Pessimistically Optimistic

Yesterday, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection announced they had issued an Administrative Consent Order regarding the Trenton Water Works. The ACO outlines definitive steps and deadlines for improvements, operations, and staffing of the water utility. Failure to meet the deadlines will leave the city open to fines.

The troubles at TWW have been well documented by Kevin Moriarty and the local press. In the past week the governing bodies of both Trenton and Hamilton have had special presentations/discussions about the ongoing issues. Yet there still seems to be a lot of misinformation out there. (Some of which is due to the city of Trenton's inability and/or unwillingness to communicate clearly with the TWW customer base as well as public officials in the towns served by the utility).

We heard more than one public official say that would like transparency with regards to the budget of the Trenton Water Works. Well, the water budget is available on line as part of the City of Trenton budget. Unfortunately, some of the numbers are not readable because, for space reasons the cells are not large enough to contain the entire sum. However, the key information is there, especially the amount of the anticipated and realized surpluses each year.

With a realized surplus of $12 million for fiscal year 2017, it is obvious that there is money available for staffing, maintenance and improvements.

There is confusion about the city's residency requirement for employees. Let's be real clear right and here and now, the residency ordinance was amended in October of 2014 to allow a "waiver for exceptional persons". 

Chapter 2. AdministrationArticle XVI. Officers and Employees ...
§ 2-95. Residence requirements; exception; waiver. D. Waiver for exceptional persons. Whenever the hiring authority of the City of Trenton shall determine that there are certain specific positions and employments requiring special talents or skills which are necessary for the operations of the City of Trenton and which are not likely to be found among the residents of the City, such positions or employments so determined shall be filled without reference to residency. This provision shall be used for positions or employments for (1) officers that are subject to the advice and consent of the City Council and (2) positions requiring persons with scientific or technical licenses or certifications required by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, New Jersey Division of Community Affairs or any other state governing agency.
[Amended 10-2-2014 by Ord. No. 14-33]

It is obvious that the intent of the amendment was to allow the city to hire form outside of the city the licensed individuals necessary for the proper operation of the TWW. And, it was done in the first few months of the failed Jackson administration.

If the residency waiver was in effect, why have so many technical positions been left unfilled?

One answer, based upon the testimony heard at last week's Trenton city council meeting, was that the city was bad about responding to/following up with applicants. One individual stated she never heard back from the city; not even a "thank you, no" letter. Nothing!

The administration offered the excuse that the salaries being offered "were not competitive". Well, if you are operating the utility with a surplus but your salaries are not competitive, maybe you should increase those salaries. Is it that hard?

A third issue is that, until recently, the advertising of the vacancies seemed to be sparse and sporadic at best. We heard that open positions were not currently posted on the city website and a suggestion to hang a "Now Hiring" banner on the filtration plant ignored. You aren't going to get many applicants if they don't know there are openings.

Taken altogether, it appears less that the city was unable to hire people and more like it didn't put any real effort into hiring people.

The ACO has set benchmarks for hiring critical personnel and recent contracts issued to Wade Trim for contract employees to fill some of the vacancies are a start. With increased staffing of professionals, we would expect to see a return to normal, proper operations.

Timely notification of customers about events potentially affecting have been another complaint heard over and over. The DEP has recognized that TWW's Emergency Action Plan is deficient and is demanding it be updated to eliminate those deficiencies. In a February 7 article in the Trentonian, Hamilton mayor, Kelly Yaede, complained that TWW still has up to 24 hours to notify customers.

“The neighboring municipalities should receive the notification within 60 minutes,” the Hamilton mayor said. “When you’re dealing a public health crisis, particularly dealing with quality drinking water, notification is key. In this day and age of social media, getting information out quickly, timliness is imperative.”

As we pointed out in a previous entry, that is the maximum time that Federal regulations for a Tier 1 (Immediate Notice) event to be communicated to the customers. We have to assume that the new policies and procedures to be adopted by TWW aren't going to tell employees to wait the full day before notification. We'd expect something along the lines of "should be notified as soon as possible but not more than 24 hours after an event occurred."

While many are still dubious about the ability of Trenton to professionally manage the utility, the ACO lays out a pretty straightforward road map of what needs to be done and by one. To help keep things on course, TWW must file monthly progress reports with DEP until all items have been completed. The reports are due to be submitted on the last day of each month, unless said date falls on a weekend. In that case, the reports are due on the first business day of the new month. There are fines for each day the reports are late. A prior ACO required "quarterly progress reports" be we are not sure if any were filed.

To help restore confidence in TWW, we believe it would be best if the city made those reports public at the time of submission to DEP. In this way, the customers and all of the public officials can track progress along with the DEP. If things get off track, public pressure can be brought to bear and the situation corrected sooner rather than later.

We feel this new ACO is both a positive first step and a last chance warning for TWW, Trenton's governing body and mayor now and going forward.


We're pessimistically optimistic

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.

Is there something in the water?

If we weren't so busy running around fighting the rest of the population of the eastern seabord for our fair share of bread and milk we would have posted this yesterday.

What in the hell was Mr. Irwin Stoolmacher thinking when he included the following line in his op ed about Trenton's Mayoral race that appeared in the Friday's Times:

"Trenton politics is not seen by its citizens as corrupt."

Any Trenton citizen who hasn't questioned the accountability, ethics and/or transparency of the current administration just hasn't been paying attention.

Why else would citizens have had to sue to get the administration to enforce its own residency ordinance?

Who else but a corrupt administration would hide their own salary increases in a resolution accepting a contract with one of the city employee unions, again forcing the citizens to take legal action?

Wouldn't a corrupt administration be likely to play favorites amongst developers and contractors, especially those who make sizable campaign contributions (pre-Pay to Play ordinance---which, by the way, the administration fought against)?

What's worse than Mr. Stoolmacher's assertion that this administration is not "seen by its citizen's as corrupt" is the comparison of Mr. Palmer's way of doing business with that of the late Art Holland.

We're not suggesting that Mayor Holland was pefect during his tenure as the city's CEO.  But no one can question his integrity.  The man was "open and fair" long before that became a catch phrase.

Mr. Palmer's tenure, on the other hand, has been marked by repeated examples of administrative sleights of hand that raise many questions about ethics and legalities.

We suggest that Mr. Stoolmacher revisit his thinking on the issue of a corrupt Trenton political seen.  Or at least revisit his physician to have his medications adjusted.

April foolishness

Trenton's wayward administration is still at it.

On the docket again this week is a resolution to enter into a $250,000 contract for services with E-Path Communications. E-Path, you will recall, is the small, Florida-based company who wants to build a city-wide WiFi mesh in Trenton. They promised they would do this at "no cost" to the taxpayers. The costs of building and maintaining the system will be paid for by selling access and services to government entities.

Enter the $250,000 contract with Trenton.

The "free" construction and implementation of the network is dependent upon having paying customers. E-Path is essentially asking the City of Trenton to commit to buying access to the (as yet unbuilt) system. With a signed contract in hand, we presume E-Path's management will then try to leverage that deferred income into financing for this project...and probably the yet to be completed system they are supposed to be building on Long Island in New York state.

Today's city council conference session is to include another presentation by the Wizards of WiFi from E-Path as they desperately try to make their case for the city to grant this contract.

We've said it before and we say it again...No, Thank You!

No doubt there will also be talk about the Mayor's request that Council amend the city's current residency ordinance to allow exceptions and waivers.

Haven't we been over this before?

If council had wanted to amend the residency ordinance to allow exceptions and waivers, wouldn't they have done so before entering into a law suit on the side of the citizens who wanted the law upheld? Would they/should they have spent all that money on legal representation to fight the Mayor only to turn around and acquiesce to his child-like demands of "My Way! My Way!"

Doug Palmer and his administration need to stop all of this foolishness right now.

No WiFi. No amendment to the residency ordinance.

This is not about you, Doug Palmer, and not about "defining moments" of your time as Mayor.

This is about common sense and doing the right thing for the City as a whole. Stop worrying about running around the country trying to line up your next step and take care of business here in Trenton.

When and if you come back to work for the people you claim gave you a mandate, I'd suggest leaving your ego at home with your pettiness and your spoiled brat tantrums. Accept that you don't have all the answers and the ones you do have aren't always right.

If that doesn't suit you, then step aside and let those who truly care about the people who live and work in Trenton take charge and stop this nonsense.

A few thoughts on residency

It is not about the person, it is about the law…and the benefits to the city.
Prior to Judge Feinberg handing in her decision in the Santiago case, there was a lot of back and forth about the policy of granting residency waivers to select individuals employed by the city.

Some people insist that residency requirements should be done away with completely. They don’t feel it matters in the least where anyone who works for the city lives.

Others say waivers should be allowed in certain circumstances.

One phrase we hear often in these arguments is that “we need the best person for the job, not the best person who will reside here to take the job.”

That just doesn’t make sense and here’s why:

If residency is a requirement for the job and a candidate is not willing or able to meet that requirement, then simple logic dictates they are not the best candidate for the job.

It makes you wonder what these “we don’t need residency requirements” folks think of the people who have voluntarily chosen to reside here in Trenton. If “the best” won’t relocate here, are those of us who have second rate? Isn’t that a slap in the face of the many, residency-law-abiding city employees?

Let’s make something else perfectly clear: residency requirements were enacted by the people of this city to help mitigate the loss of the middle class (and above) residents to the surrounding area. The idea was to maintain a resident base of people who could support the economy of the city by earning and spending their money here.

It’s interesting to note that the Palmer Administration’s policy of “selective enforcement” of the residency ordinance has coincided with an increasing amount of Trenton tax dollars flowing out of the city in the form of paychecks and professional service contract payments to non-residents.

Just look at the city law department. There was a time when the City Attorney and staff handle the vast majority if not all of the city’s legal work. The members of the department were required to live in the city from which they drew their paychecks. They paid taxes on their homes here; they patronized the restaurants, stores and movie theatres (remember them?) here. The dollars stayed in circulation in town. Business was supported; jobs were supported so more people could earn a living wage.

A picture of the law department today tells a completely different story. We have a City Attorney (I believe it may be a statutory requirement). But we also have the highly compensated “Special Counsel” who is essentially a non-resident contract employee. We also regularly retain several other outside attorneys to handle labor cases and contract negotiations; defense for the many damage and injury claims that are filed against the city (take a look at a council docket sometime), most from outside of the City.

In this most recent example of the residency waiver challenge, only the citizen plaintiff’s had local representation. City Council, the Mayor, Director Santiago and corporate entity of the City of Trenton all had separate legal representation and all were from out of the area.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees paid by the city each year to contract out services to providers who don’t live in the city.

Why not make sure we had an adequately staffed, professionally capable law department comprised of city residents. Then the wages paid would have at least half a chance of staying within the community and doing good where it is needed most (rather than Cherry Hill, or Livingston or Keyport etc.

Our so-called leaders tell us repeatedly of the need to attract people with expendable income to reside here; seek entertainment here; shop here; dine here.

And then they contradict themselves by giving money by the wheelbarrow load, not to mention cars, cell phones, etc., to outside attorneys, “gang” consultants, and the like.

Trenton will continue to suffer until and unless those who have been elected to office are held accountable.

Residency is one tool by which we can do that.

Doing away with it, amending it, waiving will only exacerbate our problems.

Help me with this

Contradiction and confusion between 319 E. State St and 225 N. Clinton Ave
The Mayor and his well-paid North Jersey attorney want Judge Feinberg and the residents of Trenton to believe that if Joe Santiago is ordered to vacate his office immediately, the Capital City will be at grave risk of being overrun by the criminal element. Therefore, they argue, the termination of Joe Santiago's tenure as Trenton Police Director because of his non-resident status should be stayed pending an appeal or until an orderly transition of authority can be made.

Of course, the legal wheels on this residency issue have been grinding for a couple of months. Why haven't the city and police administrations made prior plans for this transition, "just in case?" Seems to me the inaction of our leadership has put the public safety at risk by not having succession planning in place.

And didn't we just go through this with Barry Colicelli case?

Just for the sake of argument, let's consider that the Mayor is correct and the city is at increased risk without the steady hand of Joe Santiago at the command of the Police Department. Attorney George Dougherty, who represented the citizens in their fight to have the residency ordinance upheld (and who is himself a Trenton resident), rightfully asks if the safety and security of Trentonian's was then compromised every time Mr. Santiago was absent from his desk due to illness, vacation, or just plain not being around.

Excellent point, of course.

And if we weren't "unsafe" enough, now comes the issue of the request for City Council to authorize an expenditure of $200,000 for new police firearms. Currently the city city uses Glock handguns. The proposed contract would be for new guns from Springfield Armory. Through a police spokesman, Santiago has said that City Council can opt not spend the $200,000 and go for the free, "inferior weapon" and intimated that doing so would be unsafe for the police as well as the public.

But with safety a concern, was the Police Director himself or a designated representative present at the City Council meeting to make the case for the switch?

Of course not.

So to sum up:

Trentonians are at risk if Joe Santiago is summarily and immediately dismissed as Police Director. There will be presumed chaos in a police department that functioned quite well (arguably better) for over 200 years prior to Santiago's appointment as Police Director. The public will be at risk.

Since his appointment five years ago Santiago has been at best a part-time city resident and for the last two or more years has made no pretense about living 50 plus miles away from Trenton. His frequent absences do not put the public at risk.

The city should spend $200,000 to change weapons for the police department when the current supplier will provide new guns free of charge. Saving money by staying with an alleged "inferior" weapon* puts the police and the public at risk.

The police director has no problem if City Council decides to keep the "inferior" weapon, but he couldn't be bothered to attend the meeting and make his case for the allegedly safer choice.

Does this mean that the public is again at risk, but the Director doesn't care enough to make his case for minimizing that risk?

Through all of the contradiction and confusion one thing is clear, Joe Santiago is not interested in serving the people of the City of Trenton any more than he is interested in living here.

Guess it is just time for him to go. Now.

We did a quick Google search and came up with this discussion thread that concluded there is no real difference between the two weapons under consideration. And the cops we've checked with seem to agree. Why spend the money for something that is essentially the same as the no cost option?

The luck of the Irish

Feinberg says residency matters

It’s been an interesting day.

Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberg has ruled that Trenton’s residency ordinance does indeed matter and the appointed police director should indeed be a bona fide resident of the City of Trenton.

That said, there are a lot of questions.

The first is: if an appeal is made, does Santiago keep his position?

At this writing, the information at hand indicates, “No,” he loses his position until such a time as an appeal is heard and Judge Feinberg’s ruling overturned.

What about a stay of the judge’s decision?

Sources feel it’s not likely to happen.

What happens in the Trenton Police Department?

When given the news this afternoon a friend asked, “Who’ll be in charge now?”

Of course, if there were still Deputy Chiefs within the TPD, one of them would possibly be given the responsibility…at least in the interim while the dust settled and the picture clarified.

With a lack of DC’s, there are a number of Captains currently on the force, several of whom are qualified by experience and tenure to step up.

The truth is, as big an event as this is regarding the battle between the citizens and the supposed powers of the Mayor, what matters now is what comes next. What happens now on the streets and in the neighborhoods of Trenton?

There has been a lot of energy and verbiage expended on why Joseph Santiago was not an appropriate person to head up Trenton’s Police Department. Despite his alleged claim not to go until served with a legal document (and in contrast to a previous statement that if he had to move here to keep the job, he’d leave), Santiago’s tenure has timed out.

Has anyone really thought about what will come next?

Members of the TPD and the public alike need to seriously examine their approach to “life after Santiago?”

For those who felt that Santiago was doing a great job, how are you going to carry on in his absence? Will you continue to be involved or will you walk away in disgust and disappointment that things haven’t gone your way?

A similar question can be posed to those who have stood and questioned the effectiveness of Santiago’s tenure as police director. Now that his residency “waiver” has been nullified, are you going to go back inside your homes in self satisfied silence that one perceived “evil” has been eliminated from our downtrodden city?

And to the long-suffering police who have had to deal with the whims and rages of the narcissistic and egomaniacal Santiago, are you willing to commit anew to working with the community to honestly and effectively reduce crime in Trenton?

There is nothing stronger than a working community police partnership. The successful challenge to the bogus residency waiver issued by Mr. Palmer to Mr. Santiago is a perfect example of what can be done when people unite to uphold the law. But will the bond be sustained and efforts refocused on the everyday street crime?

Will the general public maintain the trust in and communication with the Police? Will they share the information necessary to allow the Police to arrest and convict those responsible for the crime in our communities?

Will the police sustain and build upon the bridges of cooperation with the community that have been built because of and in spite of Santiago’s actions over the past five years?

Today’s judicial action has a lot of potential, let’s not waste it. One of the most divisive chapters of Trenton’s community-police relations was effectively laid to rest by Judge Feinberg’s decision.

It’s time to look forward to a safer, more unified Trenton and leave the abuses of power and privilege behind.

Are you listening, Council?

Earthlink has halted all of its work in Muni-WiFi systems and is officially pulling out of the as yet uncompleted Philadelphia network after three years. Why are we contemplating a "commitment" to a $250,000 contract with a small, unknown company with even less of a track record?

We already have Automatic Vehicle Locators in our Police Vehicles. Why are we soliciting bids for a new system?

The CitySide housing units are a fiasco. Why give a second thought to helping the owners bail out of their self-made mess with City financing, PILOTs, and property swaps?

Our Civilian Police Director does not live in the city as required by law (you said so yourselves with your vote in December), took sick days Monday and Tuesday and yet appeared before the Plainfield City Council Monday night. (Remember back in December when you chastised him for not being present and accessible to you and the citizens?) Why don't you go all the way and terminate his employment by the city?

The Administration has actively pursued and fired employees for non-residency, even when they've maintained an apartment in town and only lived away on weekends. Why are you allowing Communications Director Irving Bradley to split his residency?

Personnel Director Raisa Walker, presumably under oath, stated in July of 2006 that the City of Trenton had not issued any residency waivers to any employees in six years. Business Administrator Jane Feigenbaum stated in January of that same year that Mr. Santiago had been granted a residency waiver. These statements clearly contradict one another. What are you going to do about it?

The city is broke and broken. We need you to stop the stupid, illegal and wasteful spending and start repairing the civic infrastructure.

Who's at the helm?

After burning up the keyboard and the logging some serious verbiage last weekend, we sat back this week to quietly observe things from our vantage point on the stoop.

The picture isn’t all that good.

Revelations about Mr. Colicelli’s continued use of city resources and appearances at City Hall despite not having a binding contract, coupled with the fact that he’s been paid for “work done” last month and not authorized under any contract irritated certain council members. Meanwhile the Times, unconvincingly took those council members to task for an alleged hasty vote that didn’t allow for a proper transition as the consultant, who according to his submitted invoices did little more than attend meetings, exited.

Trentonian columnist L.A. Parker wrote about the questioned need for a $130,280 Chief of Staff position and a $55,457, part time aide. Citing an anonymous source, Parker reported that “Palmer antagonists” may be setting their sights on eliminating these two positions.

Interestingly, these (and other) positions need to be reviewed with respect to their effectiveness in the overall operation of the city and the relative cost to the tax payers. During the Palmer years, the city hall hierarchy has grown. The Chief of Staff position, a police driver, and various aides to the Mayor: these have all been added, but do the results justify the costs?

Or is the Mayor:

a) covering for his own managerial inadequacies
b) taking care of friends and associates
c) paying others to do things he’s not interested in doing.

Perhaps all of the above.

Councilman Coston made a point in the aftermath of the Colicelli decision that maybe the Palmer should “take the reins.” And that is the simple truth.

The hallmark of the Palmer administration is that the man himself is remote and detached from the day to day job he was elected to do. In fact, he is increasingly absent from the city itself. In his stead we have had a succession of Chiefs of Staff: Bill Watson, Gwendolyn Long-Harris, and Renee Haynes. And then there are aides, like Mr. Jerome Harris…who, if we are not mistaken, is the husband of the former Chief of Staff.

It was also announced this week that there will be some half dozen different attorneys working on the Santiago residency case. And they will all be funded by city tax dollars. All because Doug Palmer is determined to have his way, or punish those who oppose him by dragging things out in the courts. And if he won’t capitulate and rescind his unlawful waiver, city council should step up and terminate Santiago’s employment with the city. The law is the law (and take heed all you other not-quite-bona-fide-city-resident Directors who’ve been sticking closer to your Trenton cribs—you could be next). Drawing this matter out in the courts is unnecessary and costly.

Similarly, it was revealed in today’s paper that the city is filing for the return of settlement payments made to Trenton Fire Captain Ron Kosztyu. Kosztyu had alleged the city passed him over for promotion due to his union activities and anti-administration stance. The State Department of Personnel Merit Board agreed, but the city appealed. Just prior to the case going before the judge, a settlement was reached.

Now the city is challenging that Kosztyu and his attorney, George Dougherty (who is also representing the citizens who are challenging the Santiago residency waiver), improperly spoke to the press regarding the settlement and disparaged the city. On these grounds, the city is seeking to have the settlement declared void and the payments returned.

Anyone notice a pattern here?

It’s been said elsewhere but the comparison to Nero fiddling while Rome burns keeps coming to mind.

Palmer is only fooling himself if he thinks the people of Trenton can’t see through his charade of leadership. This Captain is not on the ship, let alone in the pilot house. He’s left it to an ever increasing cadre of loyalists with questionable competencies (the names Haynes, Gonzalez, Santiago, Colicelli come immediately to mind) to run the city.

And folks, we’re in danger of running aground.

Perhaps its time for our other elected officials, city council, to grab the oars and turn this boat around. Before it’s too late.

One turkey sandwich, please

Make mine to go.

In his Trentonian column on Wednesday, January 16, local scribe L. A. Parker compared City Council’s long-awaited action on the residency waiver to their inability to construct a decent turkey sandwich with the ingredients set out before them.

Parker, who is not known for his objectivity when it comes to the actions of the Doug Palmer administration, admonished the six members of Council who voted to give the Mayor seven days to rescind his action regarding Police Director Joe Santiago’s residency.

L. A. decried the hours spent discussing and avoiding action on this one issue when so many other items need to be addressed. And Parker is right on that, there are a lot of other issues to be dealt with.

a) the City’s infrastructure is not in good shape
b) housing enforcement (indeed, enforcement of all laws in general) is more lax than it should be
c) Our schools are physically falling apart and the school administration is failing our children, despite the millions of dollars poured into the system by the state (this is not a Council problem per se, but it still needs to be dealt with).
d) No matter what the Mayor, Director Santiago, or their respective spin doctors say, public safety in Trenton is not better now than it was 40 years ago. It is not even better now than it was 40 months ago.
e) We still have no economic opportunities for unskilled city residents and no prospects of attracting a major employer to the area in at least part because of points c and d above

What Mr. Parker fails to acknowledge is that after 17+ years of the same bullying, arrogant, administration the state of the city of Trenton is not totally Council’s fault. Indeed, if you follow the money and support that Mr. Palmer has given to “his team” of council people, logic tells you that implicit in that funding and endorsement was that they would support his agenda and personal whims.

Of course, Mr. Palmer and Mr. Parker would, along with the council people who received the Mayor’s largesse, deny that there was ever any intent to co-opt the legislative branch of city government to do the executive branch’s bidding.

If that were truly the case, why would Mr. Parker make snarky remarks about a council majority that found its voice?

So what, it took them awhile. But they made a turkey sandwich and it tastes pretty good. Maybe they’ll get comfortable in the kitchen and start making more.
If Mr. Palmer continues to ignore the law for his own selfish and egotistical reasons, maybe Council can cook up another sandwich and send him packing as well.

It is obvious Doug doesn’t want to be here anymore and we certainly can’t afford his poor leadership any longer.

As columnist, Mea Kaemmerlen of the Times wrote this morning, “Trenton -- beleaguered and beloved -- deserves an energetic, intelligent, inspired, workaholic leader.”

Let’s order up a triple-decker turkey club, to go.

Council takes a stand on residency

Mayor Palmer throws a hissy fit

With a vote of 6-0 and one abstention (Council President Paul Pintella), Trenton's City Council voted last night to have the Mayor enforce the city's residency ordinance as it pertains to Police Director Joseph Santiago. The Mayor was given seven days to notify Council of his compliance with their "respectful" request.

For his part, Mayor Palmer reacted in his typically child-like manner.

Times reporter Eva Loayza quoted the Mayor in an article in this morning's edition:

"Respectfully, that resolution is not going to carry weight with me nor will I fire him because he has legal standing, he has a waiver," said Palmer, who has repeatedly said he had the right under the ordinance to grant Santiago a waiver.

"I am not going to do their dirty work. If they want to fire him, let them do it," said Palmer.

What happened to the Doug Palmer who dismissed charges that city council was his personal rubber stamp? Now that a majority voted and voted against him, their opinions no longer "carry weight" with him?

What happened to wanting a council and administration that showed they could work together to get things done? Now that he isn't getting his way, he's saying "let them do it."

There are a lot of facets to this Santiago/residency issue. Many hours have been spent discussing and debating the situation...on the front stoop and elsewhere.

The simple fact of the matter is, there is a law currently on the books and in effect. That law has been applied against employees from time to time in a very inconsistent (and some might say selective/vindictive) manner. To many, ourselves included, the current reading of the ordinance does not allow for the granting of any waivers once an individual accepts a position with the city.

And since the Mayor steadfastly disagrees, it will be up to the courts to decide who's right. And unfortunately, it is going to cost the city and us taxpayers money to prove or disprove the Mayor's "belief." Money, that we obviously don't have.

As a city, maybe we should continue to discuss the merits of residency requirements for city employees. But in the meantime, there are many other concerns we need to deal with. For now, the residency ordinance is what it is; the law is the law.

Contrary to what Mr. Palmer may think, the City of Trenton is not his personal kingdom. He is not an emperor. He is not above the law (and neither is Mr. Santiago).

The thinking members of city council get it.

It's about time the Mayor does too.

It's Cryin' Time Again

So, Mayor Palmer pitched a fit in front of City Council Tuesday evening, daring them to vote to terminate Police Director Joe Santiago for non-residency and vowing to "keep him" anyway.

The Mayor seems to think that the fact that the Santiago family was threatened, received "pornography" in the mail and may have had someone trespass on their property is reason enough to allow this questionable, if not illegal, "waiver."

Besides the amnesia over his own words of several years ago, the Mayor seems to be overlooking a couple of very simple facts.

Mr. Santiago is a career law enforcement professional. If he doesn't know and accept the risks that come with the job, he should retire. And, frankly, the Police Director has been quoted as saying that his family comes above all and everyone else.

Fine. Admirable.

So, if the Director's family is "first, second and third" on his list of priorities, that makes Trenton number four on his list at best! Can he really be the best choice to lead our Police Department then?

Additionally, Mr. Santiago and Mayor Palmer were fully cognizant of the residency requirements of the job when the appointment was made and accepted.

Mr. Santiago made frequent comments about seeking a suitable home here, resided at the Trenton Marriott for awhile (and do we know who actually paid for that choice?) and then allegedly had residences at the Grand Court Villas (aka Cigar Factory) and later with his then assistant, Abe Hemsey. Suddenly, it became important and acceptable for Mr. Santiago to reside elsewhere other than Trenton?

The contradictions and deceits abound.

Santiago was going to move here, but the market changed and he could "no longer afford" to buy a house in town? Well, maybe not if it was only going to be a "second home" to hold off the critics. Certainly he could have afforded Trenton by disinvest himself of his Morris County property.

And while we're crying "poor" let us not forget that this is a man being paid over $100,000 per year by the City (not counting a $25,000 stipend, free cars, gas, etc.) and collecting a full pension from 30 years as a cop.

If he can't afford to live in Trenton, maybe he should have applied for some of the subsidized housing opportunities the Palmer administration has been so fond of creating!

As for the Mayor, it is painfully obvious that he does not accept or uphold the very laws of the City he was elected to serve. Otherwise he wouldn't so readily make these arbitrary (and possibly illegal) decisions to circumvent City Ordinances when and for whom it pleases him.

The residency issue is not just about Joe Santiago.

It is not about whether the Police Unions are happy with the administration and it's appointed leadership of the department.

The residency issue is about a Mayor who has gotten so mad with power and position that he has forgotten all about the reasons for civil service rules; integrity; accountability and fair play. It's about circumventing those rules and regulations for political expediency (as in the case about the newly appointed Communications Director, Irv Bradley who not only has a police record, but is also a non-city resident). It's about violating the very Civil Service rules intended to remove the politics from Government jobs and provide equal opportunities to all qualified candidates, not just friends and friends of friends.

Mayor Palmer is worried about how Trenton will be perceived if Joe Santiago is forced out (remember, he was forced out of the State Police before he came to Trenton). Just how does Mayor Palmer, the self-important President of the U.S. Conference of Mayors and admitted campaign co-chair for a high-profile Presidential Candidate, think our city is perceived now?

Trenton is a broke and broken, dysfunctional and dyspeptic example of a once great city. We continue to suffer under the despotic rule of a Mayor who lacks the integrity and enlightenment to admit when he is wrong.

Instead of making this personal, the Mayor should admit that mistakes have been made and policies have been broken and/or ignored. Only then can he hope to engage his detractors in a meaningful and positive way.

Until he admits that he is wrong in this matter, Mayor Palmer will never be perceived as more than another "first" that dragged his city into last place.

Now that is something to cry about.

Bending the law

It's shaping up to be a tough week for the stand up guy who leads the City of Trenton Police Department.

The front page of this morning's Trentonian touts a story about how the crime reports are tweaked and sanitized before being provided for public consumption (and at that, they are rarely made easily available to the general public).

It will be interesting to watch how City Hall and Police HQ try to spin this one. Hopefully they are more successful than Hamilton Mayor Glen Gilmore was at hiding the sizable budget shortfall in Mercer County's largest municipality (you know, "Clean, Safe Hamilton").

There are those in the community who have for years begged, bargained and pleaded for the regular release and publication of the crime reports to the public. Why?

For one, so that the residents of any given neighborhood can see if what they are experiencing is actually showing up in the reports. That way all parties can be kept honest about what is reported and how large or small the crime problem actually is. This is not an unheard of approach. And really, how hard would it be to accomplish since the crimes are mapped for the weekly comstat meetings anyway?

Additionally, regular disclosure of criminal activity will reduce the suspicion that the authorities are holding back or hiding information.

But crime reporting isn't the only issue facing Mr. Santiago this week.

The question of his residency continues to dog the police director. In today's Times, Mayor Palmer states that he has granted Mr. Santiago a waiver of the residency rule.

There's only one small problem: there doesn't appear to be any clause in the City Ordinance granting the Mayor or anyone else the power to waive residency once the appointee has accepted the position.

Therein lies the basis of Frank Weeden's complaint.

Hopefully, these issues will not go away between now and the Police Director's scheduled appearance before City Council at the end of the month.

And, if you only attend one council meeting this year, make it that one.

Make the Director answer directly to the questions about crime reporting and residency.

You've got nothing to lose, the TV writers are on strike anyway.

Step up

Last week, city activist, businessman and former mayoral candidate Frank Weeden formally notified City Council that he was questioning the residency status of Police Director Joseph Santiago. In a letter addressed to Raisa Walker, Director of Personnel, Weeden raised the issue of Santiago's non-compliance with the city ordinance requiring residency.

As has been noted here previously, Director Santiago is not the only member of Mayor Palmer's cabinet, past or present, to flex the residency rules. Some may have done a more complete job of covering the fact that they don't really live here than Mr. Santiago, but it is still a known fact that he is not the only one.

West Ward Councilwoman Annette Lartigue immediately went on record as supporting Mr. Weeden's inquiry. You might almost have thought she was first learning of this little tidbit. Or you might reason that she's starting to align things for the 2010 municipal elections when she will be seeking a post higher than representative of the West Ward. Her letter to the editor in either Sunday's Trentonian or this morning's Times is a further indication of her intentions (if you click on the link to the Times, you'll have to scroll down the page. Her letter is the third or fourth one).

It doesn't really matter why, it is good that Ms. Lartigue is echoing the question. One can probably guess that South Ward Councilman Jim Coston will also be interested to hear the 'explanation' for the Director's lack of Trenton residency with the North and East Ward Councilmen joining the chorus.

And while it is tempting to point fingers and ask these elected officials why it took so long for them to recognize this issue, we can't forget that they were elected to represent the people of this city. If the residents didn't publicly or formally bring this topic up prior to Mr. Weeden's letter, then we can't really blame the elected representatives for leaving it alone.

While we might hope that our elected officials were a little more proactive in such matters, we have to understand that they are subjugated to the bullying tactics of the Mayor and his administration. If a Councilperson pushes the administration too hard on this or any matter, he or she may just find themselves in a situation of not being able to procure proper city services to his or her constituents. And that doesn't do any of us any good.

Maybe now that Mr. Weeden has broken the public silence on the matter of residency, a majority of Councilpeople will join in and demand the administration do the right thing.

And to help stiffen the resolve of Council, everyone who can should plan to attend the City Council meeting on the 27th when Director Santiago is scheduled to appear. Let him know that he's not fooling anyone and that he is not above the law.