Giattino first voted "NO" on Eminent Domain for Southwest Park


Reform-minded folks are asking, what is the difference between the two Reform mayoral candidates Ravi Bhalla and Jen Giattino?

The answer depends on who you ask.

Giattino folks will probably answer with attacks on Bhalla.

The refrain, repeated by Giattino in her speech last night is that Bhalla is a "national candidate"; Giattino told her supporters “you all deserve a mayor that’s actually running for mayor to represent you and makes Hoboken come first.”  GA has also heard Giattino folks say that Bhalla was "unelectable"- whatever that means. A pro-Giattino independent council candidate makes "Sikh" puns in private.  Giattino trolls attack Bhalla's employment on his Facebook page, spreading false and potentially defamatory claims about non-existent ethical quandaries; Bhalla actually answered one:


Perhaps it is because their candidate, wonderful as a Councilperson, is an underwhelming mayoral candidate.

Giattino's three public speeches to-date were read off of a piece of paper: her announcement, her kickoff and last night's fundraiser. Either Giattino is not comfortable speaking in public or she doesn't bother to memorize her speeches. Neither speak well of her qualifications to be mayor of Hoboken.


Ask Bhalla folks for the difference between the two Reform candidates and you will get a substantive answer.

Bhalla supporters will talk about their voting record on open space, development, and other matters of public interest and public concern.  They don't troll Giattino, they don't make gratuitous personal attacks.

Note, there are few differences in voting record between Giattino and Bhalla in the 6 years she has served on the City Council.

One of the votes where both differed was the very first vote on the use of eminent domain to acquire property for the park in Southwest Hoboken.

Jen voted "NO" to acquire the Southwest Park property with Councilpersons Beth Mason, Mike Russo and Terry Castellano.

Multiple sources told GA that Giattino had proffered that it was not fair for Hoboken residents who had paid more money to live near a park (like her, in central Hoboken near Church Square Park)  to subsidize a park for residents who had paid less to live in an area with no parks.

Giattino eventually voted with the Reform council to approve Eminent Domain to acquire the Southwest Park, but it is notable that her first instinct as a new Councilperson was to say "no" to the Southwest Park.

Don't believe me? The video of the July 20, 2011 vote is above.

Bhalla, on the other hand, was from the beginning, a believer in a Southwest park for Hoboken. True, it directly benefitted the surrounding neighborhood, but a rising tide (the Southwest Park) lifts the Hoboken boat.

And that is a key difference between how the two candidates think.


Comments

  1. What is this, the National Park Service???? NO! It's Hoboken. Stop NATIONALIZING the election by bringing up issues that are NATIONAL! You want a park? Go to Liberty State Park and run for governor so you can have jurisdiction over STATE PARKS!!! Jen Giattino and her LOCAL friends like to hang out in CHURCH SQUARE PARK, where REAL HOBOKENITES belong!!! If that's not good enough for you, go run for president and appoint a bunch of National Park Service rangers to come do something about it, you climber!!!!

    Typical Backroom Bhalli Ravioli, trying to use Hoboken as a springboard for divisive NATIONAL issues like parks!!! All so he can make his backroom deals to pull the ol' switcheroo baton handoff without consulting with important NHSA Real Reform Resistance Terror Alerts like yours truly! Boy did they bungle that one up. They sure screwed the pooch! They could have shown the proper deference and asked my opinion. What happened, Shadow, you didn't know where to find me? Didn't have time to Sikh me out??? Nice botch job there, puppet master.

    My new sponsor Mr. Horsey says we don't even need parks, that we should be cutting down more trees so we can widen the ozone layer enough to allow the flying saucers through to liberate us from the libtards. He says all you commies who are into parks and affordable housing are actually robots remote controlled by a giant mind head in the sky looking to enslave earthlings to steal our liberties and precious bodily fluids, and that only these flying saucers can save us from the hive mind assimilating us enlightened souls who know where to get the REAL information on what's going on. The truth is "out there"! Until the hive mind is defeated, we all need to be on guard against "outlandish" Manchurian candidates like Bhalli Ravioli and be on high alert, if ya know what ah mean!

    Anyway, down with switcheroodles, down with national issues like parks, and down with backroom deals! Up with Jen Giattino and her crusade against hive-mind commies who want everyone to chip in so they can have a neighborhood park! We need a Republican who understands how the world really works, just remember, this is a NONPARTISAN election, so don't keep bringing up her party affiliation and ideology.

    Did I mention she's a republican who'll stand up for your property rights?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Speaking of killing, have you ever heard my sponsors JFK theories?
      https://youtu.be/9edQEzp7zGA

      Delete
  2. Jen's vote against eminent domain in the SW was also a vote against the strategy that made acquiring the 6 BASF acres possible.

    Leadership is about doing what's right even if it pissed off some of your friends, making hard choices and getting hard stuff done.

    I like Jen, but to put it mildly, leadership is not the first word that comes to mind with Jen. In fact, it doesn't even make the list.



    ReplyDelete
  3. GA, there are two other points of distinction between Ravi and Jen. First, buttressing the point by @numberscruncher about leadership, Jen also ran silent during the critical public referendum on rent control, perhaps the most important action on the issue in the last 10 years. Second, Jen also ran silent when the Kids First team was making a go of the Hola suit. I know sore subject. It's clear to me though that on rent control, charter schools, and eminent domain she really did take the standard issue, typical Republican position (or in some cases silent nonposition), right? Separating national from local is not as easy our opponents would have us believe.

    I am also happy you made the point about class. Jen's supporters have been trolling on the internet and making terrible personal attacks. Ravi's have not. He's running a classy campaign.

    That said, as you correctly point out, we're mostly digging here. They have 95% in common in terms of voting record.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Voting record, schmoting record. That's just the tip of the iceberg - our candidates' differences run MUCH deeper than that. Bhalli is, you see, "unelectable." You get me? Nudge nudge, wink wink. We need s candidate who's "electable." Not one who'll go out Sikhing votes only to have people say, "What kind of name is Bhalli for a mayor?"

      In these dangerous times, we need a Republican mayor to keep us safe and remind us this is a nonpartisan, non-nationalized election. Just make sure the terror alert is on high for "unelectable" Bhallis.

      My new patron told me all about Jade Helm. He said our nation elected a Kenyan Muslim Socialist president named Baralli Oballi, and he took everyone's guns away and opened the borders to terrorists Sikhing to do us harm. He said Jade Helm was a military exercise to enforce policies against "climate change" in order to shrink the ozone layer to keep out the flying saucers that will save us from the socialist mind hive. To get us into the Bhalli of the Beast, so to speak.

      It CAN happen here, folks. Don't let it. Vote for an "electable" mayor with a good old all American name like "Jen" who would never stoop to nationalizing the election and making it partisan. Did I happen to mention she's a Republican who'll protect your property rights from rent control, public parks and socialistic public schools?

      Say "no" to a localized version of Baralli Obhalli. Say "no" to backroom antics with Stab the Shadow and his Puppet Mayor wife. Say "no" to mayors making endorsements without conferring with illustrious all-important NHSA commissioners. Say "no" to tossing batons to anyone but ballerinas.

      Say "yes" to omniscient pundits like Mr. Horsey who's new book Conspiracy a Go-Go is coming soon to a street-corner pamphleteer near you.

      Make Hoboken Great Again!

      Delete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I've been meaning to comment on Some Giant Idea's posts for a while. They are hilarious, particularly since SGI evicerates Kurt (and Roman) at his/their own game: Satire. So funny. Adds much needed humor to the conversation.

    I have another thought I'd like to share about Tiffanie that builds on my comment above. Jen has consistently taken the predictably Republican tack on local issues - eminent domain (a no vote), rent control (silence), charter schools (silence during Hola suit), anti-discrimination (no vote on Vape van). Now I know Tiffanie is really good at math and the Mayor and our city employees and her Council colleagues including fellow Reformer colleagues are all "bad at math," in her words, but she is supposed to be Dem Party Chair, does she not get this dynamic? A Republican is taking typically Republican stances of local issues and yet our Dem Chair is all out trying to get her elected in order to take... more Republican stances? I know it's not a math problem, which she is very very good at, but... something does not add up.

    We won't forget Tiffanie. This dual office holding nonsense needs to end.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re: Tiffanie- while I share your frustration, and agree with the reasons behind it to a substantial extent, in my opinion, we all need to try to find a way to live with one another and work with each other on the things that we can agree on. This election is going to be over in less than three months, and holding grudges forever, no matter how justified, isn't going to help anything. Smart politics is about working with others you may not always agree with to achieve tangible accomplishments that make things better. And sometimes working with people on some things that you agree on while simultaneously trying to defeat them on things where you disagree. It shouldn't be about punishing particular politicians, even if they've done something wrong, and especially if you agree with them most of the time. Focusing on vengeance and recrimination can be an endless cycle, and within a party it can be deadly.

      "If you want a friend... get a dog."

      For what it's worth, I think people should also leave Kurt alone.

      Delete
    2. Agree with Hoboken Dem. The angry posts have reached crescendo status, and you all were friends and worked together in the past. I don't see Ravi and Jen attacking each other this way.

      Delete
    3. FWIW, I have no problem with SGI's hilarious satirical response to the thrashing Ravi, yours truly and this blog receive on a nearly daily basis "elsewhere." Especially since I have been censored from defending myself and/or correcting false allegations over there. And much of SGI, if not all of it, is fair comment. At the same time, it shouldn't (and won't) dominate the discourse. Agree, I don't want grudges and recrimination in November, at the same time, some of us may see our friends in a different light. Some of us will be VERY angry if Stick or DeFusco get elected. I practically pleaded for Reform to work it out and NOT split, because it was bound to get ugly. I was basically told to shut up. Here we are.

      Delete
    4. Sorry if I came off as angry or seeking vengeance @HobokenDem! Imagine me saying the below calmly :) As a matter of dispassionate principle and setting a floor for our Party, I think the Dem Party Chair even in a non-partisan election should support registered Democrats or at least not actively support registered Republicans. The situation we're in is very odd. It probably make us a laughing stock of Dems around the county and state. What's the point of having a Dem Party in town if the Chair's primary activity is to actively campaign for a Republican who actually takes Republican positions on local issues (see above). It's intellectually untenable. I'm sure there are other people who are as qualified as her to play this role and will actively embrace it during this election when we need to support the election of Democrats in this state. Does that makes sense?

      With regard to Kurt, he could have stated why he supports Jen instead of constantly attacking Ravi. That was his leadership choice. He chose a different fork in the road and so is hearing pushback.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. Editing my reply as I hit send too soon on a lengthy paragraph. The problem here is a lot of the issues you (All Hoboken) highlight (except really rent control) are not really Democratic or Republican issues. Was eminent domain a Democratic or Republican issue when Donald Trump used it against Vera Coking? Or was it a Republican issue in the Kelo case when the NAACP and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference argued that eminent domain disproportionately impacts minority communities? Or is the ACLU (who I would argue --as a card carrying member -- is a Democratic organization) taking a predictably Republican tact when arguing in response to the horrible events at UVA that "we cannot allow our representatives to suppress views they think are wrong, false, or disruptive."(see attached written by the National Legal Director of the ACLU)
      http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2017/09/28/why-we-must-still-defend-free-speech/ Are Cory Booker or Shavar Jeffries not Democrats because they have supported charter schools? The Hoboken issues you listed above are complex local fights that are overly simplified when a national party tag is thrown on them (and I personally don't like that supporters of both "reform" candidates are doing throwing party tags around). GA correctly highlights that there are many differences in how the council members voted on many local issue. If you believe that their stance on that particular issue is correct, vote for that candidate. But labeling them as Democratic or Republican issues leads -- at least me personally -- down a difficult slope of voting for someone purely because of party affiliation rather than their actions that I believe impact Hoboken.

      For example, is the approved redevelopment of the Pinot site a Democratic or Republican win? Democratic (in favor -- open space!), Republican (opposed, Pilots equal tax increase), Democratic (Wait, now opposed. Pilots take away from funds for public schools!), Republican (Wait, private job creation if built! Now in favor), Democratic (Wait, now in favor, union jobs in the trades!), Republican (now opposed, forgot about the unions benefiting!).

      As for the laughing stock around the county reference, Sen. Stack endorsed Gov. Christie and stayed the chair of the UC Dem Party and he won re-election with like 105% of the vote. Gerry McCann, I believe, was the head of the JC Dem party when he endorsed Reagan. It happens and the state/county never blinks. "Forget it Jake, its Hudson County."

      Delete
    7. GA, it's hard not to respond if someone attacks you, especially if there's a lot of accurate things to respond with, and the attack was particularly unfair or dishonest. So I understand. But if we are going to respond, we ought to try to do so in a measured way. When All Hoboken wrote "We won't forget Tiffanie" I think it went too far. And as funny as SGI may be, I think it's time to lay off Kurt.

      I think listing everything that someone else has done wrong, even if it's all true, is not very helpful if you want to work with that person in the future.

      All Hoboken, there's not really much I disagree with you about the past. That doesn't mean that it's helpful to keep talking about the past. (Or, sadly, the present.) And yeah, in hindsight, it is pretty ridiculous having a party chair who is primarily trying to get someone of the opposite party elected. But she is the chair, and attacking her would alienate her and at least some other Democrats- even after this election is over. We shouldn't be focused on who's on top or in charge, it's about getting everyone on board to do everything we can together going forward.

      Kevin, respectfully, I disagree with you about Republican and Democratic positions on local issues. I was particularly struck by Jen G's remarks on the fairness to residents of the Church Square Park neighborhood of the City investing money to build a Southwest Park. That sort of "I've got mine" initial attitude, even if she didn't end up voting that way, is very... Republican.

      As for Stack's endorsement of Christie, I'd say something but don't want to end up [comment deleted]. Endorsing Reagan is pretty unforgivable, at that time and in hindsight, but that was a generation ago- is McCann even alive?

      Delete
    8. For the record, re: SGI. The character is does not "attack" Kurt. The character takes the things that have come out of Kurt's mouth and reflects them back through a fun-house mirror. SGI has not made a comment pertaining to Kurt himself, his character, his ethics, unlike the rather vicious, personal rhetoric he has aimed at yours truly and others. SGI simply regurgitates Kurt's own talking points. If that comes across as insulting, its only because his own behavior reflected back at him reflects so poorly. The truth hurts. It is quite brilliant satire. Satire points out human folly, it is does not "attack." Most folks probably have not been paying that much attention, so it is understandable that some don't get it.

      Delete
    9. Gerry McCann is, I believe alive, kicking, I still believe on the JC payroll (hired by Fulop's people and was an inspector for the JCIA as of 2015 -- that Authority has been dismantled -- I think), and was getting out the vote as of 2015. So unless he passed and I missed the wake, still around. He would only be in his mid 60s. As for the statement by Jen, the reporting is that "Multiple sources told GA that Giattino had proffered that it was not fair for Hoboken residents who had paid more money to live near a park (like her, in central Hoboken near Church Square Park) to subsidize a park for residents who had paid less to live in an area with no parks." If the sources are accurate and she made that statement, that is a very, very problematic statement. If it is sources feeding a story to create a narrative, that is another issue.

      Delete
    10. Thank you, GA, I can personally attest to never having remarked on anyone named Kurt. I have, however, viciously assailed the following people:
      1) Backroom Bhalli Ravioli the contract Sikher
      2) Stab the Shadow and his botched baton toss
      3) Puppet Lady Mayor
      4) Sybil Pinko and her Commie Cave Cronies
      5) President Baralli Obhalli


      Not a very long list, really, so cut me some slack!

      Delete
  6. Yeah, leave me alone! I'm just another innocent Hatfield McVictim, smearing and attacking people who have the nerve to respond. I'm a McVictim of Stab the Shadow, the Puppet Lady Mayor, Bhalli Ravioli and his Backroom Buckaroonies, and of course Sybil and her Cave of Cave Trolls! All of you have failed to take my smears unanswered, and for that you must pay!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Kevin you say that if Jen held the position ascribed to her by GA it would be problematic. Has ever occurred to you to ask why Mayor Zimmer chose to endorse Ravi rather then Jen? Perhaps the Mayor, having worked with Jen and Ravi for tears, has an educated opinion.

    Did people like Brice and Gardner who blather constantly and incoherently about the Mayor endorsing the candidate she thought was best as though that was some sort of crime ever asked the mayor why she prefers Ravi over Jen?

    The fact that that have not says it all. They do not care about the why because the answer does not fit their lunatic narrative.

    Roman fancies himself a reporter. Instead of writing fictional accounts of an imaginary "resistance" wouldn't even an incompetent reporter have reached out to the mayor to ask why?

    Critiquing the why would be fair game but to critique it you'd have to know what it was.

    So far Roman and Kurt have failed to articulate a single reason for supporting Jen over Ravi other than racist innuendo about electability electability and insisting that the mayor opinion should be subordinated to Tiffany Fisher and Peter Cunningham's and by extension to Roman and Kurt's.

    I suspect the Mayor's reasons for preferring Ravi are somewhat more coherent

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, numbers but would the mayor give a real, unvarnished, brutally honest answer? I am not trying to challenge you, I want to know because I would ask her myself. Yes, that's true the bashers have not bothered to ask. I will.

      Delete
    2. I have a question about Backroom Bhalli - is he going to show his bhirth certificate? The Backroom Bhalli Bhirther Bhrigade demands it!

      Delete
    3. Speaking of which, for the record, our friend Sheriff Joe made a long and compelling case for why Baralli Obhalli's bhirth certificate was a fake. My equestrian sponsor has been all over Facebook letting people know how much Sheriff Joe was victimized and how just it is for Mr. Donald to pardon him for his racial profiling. Mr. Horsey is entitled to his point of view. Sometimes I disagree, but I appreciate that Jen Giattino accepts support from many sides, from many sides...

      Delete

Post a Comment