Hoboken's biggest website exposing corruption and bad pols
In an interview with the Hudson County View on Friday, City Council President Jen Giattino explains how her unexpected mayoral candidacy occurred, the Suez $8.35 million liability uncovered in recent days and why she will win in November and become Hoboken’s next mayor.
Talking Ed Note: In this interview, Hoboken learns why Jen Giattino is surging among the main mayoral candidates. She’s a straight shooter. There’s no “political speak” or the usual hedging one sees in political candidates.
In an interview with Mayor Zimmer the Hudson County View last Thursday, the Suez contract is discussed with the mayor citing the improvements from the previous terrible contact made in the 90s.
From the Hudson County View story:
Giattino has previously said that several questions brought up during subcommittee meeting were not answered, also noting that the city auditor was not made available for these meetings.
Official release:
Dear friends and neighborsI am proud to endorse City Council President Jen Giattino to be our next Mayor of Hoboken and her council slate comprising of Zoning Board Chair Jim Aibel and long-time Hoboken residents Jason Ellis and Sal Starace.
The day Mayor Zimmer announced her intentions, I awoke feeling unsettled and concerned about Hoboken’s future. To me the right message going forward for Hoboken is embracing what works, but fixing what doesn’t. And when Jen decided to run for mayor a week later, the unsettled feeling went away.
Mayor Zimmer sent a Nixle on the $8.5-10 million Hoboken owes to Suez Water. Yet in over 1,000 words the word “debt” never appears. Google defines debt as “something, typically money, that is owed or due.” There has been some nervous muddying from City Hall about whether the money is currently due, but there have been no claims that it is not owed. While City Hall has kept it pretty quiet, Hoboken does, in fact, owe $8.5-10 million to Suez, and Mayor Zimmer has known about it for years.But I can understand why she didn’t say so. Admitting keeping an $8.5-10 million obligation secret raises uncomfortable questions: 1) How long did the Mayor know about this debt? The Nixle alert says 2 years, at the last council meeting they said 4 years, and the reality is anyone’s guess. 2) Who knew, and when? Did city auditor Steve Wielkotz know? At the council meeting he said he didn’t, but the Nixle raises questions when it says “accountants” did. Which accountants? Which Council members knew before July? I know Cunningham, DeFusco, Fisher, and Giattino have said they knew nothing, and I think Russo and Ramos said so too, but I’m not sure on the rest.Even Councilman Ravi Bhalla would be expected to answer – recusing yourself from a vote doesn’t mean you don’t have to answer to the public. And what about the Mayor’s former chief of staff, now manager of the Bhalla campaign? It’s kind of hard to believe the chief of staff didn’t know. 3) Was this debt disclosed in the annual audits, and in recent bond offering statements? My strong suspicion is no. Was it required to be? I think it extremely likely. If some credible professional said it was ok to leave it out – as Mayor Zimmer implies in her Nixle – who were they, did they put those opinions in writing at the time, and why haven’t we seen the proof? It’s no wonder Mayor Zimmer is publically second guessing herself for going public on this before the election.Does any of this matter? I think it does. If “reform” means anything it means talking openly and honestly about what’s going on in City Hall. Despite what has been implied, no $8.5-10 million forgiveness is coming, there is no Santa Claus, and even though you can refinance your mortgage – or your water bill – you still end up owing the money. Why does this matter? Because when our elected leaders start hiding financial realities they invariably end by doing deeply damaging things as they struggle to avoid disclosure. About 17 years ago a past administration put short term priorities over long term fiscal health and signed the awful water deal that haunts Hoboken now. Had the facts not come out it could easily have happened again. Slow down. Get the facts. We’ve owed the money for years, we’ll still owe it in January. Let the next Mayor and Council decide. They, and we, will have to live with those decisions.Michael LenzTalking Ed Note: The gnashing of teeth at Sybil’s Cave lacking a logical counter to Councilman Michael Lenz says all you need to know about the fear and panic the Suez debacle besets the Bhalla campaign.
The political decision to bury the debt of millions exploding in the Suez water contract since 2014 by rolling it into a new Suez contract extension is a standard Soprano State trick politicians use to bury mistakes in the hope the public doesn’t ask questions.
The City Council sought a closed session briefing at its prior meeting with the city auditor and the financial analysis underlying the proposed contract extension. They were denied by the Zimmer administration. Is it to protect Councilman Ravi Bhalla and his conflicts heading into the election?
No, it’s not an election result that comes in November. Karen Nason, a mayoral candidate attended the ballot drawing at City Hall yesterday and will however appear as the first candidate listed on the ballot.
She’s no. 1!
Karen Nason was pleased with the result writing, “I could not have been happier to have been placed in the number 1 position for mayor. It is an honor to be on the ballot and I promise to deliver on that number 1 position.”
Locations on the Hoboken Municipal Ballot in the 2017 non-partisan municipal elections were drawn at City Hall earlier today.
Here are the candidate appearances for the upcoming November 7th Election Day ballot. =&0=& Karen Nason Ravi Bhalla Mike DeFusco Jen Giattino Ron Bautista Anthony Romano =&1=& Josh Einstein Angelo Valente Michael Flett, Andrew Impastato, Vanessa Falco Dave Mello, Laini Hammond, Charles “Buddy” Matthews John Allen, Jim Doyle, Emily Ball Jabbour Jim Aibel, Jason Ellis, Sal StaraceThe Ballot (lower half, mayoral candidates left, council candidates right):
There’s yet another telephone poll going around Hoboken. Before the questions are bestowed on you the reader, a little word of warning about polls.
If the public is not provided the sample size, the number of likely voters or all voters, etc., you don’t know anything about the =&0=& of a poll. You’re not suppose to of course as this is paid for by private groups/campaigns for their use not to enlighten you the public. Between now and November, as earlier, you’ll hear select information about a poll, people talking about polls and “telling” you how to think about any poll(s). What they won’t be talking about is the full complete internals, the full data about any poll. The only value in a poll for the public is to see those details, if it’s a poll made public. Short of that, it’s a little game people play to try to manipulate your choice, wait for it, at the poll. It’s called propaganda. The one poll that actually counts is taken by the Hoboken public on November 7th, Election Day. In the interim, people will and have referenced “a poll” telling you how important it is for you to take this into account before you. You never get the details only what they want to tell you. Undoubtedly, it’s the candidate they are already backing as they look at you with whimsical eyes when possible, hoping you take the bait. Part of the entire poll game is to manipulate you to “join the inevitable,” what is called the “bandwagon effect.” Some may have noticed this psychological warfare didn’t work last November. As an example, an informal poll in Hoboken might show 50% or more of the eligible voters describing themselves as “Undecided.” Or they may not even ask if the person polled is undecided in order to generate a result. The polled would be voter may not even have a clear idea on who the candidates are in the race and hasn’t focused on who they may consider voting for in November. None of this would show up in a poll. The saying, garbage in, garbage out applies. Among this polled group of “undecideds,” many if not most may break to or away from a candidate late in the race because of an issue or revelations learned prior to Election Day. They may also choose to not vote at all. Keep this in mind when you hear anyone, =&1=& selling you a bill of goods about “a poll.” It’s why you don’t hear MSV talking up any poll in Hoboken in more than eight years. Hoboken is a small voting environment and the idea any scientific poll of any value being given to you for free is not only unlikely to happen, it won’t happen. So having shared the secret sauce on polling and polling manipulation in Hoboken and elsewhere, here’s reader questions submitted on the breaking Friday poll likely to stay around town for some days. No, it’s not scientific, your questions can vary. Often, questions can be changed, added or removed depending on what the people behind the poll are looking to do but that’s entirely a different story. =&2=& Are you a registered voter? Do you live in Hoboken? Do you hold any government position? =&3=&The Waiters v Romano complaint filed on behalf of whoever is behind Patty Waiters was heard earlier today in Hudson Superior Court.
The legal effort to see an injunction keeping Freeholder Romano from appearing on the ballot for Hoboken mayor and freeholder was denied by Administrative Judge Peter Bariso earlier today.
The complete legal decision follows:
Waiters vs Romano by Mile Square View on ScribdTalking Ed Note: The injunction is denied but the matter may be fully briefed for further court review. Let’s see what people decide to do on the issue. Based on the story that followed on Hudson County View, attorney Eric Dixon will make an emergency application with the NJ Appellate Court.
Word this morning is the dual ballot appearance legal challenge against Freeholder Anthony “Stick” Romano is scheduled for today.
Romano is set to appear on the November election ballot as a candidate for Hoboken mayor. He’s also the candidate on the Democrat line as he won the primary for re-election freeholder back in June.
All rise before the honorable Administrative Judge Peter Bariso in the case of Patty Waiters, re: the Shinny Penny Mike DeFusco vs. Anthony “Stick “Romano.
Most people didn’t see last week’s City Council meeting where the eruption of a $8.35 liability owed Suez, the water vendor was discussed. Many don’t care for reasons political and personal but the public is learning of it and about as thrilled as the last time they “discovered” bills in the $10 million ballpark in a prior administration.
Councilman Jim Doyle at last week’s discussion on Suez
and the $8.35 million liability owed. He along with the rest of
the council declined to sponsor the Administration’s proposed contract.Notice the calm demeanor of the council who was rebuffed from asking questions of the City auditor prior to the meeting.
Then ask yourself, what does not compute? The discussion shows a striking lack of intellectual curiosity among those working within the administration on the exploding million dollar costs.
