We are at a news-lull... so today I've got (news) scraps.
LAST NIGHT
Last night's Council meeting was low key. Even the kinetic DeFusco was more restrained than normal; hardly a seat bounce, pen-wave, or twitch.
GA wonders if he's somewhat chastened by the way the Sacco favor blew up on the Council majority. (It is not far-fetched to assume that DeFusco a hand in arranging North Bergen's gift to Giattino.) Political favors are supposed to fly under the radar. Like those lawsuits against Anthony 'Stick' Romano during the election, which were filed by a different North Bergen lawyer.
Who paid for those? Another gift?
Who paid for those? Another gift?
So, when a member of Hoboken's municipal body (Jen Giattino) blurts out at a public meeting that she accepted "free" legal services from a Sacco-ally, she's exposed a favor that's supposed to stay in shadow. Oops. North Bergen's involvement in Hoboken municipal government is now out in the open.
GA imagines that the North Bergen folks think DeFusco bungled the favor, think he's a hapless idiot.
But I digress...
But I digress...
So... last night GA caught a nostalgic glimmer of the 'old' Reform in a lively discussion about how much of Hoboken's budget surplus should be spent. Russo lead the charge for the Spenders, Fisher led the charge for the Savers.
Off the top of my head, our budget surplus is about $24M. If I got this right, Hoboken will spend about $11.3M to cover our operating expenses during the year, when needed in between revenue streams (like quarterly property taxes.) But, the City will pay back what we've taken from the surplus by about the same amount that we used for operating costs, which leaves Hoboken with a floating surplus of about $22M-$24M dollars.
According to the BA, $22-$24M is an amount a municipality like Hoboken should keep on reserve.
The Spenders want to spend the surplus to lower taxes- a nice gimmick for one tax cycle. Then the next year- ZOOM- our taxes go back up again.
The Savers follow recommended fiscally responsible guidelines. Count me in. Nerds rule.
As for the Rent Leveling Board- related resolutions, all were tabled. GA is surprised that the sponsors of CL-7 (consent to appoint Father Warren Hall) and CL-8 (consent to appoint Heath Urban) let that one go quietly. I suppose one has to pick their battles, so Doyle and Jabbour must have their reasons for not asking for an explanation why the Hall and Urban votes were being tabled.
GA was left feeling like those appointees are hostage to the success or failure of that patronage scheme-in-limbo, Ordinance B-10 (usurping Rent Leveling Board appointments from the mayor to seat two political loyalists.)
GA was left feeling like those appointees are hostage to the success or failure of that patronage scheme-in-limbo, Ordinance B-10 (usurping Rent Leveling Board appointments from the mayor to seat two political loyalists.)
So, we await... something. Corporation Counsel has been mum thus far on the Sacco-lawyers 'gift' opinion. GA assumes that the mayor is waiting for Corporation Counsel's advice. Tick tock... tick tock...
I wonder if Ordinance B-10 gets torpedoed, will the hostages get the ax?
MASON HHA APPOINTMENT
Hoboken Housing Authority Director Mark Recko told GA that Christie's appointment for the HHA, Beth Mason, had not been sworn in at the March meeting. Recko still has not received the letter from the DCA finalizing her appointment.
Until Recko is notified, the "governor's seat" will remain vacant.
DeFUSCO ATTENDS MARCH 14 PLANNING BOARD MEETING
Normally, it would be unnecessary to track the Council representative on Hoboken Planning Board's attendance record. Certainly not with Jim Doyle, who never missed a Planning Board meeting.
But, DeFusco missed the first 2 out of 3 meetings.
So, GA is happy to report that he showed up at the last meeting, which puts his attendance rate at 50%.
So, GA is happy to report that he showed up at the last meeting, which puts his attendance rate at 50%.
Will that attendance percentage rise?
Is your cup half full or half empty? Stay tuned.
Is your cup half full or half empty? Stay tuned.
Russo just wants to "spend" the money so he can claim he lowered taxes. What he also would have done is potentially put the city's credit rating and cost of capital at risk. Cities with healthy reserves can borrow money cheaper than those with no or insufficient reserves. Cities with reserves also don't have to borrow to meet short term liquidity needs. Best we save the money - and hold the line on spending.
ReplyDeleteNone of the members of the Council of No could run a successful business and are clueless when it comes to the city's finances.
ReplyDeleteThe meeting definitely brought back old memories, from Mike Russo's "give back the Surplus" to Ruben Ramos's paean to the importance of increasing ratables (develop or die). DeFusco grandstanding about a routine authorization of the cap bank reminded me of the Mason days as well.
ReplyDeleteSquandering the surplus would be a one way ticket back to the bad old days of fiscal irresponsibility.
I didn't watch the whole discussion but I didn't hear any discussion of how the Suez contingent liability is being handled in the budget. Does anybody know if it was mentioned?
I doubt Jen and the gang want to remind anyone of how they screwed that up or that Ruben and Tony are in part responsible for approving that deal. Oh, and who put Ruben and Tony in their current positions? Jen and the gang.
DeleteCan't wait for people to get the details on Suez.