Saturday, January 11, 2014

Commentary on Jan. 13 Meeting

As Dr. Yood has noted, the agenda for Monday night is rather sparse and may not require any research at the Plainfield Public Library tomorrow. Dr. Yood was surprised not to see any nominations for Public Safety or Police directorships; the appointment I am hoping to see soon is for a chief financial officer. It will soon be two years since the city began relying on five to seven hours per week from a very busy administrator and CFO in another town. Plainfield had a full-time CFO for decades until the past administration began relying on make-do remedies for the lack of one. We need one ASAP! Do I make myself clear??

Among other items, there are three proposed appointments to the Planning Board. One is for Horace Baldwin to succeed himself for another four years, to Dec. 31, 2017. There are two other appointments that come with the changing of the guard at City Hall. One is for the "mayor's designee," formerly confidential aide Barbara James under Mayor Sharon Robinson-Briggs. It is listed as the "Class I" appointment and the nominee is John Stewart, Mayor Adrian O. Mapp's new chief of staff.

"Class II" is listed on the city web site as "municipal officer," which the last mayor apparently took literally, as she kept appointing cops. A municipal officer can be any person of authority. Years ago, the city engineer held the post. So Mapp has proposed Carlos Sanchez, the newly appointed deputy city administrator in charge of economic development. I know being sick for the past three weeks has made me crankier than usual, and I had a grumpy reaction to this nomination. Here's why: If this person will be the one to greet developers, maybe help them find suitable properties and assist in identifying funding sources, would there be an implied "yes" vote from him as the municipal officer when the developer came before the board for approvals? Maybe by then they would have cleared all hurdles anyway, but it just made me wonder how the economic development point person can serve at both ends of the process.

The Planning Board will be reorganizing on Thursday, but these appointments will not be voted on until Jan. 21. For your entertainment, below is a 2008 account of a Planning Board reorganization that shows what goes into it - the reappointments, the naming of an attorney, etc.

Here is a post on the 2008 Planning Board reorganization.

I have a feeling that there might be some add-ons to this agenda. If the council is to continue its committee and liaison assignments, they should be made soon. There are a number of other vacancies to be filled on boards and commissions, including the Plainfield Cable Television Advisory Board, Plainfield Advisory Commission on Hispanic Affairs, Human Relations Commission, Cultural and Heritage Commission and more.

The PCTVAB is supposed to have an oversight function to the operations of local cable operations. Now that the former chairman is working for the city in a hands-on capacity and all memberships on the board have expired, the checks and balances are lacking. The Transition Report had some specific concerns about the PCTV operations that must be addressed. There is also a franchise renewal process to be undertaken.

OK, rant over. Time to fire up the Kindle and resume reading that depressing book I downloaded. This year is starting to feel long already.

--Bernice

20 comments:

  1. It is highly inappropriate for a major developer's business associate to be given a seat on the Planning Board. Mr. Stewart, the newly-minted Chief of Staff, has one or more real estate investments in downtown Plainfield in tandem with Landmark's Frank Cretella, or so I've been led to believe. Stewart also hosted a Mapp fundraiser at Cretella's Ryland Inn back in the early days of the 2013 campaign. (http://ptoday.blogspot.com/2012/12/new-dems-holiday-breakfast-saturday.html)

    Presumably these relationships have been fully disclosed, and the Planning Board understands where the line is that potential and actual conflicts of interest begins. Mayor Mapp should actually be looking to fill this vacancy with someone else, just to avoid this entirely.

    Striking by their absence are any nominations to the PMUA Board of Commissioners. Its reorganization is February 1, when new professional service contracts are approved. The Authority's auditor and law firm made prohibited campaign contributions in the last primary, and they've provided cover for many of its legal lapses over the years, ranging from illegal commissioner compensation, contract fraud, to generally living large on the public dime. There's also a rate hearing still to be had, a lawsuit by a former executive, and a State investigation Mr. Mapp said has been going on since last April. With its $21 million budget, and approaching Re-org, PMUA ought to have been a priority from day one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with your concerns and Bernice's about the mayor's appointments to the Planning Board--there's too much potential for conflicts of interest.

      Delete
  2. Can you blame him Alan? Stewart has a vested interest, he needs to keep an eye on those investments. He has invested heavily in Mayor Mapp, so Mapp is giving him what he wants, plus a job, and his partner invested heavily in his home which is worth 25% of the money he put into it. So why not cash in your chips with the new Mayor. Same old in Plainfield, nothing changes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I for one am starting to get confused - is this the Stewart Administration or the Mapp Administration? How is the COS going to be effective on the Planning Board if he has to recuse himself for half the votes because they involve a friend? Not sure how we have a city of 50,000 people and the same 8-10 guys are the only ones qualified for everything? And wasn't Stewart in charge of collecting the names if interested parties for commissions? This is like when Dick Cheney was in charge of VP selection and came back with only his name. And why after 8 years of Sharon when appointments were a train wreck is Mapp reappointing people? I thought he was all about new day, new blood and new ideas.

      Delete
    2. Horace Baldwin has served the Planning Board well and in my opinion is a valid nominee for reappointment. You need some experienced people on the land use boards. Many bring professional expertise that is a benefit to the city.

      Delete
    3. I am sure Mr. Baldwin is an excellent nominee and the comment about reappointment wasn't directed at him personally. The point was that if you look at even the transition report and the bios for the members there are numerous engineers, lawyers with specialties in land use etc. and many other possible nominees for that type of nomination - for the new blood and new ideas etc. etc.

      Delete
  3. Bernice, I agree that the CFO is the most important other vacant position that needs filling ASAP; that is yesterday.
    I only mentioned the two police related sinc there were resolutions last week that were not acceptd to be voted on at that meeting.

    Although this could be considered tantamount to rejection it was not and they should be on the agenda. If then turned down explanations are mandatory.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well at least we know that the desire to get new blood and plainfield citizens involved was just what many assumed it was - plain PR. We are now going to get to see the same group of revolving chairs that this town has seen for years - with the same people focused on their own self interest instead of the city as a whole. At least we don't have to wait in suspense any longer. Also - I hope they hire a PR/Communications person soon because whoever thought it was a good idea for Mayor Mapp to comment publicly on the GWB scandal isn't thinking clearly - Plainfield shouldn't be jumping into that issue on the record - there is zero benefit to its citizens for our Mayor to play pile on. And whoever let him make the quote that he made should be fired - his quote is the type that just comes back to haunt a politician for the rest of their career.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What is with you people? First, I would like to know what each of you have done to help make this city better? Stewart invested in this city when Sharon was in charge-do you really think they have that kind of a crystal ball to know the future?

    And, I am sick of listening to do nothing, cry baby Plainfielders. This city is where it is because people who have lived here for 20+ years just complain.

    So, if you know the mayor for a year you are considered old blood?

    What are you people talking about! Stop complaining, stop thinking that you know it all, stop being unrealistic and uninformed and either help out, or shut up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the point that Anonymous 1:27 is clearly missing is that there are plenty of people in a town of 50,000 that would be excellent participants on commissions and boards but for the last 8 years there has been a lack of inclusion. It is also risky to assume that people commenting on the blog aren't already participating to one degree or another.

      I think there are probably a few people who purchased homes in plainfield in the last 8 years so there isn't anyone that hasn't experienced issues related to property values, economy and the prior administration. As for knowing the mayor for a year and being old blood - not sure what that even means really.

      People complain because something either doesn't seem right, the communication they receive is lacking or spotty or the doors to participation are closed to all but a select few people. Likely other reasons as well.

      Delete
  6. Mayor Mapp has his hands full, and then some, getting his new administration launched. Starting his mayoral career by posturing as a qualified critic of the Christie event seems to me to be a bit audacious. In 4 years, when and if Mayor Mapp can point to a record of fiscal improvement in Plainfield, commensurate to the advancements which Governor Christie has achieved for the State of New Jersey, then Mayor Mapp may have earned the prerogative to hone in on the controversy. Right now it looks like plain old showboating.

    The Council members that oppose the appointment of Mr. Riley owe the public an explanation. How about it?

    Mayor Mapp's reticence in nominating PMUA Commissioners suggests a conflict between his conscience and what I believe to be pressure being exerted to nominate another gang from the Democratic Club. The pressure being to select candidates whose avowed purpose is to defend and endorse the conduct of PMUA to the exclusion of the interests of people of Plainfield. The primary function of a commissioner is to insure that it is the people who are getting a fair shake.
    The curent Board of Commissioners does not appear to understand this.

    The median income in Plainfield is $41,000. Obviously Plainfield is not an affluent community. The number indicates that many families have incomes of 25, 30 or 35,000 dollars. If you estimate the take home wages, after taxes, and other employee side deductions, and further reduce the income by direct and indirect property taxes, sales taxes, etc. it can be seen that the combined Household Collection and Shared Service fee, and Sewer Tax, charged by the PMUA consume from 2 to as much as 4 weeks take home pay. And, again a reminder that the independent study revealed that our PMUA's rates are about 250% higher than nearby communities with the same population.

    As I have said before, the nomination by Mayor Mapp of the replacement Commissioners will be the barometer of his desire an/or his ability to affect meaningful change.
    Bill Kruse

    ReplyDelete
  7. GWB scandal ? The fact that the City MUST pay for ALL maintenance related to Route # 28 in town while other towns don't is a scandal Mapp could correct ... if they really care about the public.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As a Councilman, Adrian Mapp was opposed to using City funds to repave Route 28, South Ave.

      The project was put on hold (delayed) while he petitioned the state on behalf of the City to maintain the road. The State refused.

      Delete
  8. to 9:07
    close you mouth and keep selling houses!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Maybe the writers of the previous comments would rather have SRB as mayor???

    This administration is less than two weeks old. Let it swim or sink by its own behavior.

    Most of the previous comments were made by intelligent people. So, how about allowing time for this administration to success or not?

    Jan Massey

    ReplyDelete
  10. 50,000 residents in Plainfield and how many get involved? Ever go to a council meeting? Maybe 30 people tops if your lucky. Maybe 200 showed up at the reorg meeting. How about planning board, zoning, HPC, PMUA, school board?? Lets be generous and say 100 people attend thats less than 1% of the residents. So where are all these people who would be great for commissions??? Why aren't they attending city meetings??? Some people just like to bitch and moan regardless, others talk and get involved and actually accomplish things. It's way to early to judge Mayor Mapp or his administration so stop with all the negativity. He has set lofty goals that will benefit Plainfield and all it's residents. 70% of the voters voted for Mapp for mayor for 4 years, it's been 2 weeks and people are already negative. We all need to stand behind Mapp and his administration yet hold him accountable of his goals. Only time will tell but we can all be supportive along the way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For 8:46 and Ms Massey - voting for Mr. Mapp didn't eliminate a taxpayers/citizens right to voice their opinion, be it on day 1, 50 or 500. Mr. Mapp has been working towards this position for years and has witnessed the process very closely for many years on the council - therefore the expectations are going to be a little higher (vs a person who came from private sector and had to get up to speed on the ways of the gov't world) rightly or wrongly.
      People don't have to show up to council meetings to demonstrate their interest in getting involved - council meetings are not always at convenient times and people have to work to pay the ridiculous taxes and the outlandish PMUA fees that are never honestly addressed. The city also has a history of being run an an insular group of people who honestly prefer that people not get involved - it makes playing games all the easier. So go easy on those that don't attend meetings - there is often more to it than just lack of interest. Although i would be interested to know how many of the "30 tops" people that usually attend meetings have been nominated to a board, commission or panel. My guess is probably not many.

      Dissent and/or criticism is never fun but it is how our system works. In many of the comments there is often a shred of truth or a meaningful point. Blog posters/readers would be wise to look for those tidbits and those in the city government may want to pay attention as well. As they used to say, one comment/complaint often has 100 identical believers that haven't voiced their opinion.

      So until an ordinance is passed that makes it illegal for citizens to voice their opinion - I would suggest refraining from telling people to stop complaining, stop criticizing and stop commenting. It has a hard nosed, closed minded ring to it and turns people off.

      I am sure almost everyone wishes Mr. Mapp well - as has been said before his success is Plainfield's success - however, it doesn't mean everyone has to drink the kook-aid. We can support the administration and encourage the administration and also criticize the administration when we feel it necessary (not when others feel it necessary).

      Delete
    2. Everyone doesn't wish Mr. Mapp well. And, you are correct, people can still voice their opinion. However, most of the voices that I hear are uninformed and based on nothing. The opinions are from people who just want to complain. It is a waste of time

      Delete
  11. I find it disturbing how one can judge an other without giving him a chance. Yes Mr. Mapp has plans for the City but how about you negative folks give him more than 2 weeks after all you gave our previous mayor 8 years and look at where we're at. I on the other had realize it takes time to correct or should I say rearrange things, unlike the old T.V. show bewitched when you could wiggle your nose and it comes to be, it just don't happen that way. Now what I'd like to see is a different solution to time stealing. Writing in time and attendance just don't work in corporate America. Finally we employees who were laid off also needed health insurance, so I can't understand how the Public Defender (JS) would be back on the agenda to be considered to bring back due to her husband. I and others have health conditions and we had to go with Cobra, no offense she has the same opportunities as we and if her brother in-law is so concerned let him reach in his pocket and help her out, Isn't that what family does?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anyone who knows Mr. Stewart, knows that many of the individuals who served on the transition team are Mr. Stewart's "friends" and/or part of Mr. Mapp's financial contributing circle; so much for being inclusive and reaching out to people who time and time again have demonstrated interest in participating --- most of those folks didn't make the cut.

    Let's not draw conclusions to think that Mr. Stewart has investments downtown, most likely, his partner is the one making the financial investments and Mr. Stewart has invested his free time to guide Mr. Mapp -- sort of like a celebrity handler -- by managing to link himself to developer extraordinaire Frank Cretella and, in turn, Mr. Stewart has been rewarded with a job, peculiar all around - there's a money trail here, somewhere.

    Note: pleased that SRB is no longer the Mayor and I'm looking forward to see what Mr. Mapp will do, however, will someone close to Mr. Mapp advise him to tone down his arrogant demeanor -- it's not charming, at all. He commented on the Christie issue? Really? Relax Mr. Mapp, next election is 4 years away.

    ReplyDelete