Russo Gives Away Coming BoE Stunt

Ha!  GA alluded to this in my previous post; that Mike Russo blurted something out at last night's City Council meeting which revealed something's coming...

This reader noticed it, too:
GA, was watching the cc meeting....Scott Siegel got up and spoke in favor of moving the elections to November..went into the arduous task of explain who and how it could be done.

He couldn't positively remember the exact amount of votes need for a public referendum and Russo suddenly, exclaimed with a shit eating grin--"2186, to be exact". Shortly thereafter, Jimmy, reached over and had a side conversation with Castellano- both were smiling....

Remind me, who has to certify those signatures? LOL!

So my guess is: they are going to show up at the Tuesday BoE meeting with 2190 certified signatures and claim that you needn't vote as the public has spoken and they want a referendum....

Ah, too bad sooooo sad....that must have cost Mason a few pennies  :)
Exactly what I was thinking, reader!

Firstly, Mr. and Mrs. Melanoma (prosbus-Bajardi and Curious Kim Cardinal) have been verrrry quiet... after blurting out there's a "grass roots" effort underway... you know what that means. They are "grass roots".

I call them stinkweed.

You see how prosbus-Bajardi gave the heads-up about the "signature campaign"?  I think that's Secret Agent code for 'petition'.

How nice to have Mike Russo confirm that last night.

Which means you can expect the following.

Expect to be accosted at your bus stop, PATH station or Ferry by a young person who has no idea what the petition he/she is asking you to sign says.

Expect the slogan  on their t-shirt: "Let the People Decide" or  some-such other jingoistic, feel-good phrase to make you feel like a Commie if you don't sign it.   So you will.   Unless you live in the HHA and get cash, not guilt- that's Capitalism working for you.

Then, on Tuesday...  SHOWTIME!

Expect Mason's videographer and a crowd in attendance (Stevens students she's paid for) maybe some picketers (more Stevens students, maybe the ones she attempted to buy for her OLG debate)... 

Expect assorted riff-raff to make a scene for the first anti-Kids First campaign video- like how the Caliccios and Russo performed on this Zimmer-stalking video  posted on MSV.

Mason pays videographer to stalk the mayor

Expect the video to be watermarked Hoboken411 and dumped on that cyber-sewer.  Expect the entire Mason production team and cast aligned for the making of that phony anti-Kids first video.

Unlike her allies, Mason could care less about the $59 million kitty.  This is the same old proxy war on Zimmer.

Because if she can't be mayor, then nobody can.

What did you expect?


  1. No, I don't think they can stop it w/ this new stunt. As I understand it, there are 3 ways to move the election. If the BOE decides to move it, it gets moved. If the CC decides to move it, it gets moved. If nobody decides to move it and people petition for a referendum, if the referendum passes it gets moved. But I don't think they can try and petition for a referendum to legally prevent the BOE from making the move this November. I just don't think the law Christie signed allows for that sort of delay. Now they can argue there is no need to make the move if there is a referendum on the issue, in which case I suggest the BOE completely ignore the Russo faction and just make the move regardless of how hysterical these vote buying crooks get.

  2. not for nothin' GA - 'cause you're probably right about this; but anyone that's been involved in a referendum (and Russo recently has) could spout off the number of signatures required without hesitation when someone is fumbling on the number that is the way, it's 2189...

  3. I agree with Redrider.

    Here is a link to text of A-4394, the law in question:

    And here is the first paragraph of the "Statement" at the end of the law (page 37), which explains it:

    "This bill establishes procedures for moving the date of a Type II school district's annual school election to the day of the general election in November. Under the first procedure, the question would be presented to the voters for their approval whenever a petition signed by not less than 15% of the legally qualified voters who voted in the district at the last preceding general election held for the election of members of the General Assembly is filed with the board of education. Under a second procedure, the date of the annual school election may be moved to November without voter approval, upon the adoption of a resolution by the board of education or the governing body of the municipality. If the district's annual school election is moved to November, then the district's board members will be elected in November and take office at the beginning of January; and any proposal for additional funds above the school district's tax levy cap would also be presented to the voters at that time. A district that has moved its annual school election to November would not require voter approval for its base budget, which is a budget with a proposed tax levy that does not exceed its tax levy cap. If the date of the annual school election is moved to November, then a district may not move the school election to the third Tuesday in April until at least four annual school elections have been held in November."

    I am not an attorney, but - just as Redrider says - what I think this says is that any one of three paths can be taken to move the elections to November. The first method is a referendum; the second method is legislative and bifurcated - either the school board can vote to change it or the municipality's governing body can vote to change it. The twist is that a negative result with any one of these paths does nothing to prevent a positive result from either of the remaining paths. The referendum can fail (and note that it is only a positive referendum in that voters are asked if they want to move the election to November, yes or no), AND the school board could reject a change, but if the city council votes to make the change, the election is moved. No one path outranks another, and a positive from any path supersedes a negative from either or both of the others. (Of course, a school board might think twice about making a change if a prior referendum has failed.) Finally, petitions could be dropped on the City Clerk's desk tomorrow, and a referendum scheduled for November, but if the Board or Council in the meantime vote to move the elections, then the referendum would presumably be canceled.

    Once a change is made, there have to be four elections at the new time before the same procedure may be followed to move elections back. This is the case whether the elections are in April or November. So they can move back and forth, but only in intervals of at least four years (assuming annual elections).

    It's a curious law, carefully crafted with a particular goal in mind. The deck is clearly stacked in favor of making a change. But the flip side is that if our school board elections are moved to November, once four years have passed, the deck is then stacked to move them back to April!

  4. Thanks, HD.

    To your final point, I think people being essentially lazy creatures (me, me, me) will take to consolidating elections, and won't want to go back.

    That said, the creatures of the Dark Side will pull out all stops to do just that.

  5. You're welcome.

    I agree with you on the lazy voter aspect. But here's what could happen:

    1. If a bloc of those so inclined holds a majority on either the School Board or the Council, a simple majority vote is all it takes to change it back after the four year interval.

    2. Lacking that at that point, the petition signatures can be collected on a time line to force a referendum at the time of a non-general election, i.e., to coincide with a Council election for example. Still an uphill battle in this case because I think a sufficient number of people might actually be annoyed enough to turn out to vote such a referendum down. But it's not a forgone conclusion.

  6. HD, you are right. I'm having another 'Pray for the Feds' moment.

  7. Ray Smith mentioned it on twitter.

    It will be the same collection of even-if-I'm-indicted co-signers from CT, HHA and BarryTown with a smattering of opportunistic douchebags like Dave Liebler. They can safely be ignored. Their record speaks for itself. God-willing they'll get another kind of 'record' soon enough.

    If you see anyone collecting signatures, ask them who is paying. If you have a digital recorder, it would be good to record their various deceptive pitches for public consumption.

  8. The only people moving the election to November will hurt are the people who want to collect $40 in April & November to vote. :)

  9. A pox on anyone who takes money in exchange for their vote.

  10. How come there are never ELEC reports on the BOE from Raia and company - is there an exmption of which I am not aware that applies to him?


Post a Comment