Back to School

No, I'm not talking about September 7th, when the doors of Hoboken's public schools swing open for the 2010-2011 school year.

I'm talking about a primer that was given yesterday in the separation-of-powers of Hoboken's branches of government.

I could use that.

An elementary lesson in the structure of our governing bodies and powers of their respective elected officials; where they intersect and where they overlap, if they do. Because I am not an elected official and don't have the power nor the authority of one. What about your elected representative?

Do you have confidence in their knowledge and competence?
Your Councilman or Councilwoman.

Do you expect them to understand their role and their authority in representing your interests?
Basic stuff. I hope you do.

Do you expect them to work constructively with our mayor, although he or she may disagree with her on a policy or issue?
I hope you said 'yes' because paralysis and partisanship benefit no one.

Back to yesterday's primer.

It came from the Mayor's office. In the form of a press release. In response to a member of the City Council. One who has been representing some of you for 3 years. Who appears not to understand the limits of her authority and is confusing them with the mayor's.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, at Wednesday night's City Council meeting 2nd Ward Councilwoman Beth Mason attempted to introduce a resolution condemning the police layoffs. My friends at HJ and MSV have already covered the details- Horsey, that is one excellent photograph; it captures the weight and tension of the night on all in the frame, particularly Mayor Zimmer.

All I've got to add is this: Mason's fundamental misunderstanding of the powers of the City Council shows either profound incompetence or an absolutely cynical attempt to manipulate public sentiment, already raw and bleeding, for political points. And that kind of cold-blooded cruelty, playing on the emotions of the suffering is reptilian.

So whatever was behind that attempted Resolution which the Mayor's office described this way in yesterday press release,

"The Resolution clearly crosses the line that separates the roles of the governing body and the Administration, and is a patent attempt to usurp the role of the Administration."

be it incompetence or a stunt, voters must reject this reckless type of governing next June.

Let's do it, people.


  1. "I'm very disappointed that the mayor would use legal reasons for not allowing the council to express its opinion however it chooses to do so," said Mason

  2. Hmmmm... so Resolutions are "opinions"?

    And statutes are feelings? Ordinances are impressions?

    Have I got a Resolution for you, janis.

  3. Regardless, Mason fails to admit ir was not thre council's opinion anyway, it was hers and her co sponsor's

    What happened to public notice of resolutions anyway? Mason pulls out a pocket resolution without showing the city attorney or the council president?
    That's a public trust and public notice boo-boo- Beth!

    Beth Mason violates open government once again.

    NJ FOG should revoke her membership card.

  4. What's this world coming to? I was recently stopped for running a red light and they started in on me with this same "legal reasons" crock of nonsense. When did this start? Where are these people from? What do they want from my life? What do they think this is, ....anyway?

  5. Legal, smiegel. Only the rich and powerful have the right decide these things. Not you, Pinkers.


Post a Comment