Friday's mail brought a disconcerting mixed message from Jerry Green.
On the front he is quoted as saying, "Plainfield is my home and I will always do anything in my power to help this great city ..." while inside he condemns Mayor Adrian O. Mapp, who took office on Jan. 1 and is now just four months into a 48-month term.
I do not recall such a bald attack on a new mayor, especially one who needs time to reorient a city that went without full fiscal oversight for eight years and had nine shifts in the office of city administrator; six people in charge of Administration, Finance, Health and Social Services; and five directors of Public Works & Urban Development. Mapp won with 70 percent of the vote, but Green, who admits he deferred to the power of his predecessor as head of the Union County Democrats to back Mapp, now vows to use his power in that seat to disenfranchise the electorate and make their votes null and void.
I recall one election night where a sitting mayor lost his re-election bid. His comment was simply, "The people have spoken."
Those who find this mailer out of line are waiting to see what the people say on June 3. Green says he "always supported the Democratic Party's choice of candidate and done all I could to see they were elected." He alone chose the party's ticket for 2014 City Council seats and no doubt has a large ego investment in them. A quick look at the flier might make one think he himself is on the ballot, but that will be next year.
Green says, "In less than a year (sic), Adrian Mapp has proven to be every bit as bad for Plainfield as I feared," and claims Mapp is dividing the city.
What message does this give to those who might want to bring transit-oriented development to the city and create the new ratables the city needs? Normally, developers approach the administration with their plans and rely on certain approvals from the governing body. If they are told to ignore the executive branch, how do they get started? Maybe they will go where the politics are less byzantine.
Green states he was "loyal to the Chair and followed her instructions to support Mapp" even though he believed it was a mistake. Now he wants people to be loyal to him and support his choices regardless of what they believe. Is there a moral here about dumb loyalty versus voting one's conscience? When the people speak and he doesn't like it, will Jerry say STFU, I run this MF? Oh wait, I think he just did.