Bass ackwards

When you hire an employee, you usually try to hire someone with the most qualifications and/or experience pertinent to the job he or she will be doing.

At least that is the theory.

In the city of Trenton, it appears that the inverse is more the rule than the exception. The hiring policy in city hall seems to follow the old adage "it is not what you know, but who you know."

Marc McKithen, city law director, is a case in point. 

Marc is bright, well educated, and with a strong ethical bent.  He is not an expert in municipal law...especially the byzantine version followed here in NJ.  McKithen admitted as much while being questioned by city council woman Marge Caldwell-Wilson during his confirmation (advice and consent) appearance before the governing body.

Apparently, above and beyond his actual qualifications for the position, McKithen comes from a large, well-known local family.  One of his uncles gave a substantial contribution to the Tony Mack campaign.  Marc made a contribution as well.

During his brief tenure as the city attorney, Marc made some bad calls and a couple of good ones.

One notable example of the latter was McKithen's lack of understanding of the New Jersey's public purchasing laws that lead to the ADPC/Lynx IT consulting contract debacle.  It resulted in the case going before Judge Linda Feinberg, who not only decided against the city's position but gave Mr. McKithen quite the tongue lashing.  The judge was none too pleased with the city's complete abandonment of the proscribed purchasing process.

To the good, Marc McKithen famously and correctly declared the legal services contract between the city and the Cooper Levenson law firm void due to campaign contribution law (pay-to-play).  The Cooper Levenson firm is headed by Lloyd Levenson. The firm contributed significantly to the Partners for Progress political action committee that in turn gave money to Mayor Mack's campaign.  The contribution was allegedly withdrawn by the firm and repaid by the campaign although there was never any hard proof of that. 

What didn't come out at the time or in the aftermath, was that Cooper Levenson also made a $2,500 contribution to another political action committee, Trenton Thrives that in turn spent money on behalf on Keith Hamilton's campaign to become mayor of Trenton.  This also violates the city's pay-to-play law and would have disqualified the firm from doing business with the city.

Levenson himself served as a chair of the Mayor's inaugural ball. His name was featured prominently on the invitation to the event.  In most circles, that constitutes solicitation on behalf of the Mayor and thus would violate the pay-to-play law as well.

All that didn't seem to matter and the administration saw to it that council approved the contract to Cooper Levenson in the fall of 2010.  Only later, when things started getting heated in the press, did Mr. McKithen (who, it must be pointed out, was on staff but not yet the actual law director when the contract was approved) determine the contract to be null and void.

The Mayor quickly issued a follow up message stating that Mr. McKithen was wrong and that the contract was legal and in force.  As the public turned up the heat on the deal, Cooper Levenson oh so gallantly "withdrew" from the contract.

Then came the onslaught of Open Public Records Act requests.  Reportedly, the Mayor didn't like the fact that McKithen was complying with the law and releasing information to the public.  Information that demonstrated just how inept, corrupt and sloppy the Mack administration was.

Rather than clean up his act, the Mayor decided to clean house and put pressure on McKithen to resign.

McKithen has apparently given up trying to bring some semblance of law and order to the Mack administration and has tendered his resignation effective June 30.

So the guy who was trying to do the right thing is being forced out of an administration that needs all of the competency it can get.

Bass ackwards.

Do as I say, not as I do

On Thursday, June 9, the city business administrator announced a new policy regarding who could take home city vehicles and why.

From: Colin Cherry [mailto:ccherry@trentonnj.org]


Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 4:47 PM

To: Seigle, John; McKithen, Marc; Rubino, Joseph; Burzachiello, Ralph; 'jjuniack@trentonpolice.net'; 'qbashir@aol.com'; Thompson, Cleveland; Rousseau, David; Denson, Walter; Jones, Nathaniel; Roberts, Anthony

Cc: 'jgnandt@trentonpolice.net'; 'eberry@trentonnj.org'

Subject: Take Home Vehicle Policy

Importance: High

Good afternoon,

Per the direction of the Business Administrator, the following is to be in effect this coming Monday, June 13, 2011 until further notice.

No passenger vehicle (including those assigned to Department Directors) is to be operated outside of business hours. This means that no vehicle should be “taken home”.

The only exceptions to this policy are those employees who work non-standard schedules and require a vehicle to be “on call”. In such cases, the vehicle must be specialized and necessary for the conduct of City business (for example, a water utility van with equipment inside).

All other vehicles are to be parked in their respective lots – that is a Department lot if applicable, the City Hall lot otherwise – at the close of the business day. After the close of business on Monday any vehicle for which the employee has not received special dispensation from the Business Administrator which is found to not be parked as directed will be considered to be in misuse. The Office of the Business Administrator will be forced to assume that the employee has the intention of depriving the City of Trenton of the proper use of that vehicle and all appropriate action will be taken to ensure that it is returned.

Thank you and please ensure that you communicate this directive clearly to your employees.

__________________

Colin Cherry

City of Trenton

Management Assistant

319 East State Street

Trenton, NJ 08608

(609) 989-3532

ccherry@trentonnj.org

All well and good.  After all, it merely conforms (somewhat) to the intent of ordinance 10-007 passed in January of 2010 and limiting the "take home" use of city passenger vehicles.

One little problem, on Monday evening, June 13, 2011 guess who had a city vehicle parked across the street from his Trenton apartment.  Why, none other than Mr. Eric Berry, Business Administrator for the city of Trenton.

I guess his job puts him above and beyond the reach of his own new policy.

Nice one, Mr. Berry.  Way to go.  You obviously care more about what you can get out of the taxpayers' pockets than what you can do to clean up the cess pool that is city hall.

What's Mack serving?

At the Trenton Council of Civic Associations meeting on Thursday, June 9, it was announced that Mayor Mack would hold a “catered picnic” for all civic association members and their families on June 29 in Cadwalader Park.


Mayoral aide and alleged grant writer Yakial Garnier (who also happens to be Councilwoman At Large Kathy McBride’s daughter) made the announcement to the gathering and provided a letter from the Mayor as an invitation.

Everyone is welcome, the city only requests that you RSVP to Ms. Garnier “ASAP.”

Now, we don’t want to be overly suspicious, but why is it that we first learn about this event recognizing “the essential work, effort and time each Civic Organization dedicates to making their communities safe , and more vibrant places to live” just a couple of days after a group of citizens filed notice of intent to recall the mayor?

This couldn’t possibly be a ploy to play to the Mayor’s base constituency who has shown they can be readily bought for free food and maybe a voucher for some cash? You do remember the fiasco after last year’s runoff election when there was a near riot on Hamilton Avenue because Mack’s campaign workers were given vouchers (illegal under NJ election laws) for food and pay, don’t you?

Yes, the timing of the announcement of this picnic is more than a little ripe. But that is not all that stinks.

Anyone else wondering where the money is coming from to pay for a “catered” picnic for an as yet unknown number of people just three weeks hence?

Certainly, if the city has the money, it could be put to better use.

And if it is coming from the Mayor’s campaign committee, he’d better make a full accounting of it.

Spin, spin, spin

Well, there you have it.
A group has come together and filed the necessary paperwork to start the recall process for Mayor Mack.

Late Monday afternoon, a response was posted on the City of Trenton website. Besides being a questionable use of city resources in the service of the Mayor trying to hold onto his position, the press release contained erroneous information along with the usual poor grammar we’ve come to expect from this administration.

In the release, it is stated that: Under the law it is the requirement of the recall committee to pay for the costs associated with the actual election.

FACT: the city foots the bill for any special elections held as a result of a recall effort.  The city's statement is point blank incorrect.

And while we’re at it, the $100,000 figure touted as the cost of a recall may be a little high. But, for the sake of easy math, let’s accept it. The simple fact is that $100,000 spent on anything calculates to a tax increase of about $0.00507, or about 1/2 of 1 cent per $100 of valuation. That means if your home is assessed at $100,000, a special election would cost you $5.07 more in taxes.

It is an added cost, yes. But compared to some of the other waste that is occurring in city hall, it isn’t much.

We’re paying that much right now for the Mayor’s two “grant writers” who have produced absolutely zero in the way of revenue for the city. In fact, looking over public records, we are hard put to find even a half dozen grant applications that can be credited solely to either of these individuals. Cut them loose…save over $100,000 just in salaries and a bit more in benefits.

Don’t let the rhetoric from city hall fool you. The constant spinning of the facts have left them all a little dizzy.

Tony Mack*

"Tony Mack"

Tony, Tony, oh Tony Mack, we want our city back!
Tony, Tony, oh Tony Mack, we want our city back!
I am fed up with you, my friends feel the same way too
I tried so hard to be true, like I promised I'd do
But every time I turn around, you’re bringing shame to our lovely town

[Chorus:]

Hey Tony, Tony, oh Tony Mack, we want our city back
Tony, Tony, oh Tony Mack, we want our city back
We call you on the phone, at least three times a day
All you do is wish us “Happy Pearl Harbor Day.”

But this frustration that we have within makes us ask for your resignation

[Chorus]

Can‘t you govern?, Can't you govern?

[Instrumental break]

I wanna say, I'm not getting any stronger, I can't hold out very much longer
Trying hard to be true, but Tony, you just don’t know what to do.

[Chorus]

Can't you govern?, Can't you govern?
Can't you govern?, Can't you govern?...

(Tony, Tony, oh Tony Mack, we want our city back)

[Repeats out]


*our apologies to Martha and the Vandellas
　

Dear Trentonians,

What follows is not news. It is not a revelation. It is simple, common sense.

Read it or don’t.

Heed it or don’t.

If you want a better city, do something about it.

Stop condoning violence through inaction. You know who has the guns, who is shooting at whom and why. Speak up. There are confidential tip lines set up to protect your identity if that is your concern.

Your silence is killing this city.

Parents, if you want a better school system and better educational opportunities for your children, get involved. Discipline your children. Teach them how to act in a productive, not disruptive, way. Show them what is acceptable behavior and standards of dress. Reinforce that learning is good and hard work is the way to a better life. Dissuade them from the flash and dazzle portrayed in popular culture by teaching them lasting values.

Do it with actions as well as words, even if it means dropping a few of your own pretences. Do you really need that Mercedes or BMW SUV when a Ford or Chevy will serve you just as well and cost you less to maintain?

And if you are worried about what your kids are doing in their spare time…get out of your chair; leave the bar and find out. We have sports leagues crying for participating children AND PARENTS! Take advantage of the opportunities to engage in positive activities with your children. Being a parent is not the same as making a baby.

Tired and frustrated by wading through the filth and garbage in our streets and lots? Clean it up! If you want others to take pride in and care of this city, you must set the example. Maintain your property to the best of your ability and help others do the same for theirs. Again, leading by example will make a difference.

Want a better, more accountable government? Get involved. Follow what is going on by reading the local papers, talking to your neighbors and the various blogs. Inform yourself on the issues. Don’t rely solely on what elected officials tell you. Take the time to research and reflect on the information available, then communicate your thoughts and opinions to the Mayor and Council.

If, after all of your input, you feel that your elected officials are not serving the best interests of the city…

…remove them from office.

Fed up?

The arrest last week of former Trenton chief of staff Paul Sigmund brought out the expected waves of compassion from the public.  To be sure, everyone wishes Mr. Sigmund well on his journey down the long road of recovery. 

What can't be overlooked in this matter, however, is the fact that Mr. Sigmund should have never been hired by Mayor Mack in the first place. 

The past two days, letters to the editor have appeared in the Times addressing this situation.  On May, 9 we read this:

Noblesse oblige


The writer of the letter "Enough, already" (May 6) complains that The Times has published "humiliating photos of the son of one of the oldest and most respected families in Mercer County."

This newspaper has not humiliated the Sigmund family; Paul Sigmund IV did that all on his own. I, for one, would expect more of someone like Mr. Sigmund. This is a man born with all the advantages, all the connections, all the chances that most of us just dream about. I think it's deplorable that Mr. Sigmund behaved in such an irresponsible, selfish and thoughtless manner.

Patricia H. Stewart,
Trenton

And on May 10, this letter appeared:

A gaggle of rogues plummet from power

I applaud The Times for often showing the Trenton mayor's disgraced former chief of staff, Paul Sigmund IV, in handcuffs on Page One (letter, "Enough, already," May 6). He deserves the newspaper's shaming and so much more. As for his "respected Mercer County family," it is surely quite less so now. They have a lot to explain, if they hid the truth from the citizens of Trenton.

I urge The Times to publish a rogues' gallery of all the corrupt, unethical or incompetent high-level city appointees once placed in positions of trust and power by the good mayor of Trenton. Remind the newspaper's readers and the taxpayers and voters of the city that birds of a feather flock together. It is "enough, already." Trenton Mayor Tony Mack should resign before he does any more damage to the reputation of the Capital City, and all of his unworthy henchmen should be fired.

William E. Andersen,
West Windsor

Both writers make valid points.

The Times (of Trenton), the Trentonian, the New York Times, WPVI-6 none of the media outlets created this situation.  It may be argued that they have surely capitalized on the newsworthy event of a high-ranking official of New Jersey's capital city being arrested for drug possession and assaulting the arresting officers.  The fact that the official is the scion of a notable family just adds to the interest factor.  The humiliation is totally the responsibility of Mr. Sigmund.

Mr. Andersen's letter is about another humiliation...that perpetrated by the Tony Mack administration with his string of bad choices for appointees.  The suggestion that Mayor Mack step down is not an unreasonable one. 

For those who might question the right of a non-Trenton resident weighing in on the matter we would respond, "and why not?"

The taxpayers of the state of New Jersey have underwritten Trenton's mismanagement for way too long now.  They should have the right to voice their opinion on whether or not the city's leadership is doing a good job.  Surely, the voters of the city of Trenton have not shown they are up to the task.

After electing the previous mayor to five terms the voters seem to have lost their way.  From a field of 10 possible replacements running in last May's election, Mayor Mack won the runoff in June.  Since then, the city has suffered one humiliation after another. (The saga has been reported here and elsewhere, we won't delve into yet again).

There is a chance for the voters to redeem themselves.  Anytime after this Thursday, May 12, a recall effort can be launched.

It is a daunting task with a maze-like process that is bound (designed?) to trip up the unprepared.  But it can be done.

For it to succeed, Trentonians must keep a few things in mind.

The three person recall committee needs to be representative of the city populous. 
There should only be one committee to recall.  Multiple entities will just dilute and derail the process.  Regardless of one's reasoning for wanting to remove the Mayor (or a council member...they are subject to recall as well), you must join together over the common bond of wanting to improve things in the city.
Similarly, any individual wanting to run to replace a possibly recalled official should be vetted and agreed upon collectively.  Too many candidates will just make it that much easier for the status to remain quo.
Get organized and get smart.  The signature drive is a large hurdle to get over in the process. Work together and consider using centralized signature collection locations rather than relying mostly on door-to-door canvassing.

The clock is ticking, Trenton.  Nearly everyone you meet is talking about the needed changes in city government.  You can make it happen.

Or you can be humiliated again.

Another unqualified appointee.

No, this isn’t about Paul Sigmund IV’s brief tenure as Chief of Staff/Deputy Mayor for the City of Trenton.

Not directly.

This is about Mayor Mack’s choice for law director, Marc McKithen.

At first glance, Mr. McKithen might seem a perfect candidate to be tapped to head up the city’s law department. He grew up here, he’s from a large and well-known and respected Trenton family, he graduated from the city's Young Scholar's Institue, Rider University, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill and Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University

Besides being general counsel for the family business, Kelly’s Janitorial Service, Inc, he was an associate at the Manhattan firm of Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy. And by his own admission has little expertise in municipal law. His experience, you see, was in corporate matters, specifically intellectual property…patents and such.

While there are some basic similarities to the various disciplines of the legal profession, there are also very great differences. There are areas of arcane knowledge that are of little use or consequence unless you are working in a specific area of the law.

Municipal law, especially here in New Jersey, is a fairly specialized field. The basic form and procedures may be the same for all areas of law, but the details and minutiae (and isn’t that really what law deals with mostly) are what separates them.

If you are having trouble grasping this, think of the medical profession. The basic biology of the human body is the same, but do you want a podiatrist to perform cataract surgery on you?

So we have a corporate law guy sitting as the de facto legal expert for the city of Trenton. He is supposed to provide good counsel to the administrative and legislative branches of the government so we, as a city, don’t get into trouble.

Mr. McKithen has not only admitted on the record during his advise and consent hearing that he had limited experience in the practice of municipal law, he has demonstrated it.

The inept and irresponsible handling of the city’s information technology (IT) consulting contract is but one example. Even when the errors in the city’s process were pointed out, McKithen allowed the council to illegally choose an unqualified vendor over a qualified one. This cost the city time and money to unsuccessfully defend itself in court.

To his credit, Mr. McKithen did pull the plug on an outside legal contract to the Cooper Levenson law firm after it was discovered and loudly made public that the firm had violated the city’s pay-to-play ordinance. But while he gets the nod for doing so, it should also be pointed out that he was on staff at the time that the contract was repeatedly brought up for council to approve and he never advised against it….EVEN WHEN MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC POINTED OUT WHY IT SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED!

These are just two examples of Mr. McKithen’s inexperience leading to bad decisions.

Just this week, when faced with the Sigmund saga and with the administration seemingly unable to make a stand up decision on the man’s employment status, McKithen has failed again.

City Council, for once, seemed poised to act as a responsible and thinking body by beginning the process of removing Mr. Sigmund from the city’s employ. Colin Cherry, a city employed “management assistant,” after consulting with McKithen circulated a memo to members of city council, the business administrator declaring that the governing body does not have the authority to remove from office the Chief of Staff/Deputy Mayor since they did not have advise and consent power over the appointment to that position.

From: "Colin Cherry"


Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:08:39 -0400

To: Zachary Chester; Alex Bethea;

George Muschal; Kathy McBride; Marge Caldwell-Wilson; Phyllis Holly-Ward; Verlina Reynolds-
Jackson

Cc: Baylor, Leona; ; 'Eric Berry'; McKithen, Marc

Subject: Removal of a Municipal Officer by Council

Good afternoon,

I just wanted to reach out to clarify the powers of removal that are granted to City Council.

Following my discussions with the Director of Law, I am providing the following clarifications.

City Council does not have the authority to remove deputy mayors (including the Chief of Staff), mayoral aides, or the Mayor’s personal and executive secretaries. These positions are appointed by the Mayor and can be removed at his discretion pursuant to State statute (N.J.S.A. 40:69:A-60.1) copied below.

The mayor of any municipality having a population of more than 80,000, but less than 300,000, which, prior to January 9, 1982, had adopted the form of government designated as "Mayor-Council Plan C" provided for in article 5 of P.L.1950, c.210 (C.40:69A-55 et seq.), may appoint one or two deputy mayors, a personal secretary, an executive secretary, and aides not exceeding seven in number, who shall serve and be
removable at the pleasure of the mayor, and who shall serve in the unclassified service of the civil service of the municipality and shall receive such salary as shall be fixed by the mayor.

City Council does, however, have the ability to remove, with cause, Department Directors, the Business Administrator, or any other position that requires the advice and consent of Council. To do so requires a two-thirds majority (5 votes). The Department of Law is currently investigating whether or not there are any other positions that may fall under City Council’s purview to remove, however no additional positions are believed to fall under Council’s authority at this time.

Thank you and please let me know if you have any further questions.

_________________

Colin Cherry
City of Trenton
Management Assistant
319 East State Street
Trenton, NJ 08608
(609) 989-3532
ccherry@trentonnj.org

When consulted on the matter, noted local attorney and former city law director George Dougherty offered up a two page opinion contradicting Mr. Cherry’s assertion. This opinion was sent to Mr. McKithen.

Mr. Dougherty's cover letter that accompanied his opinion reads in part:

My opinion is that the City Council’s powers under NJSA 40:69A-37 expressly apply to “any municipal officer” other than the Mayor and a Council member. Attached is my explanation and supporting authority. The fact that the mayor can appoint a deputy (and some other officers) without council advice and consent and can remove, does not equate to the City Council has no authority to remove. It has it clearly under Section 37. See attached.


Mr. Cherry’s opinion adds something to Section 37 which does not appear in print. There is no requirement in the published portion of that section which limits Council’s removal power over “any municipal officer” to those officers whose appointment is subject to Council’s advice and consent. If he has a citation to that requirement I would be happy to reconsider.

Yet, when asked at Thursday night’s council meeting for an opinion on the body’s power to remove public officials, Mr. McKithen responded that the council’s authority did not extend to the chief of staff. His contention is that if they don’t approve (through advise and consent) the appointment, they cannot remove the appointee.

Well Mr. McKithen, we think you may be wrong.

There is one thing that we agree upon…council had to approve your appointment and so they have the power to remove you.

And they should.

Make it right, Mayor Mack

Monday’s arrest of Paul Sigmund is a very sad turn of events.

 

Let’s be perfectly clear here: Mr. Sigmund obviously has some problems that we all hope he will seek proper treatment for. May he find the will and the way to overcome his personal demons and correct his path. And may his family be able to move through and past this chapter of their lives.

 

While we wish Mr. Sigmund and his family well, there are other more public and pressing matters that must not be swept aside in sentimentality.

 

Mayor Mack’s judgment is once again in question.

 

Are we to believe that the Mayor knew nothing of Mr. Sigmund’s problems before bringing him on board less than two months ago? Rumors and questions about just what was reported in Mr. Sigmund’s required background check have swirled since his appointment as Chief of Staff was announced.

 

 

The New York Times reported that Mack spokesperson Lauren Ira stated that Mr. Sigmund submitted to and passed the required drug test at the time of his hiring.

 

Are we to believe then, that only in the last seven weeks Mr. Sigmund has developed a heroin habit?

 

Last month there was the speeding incident where Mr. Sigmund was stopped for driving a city owned vehicle 35 miles over the speed limit. It was later learned that Mr. Sigmund had neither a valid New Jersey nor California driver’s license.
 

Are we to believe that, as was claimed at the time, the city administration had no knowledge of Mr. Sigmund’s lack of valid driving privileges?

 

Mayor Mack it is time for you to step up and do the right things: 

1. You need to ask for Mr. Sigmund’s resignation immediately.
2. You need to come clean about what you really knew about Mr. Sigmund’s background; his substance abuse problem and his suspended driver’s license.
3. You need to issue an executive order directing all elected and appointed officials of the city of Trenton to immediately submit to a drug test.
4. You need to remember that the first day to submit the paperwork initiating the recall process is just eight days away.

Mayor Mack, your poor judgment has yet again put the city of Trenton in a bad light and the taxpayers on the hook. We are fortunate that the events above did not take a more tragic route where someone was injured or worse while your appointee illegally operated a city owned vehicle while speeding or driving under the influence or both.

 

This may very well be your last chance to make things right.

Stupid is as stupid does...

...and says.

The following are direct excerpts from online stories regarding Trenton Chief of Staff/Deputy Mayor Paul Sigmund's lack of a valid driver's license when he was stopped for speeding in a city owned vehicle. Links to the full article are provide.

From the Trentonian: 


“It’s true that I don’t have a New Jersey’s license. I’ve been to DMV a couple of times but you need like six forms of identification to get a license. I will take care of it. And in regards to California, I have a permit that allows me to drive to work. I thought I could drive in New Jersey,” Sigmund said.


Sigmund attempted to explain his admitted mistake.

“I was totally lost in thought, rushing back to work because I had this great idea about improving our school system. I’ll tell you about it soon.”

Sigmund, in March, assured the Trentonian that he had “taken care of” his California problems, stemming from two unpaid tickets, and then promised to not drive a city car until he could show proof of rectification.

“I thought everything had been taken care of. I thought all of the restrictions had been lifted,” Sigmund said.
 
Again, from the Trentonian:
 
Mayor Tony Mack today said his Chief of Staff Paul Sigmund should not have been behind the wheel of a city-owned vehicle last weekend when he racked up tickets for speeding and driving without a license.

“In hindsight, Paul should not have been given a city car and he should not have been behind the wheel of a vehicle,” Mack said.

Mack said he had “no idea of how this occurred,” referring to Sigmund being issued the Trenton government Ford Escape without having a valid license.

Mack made one other statement, saying that he and Acting Police Director Joseph Juniak never discussed whether Sigmund should get a city vehicle.

“I didn’t speak to Juniak about this,” Mack said.



From the Times:

“My understanding, both from California and New Jersey, was that my license was valid,” Sigmund said yesterday.


He acknowledged he was speeding, saying he was “lost in thought” at the time of the stop and was unaware of how fast he was going.

During a press conference yesterday introducing former state treasurer David Rousseau as Trenton’s new finance adviser, Mack cited personnel issues in refusing to discuss whether he knew of Sigmund’s license status. But Sigmund said he told Mack about the issue earlier, when he believed he had it fixed.

“I brought it right to Tony’s attention the second I found out about it,” Sigmund said.

Sigmund said he drove to work yesterday morning, but would be leaving his sports utility vehicle at City Hall and finding another way home.

That pretty much says it all, doesn't it?

Remember this guy?

Remember back last summer when Mayor Mack wanted to appoint Andrew Weber the Business Administrator for the City of Trenton?  You know, after Bill Guhl un-volunteered himself and before Andrew McCrosson (later to resign and plead guilty to embezzlement) got to hold the chair for a few months.  The problem with the webe appointment was a blatant conflict of interest. Weber is a partner with the Mt. Holly law firm of Riley and Riley.  Riley and Riley were being considered for a legal services contract with the city.  Mr. Weber, who also served on Mayor Mack's transition team and was a former special counsel with Cooper Levenson. (You remember them, right?)

Well, it looks like Mr. Weber got the tiniest of wrist slaps from the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission (NJ ELEC) this week:

NEW JERSEY ELECTION LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSION

P.O. Box 185

Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0185

NEW JERSEY ELECTION
LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSION,
Complainant,

FINAL DECISION FOR

LATE FILING

v.

ANDREW WEBER,
Respondent.

C-1598-1-2009L

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission (hereafter, the Commission) considered at its meeting of March 15, 2011 the Complaint, issued on October 27, 2010, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:13C-18 et seq., for non-filing of the Governmental Affairs Agent Quarterly Report (Form Q-4) for the 2009 third quarter report period, which Complaint is hereby incorporated by reference in this Final Decision. The Commission considered the Respondent’s Affidavit and Waiver of Hearing submitted in response to the Complaint, and by a vote of 4-0 adopted as its Final Decision the proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth in the Complaint, after modifying them to reflect that the Respondent filed a Governmental Affairs Agent Quarterly Report (Form Q-4) for the 2009 third quarter report period on February 1, 2011 (476 days late).

PENALTY

THEREFORE, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:13C-23.1 and N.J.A.C. 19:25-20.18, the Commission hereby REPRIMANDS the Respondent and imposes a penalty in the amount of $300.00 for late filing of Form Q-4. Respondent submitted payment of $300.00. No further payment is required.

NEW JERSEY ELECTION LAW

ENFORCEMENT COMMISSION

Date of Mailing: March 30, 2011  BY: _____________________

RONALD DEFILIPPIS

Chairman

CERTIFIED MAIL NO. 7009 3410 0001 8442 8922
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
AND FIRST CLASS MAIL

To be sure, a $300 fine is nothing to Mr. Weber.  And we're sure his late filing of a Government Affairs Agent (lobbyist) report was a mere technical oversight.  Right.
 
Just like not mentioning the various PAC's Mr. Weber is involved in during all of the Cooper Levenson/City of Trenton controversy was an oversight.  You know, PAC's like Voters United New Jersey that Mr. Weber just happens to have the sole signatory power on their checking account. 
 
According to the 4th quarter ELEC report filed (filed about two weeks late, btw) by Voters United, Riley and Riley, along with Cooper Levenson and Hydro-San (which has the same address and ownership as Alaimo Engineering, another consulting firm that has been trying to get work with the city of Trenton) all gave $5000 to Voters United last December. In that same report, we see that Voters United just happened to make a $2500 contribution to the questionable local Trenton PAC, Partners For Progress that same month.
 
But don't worry.  Mr. Weber, Mr. Levenson and friends have no undue influence over the Mack administration.  None whatsoever. 
 
Right.

Art for art's sake

Spelling doesn't count.

This is the flier produced for tonight's "Arts Summit" at the Mill Hill Playhouse. We love the creative spelling incorporated in the program.

Guess $50,000 a year doesn't buy much in the way of proofreading any more.

State of the City

We’ve been tempted to draft a lengthy dissection of Mayor Mack’s State of the City Address but hesitated. Fortunately, Dan Dodson was on it immediately and posted a thoughtful response on his blog.


Sometimes, procrastination pays off.

At tonight’s city council meeting, that pay off came. Sort of.

Resolution 11-157 was the extension of the information technology (IT) consulting contract with ADPC. This is the contract that an RFP was issued for last fall and that resulted in the controversial and faulty hiring of an unqualified vendor, Lynx Technology Partners.

ADPC, who has provided this service to the city for over 20 years, took the matter to court and prevailed.

In an order issued on March 11, Judge Feinberg determined that the RFP process would need to be rebid and that ADPC would continue under the terms of the current contract until June 30, 2011.

Tonight’s resolution was presented on the docket this way:

11-157 RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE CONTRACT WITH ASSOCIATED DATA PROCESS CONSULTANTS, INC. (ADPC), 116 VILLAGE BLVD, SUITE 200, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF TRENTON, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, DIVISION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (not to exceed $319,2000 term March 1, 2011 to June 30, 2011)

According to a report posted by Bob Chilson on his blog, when the resolution came up for a vote, it failed to pass.

Councilwoman Holly-Ward asked the City Attorney, Marc McKithen, if there was any paperwork to back up the resolution. McKithen reportedly stated he didn’t have anything.

Council voted 5-2 against the resolution. The two members who voted in favor of the resolution, Council President Muschal and Councilwoman Caldwell-Wilson, were the only two to vote against awarding the IT contract to Lynx technologies in the first place. It is pretty obvious that they are paying attention.

It is hard to say what is more disappointing in this matter…the complete lack of understanding on the part of five city council members as to what the judge ordered or McKithen’s apparent refusal to offer a proper and thorough explanation of the matter so they could vote intelligently.

At best, we have a situation where the ignorance and incompetence of a majority on our governing body is compounded by the willful contempt demonstrated by the city attorney and the rest of the Mack administration.

That, friends, is the real state of the city. It is not "well."

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.

Technical foul.

Does anyone really know what is going on?

 

A few weeks back, the city announced it was going to institute temporary layoffs (furloughs) for all departments except police and fire. The furloughs would take place every week for 13 weeks starting in April.

 

This announcement bothered those seemingly few people who were paying attention because it meant the virtual shutdown of the Trenton Water Works (TWW) for one day each week. Considering the facts that

 

1. the water utility operates on its own budget; employees are paid from rates charged for water usage, not tax dollars so any cost savings from the furloughs would NOT save the city money
2. the majority of the customers of the water utility are located outside of the city and thus would be penalized by the weekly furloughs
3. all customers would be put at risk because the furloughs would mean no one was minding the water treatment plant, pumping stations, etc. on those days

The problem comes from civil service rules that state furloughs must apply to entire departments. Since TWW operates under the umbrella of the Public Works Department, any layoffs affecting Public Works must apply to TWW.

 

Fortunately, the state of NJ through the DEP recognized the potential problems and squelched the furlough idea.

 

Before that occurred, a plan was drawn up to make TWW along with the Sewer Authority their own department, thus isolating (like Police and Fire) from the furloughs. It was a good idea…for a lot of reasons.

 

However, the city is only allowed to have 10 departments and our current structure has us maxed out. In order to create a Water and Sewer department, room has to be made in the organization chart. Part and parcel to creating the new department was the idea of making the current department of Inspections a division of the department of Housing and Economic Development. This would actually be a return to the way things once were.

 

This all needs to be accomplished by an ordinance introduced and passed by the governing body (city council). Predictably, with this administration and council, the plan has stalled.

 

Some object to moving Inspections back under Housing and Economic Development. Some don’t understand or object to creating a Water and Sewer department.

 

A workable solution languishes because the governing body seems unable to get its act together to do anything positive and the administration can’t think its way out of a paper bag.

 

Now here’s an interesting twist…

 

In November, the Mayor rearranged the former department of Recreation, Natural Resources and Culture (RNRC). Recreation and Culture were brought under the Mayor’s office directly and Natural Resources were moved to the Public Property Division of the Department of Public Works. In some respects the consolidation of departments is a good thing. Eliminating a director’s salary and merging functions are ways to economize.

 

And doing away with the department of RNRC frees up a space on the organization chart that could be filled by a newly created Water and Sewer department. Right?

 

Well, it would IF the city’s administrative organization chart was properly amended by ordinance. The Mayor cannot arbitrarily do away with a department. That must be done by ordinance approved by the city council.

 

Guess the Mayor didn’t think about that.

 

Neither did the city law department…obviously because of their inexperience with municipal law.

 

And the City Clerk didn’t catch it, so the city council didn’t realize it either.

 

Technical foul charged to the whole lot of them for simple failure to operate according to the rules.

Balk!

On the docket for Trenton’s City Council meeting this past Thursday was an executive session to discuss “Personnel and Litigation: ADPC.”

Published reports say that Acting Business Administrator Elaine Adams was to go before council to answer questions about the city’s financial situation. Ms. Adams is a long time city employee who, by all accounts, is competent and conscientious but who has reluctantly taken the hot seat by holding down the oft-vacated position of BA for the city. Apparently, the pressures and controversy surrounding this pivotal position in the city administration are not to Ms. Adams’ liking. She has not been present at many city council meetings and reportedly has not been very responsive to inquiries from city council.

Presumably, Thursday night’s executive session would have provided an opportunity for Ms. Adams and the governing body to come to an understanding regarding the BA’s responsibilities in responding and reporting to council.

Ms. Adams may be uncomfortable in her duties as acting BA. If that is affecting her job performance than she needs to either politely refuse the “honor” of the position and go back to the work she is familiar with or resign from the city completely. If she wants to continue in the acting BA position, than she needs to suck it up and do the job or face these closed-door inquiries.

Council went into session with Ms. Adams standing by. A quarter of an hour later, Council President Muschal told the acting BA she would not be meeting with council after all.

What?

Council, who has complained for weeks on end about a lack of answers from the administration, had the opportunity to flex its legal authority and call a high ranking, if reluctantly so, official onto the carpet and they balked!

Because of the nature of the closed-door session, we may never actually know what happened. What we do know is this: the governing body of the city of Trenton failed yet again. This group…and we are speaking of them as a singular entity here; either does not understand its power and authority or is totally unprepared and unwilling to use it.

While much attention has focused on the failings of the Tony Mack administration, little has been said about the council. This week’s episode pretty much demonstrates that this group of neophytes is ill prepared to carry out the duties of the elective offices they sought.

Looking back over the past eight months of their tenure reveals their repeated breakdowns. This council approved the appointment of the municipal judge at the urging of the Mayor…even though the requisite background check had not been completed. This council approved a legal services contract with Cooper Levenson that later had to be voided because it violated the city’s pay-to-play ordinance. This council drafted and introduced a faulty ordinance that would allow them to participate in their meetings via telephone.

Let us not forget how this council voted to give the city’s Information Technology (IT) consulting contract to a bidder with a weak and non-compliant proposal. Even after a number of individuals pointed out the flaws with the proposal, this council went ahead and made a choice that was overturned by a judge. Now the city is left without an IT director (let go in the November layoffs) or a consultant to monitor and maintain the city’s systems. Moreover, there is the matter of continued litigation in the matter as witnessed by the second item that was to be discussed at Thursday night’s executive session.

In baseball, as in all sports, when players are not performing as expected they are removed from the game. This council has had way too many “visits to the mound” made by members of the public to encourage, enlighten, and enlist them to do the right thing. The council has continually failed.

Time to pull them from the game.

Dear Mr. Kienle

Letter to the Editor of the Times, Thursday, March 3, 2011:

Let's have Mack's back


With his back to the wall, Tony Mack entered the mayoral office of Trenton. He has been on the defensive ever since (editorial, "Cooperation deficit," Feb. 27).

Politics at any level requires strategy to try to satisfy those who put you in that seat, hoping that it does not become "the hot seat."

Right now, the seat is a bit warm. No one is perfect. Let's try to find a way to help this man out of his dilemma.

This letter is a vote for His Honor, Tony Mack, mayor of Trenton.

Joe Kienle Jr.,

Trenton

Dear Mr. Kienle,

Agreed…Mayor Mack came into office with facing an unprecedented budget crisis and other problems left to him by the previous administration.

You say the Mayor has been on the defensive ever since. Again, we agree.

Now ask yourself, “Why has the Mayor ‘been on the defensive ever since?’”

Have you not been paying attention, sir?

Shall we start with nominating a twice convicted felon to head up a vital city department? Or how about the questionable judge appointment?

Then there is the summary dismissal of all department heads who served the previous administration and the consequential loss of expertise and knowledge in how the city runs. At the same time, the Mayor filled positions with friends, supporters and the like…most of whom have no experience matching the duties of their jobs.

Or maybe that is the strategy you allude to in your second paragraph. You know the part about trying “to satisfy those who put you in that seat.”

Indeed, the Mayor’s chair is “a bit warm.” And no one, especially our Mayor, is perfect.

You suggest we “try to find a way to help this man out of his dilemma.”

What do you think the likes of Mr. William Guhl was doing? What do you think many of us have offered and tried to do over the past eight months or so?

Many, many people have publically and privately offered assistance and suggestions to help make things right. The Mayor has had none of it.

Mr. Kienle, the plain and simple fact is that Mayor Mack is in over his head; he has refused to accept this fact as steadfastly as he has refused good counsel when offered. Many have tried to have his back, but are forced to turn away because it is of no use.

If you cannot see that the Mack administration to date has been an abject failure then you, sir, are as delusional as the Mayor.

You can not vote for “His Honor” because he has none.

Failed

The first eight months of Mayor Tony Mack’s administration have been a tragic-comic opera. It is a plot overloaded with bad decisions, missteps, and colorful characters. It has given us the crowd favorite tag line: “Happy Pearl Harbor Day!”
Daily the action unfolds in front of an audience split into two camps: those who still support the Mayor and those who are ready to “give him the hook.”

Those who defend and support the Mayor suggest that the others are being unfair. “He’s only had eight months to undo all of the mess left by the previous Mayor,” they say.

Or they might offer up this, “Where were all these critics while {Doug} Palmer was running this city into the ground?”

Some have even gone so far as to suggest that Mayor Mack’s missteps are the result of him being “dumb, not criminal.”

Loyalty is a good trait…to a point. But when it becomes blind, if not delusional, it is a bad thing.

Past Palmer

Those who think there was no criticism of the previous administration and council either were not paying attention or are in complete denial. From 2003 onward, there was increasing criticism of Palmer’s actions and much was made of his “rubber stamp” council.

True, there was not the same amount of media coverage then as there has been of Mayor Mack. Yet there were people speaking out then who continue to speak up now. (This blog, started in 2006, is but one example).

It was the action and criticism on the part of the public that stopped the ill-conceived Leewood development plan for South Trenton; it was the citizens that passed the city’s Pay-to-Play ordinance that the current Mayor is now running afoul of; it was legal action brought by the citizens that removed Joe Santiago from the police director position for not following the residency law; it was legal action by citizens that got the proposed split and sale of the Trenton Water Works onto the ballot and defeated.

There is no argument and no doubt, that Palmer left a mess in his wake. It is actually amazing that anyone, let alone 10 individuals, would want to run to succeed him, knowing how bad things were. Some might think that Mr. Palmer had “outgrown” the job of Mayor of Trenton. We think he was trying to outrun the collapse of the house of cards he had built here.

Regardless…Palmer is gone; what he did (or did not do) is in the past and it cannot be changed. Certainly, more people voicing publicly what many would only say privately might have helped slow if not avoid the city’s decline. Again, it is in the past and cannot be changed. The point is some noise was made; some criticisms levied, some change occurred.

First steps faulty

Only July 1, 2010, Mayor Mack took the reins of city government and almost immediately displayed a failure to grasp the situation he found himself in.
At a time when the city was facing a huge budget deficit and impending layoffs, Mack dismissed all of Palmer’s cabinet members…and the experience and knowledge that went along with them. Note…we are not suggesting some of them did not need to go, but the wholesale dismissal seemed a little shortsighted, pun not intended.

Knowing there was going to have to be a staff reduction of some sort in the coming months, Mayor Mack padded the payroll with unnecessary hires, filling out the full compliment of aides afforded him under the Faulkner act, paying top dollar to his new appointees, putting on “interns” and paying them through CDBG money that might better have been applied to the real needs of the city. Just a few months later, demotions and layoffs reduced the workforce and the pool of knowledge and experience the Mayor could have drawn upon as he struggled to keep the city afloat.

The nomination of a felon as a department head, the questions surrounding the appointee to the municipal bench, and the game of musical chairs regarding who sits in the Business Administrator seat are all indications of the Mayor’s lack of comprehension as to what his responsibilities are to the city.

It did not take much to figure out why the highly respected and experienced Bill Guhl stepped away from city hall after only a month of volunteering to help Mack get a handle on things. Tony continues to not accept good counsel and helping hands when offered.

Instead, he prefers to hide behind a screen of sycophants and hangers-on while he fiddles and the city burns.

Many people have offered advice and assistance to help the Mayor steer the city forward, but he seems to prefer to consult with the expensive suits from Atlantic City and the company of his lackeys to anybody who really has the best interest of Trenton at heart.

The list of bad choices and inappropriate actions is lengthy. The one consistency of the Mayor’s tenure so far has been his inability to do the right thing.

And there are exceptions to that rule…his appointment of Dan Dodson and Michael McGrath to the board of the Lafayette Yard Development Corporation. This entity actually “owns” the Marriott Hotel and oversees its operation for the taxpayers of the city. From its inception, it functioned in secret with little information flowing to the public “share holders.” That has started to change with Dodson and McGrath on board.

Unfortunately, that is not enough to make up for the rest of the eight months of foolishness coming out of city hall.

Is it the money?

Is it the Mayor’s personal money situation that has made him such easy prey for outside interests? It certainly would not be the first time that a desire for financial security has lead to poor decision making.

And to those who want to excuse Mack’s shortcomings as a function of his mental capacity, well…that just doesn’t wash. If eight months of mistakes are because he is intellectually deficient or mentally incompetent than he is not qualified to serve in the position of Mayor. We all have limitations and Tony’s may preclude him from holding his current job.

This is not to pick on him, put him down, or make fun of him. If he doesn’t have the sense to make the right decisions or won’t compensate by listening to those who do have the ability to determine what the right decision is and accept their suggestions, than he must go.

The taxpayers of the city of Trenton cannot afford to subsidize such ignorance. And anyone who thinks otherwise must also have diminished mental capacity.

Tony Mack has failed in his short time as Mayor of the City of Trenton. There is no way to argue or refute that fact. The citizens who continue to stand by him are failing as well.

Accept that Mr. Mack will probably not finish out his term and let’s start thinking about finding a competent, ethical, intelligent replacement.

Cash, lies and videotape

Show me the money, part II

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pretty sloppy record keeping, don’t you think?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Show me the money

If you have been hiding under a rock or stuck in an ice cave the past several days, you might have missed the latest in the ever lengthening line of scandals to hit the Tony Mack administration.

In a nutshell, the city awarded a contract for general legal counsel to the law firm of Cooper Levenson last October. The head guy at Cooper Levenson, Lloyd Levenson, was on Mayor Mack’s transition team and he headed up the committee that put together the Mayor’s Inaugural Ball.

The Mayor wanted Cooper Levenson to get the city contract so badly that he sent it before council three times before he could muster the four votes needed to carry out his desire. At the time, many raised the issue that Mr. Levenson, whose name was prominently featured on the invitation to the Mayor’s gala, was soliciting on behalf of the Mayor and therefore his firm was not eligible to be awarded the contract.

Mr. Levenson, of course, denied that he ever contributed to or solicited contributions on behalf of Mayor Mack. Four members of Trenton’s city council: Alex Bethea, Phyllis Holly-Ward, Kathy McBride, and Verlina Reynolds-Jackson voted to approve the contract.

On January 31, the Times published a story detailing a $7,200 contribution made to a local Political Action Committee (PAC), Partners For Progress (PFP). PFP in turn made an equal contribution to Mayor Mack’s campaign.

A spokesman for Cooper Levenson claims that the firm sent a letter requesting the return of the contribution so they could proceed with soliciting business from the city. The spokesman claims the contribution was repaid and so the potential violation of the city’s Pay to Play ordinance was averted.

If that is the case…show us the cancelled check proving that the contribution was indeed refunded, when it was refunded and that it was re-deposited into the law firm’s account.

Until that check is produced no one should have to take Mr. Levenson’s or anyone else’s word that the violation was “cured,” as the lawyers say.

As for PFP, their tardy reporting to the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission (ELEC) just may be central to what is looking to be a very interesting story.

Partners For Progress was formed, in early 2010 by Cynthia Taylor, Carla Hogan and Pete Fields: two Trenton residents (Fields and Hogan) and the owner of a Trenton business (Taylor owns Jet Wine and Liquor on Willow Street). At the bottom of a press release distributed about 3:00 pm on Wednesday, February 2, 2011 PFP states the following:

Partners for Progress PAC — Partners for Progress PAC is an independent, non-partisan group of individuals dedicated to supporting candidates, organizations or causes who demonstrate a commitment to advancing the interests of their community socially and economically. Through political participation and organizational support,

Partners for Progress PAC plans to endorse candidates or causes who have shown an interest in shaping good government policies that will advance the issues important to our organization.

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

Well, maybe Ms. Taylor, Ms. Hogan and Mr. Fields should have raised their own awareness and educated themselves on how to correctly participate in the political process.

PFP is required by law to file quarterly reports detailing their fundraising and expenditures. Since they “organized” in February of last 2010, their first report covering inception through March 31, 2010 was filed when due on April 15, 2010. No additional reports were filed until January of this year when the one covering the period ending June 30 and due on July15 was given to ELEC.

The reports due October 15 and January 15 for the 3rd and 4th calendar quarters have yet to be filed (or at least aren’t yet posted to the ELEC website).

{Note: As far as that goes, many of our candidates/elected officials are behind in their report filing as well. But we’ll get to that some other time.}

Besides the late and missing filings, there are some other issues with PFP’s reporting.

In December, Politicker NJ reported that ELEC was investigating the unreported and excessive contribution made to Tony Mack’s campaign by PFP.
By law, a PAC like PFP can only contribute up to $8,200.00 to a candidate committee in an election. The Mack campaign reported receiving a contribution of $8,805 from PFP…$605 over the limit. PFP hadn’t filed the required reports so there was no record of the contributions from that side…a violation of the state’s campaign finance laws.

Interestingly, the Mack campaign also reported a reimbursement back to PFP of $3,173. But it only had to return the $605 excess. Hmmm.

Why then, did Mack return an additional $2,568 to PFP? There’s no details on the Mack report…could it have been a “partial” repayment of the infamous $7,200 from Cooper Levenson?

Let’s say it was returned to PFP so PFP could in turn repay Cooper Levenson. Where is the documentation?

PFP’s sole report, filed months late and only after the story appeared on Politicker NJ has an entry showing the return of the $3,173 from the Mack campaign but it doesn’t show any reimbursement…in part or in whole…to Cooper Levenson.

Did the reimbursement come in the next reporting period (July 1 – September 30)?

We don’t know because there is no evidence of PFP report having been filed for that or any subsequent period.

In the Times article on this mess published February 3, reporter Alex Zdan wrote the following:

According to Mack, the city received Cooper Levenson’s refund letter when it was sent to Partners For Progress June 28, three days before Mack became mayor. A copy of the letter could not be provided to The Times last night.

“The problem is, it’s in a locked office and I don’t have the key,” mayoral spokeswoman Lauren Ira said.

McKithen could not be reached for comment last night.

Partners For Progress’ Cynthia Taylor denied the $7,200 was specifically for Mack.

“We didn’t approach him, he came to us, he didn’t say, ‘This is for Tony, or anything like that,’” Taylor said yesterday.

Although Levenson said the firm received a full return of their contribution, Taylor said she was not sure.

“Well, like I said, I don’t know what’s going on, what happened since then,” she said. “I just know they asked for the money back sometime in June.”

So was the money returned or wasn’t it?

Levenson claims there was a full return of the contribution, but Ms. Taylor doesn’t know. And, according to the paperwork filed with ELEC, Ms. Taylor signs the checks for PFP.

A reading of the city of Trenton’s Pay to Play ordinance makes it pretty clear that the contribution has to be returned in full before the violation is corrected.

Let’s look at another aspect of the PFP report. The first sheet of the 30 page document gives a summary accounting of the PAC’s funds. It shows an entry of cash on hand of $2,248.71.

If PFP hadn’t returned the $7200 contribution to Cooper Levenson by the June 30th close of the reporting period as indicated by the report, then the refund must have occurred later (if at all).

Since no subsequent reports have yet to be filed, we can’t determine if a later payment was actually made. But with a balance of $2,248.71 shown on the report, PFP would have to find another $4,951.29 somewhere to make up the difference and be able to return the contribution to Cooper Levenson.

Again, no subsequent reports have been filed, so PFP can’t show that they took in the money.

Doesn’t seem likely that they returned Cooper Levenson’s contribution, does it?

There are other interesting aspects of the PFP report filed on January 27, 2011. We’ll get to those in the next installment.