and from work.

He may be right in some cases. But instead of railing against the enforcement of the original intent of the auto registration laws, he might do better arguing for an end to the economic segregation caused by the RCA's that concentrate affordable housing in the old urban centers while the jobs flee to the suburbs. Then some of these cars might not be needed in the first place.

It is a tough issue. There are many who feel that these hard-working immigrants should be given what amounts to special treatment when it comes to following the laws of the land they have come to live and work in. What so many seem to fail to grasp is that by ignoring or waiving the “rules” we cheapen our quality of life and standard of living.

If this is truly a land of opportunity where hard working people, whether their immigration status is legal or not, can provide a better life for themselves, why would we want to diminish it by selecting what laws are acceptable to follow and which aren’t? Aren’t the laws of the land the rules we follow to keep the machinery of our society in working order?

Unfortunately there no doubt are some who do see this “new” law (which, again, is no different than the intent of the old law) as an opportunity to force people of a different ethnic or cultural background out of the area.

For many more, it is just a way to bring parity and fairness back to the table.

“Why do I have to register my car here, get it inspected, and pay high insurance premiums when my neighbor doesn’t?”

Critics of the “new” law speak of fairness but they are asking for favoritism and to be exempted from the law. Is that fair?

Generations of people from all over the world have come to this country and the vast majority of them have taken the time and made the effort to play by the established rules. Why is it now “unfair” to ask others to do the same?

With freedom and opportunity comes a responsibility to follow the rules. And as long as the rules are applied equally to all then there really is no reason to complain.