December will bring another attempt to change members of the Plainfield Municipal Utilities Authority, including a move to switch Chairman Harold Mitchell to an alternate's seat that would force him to vacate the chairmanship.
The Dec. 1 agenda calls for removing the Nov. 10 nomination of Michelle Graham-Lyons from the table at the Dec.8 regular meeting. Mayor Adrian O. Mapp is also nominating former Commissioner Wilbert Gill to replace Mitchell in an unexpired term to Feb. 1, 2016. The term for the vacant alternate's seat for which Mitchell is nominated expires on Feb. 1, 2015.
Graham-Lyons was nominated to replace Malcolm Dunn, a holdover in a term that expired in February. If confirmed by the council, she would serve until Feb. 1, 2019.
Gill served during the administration of the late Mayor Albert T. McWilliams. He was nominated, but not appointed, three times in 2012 during the administration of Mayor Sharon Robinson-Briggs. He is related by marriage to Mapp.
The authority has a board of commissioners, five with five-year terms and two alternates who serve two years. Alternates may only vote when needed to make a quorum and cannot serve as board chairman. Commissioners whose terms expire can stay on as holdovers until a replacement is approved.
The agenda-fixing session is 7:30 p.m. Monday in Municipal Court, 325 Watchung Ave.
--Bernice
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Conflict of interest nominated by your relative doesn't pass the smell test in the infamous words of rebbeca . Something is fishy here!
ReplyDeleteRemember this is round 4. Mapp has been trying to get people nominated for the past year that he has been in office. Why don't you write to the council and find out THEIR problem.
DeleteMapp has proposed a new slate with different names, and the council refuses the let any new Plainfield citizens participate in the running of the city. That smells of more than fish!
Why does the Mayor want to put a white or Spanish person on the board? Why does he want to put a family member on, when he promised to not act like Jerry a Green?
ReplyDeleteGet informed. Mapp has proposed all of the above - the council has said no. That question should be asked of the council. Go to the council meeting and ask them!
DeleteSorry for the typeO It was to read Why DOESN'T the Mayor
DeleteYesterday on Doc's Potpourri blog I suggested that Mayor Mapp personally pay for the illegal compensation his PMUA nominees, Brokaw and Mitchell, are receiving. This amounts to about $40,000 a year. The idea is partly tongue in cheek, because I would rather see the mayor enforce the City's compensation ordinance and the terms of the Inter Local agreement, holding all parties accountable for past and present abuses. In this light I would prefer to see the current crop of commissioners remain in place and have the City administration bring down the legal hammer on the Authority.
ReplyDeleteThe amount of illegal compensation commissioners have received has totaled many $100,000s over PMUA's life. Beginning in 1998, upon the advent of the McWilliams administration, and at a time when current commissioners Dunn and Mitchell, along with Mapp, sat together on the City Council, the City and PMUA conspired to corrupt the Inter Local Agreement, then only 10-weeks old. Solid Waste cash flow was reversed between the parties, there was no certified estimate of disposal costs that was to appear in the City budget, there was no reconciliation of actual to estimated costs that would be used to determine PMUA's solid waste lease payment to the City, the sewer lease was improperly booked as Revenue Sharing in the City budget to mask the absence of any actual revenue sharing or the required revenue sharing calculation, PMUA never (until this year) submitted its budget for City review, and PMUA began a seven year process of deliberately and subtly massaging its financial statements to hide the cash flow reversal and the gutting of the transparency and accountability requirements of the agreement.
Since then, numerous management abuses have surfaced as PMUA embarked on a path to become a high cost service provider and home to patronage jobs and ultra-high staffing levels costing ratepayers many millions each and every year. For having provided us with this opportunity to have our pocketbooks looted, PMUA's top two executives were able to quit and then turn around to extort a $1,000,000 golden parachute.
Back in 1998, the secret reversal of cash flow permitted PMUA to illicitly pocket revenue in order to artificially bolster its cash position ahead of a major bond offering. More recently, the Authority's former executive director was rewarded with the cushy position of Acting Director of Public Works and Urban Development, despite a track record of mismanagement and deceit.
Instead of reform, we are getting retreads on the Board of Commissioners, and a revolving door between the Board and the City Council, and the upper levels of management as well. The City's former Corporation Counsel is now PMUA's Executive Director. On top of this, PMUA's attorney and auditor have made prohibited campaign contributions in violation of our locally established Pay-To-Play ordinance.
So we really don't need new commissioners to bring justice to this whole sordid situation, just an administration willing to take on a few special interests and 'protected' individuals, and enforce the law and the terms of an agreement that has proven to not be worth the paper it was written on.
Enough already with the wheeling and dealing about commissioner nominees. It is within his power to act without the Board or the City Council when it comes to upholding the law and a valid contract. But on second thought, if the mayor wants to keep playing the game and insists on nominating individuals who he knows will be receiving illegal compensation, he should pick up the tab himself. Right now the game is stacked against the vast majority of Plainfield residents who foot the bill.
Thank you Democratic Party. New, old or indifferent. Just no Republicans allowed to mess up this well oiled pick pocket machine.
DeleteBenefits are not compensation
ReplyDeleteOf course they are. But it is just one of the falsehoods peddled by Leslie London, PMUA's legal counsel. Check out what the IRS says about health benefits. Section 5, beginning at the bottom of page 13, at this link:
Deletehttp://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p15.pdf
So how come mincellio was not definite in definition and if illegal why no movement to rectify ?
Delete