Is past performance indicative of future results?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Executive Summary

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mayor

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Council At Large

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

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

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

Ward Council

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Caveat emptor!

Back to the future

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

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

There were multiple problems with the expected scenario above.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Some people just don't get it

And apparently never will.

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

 

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

 

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

 

This proposal is fraught with errors.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

To be continued...

 

 

 

 

 

Nothing was delivered

Nothing was delivered
And I tell this truth to you,
Not out of spite or anger
But simply because it's true.

Now, I hope you won't object to this,

Giving back all of what you owe,
The fewer words you have to waste on this,
The sooner you can go.

That pretty much sums up last night's city council meeting.

The anticipated appearance of secretary to the mayor Anthony Roberts to answer questions about the President Obama bust didn't happen.

It seems as though (per Council President Holly-Ward) Mr. Roberts never acknowledged the council's invitation to appear. Nor did Roberts acknowledge the Business Administrator's inquiries about whether he would appear.

And then the secretary to the mayor "called off sick."

Nothing is better, nothing is best,

Take care of yourself and get plenty of rest.

No opportunity to explain how contributions were solicited; how the foundry (in St. Louis) was chosen; who gave the secretary to the mayor the authority to approve a purchase order for the base. 

Nothing was delivered

But I can't say I sympathize
With what your fate is going to be,
Yes, for telling all those lies.

The other big draw tonight was the introduction of a (revised) ordinance to reduce the mayor's salary.

Now you must provide some answers

For what you sold has not been received,
And the sooner you come up with them,
The sooner you can leave.

 

As you will recall, the last attempt was stymied when East Ward Councilwoman Verlina Reynolds-Jackson, who voted in favor of the ordinance the first time, voted against it at second reading and against an override of the mayor's veto.

Reynolds-Jackson's arguments were a mishmash of things and she kept saying it needed to be reworked to clarify the language. She cited state Senator Shirley Turner's public comments AND introduction of a motion to amend the NJ constitution to call for the suspension of pay for indicted officials.

Although the East Ward representative never came forward with any revisions of her own, the ordinance was reworked to reflect her concerns and directly quotes Senator Turner.  Reynolds-Jackson still voted against the new version.

Nothing is better, nothing is best,

Take heed of this and get plenty rest. (Now you know)

The regular business of council was the review and adoption of the items on tonight's docket.

The purpose of docket review is to go over the items before the governing body. That is the time when questions are asked, explanations given (by the administration) so that the council members understand what they are acting on and why it is before them.

It has been a hallmark of the Mack administration, through all of the BA's, the short tenure of the Chief of Staff, and the various and sundry acting department heads, that there is seldom anyone present to offer explanations or illuminations to council on docket items. Without proper back up and/or explanations, there is no reason for council to act. This is how things are let go until the last possible moment. Or later.

This is how the city runs out of toilet paper.

Tonight, yet again, there was no one present to answer any questions that the governing body might have. No one, that is, except for Superintendent of the Sewer Authority Joe McIntyre.

Three items were pulled from the docket because there was no one present to answer questions. Three items that will be postponed until...?

Nothing was delivered

And it's up to you to say
Just what you had in mind
When you made ev'rybody pay.

One of the items pulled was a change order to an existing contract with Hatch Mott MacDonald.  HMD is listed as a contributor to the Obama bust. There are two other companies currently doing business with the city that are listed as contributors.

Councilman Zac Chester raised the question of whether these donations towards the bust violate the city's Pay-to-Play ordinance. He had asked this last month and had not received an answer. Tonight he was told by attorney Peter Cohen that the matter had not yet been reviewed.

No, nothing was delivered,

Yes, 'n' someone must explain
That as long as it takes to do this
Then that's how long that you'll remain.
 
The question was put to us earlier, "Just what did council accomplish last night?"

As with so many meetings over the past two and a half years, the bare minimum was done.

Nothing is better, nothing is best,

Take heed of this and get plenty rest.

Trenton's East Ward...here's your councilwoman

The following was posted on the "Fans of Trenton's Irresponsible Blogger" page on Facebook. (reprinted with permission of the author)

I doth think she protests too much

It comes as no surprise that tonight's city council vote on the ordinance reducing the salary for the office of mayor passed 4 -3.

It is also no surprise that Alex Bethea, Kathy McBride (who both voted against the ordinance's introduction two weeks ago) and Verlina Reynolds-Jackson voted against the measure.
 What? Didn't Verlina vote FOR the intro...

duction of the ordinance last month?

Yup.

The pundits and wags and odds makers said it wouldn't last. They were correct.

The East Ward councilwoman was all full of piss and vinegar tonight as she tried to explain away her change of vote. She wanted the measure pulled and made a motion to that effect.

The motion to table the salary cut was voted down along the same line as the ordinance itself later received.

Reynolds-Jackson pulled everything out of her bag of tricks to try and stop this measure from proceeding. While stating that she thought the mayor was not performing well in the job and declaring she wanted him gone as soon as possible, she invoked "due process" and worried that the salary reduction prior to the resolution of the federal case against Tony Mack might contaminate the proceedings. (Completely unrelated and no impact on the case)

She fretted over the "broad language" in the ordinance and how it might lead to future litigation. Reynolds-Jackson suggested the council would be hamstrung in adjusting the salary back up for someone "they really wanted" as mayor. (Little can prevent a lawsuit from being brought, but the odds are slim. Council would have to approve the contracts for attorney's on both sides of the case. The mayor certainly doesn't have the resources to press that case while fighting the federal case against him. And council has the statutory authority to adjust the salary either way.)

When pressed as to why she waited until just tonight to study the ordinance further, the councilwoman offered that she voted for the measure on first reading so that it could come up a second time and we could hear public comment on it.

Interesting. But there are some holes in that excuse.

1. She could have voted against the ordinance at first reading and it would still have passed and come up for public hearing.
2. Of the six individuals who spoke during the public hearing portion of the proceedings, only two spoke against cutting the mayor's salary. Four spoke in favor of it. And at least one additional person (Mike Walker) spoke in favor of the salary cut during the public comment portion of the meeting prior to the public hearing before the vote. More than twice as many people present tonight spoke in favor of reducing the salary for mayor as spoke in favor of it.
3. Most interestingly, Councilwoman Verlina Reynolds-Jackson asked to have the ordinance tabled for further study prior to the opening of the public hearing portion of the meeting. So she really couldn't have been all that interested in hearing what the public had to say, on the record, regarding the ordinance.

That is just the kind of misbegoten mental process that passes for "intelligent" thought for some members of this council.

Let us not overlook that tonight Ms. Reynolds-Jackson stated adamantly and repeatedly that she felt that Tony Mack has been an abject failure as mayor and she wants him gone a soon as possible. Yet, just two weeks ago, this same self-described "intelligent" elected representative who does her "due diligence" did not vote for the resolution expressing no confidence in the mayor and asking him to resign.

She had problems with the language of that piece of legislation that had no actual impact beyond being a statement of position.

It is pretty clear that Ms. Reynolds-Jackson is sitting on the fence. That is the least desirable trait anyone could want in an elected official.

My hope is that the people of the East Ward absolutely bludgeon her with the blunt instrument of her own words. She could not be more senseless.

Dead from the neck up

Trenton mayor and two council members prove they are fools.

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

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

No brainer, right?

Not quite.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But wait, there's more.

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

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

A report from the scene

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

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

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

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

They passed almost all of the resolutions.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hello! Is there anyone in there?

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

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

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

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

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

Nod if you can hear me.

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.