 |
| OPRA #19-2311 |
So, HudCo Superior Court Judge Peter Bariso continues to review Hoboken's pay-to-play complaint against Councilman Mike DeFusco to determine probable cause. Meanwhile, on Wednesday's City Council agenda, there was a bizarre ordinance up for First Reading which was sponsored by the subject of City's Pay-to-Play complaint, Mike DeFusco. His ordinance would drop all restrictions on when political signage could be displayed, before and after an election, making 365-day a year political signage legal.
GA wrote yesterday how that idea sucks 12-ways-to-Sunday from a housekeeping perspective, how that kind of visual clutter and garbage would be awful. But, I didn't mention possible nefarious intent on unleashing political signage from any legal constraints.
GA wrote yesterday how that idea sucks 12-ways-to-Sunday from a housekeeping perspective, how that kind of visual clutter and garbage would be awful. But, I didn't mention possible nefarious intent on unleashing political signage from any legal constraints.
So, I wonder: does the looming possibility that the court will permit Hoboken to enforce it's own Pay-to-Play law have anything to do with DeFusco's bizarre legislation for year-round political advertising? One thing is true. Unlimited advertising that is no longer tethered to a date on the calendar (election day) invites legal unlimited expenditures by Independent Expenditure PACs.
Consequently, unlimited expenditures for political advertising would create a veritable dark money race between candidates: who could lure more PAC money to their campaign.
What a disaster. What a breeding ground for political corruption.
Candidates who are not hooked up with special interests, relying strictly on donations subject to pay-to-play law would get crushed by year-round, dark money-infused advertising against them.
My opinion: this is a horrible ordinance, an invitation to corrupt Hoboken elections, a path to circumvent local legal contribution limits.
City Council: just say "no."
City Council: just say "no."
City of Hoboken OPRA # 19-2311- PART 2 of 2 by GrafixAvenger on Scribd
Not only would his endless campaign of signage be a conduit for his sponsors to buy, package and sell DeFusco's brand of corruption, they'd be a blight for Hoboken, and he would be in violation of Hoboken's signage ordinance.
ReplyDeleteIt's such a shitty idea, it probably came from the little twerp himself. He's too stupid to realize what every talent manager knows - he'd suffer from over exposure, even if he kept his shirt on for those photos, and it would backfire. Maybe that's a reason to let him do it.
As it is, many of us downtown won't patronize the businesses that put up his reelection posters, which is too bad, 'cause I liked The Roost's coffee - speaking of which, we need a list of the places his posters appeared at, or whose owners contributed to his crooked campaign to boycott.
I'll start: The Roost
So if struggling businesses were at all concerned about losing customers if they displayed his shit-eating grin, dressed like a spokesman for a midwestern public golf club, what would he be left with as placement? Billboards? Public property? PATH posters (where he lied about his role in bringing WiFi to the platforms)?
.
But you were okay with Migdalia being bought by the very bar owners who are Santa Conning Hoboken today? You might want to read up on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteT-Bone, elected officials (a.k.a. our government) are fair game for comment. Private citizens, not so much. Please save your barbs for elected officials/candidates/public figures. Thanks.
DeletePoint of clarification.
Delete1. No name was given
2. No Business was mentioned
3. If the shoe fits they can wear it. It was a pretty unrecognizable business owner who trashes people on a daily basis around town, yet the 1st post above mentioned the ROOST and a terrible vindictive plan to hurt businesses for expressing the same free speech many of the 1st street Bars were afforded. I think defusco's idea is terrible. I'm quite tired of the nipple bearing brat myself. If anything I hope he learns something about PR. Boomerang isn't cool, and neither are his giant headphones or IG GIF's
More likely the "nipple bearing brat"got tired of you but you really should cool it with the fake homophobia. It doesn't make you seem more authentic.
DeleteCouncilman DeFusco continues to play the victim and will continue to do so until he can find a legitimate positive issue he is really responsible for to try again to become mayor. Being hyper partisan and continually negative I do not think will sway many voters to propel him into higher office. I also expect their will be much less toxic and vitriolic opposition to Mayor Bhalla in the race which will draw off those who might consider before voting for DeFusco.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBut you don't boycott the Santa Con Bars that hung Zoning violating signs for Migdalia? ...politics.....
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWell yes it is "politics" - i was showing my support of the candidate that I want to win by not going to Roost - that is my personal choice. It wasn't about signage. Changing the topic to boycotting all candidates who had zoning violations or how about campaign violations? OK, sure, but that is not what I'm talking about that, and I'm sure you knew that....
Delete