On August 28, The Record ran an article by Charles Stile about Joseph Ferriero's intention to challenge New Jersey's pay-to-play laws. The piece includes an interview with Dennis Oury, the lawyer for Ferriero's Bergen County Democratic Organization, who argues that pay-to-play is a myth manufactured by the press and government do-gooders.

In response, Senator Loretta Weinberg, Assemblyman Gordon Johnson and Assemblywoman Valerie Huttle sent a letter to Joseph Ferriero. Here is their letter:

August 28, 2007

Dear Joe,
 
We were quite amazed to read the Charles Stile Record article, "Lawyer Asks: What's Wrong With Pay-to-Play?".
 
According to this article, Dennis Oury will be going into court on behalf of the Bergen County Democratic Organization to strike down the state's landmark pay-to-play legislation.
 
As sponsors of this "landmark legislation" and as members of the Bergen County Democratic Legislative Delegation, all of whom voted for it, we wondered if we missed the Executive Committee meeting that authorized Mr. Oury to go into court on behalf of our organization?
 
Again, according to the article, "Pay-to-play is a myth, manufactured by the press and government do-gooders who never ran a race for dogcatcher, let alone a costly street fight for a county freeholder seat."   As three people who have run races in primaries and general elections from our district and county-wide, and as card carrying members of the "government do-gooders", we wonder what experience Mr. Oury has in any of these areas?
 
We are particularly concerned about our party taking a stand on this issue without the input of our leadership and rank and file. It is bad government, bad politics and bad timing just before an election.
 
Mr. Oury is entitled to do anything he wishes as a private citizen. However, as the party's lawyer and Chair of its Bylaws Committee, he has no right to take action on our behalf without full discussion.
 
We know that our constituents are concerned about important issues like property taxes, health care and the war in Iraq. We also know that pay-to-play adds to the increased cost of running government and our constituents know that too. For example, more than 2,000 Teaneck residents signed a petition to put a banning pay-to-play ordinance on the ballot this November. The Teaneck Council is now deciding whether to follow the leadership of their constituents.
 
Before this lawsuit progresses any further, we are requesting a full discussion within our party regarding this important issue.
 
Sincerely,
 
Loretta Weinberg, Senator, LD37
Gordon M. Johnson, Assemblyman, LD37
Valerie Vainieri Huttle, Assemblywoman, LD37

Today's Record includes another article by Charles Stile on this subject, including an interview with Joseph Ferriero himself.

On August 16, many of us who read The New York Times were intrigued to see a story datelined Englewood, N.J., entitled "Forced to Pick a Major in High School," on the front page. The story points out that Englewood is one of "a number of school districts around the country experimenting with high school majors." Students entering Dwight Morrow High School in September will be expected to select a major in sports management, fine and performing arts, health sciences, international studies and global commerce, communications and new media, or liberal arts. The major will determine what elective courses they take in addition to the state-mandated courses required of all students. Michael Polizzi, Assistant Superintendent, was quoted as saying the district carefully researched future demand for jobs and college programs, and surveyed student interests, before settling on these areas for majors. According to the article, the district has spent about $250,000 so far on the new specialties, hiring five new teachers and setting up advisory boards for each specialty including performing artists, doctors and lawyers.

The Times article does not say so, but this initiative is only part of the comprehensive changes which are taking place in the public schools. In February, we reported on the commendation which the district had received from State education officials for its progress in integrating the Academies@Englewood with the conventional Dwight Morrow High School. Students in the Academies already work in specialized areas, so the new majors are an important step in this process.

Politics
n. A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.
-The Devil's Dictionary, Ambrose Bierce

In Washington, we have seen the political abuse of the Justice Department. Who doubts that political considerations were behind the midterm firings of US Attorneys?  As well, even the most benign public health matters have fallen prey to politicization.   Former Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona stated that Administration officials discouraged him from attending the Special Olympics because it was founded by the Kennedy family!

In Bergen County, things are no different. On page one of this past Sunday's Record, we find the same old story.

Ever go to Rutherford's Williams Center?  Most likely not.  Apparently very few people in Rutherford do either. Nor do they donate to it.  But County Executive Dennis McNerney, who is on the bergenPAC board (!),  is throwing millions of County tax dollars at it while giving nothing -- ZILCH -- to bergenPAC.  Why be on the board if you won't steward the organization?

If we look at all of this through the lens of politics, the nonsensical starts making sense. After all, the Williams Center is where Ferrierocrat County Freeholder Bernadette McPherson holds yet another office concurrently: Mayor.  The County Machine is generous to its friends.  It'll give the shirt off YOUR back to them.

Let's make this short:

Englewood's Frank Huttle, husband of the Ferriero-independent Democratic Assemblywoman Valerie Huttle, is the founding president of the board of bergenPAC.

Eunice Kennedy Shriver and the Joseph Kennedy, Jr. Foundation founded the Special Olympics.

The Huttles should be proud.  The Huttles are to Ferriero and McNerney what the Kennedys are to Bush and Cheney.

Now, don't get me wrong.  I'd love to see the Williams Center right itself and thrive.  But the cart is before the horse.  County money is being thrown at the Williams Center before it has an artistic mission, an executive director,  real private support and a business plan. Where's the County leadership's fiduciary responsibility to us, the taxpayers?  Don't you need professionals with a plan before you spend our money? 

Perhaps the County Executive and Freeholders would like to deny the political narrative above and prove us wrong.  They could do so by giving as much support to our real/functional arts center in Englewood as it does to the virtual/dysfunctional one in Rutherford.

Is this another example of New Jersey living down to its inferiority complex?

New Jersey has two football teams that play on this side of the River but identify themselves as New York teams.  We have an NBA basketball franchise that is moving out to Brooklyn (!). We have a hockey team that deigned to stay here because it got a $377 million arena, mostly paid for by taxpayers.

And what about culture?

New York City spends over $130 million per year to maintain and support cultural assets.  It has dedicated an additional $800 million in capital funding for these assets over the next 4 years.  The Carnegie Hall board pays NYC exactly $1 per year to lease the world famous facility.  The same goes for the Metropolitan Museum of Art. $1 per year for rent.  Apparently New York City believes that the arts have something to do with the economy, value, soul and spirit of the place.  Recently, they have increased support to even more arts groups.

On the other hand, the entire State of New Jersey, the most taxed state in the nation and the most affluent per capita, spent a total of…I'm not making this up… $18 million in 2006!  Is that an acknowledgement of our dependence on NYC or merely a reflection of our governments' lack of regard for the quality of life, creativity, imagination  and, yes, economy of New Jersey?

Are we really just the clueless "bridge and tunnel crowd"  conned by and voting for our abusers, sleeping in the Tony Soprano State while commuting to more worthy places?  Perhaps we might consider insisting on something more befitting our true nature as NY-independent, energetic people living in a proud, self-sufficient state.

It's time for all of us to make our voices heard in the letters sections of the Record (letterstotheeditor@northjersey.com) and the Suburbanite (suburbanite@northjersey.com ) and in the halls of Hackensack (tpadilla@co.bergen.nj.us and webmchale@co.bergen.nj.us).

According to a recent edition of the highly regarded Kiplinger Washington newsletter, the issue of competence in government is high on a list of voter concerns. "The public has a lot to complain about: a badly managed war, poor care of wounded vets, porous borders, lost laptops with key data, food & drug safety, and now, falling bridges." One of the reasons for this sorry situation is "Bush’s distrust of bureaucrats. It crippled morale and led to an exodus of experienced workers...when government was needed...after Hurricane Katrina hit, for example...it wasn’t up to the job." It would appear that the next regime in Washington will have as large a job restoring credibility domestically as internationally.

Setting aside differing philosophies about the proper role of government, it is hard to argue logically that the governmental functions which exist shouldn’t be effectively carried out. Competence shouldn’t be taken for granted, but sought out and appreciated. There is a large and too often unappreciated body of professional civil servants, working not only on the federal level, but in state, county and local governments, which carry out the functions for which our elected officials take the credit and the blame.

This is just as true in the smaller arena which is Englewood. The responsibility of our elected officials (Mayor, Council members and Board of Education trustees) is to insure that the assigned functions of local government and public education are effectively carried out. But for this our officials inevitably depend heavily on the competence of paid professionals. Since the current city charter went into effect in 1980, the chief executive of our municipal government has been the City Manager, who serves at the pleasure of the 5-person City Council. In the schools it is the Superintendent who has a similar role.

Some of the persons who served on Englewood’s Charter Commission in the late 1970s still live here. The change which they recommended, and which was approved by referendum in 1979, was to a City Manager form of local government, with all except senior level municipal personnel decisions under the sole authority of a non-political professional City Manager. The objective was to minimize political considerations and maximize competency. Our success in realizing this objective over the last 27 years has varied.

At the present time, our local government is in a state of transition, since the Council this year has chosen to replace an unsatisfactory Manager, and is working with a temporary Manager while conducting a search for a permanent replacement. It should go without saying that their choice, expected soon, will be of great importance.

Last Thursday, we posted a letter from an Englewood homeowner whose property taxes more than doubled in this year's tax revaluation. We received a number of responses from readers that ranged from sympathy (“I know another person whose increased tax bill ruined her deal to sell her house.”) to antipathy (“Why it is always the people in wards 1 and 2 who are crying for mercy?”).

However, as we learned from Sunday's Record, modest properties, not luxury homes, are being hit the hardest by Englewood's tax revaluation. The Record reports:

Owners of half of the most modest homes will see their taxes jump by at least 25 percent, while more than half of owners of the most luxurious residences will get tax cuts.

Indeed, middle-class families are getting hit the hardest. According to an article in New Jersey Monthly, nearly 75,000 more people left the state than moved in this past year. And the ones moving in are wealthier than the ones leaving. Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, explains:

The state is losing two-income middle-class families, the backbone of New Jersey’s economy, because they decide they can’t make it here.

We could see this very trend in Englewood. The Record interviewed one resident whose modest home on Third Street rose in taxable value by 211%. According to this resident, "I'm going to sell it and move. It's too much." Meanwhile, a retired supermarket cashier is concerned she won't be able to sell her home on Van Nostrand Avenue at its higher tax rate, wondering, "How are they going to want to buy a house with those kind of taxes?"

But, what is driving these tax increases? According to the appraiser who performed Englewood's revaluation, it's the growing demand for inexpensive homes. The Bergen Record explains:

Englewood's housing market has one of the largest supply of lower-end housing in Bergen County -- most within a mile from sprawling estates.

Indeed, the problems caused by the reassessment to individual taxpayers shouldn't be confused with the problems of municipal expenses.  The City Council has no control over the relative values of properties.  That is the job of the tax appraiser.

It takes no special financial expertise to see which way the wind is blowing. Those in modest homes with modest cashflows need a financial “Plan B” for the possibility that things won’t get better any time soon, either locally or nationally.

Most disturbingly, for some, Plan B may mean moving out.

For the first time in several years, Fourth Ward Councilman Jack Drakeford has an opponent in this year's November election. On the ballot is Dierdre Glenn Paul, who is against him as an Independent Democrat. Dr. Paul is a Montclair State University Professor, a fourteen-year resident of Englewood, a divorced single parent, and an active union officer. She believes the residents of the Fourth Ward need a representative on the City Council who will more effectively address their concerns. We agree.

Jack Drakeford has been arguably the most powerful politician in Englewood in much of the last two decades. A lifetime resident of Englewood, he has served at various times as Fourth Ward Councilman, as City Clerk, as City Manager, and as President of the Board of Education. Despite holding these positions, he has generally avoided the limelight, using his influence behind the scenes to attain his objectives. Those objectives have too often been the financial benefit of himself and his friends.

The most important upward step in Drakeford’s career was his appointment in 1985 as City Manager. Accomplished by a 3-2 vote on the City Council, his appointment triggered an unsuccessful suit by concerned citizens alleging his lack of qualification for the position. As City Manager he had authority over all City departments and all except senior level hiring decisions. Under Drakeford, the number of City employees grew to a record high, requiring considerable staff reduction by his successor. Following his retirement in 1994, an anonymous whistle-blower embarrassed the Council by documenting a series of overgenerous retirement packages which had been approved by Drakeford for favored employees. Drakeford himself was generously treated by the Council, receiving a substantial retirement package and a post-retirement consulting contract with vaguely defined duties.

Having formed a political alliance with then Mayor Donald Aronson, Drakeford transferred his interest to the Board of Education. Aronson appointed him to the Board in 1993, and followed up by appointing other compliant persons, thus giving Drakeford control. Drakeford hounded the superintendent of schools into resigning, and replaced him with a new superintendent so unsatisfactory that a later Board felt it had no choice but to buy out his contract. Drakeford’s absenteeism from Board meetings and lack of interest in much of the Board’s business became notorious. The public school system is only now emerging from the disastrous consequences of the Drakeford era.

Drakeford’s successor as City Manager was Robert Benecke, who had worked closely with him as Finance Director. Although as professionally qualified as Drakeford was not, Benecke protected his political flank by continuing to work with him, especially after Drakeford was elected to the Council in 1998. With the cooperation of Benecke and his City Council colleagues, Drakeford was able to effectively control the City government from that time until January, 2006, when a newly elected majority of the Council no longer accepted his leadership. During this time, Drakeford forged a relationship with Bergen County Democratic boss Joseph Ferriero, and cooperated with him and others to bring a series of lucrative and controversial construction projects to Englewood. With Ferriero’s backing, Drakeford is Chair of the Bergen County Special Services School District.

As a result of changes in the membership of the City Council, Drakeford’s influence in Englewood has been reduced. Repudiation by his Fourth Ward constituents would further that process and contribute to the restoration of responsible local government in our City.

The Englewood Report has written about the pay-to-play corruption that has hurt our local politics and has allowed insiders to worsen our quality of life.  With the new Clean Election Program, we now have the opportunity to challenge this pay-to-play system. What is the Clean Elections Program? According to its website:

This project is a milestone in the political history of this State and seeks to halt the erosion of public confidence in the political process by instituting a voluntary‚ publicly funded campaign finance system for legislative office and is designed to remove access to large contributions‚ which is a major impediment to a citizen’s influence within the political process.

And how does it work?

A Fair and Clean Candidate in the 2007 general election must raise between 400 and 800 contributions of $10 each from registered voters within the district. Any candidate who meets this requirement and who refuses to accept contributions from other sources is eligible to receive public financing under the Clean Elections Act.

So for only $10 per candidate, we can be part of this new program to rid our political system of pay-to-play money. This is a small price to pay for a huge investment in our political system. We encourage our readers to get involved in this pilot program.

Last week, Tenafly Councilwoman Carol Hoernlein wrote about the District 37 legislators' participation in the Clean Elections Program on BlueJersey.com. This is what she had to say:

The District 37 team of Weinberg, Huttle, and Johnson needs your help in participating in the Clean Elections program.  They need to each get one check for $10 - a total of $30 - from 800 registered voters in District 37 to participate. The towns in District 37 are: Bergenfield, Bogota, Englewood, Englewood Cliffs, Hackensack, Leonia, Maywood, Palisades Park, Ridgefield Park, Rochelle Park, Teaneck and Tenafly. 

HOW TO PARTICIPATE:
I was mailed the forms but you can download them here.

At the top of each form  (you'll need one for each candidate) write in:
• Clean Election Fund of Loretta Weinberg for Senate

• Clean Election Fund of Gordon M. Johnson for Assembly

• Clean Election Fund of Valerie Vaineiri Huttle for Assembly

Fill out and sign all 3 forms.

Make out 3 separate checks to:
• Clean Election Fund of Loretta Weinberg

• Clean Election Fund of Gordon M. Johnson

• Clean Election Fund of Valerie Huttle

Mail all 3 forms and 3 checks (snailmail) to:
• P.O. Box 3392, Teaneck, NJ 07666
• Use 2 Stamps!

The GOOD NEWS:  
You only need to send in $10 for each candidate.
You don't have to be a registered Democrat to participate.

The BAD NEWS: 
You can only send in $10 per candidate.
You must be a Registered Voter in District 37.


DEADLINES:
• August 10th:  The first 400 contributions to each candidate in by this deadline allows the candidates to have the name "Clean Elections Candidate" printed on the ballot alongside of each candidate's name with an accompanying 250 word candidate statement - it's like free advertising right in the voting booth.  That first 400 donors for each candidate, also gets each candidate the first $50,000 installment of Clean Elections campaign grant money.
• September 30: A total of 800 separate $10 donations to each candidate must be in and completed in order to fully qualify for the entire $100,000 in campaign grant money for each candidate. 
 
So, lets all help out Weinberg, Huttle and Johnson - lets make Clean Elections work.  We can do this.

I have lived on Howard Place in Englewood since 1979, and have been a homeowner on this block for over twenty of these years. Yet the events of the summer of 2007 have thrown my husband and me into budgetary shock and deep self-examination about the lack of protection ordinary citizens enjoy in our town.

Let’s start with the early July letter telling us to pay $3,131.53 in quarterly homeowner taxes by August 1, 2007, instead of our customary $1,349.74.

We did learn in the Suburbanite, and later in a letter from the city dated July 11, 2007, that our anticipated tax burden would not be three times our normal amount, but only a modest 60+ percent increase.

How does the city respond?

Charlotte Bennett Schoen recommends that

1. We take the bridge loan offered by the City of $1,500 at 8% interest
2. We appeal our appraisal in 2008
3. We cannot get an extension on this year’s taxes, or a phase in of the new tax burden, because “State Law” would prohibit this

Michael Wildes responded by saying that

1. The City Council spends irresponsibly
2. He has attempted to encourage development in the City in order to lower taxes.

So, who is responsible? You got it. Not the City Council. Not the Mayor. Ordinary citizens are responsible for the taxes, and we have no legal recourse with the city or state in the face of unprecedented, unanticipated, and confiscatory rate hikes.

I ask like minded citizens to put our heads together and think of what power we can bring to bear to make the City of Englewood usher in new tax rates in a gradual and compassionate manner for its citizens.

Carole DeVito
Englewood