As widely reported in the media, 2nd Ward Councilwoman Fisher wrote a letter to the Mayor, signed by Councilpersons Ramos, Giattiino, Cunningham and Defusco, demanding that he fire a Reform Planning Board Commissioner. But, Fisher and her co-signers cited no legal authority nor statute that was violated, no law that was broken, no Planning Board applicant/application that had been prejudiced by his actions, no ethical rule that had been breached. In fact, they produced nothing upon which to base their accusations which they publicized- now read by countless thousands of people who never heard of the man- that Commissioner Holtzman had made a "material, ethical breach."
And those were the exact words used by 2nd Ward Councilwoman Tiffanie Fisher to Terrance McDonald of The Jersey Journal.
"Consensus from professionals."
Professionals? What professionals?
Fisher is referring to unnamed "professionals" cited in her letter to Mayor Bhalla. Absent naming a statute, law or ethical rule that Holtzman broke, a single Planning Board application that he prejudiced or proof of malfeasance, Fisher wrote: "We have informally reviewed this situation (all on a no-name basis) with multiple, experienced New Jersey land use attorneys and professionals who have uniformly confirmed this view."
Kafka couldn't have written it better; The Council Inquisitor has advanced a ghost-jury of no-names to declare the Defendant is guilty in the press, runs a media campaign to poison public opinion, then arranges a show-trial.
Yes, the Council has called a public hearing to remove Mr. Holtzman from the Planning Board at next Monday's Council meeting. The Inquisitor's ghost-jury of no-names has spoken.
Well, GA has news for them. The Council Inquisitors had best bring thier list of "multiple land use attorneys and professionals" for public and Corporation Counsel review.
And if you want a sneak preview of Councilwoman Fisher's actual due diligence--prior to her media smear campaign against Holtzman, check out her Facebook admission. She revealed on Facebook how her legal and professional consultants communicated their consensus about Holtzman; via "audible cringes."
You see? In her own words, Fisher's no-name cringes sound like "that's bad", "why would they do that?", "they can't do that", "You need to speak to your Corporation Counsel ASAP." "that puts the city at risk" "that's horrible."
Can a cringe be cross-examined?
In recognition that she got ahead of herself, and with ZERO legal and evidentiary proofs that Holtzman's "conduct was a "material ethical breach" (except for "cringes") Fisher filed an OPRA on Monday, September 10.
FISHER'S OPRA
GA is not rendering an opinion here about what Holtzman did or didn't do or shouldn't have done or would have been better off not doing.
This is about due process. This is about fairness. This is about legislative abuse of power.
Why wasn't Holtzman RICE-noticed? Why isn't he entitled to presumption of innocence by those empowered with deciding his fate? Who are these mutiple "land use attorneys" and "professionals"? Do they even exist or did they come from Tiffanie Fisher's fevered imagination?
GA believes that Tiffanie Fisher and her council co-horts abused their power in order to smear a political supporter of the mayor, a volunteer public servant. If they can do this to him, they can do it to you. And they will.
For this alone, none of them deserve re-election.
Ms Fishwater seems to be in need of an attorney to provide a legal framework so that what clearly boils down to personal animus can be gussied up to look like public interest. That's not an area I am unfamiliar with. Or not unfamiliar with. Whichever one means I know how to do it.
ReplyDeleteAnd as fate would have it, I seem to have a rare opening in my schedule!
I just might be of use to the plaintiff here. Or to the whatchamacallit, the other one. The non-plaintiff. In my experience they eventually become the plaintiffs, so I never bothered to learn the term for it. Pre-plaintiffs maybe? Future plaintiffs?
Full disclosure, I don't really have any experience in the land-use game. None. But I've never let that be a barrier to taking a case. That's a coward's way out, and my plaintiffs and pre-plaintiffs are not cowards!
Here is my solemn vow - I will vigorously pursue any claim you can dream up until your money is gone. Many of my clients and several state bar associations will back me up on this.
So what are we waiting for? Slide that envelope across the table and let's get this party started!
Score another one for -- JayZeke, Master Litigator!!!
(cash only, all sales final)
It sounds like Fisher's informal review by lawyers she cannot name did not even involve showing these lawyers the email in question.
ReplyDeleteIf I were Gary I'd be seriously considering a defamation lawsuit against Fisher.
On another front, Fisher's OPRA request seems like an improper fishing expedition. OPRA is not like discovery in a lawsuit which permits you to fish.
It requires that when you request correspondence you explicitly identify the sender, recipient, subject matter and a reasonable time frame. You can't just ask for everything referencing or having to do with ___ like Fisher has done. Maybe she ought to go back to the mysterious no name lawyers who informally advised her and ask them to rewrite her OPRA request so that it complies with the law.
She doesn't care about complying w/ the law. She will use the simple fact that her OPRA request is likely illegal and thus denied as proof of guilt. And yes, I get that makes absolutely no sense what so ever, but she is completely driven by spite. Well that and she for some reason thinks she should be mayor even though she not only never ran, most people would likely vote for some random homeless person over her.
Deletea public official who cannot fill out an OPRA request? She might actually be worse than Beth Mason.
DeleteEverything about this smells.
DeleteGary did not have due process. Fisher smeared him in the media, and this public hearing to throw him off the Planning Board is Kabuki theater. Gary should have been Riced-same as I was in 2011 Yes, in 2011 when Timmy tried to throw me off the ZBA for "conduct unbecoming" (over a blog post!) Well, I chose a hearing in Executive Session, which made Beth Mason nuts! I recall her screaming and yelling and storming off the council dais because she couldnt read a statement excoriating me in public! Fast forward to the present. Where was Gary's Rice notice? Why did Fisher accuse Holtzman IN THE PRESS of "material, ethical violations" allegedly confirmed by her no-name shadow "land use attorneys and professionals"? They'd better step out of the shadows. If they don't exist, is that fraud?
I'm no lawyer. As a layperson I believe that Gary has a case for defamation of character against Fisher. Where's her proof that he had nefarious intent? I think he has a case that she made claims that she knew to be false (starting with a list of "no-names") and did so out of malice. Amazing how history keeps repeating itself in the Mile Square.
What's in the water in the 2nd ward? ?
DeleteOk, I'm confused now. Which one is suing which one? Is everybody suing everyone? I have a group rate that could work.
DeleteFisher has certainly provided a basis for a defamation suit if Gary is inclined to file one, unless of course she can produce a group of lawyers willing to testify (with names) that she consulted them and they advised her that Gary's letter was a "material ethical breach." Of course if they didn't even review the letter they can't possibly have given that advice. In which case Tiff's defamatory statement to that effect was knowingly false. Remember she was not stating her opinion, which she would have every right to do. She claimed to be stating the expert opinions of numerous expert land use attorneys and professionals she had informally consulted.
DeleteI hope he does sue her. JayZeke could use the money.
DeleteIf he were to sue her in her capacity as a Councilwoman, the taxpayers get stuck with the bill. Could he sue her in her personal capacity?
DeleteGary could definitely sue her in her individual capacity. Council members have qualified immunity when they speak on the Council dais but when they put out defamatory press releases or make defamatory comments in the press they put themselves at risk.
DeleteTiffanie should have asked the mystery lawyers about that before jumping off the cliff.
The other thing that is disgusting about this whole thing is they are completely fine with Mike DeFusco being on the planning board despite all those problematic campaign finance violations. It is like they are going out of their way to remove the honest planning board members.
DeleteThe hearing is illegal if Holtzman hasn't been RICEd.
ReplyDelete9 of of 10 audible cringes sound like "that's bad!" to Tiffanie Fisher but what about ME, the 10th cringe? I have feelings, too.
ReplyDeleteIn 1 year, 1 month, 3 weeks, 4 days, 3 hours and 33 minutes, this will all be behind us.
ReplyDeletethose nine lawyers probably cringe whenever they encounter tiff.
ReplyDeleteCouncilwoman Fisher's lack of maturity, of professionalisn, of judgment, is appalling. Mr. Holtzman needs an attorney, one with a name.
ReplyDelete