So...
GA's been going through my OPRA return; 400-pages of communications relating to SUEZ: emails, text messages, letters, contracts.
Recall how the resolution for an up or down vote on the renegotiated SUEZ contract exploded at the September 6 Council meeting, amidst a love-in between the Dark Side and Reform Council members, with cries to "investigate" the mayor...
Recall how the resolution for an up or down vote on the renegotiated SUEZ contract exploded at the September 6 Council meeting, amidst a love-in between the Dark Side and Reform Council members, with cries to "investigate" the mayor...
Well, get ready. Tonight, another hot-button issue is on the Council agenda: the resolution to authorize eminent domain as a tool for the acquisition of Union Dry Dock's property.
Sources tell GA that the resolution was submitted with "The Administration" as the sponsor, so as not to politicize it, but mysteriously the Resolution got kicked back, with the demand for sponsorship by council members.
Hmmm, sounds like "someone" wanted to force this resolution into the political arena, for possible consumption as a campaign issue. Which aligns with FWB's July 27 "Call to Action" to make "Union Dry Dock... a campaign issue"
But I digress!
There is a reason why GA mentioned my OPRA return earlier. It is because in those voluminous email communications, interrelationships between particular City Council members, the mayor and the public is coming into focus.
Reading between the lines (and the lines too) the emails suggest a power struggle between co-equal branches of Hoboken government. Specifically, a 3-member "anti-Zimmer" Council faction headed by Tiffanie Fisher, seeking information that she feels (with or without merit) is being withheld by City Hall, and the Council acting as arbiter of what information the public will see and know, and when (or if) they will know it.
GA gives you an example below.
On September 1st, Council president Jen Giattino tells Hoboken Business Administrator Stephen Marks to pull SUEZ's (10-minute) presentation about new leak detection technology off the September 6 Council Agenda.
Note, this new leak detection technology was a $2M benefit included in SUEZ renegotiated contract that was up for a vote on that night.
Note, this new leak detection technology was a $2M benefit included in SUEZ renegotiated contract that was up for a vote on that night.
Giattino gives Marks two reasons for pulling the SUEZ presentation off the agenda:
(1) "it was not in the copy of the agenda that I received earlier this week" and,
(2) "the agenda is long and I have concerns about not getting through the entire agenda by midnight."
Here is B.A. Mark's response- to Jerry Lore and the Mayor.
 |
| B.A. Marks ignores Giattino's request to pull SUEZ presentation |
So, for reasons unknown, Giattino didn't want the public to know this information (the SUEZ leak detection technology) which she and other Council members already had possession of in their resolution packet. The OPRAed communications suggest that it is highly unlikely Giattino acted without consent of others on the anti-Zimmer Council faction, Fisher in particular.
Remember 3 private Council subcommittee meetings preceded the Sept 6 Council shitshow where Giattino refused to allow an up or down vote on the renegotiated SUEZ contract. Giattino did not allow public debate on the merits of the renegotiated SUEZ contract, denying the public the public a presentation on a substantial benefit.
This appears to be a pattern of anti-Zimmer "reform resistance' Council members as self-appointed 'deciders' on when and how information should be released to the public, secreting information from the public (such as omitting an important letter from SUEZ from their responses to my OPRA request) or expecting that the Council get information from the Mayor first before the public even when the information is not confidential in nature nor compromises the City in any way.
Which ties right into this tantrum about Tweets the mayor had sent out to her 10.6K followers.
Fisher seems indignant, as though the Council should be arbiter of when our mayor can talk to us.
We don't need the City Council as arbiters for information that the public has a right to know.
It so happens that the information in this string of Tweets includes critical facts the public should know; on Sept 16, Union Dry Dock told the mayor that they are winding down their business.
Which eliminates the notion that eminent domain would seize a viable business off the table.
READ TWEETS FROM THE BOTTOM UP
Did you read the Mayor's tweets?
Precisely what did she say that does not belong in the public domain?
NOTHING.
In fact, she raised substantive points for another day.
The tantrum over the Mayor talking directly to her constituents ahead of our imperial Council is telling. The more I see from this anti-Zimmer "Reform Resistance" faction, the more concerned I am.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteNice post Q. I like it a lot.
ReplyDeleteI would only add that I don't use twitter and I'm glad.
All the handwringing and whining coming from the Tea Building is a bunch of disingenuous horse shit. T-Girl told the mayor, after she won the 2nd ward seat, that the mayor was going to have to govern by committee, a committee that the T-Girl would select from amongst her political pals (to include some down on their luck non-elected political hacks itching to get back into City Hall). The mayor told her no way and thence began the saga where the Jen Brigade decided to try and destroy the mayor’s reputation and stain her with allegations that she was “corrupt” and “out of touch” and “not good with numbers” all because they did not get their way. They are nothing but a bunch of self-important blowhards that wanted to work behind the scenes with no “transparency” and who have a way to high opinion of themselves. But incredibly, I have yet to hear any real reason why Jen is in the race. Ego and hubris are the only campaign “issues” I see coming from the manure filled vie smelling broken down horse barn inhabited by that ready for the glue factory gelding.
ReplyDeleteThe T-Girl has shown herself to be the antithesis of what Reform used to stand for and has her hand up Jen so far up Jen that T-Girl can feel Jen’s tonsils. T-Girls’s outright betrayal of the HDC by attending and supporting a Republican fundraiser in town is beneath fucking contempt. I don’t care if she wants her pal to be the first Republican Mayor in Hoboken. Jen, if you did not vote for the Orange Blimp, say so. Stop with the ”I supported Kasich” shit. He wasn’t on the ballot.
That foul stench emanating from that shit filled horse stall about the Ravi flyer, claiming that that Ravi is engaging in Sharptonesque race baiting, is hysterical coming from the Jen Brigade where one prominent supporter claimed to several people recently that ‘Hoboken is not ready for a Mayor with a turban on his head”. Fucking bunch of moronic privileged white entitled racists. The claims that Ravi was not “electable” and was not “executive material” were nothing but code words for their racists views. They have no differences with Ravi on issues, they just don’t want a guy with a turban on his head elected Mayor. To that bunch of imbeciles, winning is preventing the “guy with a turban on his head” doesn’t get elected to sit in the Mayor’s Office. Mental midgets and scum.Your damn straight that Ravi is everything that the filthy crew of Republicans, that is the Jen campaign, despise. At this point , the Jen people are dead to me.
UGH! I saw the T-Girl and her Mistress "Jen" electioneering at the Uptown Ferry Terminal this morning. It is beyond my comprehension that these two incompetents have been so adept at chipping away at true Reform and its support. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that in this golden age of Trump these two hacks with no message and no character could actually convince so many people to tape headshots of the candidate to their windows. "Jen" and "Tiff" aren't worthy of shining Dawn Zimmer's shoes.
DeleteThe Mayor is correct to raise questions about Fund for a Better Waterfront. This is a group that has gotten away for far too long hiding behind the holier-than-thou mantle of unimpeachable do-gooder-ness. Several of their key members have profited handsomely through the organization directly and the local real estate game in general, while consistently supporting the most developer-friendly candidates in every election.
ReplyDeleteHine, Vance and Garcia-Keim all supported Cammarano, as well as various Old Guard/Russo-allied candidates in subsequent midterm elections. They supported Mason largely on the grounds of their desire to eject Lenz and Soares from their political lives, and are now soldiering alongside Soares on the DeFusco campaign. Some of them have impressive real estate portfolios that warrant more than a little scrutiny as to what's driving their consistent support for the most developer-friendly candidates, who seem to fly directly in the face of their stated mission.
It's ok to have a political agenda. It's even ok if that agenda entails supporting pro-development candidates, and still ok if you're doing it because you own properties that might benefit from development-oriented policies. It is NOT ok to attempt to dupe people into thinking you're a community organization on an altruistic mission when what you're really doing is effectively functioning as a Trojan horse. This is a group that has evaded scrutiny through piety and sanctimony, and it is high time the Mayor publicly called their bluff.
Defusco is a thirsty little shithead. That will do and say anything to get whatever is his current goal. The attention span of a gnat is eons longer than what the DeFormco mutation is capable of sustaining. I hear that he has already struck deals w developers in exchange for favorable approvals, let Ali e UnionDry Dock. If true he is the new coming of that felon Cammarano. Buyer be ware. Living proof that a gay can be just as corrupt as a Russo. Shades of Mo Firzgibbons.
ReplyDeleteMakes you wonder about his supporters if he is truly this bad ;-)
DeleteWell, maybe not. They are pretty bad.
I hear Ron Hine collects a yearly paycheck of $40,000 from FBW .
ReplyDeleteFund for a Better Waterfront, Inc. is a registered 501 (c)3. Hard to verify an Executive's salary without inspecting their tax returns. Looks like the IRS allows returns to be inspected by the public:
Deletehttps://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/6020c0de-e96d-442b-bea2-cd2071197b1c
501(c)(3) Organizations Must Meet Inspection and Disclosure Requirements
501(c)(3) organizations enjoy significant benefits, such as receiving tax exempt contributions and not having to pay taxes on income. In return, Congress allows the public to inspect/copy documents (such as the Form 990 990-EZ or ) these organizations file with the IRS. These forms – which report gross receipts, expenses, etc. – are information returns and do not report paying taxes. In addition, the public can review an organization’s original application for recognition of tax-exempt status (Form 1023 ), any documents filed with the application, and any correspondence between the organization and the IRS regarding the application.
The public can also inspect Forms 990-T , a tax return filed by organizations that receive unrelated business income of more than $1,000 annually.
In addition to disclosing annual returns and applications for exemption, 501(c)(3) organizations must make certain disclosures to donors to whom something has been given in return for their contributions. This is called a quid pro quo contribution, which in Latin means “something for something.” For example, suppose a donor gives a charitable organization $100. As an incentive or thank-you, the organization sends the person a concert ticket with a fair market value of $40. The donor’s tax deduction in this transaction may not exceed $60. In this case, the donor’s payment exceeds $75, requiring the charitable organization to furnish a disclosure statement to the donor, even though the deductible amount does not exceed $75.