(Trenton) - Legislation sponsored by Assemblywomen Annette Quijano and Valerie Vainieri Huttle to protect some of the state's most vulnerable residents from having their rights abused by assisted living facilities and personal care homes has been signed into law.
The new law (S-2458/A-3732) will strengthen protections for these patients by codifying into law the more than 40 rights designed to protect a patient's safety, well-being and privacy; and requiring each facility to provide patients with a copy of these rights.
"Assisted living facilities care for some of our most vulnerable residents, many of whom are in the twilight of their life," said Quijano (D-Union). "It's morally incumbent upon us to ensure that they are taken care of with a measure of dignity and respect. Hopefully this law will help people sleep easier at night, knowing their loved one is being cared for in a dignified manner."
The legislation was born out of a 2009 report by the state Public Advocate, which found that Assisted Living Concepts was violating its Certificate of Need (the license obtained by the state) by attempting to kick out patients when they ran out of money and became Medicaid-eligible.
"When you have a loved one, particularly a mother or father, who is being cared for by a licensed facility, you hope and pray that they are in the best hands," said Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen). "But this shouldn't be left to chance. We need to put the weight of law behind it to make sure they are receiving the best treatment in a fair manner."
The law will require assisted living facilities and comprehensive personal care homes to distribute the statement of resident rights to each resident, and post it in a conspicuous, public place in the facility or home.
In addition, the law requires providers to inform each resident, the resident's family member, and the resident's legally appointed guardian, if applicable, of the resident's rights, provide explanations if needed, and ensure that each resident, or the resident's legally appointed guardian, as applicable, signs a copy of the statement of rights.
The measure also builds upon a law (A-3405) passed in January, and sponsored by Vainieri Huttle, that ensures that Medicaid-eligible residents of a state-licensed assisted living residence or comprehensive personal care home, which has promised not to discharge residents who become Medicaid-eligible, are able to reside in another such facility if the former facility opts to surrender its license after making that promise.
The law will take effect 30 days from today.
Friday, April 29, 2011
New Jersey Leading Nation in Fight to Protect Newborns
O'Donnell, Wagner, Ramos Bill Requiring Non-Invasive Test at Birth Will Save Lives
(Trenton) - The State Senate on Thursday approved a bill sponsored by Assembly members Jason O'Donnell, Connie Wagner and Ruben Ramos that could make New Jersey a leader nationwide in the movement to implement a non-invasive, low-cost test that will save newborns' lives.
The measure (A-3744/S-2752), passed unanimously by both houses, would require a pulse oximetry, or "pulse ox," test at least 24 hours post-birth to identify Congenital Heart Disease (CHD). With only a handful of other states having similar measures pending, New Jersey could be the first state in the nation to legislatively implement the life-saving measure if signed into law soon.
"I am proud that New Jersey is setting an example for the rest of the nation by requiring the pulse ox test to save babies lives," said O'Donnell (D-Hudson), whose third child was born with CHD. "This bill is common sense. We have a mandatory check for hearing on newborns, and it's about time we establish a mandatory check for life-threatening heart defects."
CHD is the most common birth defect in infants, with approximately one in 100 children born with some type of structural problem in the heart, most of which are not diagnosed prior to birth. Such structural problems impact the flow of blood through the heart, lungs, and brain.
Some types of CHD cause no or very few health problems for the infants, while others bring a significant risk of morbidity and mortality if not diagnosed soon after birth. Failing to detect critical CHD prior to letting the child go home can lead to life-threatening events including cardiogenic shock, and organ failure.
"With the passage of this bill, New Jersey is leading the way in improving how we deal with newborn screenings in this day in age," said Wagner (D-Bergen). "One test will not only protect newborns and parents, but also hospitals and doctors. I can think of no better present for any future parent than to know that we are putting into place a measure that will protect their child."
The pulse ox is a simple, non-invasive and painless test used to measure the percent of oxygen in the blood. The pulse ox is placed on the baby's foot by a sticky strip, like a band-aid, and takes just a few minutes to perform. A low pulse oximetry reading would prompt a doctor or nurse practitioner to ask for more testing, such as a heart ultrasound or echocardiogram. While the pulse oximetry test may not identify all CHD, it is a significant and sensible step toward early detection.
"Even one newborn saved through this test will make this bill worthwhile," said Ramos (D-Hudson). "This is a simple, common-sense way to protect the lives of our children while also giving parents peace of mind."
Other states are working on similar bills, including Indiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Tennessee. Minnesota has already implemented the requirement, however, it was done through a mandate by the state's health department, rather than legislatively.
On a national level, the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children (SACHDNC) worked the past two years with the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Cardiology, and the American Heart Association to establish standardized federal recommendations for screening and diagnostic follow-up of CHD issues.
The U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, just last week stated that there is critical importance of screening for CHD. She has tasked the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Newborn and Child Screenings (ICCNCS) with immediately (within 90 days) reviewing and closing any gaps within and providing a plan of action to implement the SACHDNC's five recommendations for a national standard of screening and diagnostic follow-up.
(Trenton) - The State Senate on Thursday approved a bill sponsored by Assembly members Jason O'Donnell, Connie Wagner and Ruben Ramos that could make New Jersey a leader nationwide in the movement to implement a non-invasive, low-cost test that will save newborns' lives.
The measure (A-3744/S-2752), passed unanimously by both houses, would require a pulse oximetry, or "pulse ox," test at least 24 hours post-birth to identify Congenital Heart Disease (CHD). With only a handful of other states having similar measures pending, New Jersey could be the first state in the nation to legislatively implement the life-saving measure if signed into law soon.
"I am proud that New Jersey is setting an example for the rest of the nation by requiring the pulse ox test to save babies lives," said O'Donnell (D-Hudson), whose third child was born with CHD. "This bill is common sense. We have a mandatory check for hearing on newborns, and it's about time we establish a mandatory check for life-threatening heart defects."
CHD is the most common birth defect in infants, with approximately one in 100 children born with some type of structural problem in the heart, most of which are not diagnosed prior to birth. Such structural problems impact the flow of blood through the heart, lungs, and brain.
Some types of CHD cause no or very few health problems for the infants, while others bring a significant risk of morbidity and mortality if not diagnosed soon after birth. Failing to detect critical CHD prior to letting the child go home can lead to life-threatening events including cardiogenic shock, and organ failure.
"With the passage of this bill, New Jersey is leading the way in improving how we deal with newborn screenings in this day in age," said Wagner (D-Bergen). "One test will not only protect newborns and parents, but also hospitals and doctors. I can think of no better present for any future parent than to know that we are putting into place a measure that will protect their child."
The pulse ox is a simple, non-invasive and painless test used to measure the percent of oxygen in the blood. The pulse ox is placed on the baby's foot by a sticky strip, like a band-aid, and takes just a few minutes to perform. A low pulse oximetry reading would prompt a doctor or nurse practitioner to ask for more testing, such as a heart ultrasound or echocardiogram. While the pulse oximetry test may not identify all CHD, it is a significant and sensible step toward early detection.
"Even one newborn saved through this test will make this bill worthwhile," said Ramos (D-Hudson). "This is a simple, common-sense way to protect the lives of our children while also giving parents peace of mind."
Other states are working on similar bills, including Indiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Tennessee. Minnesota has already implemented the requirement, however, it was done through a mandate by the state's health department, rather than legislatively.
On a national level, the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children (SACHDNC) worked the past two years with the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Cardiology, and the American Heart Association to establish standardized federal recommendations for screening and diagnostic follow-up of CHD issues.
The U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, just last week stated that there is critical importance of screening for CHD. She has tasked the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Newborn and Child Screenings (ICCNCS) with immediately (within 90 days) reviewing and closing any gaps within and providing a plan of action to implement the SACHDNC's five recommendations for a national standard of screening and diagnostic follow-up.
Greenwald, Barnes, Johnson, Pou & Moriarty Small Business Tax Cut Bill Signed Into Law
Bill Similar to One Vetoed By Governor; Then Included in Budget Proposal 4 Days Later
(Trenton) - Assembly Democratic legislation sponsored by Lou Greenwald, Peter J. Barnes III, Gordon Johnson, Nellie Pou and Paul Moriarty to provide a vital tax break to small businesses that employ many New Jerseyans has been signed into law.
The new law (S-2754/A-3870) is a slightly revised version of measure (A-3535) approved in January by the Legislature, only to be vetoed by the governor, then included in his budget plan four days later.
"Businesses could have already been taking advantage of this important tax cut if it wasn't for the governor's nonsensical veto, but as they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so I'm pleased to see this bill signed into law," said Greenwald (D-Camden). "If we're going to create jobs and build a stronger economy, we need to protect the small businesses that are the lifeblood of this state. It's time to get rid of archaic tax rules that inhibit job creation and economic growth."
"Small businesses must be a priority as we position New Jersey's economy to thrive," said Barnes (D-Middlesex). "Our small businesses must be free to use creativity and innovation they're famous for to create jobs and spark economic growth throughout our state."
"This change will make it easier for entrepreneurs to invest in and establish new businesses by allowing them to balance losses from one venture with the gains from their established, profitable entities," said Johnson (D-Bergen). "It's a great gain for our business community."
"The law provides sole proprietors and other small business owners with a tax cut by requiring the tax code to treat them the same way as it does larger corporations," said Pou (D-Passaic/Bergen).
"This is a vital piece of ensuring New Jersey's small businesses can thrive and create jobs, positioning our state for success," said Moriarty (D-Gloucester/Camden). "It's unfortunate others have played games with this bill and delayed its benefits, but we're committed to fighting for job creation and helping small businesses succeed."
Under current law, New Jersey's personal income tax is calculated through 16 separately defined categories of income.
Unlike the federal tax code and the tax laws of 48 other states, state tax law does not permit filers who generate income from different types of businesses to offset gains derived from one business entity with losses sustained from another.
The new law establishes an alternative business calculation under the gross income tax as a mechanism that permits taxpayers who generate income from different types of business entities to offset gains from one type of business with losses from another, and permits taxpayers to carry forward business-related losses for a period of up to 20 taxable years.
The law phases in the tax savings over five years beginning with tax year 2012. Once fully implemented, the maximum savings will be equal to 50 percent of the savings that would accrue from unlimited netting between these income categories and the net loss carry forward.
The law will also give small business owners the same ability to recoup losses over 20 years that large corporations currently enjoy under a Greenwald bill signed into law two years ago.
(Trenton) - Assembly Democratic legislation sponsored by Lou Greenwald, Peter J. Barnes III, Gordon Johnson, Nellie Pou and Paul Moriarty to provide a vital tax break to small businesses that employ many New Jerseyans has been signed into law.
The new law (S-2754/A-3870) is a slightly revised version of measure (A-3535) approved in January by the Legislature, only to be vetoed by the governor, then included in his budget plan four days later.
"Businesses could have already been taking advantage of this important tax cut if it wasn't for the governor's nonsensical veto, but as they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so I'm pleased to see this bill signed into law," said Greenwald (D-Camden). "If we're going to create jobs and build a stronger economy, we need to protect the small businesses that are the lifeblood of this state. It's time to get rid of archaic tax rules that inhibit job creation and economic growth."
"Small businesses must be a priority as we position New Jersey's economy to thrive," said Barnes (D-Middlesex). "Our small businesses must be free to use creativity and innovation they're famous for to create jobs and spark economic growth throughout our state."
"This change will make it easier for entrepreneurs to invest in and establish new businesses by allowing them to balance losses from one venture with the gains from their established, profitable entities," said Johnson (D-Bergen). "It's a great gain for our business community."
"The law provides sole proprietors and other small business owners with a tax cut by requiring the tax code to treat them the same way as it does larger corporations," said Pou (D-Passaic/Bergen).
"This is a vital piece of ensuring New Jersey's small businesses can thrive and create jobs, positioning our state for success," said Moriarty (D-Gloucester/Camden). "It's unfortunate others have played games with this bill and delayed its benefits, but we're committed to fighting for job creation and helping small businesses succeed."
Under current law, New Jersey's personal income tax is calculated through 16 separately defined categories of income.
Unlike the federal tax code and the tax laws of 48 other states, state tax law does not permit filers who generate income from different types of businesses to offset gains derived from one business entity with losses sustained from another.
The new law establishes an alternative business calculation under the gross income tax as a mechanism that permits taxpayers who generate income from different types of business entities to offset gains from one type of business with losses from another, and permits taxpayers to carry forward business-related losses for a period of up to 20 taxable years.
The law phases in the tax savings over five years beginning with tax year 2012. Once fully implemented, the maximum savings will be equal to 50 percent of the savings that would accrue from unlimited netting between these income categories and the net loss carry forward.
The law will also give small business owners the same ability to recoup losses over 20 years that large corporations currently enjoy under a Greenwald bill signed into law two years ago.
McKeon & Stender Praise Move to Criminalize 'Bath Salts'
Will Pack a Powerful One-Two Punch Along with Pending Legislation to Crackdown on the Dangerous Substance
(Trenton) - Assembly members John F. McKeon and Linda Stender today praised the state Attorney General's Office and the Division of Consumer Affairs for adding bath salts to the list of controlled dangerous substances, a move that will pack a powerful one-two punch along with legislation the lawmakers are sponsoring to combat the dangerously misleading substance.
McKeon and Stender announced plans in March to introduce legislation to crackdown on the dangerous practice of selling illegal drugs disguised as bath salts.
"This is a smart move to get these dangerous substances off the market immediately," said McKeon (D-Essex). "I'm glad the Attorney General's Office and the Division of Consumer Affairs have moved quickly to address the problem. I'm looking forward to introducing our legislation next week so we can codify the measure into law and ensure that stiff penalties are in place."
"It's truly unnerving the way these substances were slipped onto the market disguised as 'bath salts,'" said Stender (D-Middlesex/Somerset/Union). "Given the dangerous and deadly side effects that have been reported, it is comforting to see the Attorney General and Consumer Affairs acting swiftly to address the issue. While this will get it off the market immediately, our legislation will help ensure that stiff penalties are in place for anyone selling or buying the substance."
The measure, which McKeon and Stender are expected to introduce next Thursday, would criminalize the possession and sale of products containing narcotic substances such as mephedrone or methylenedioxpyrovalerone, commonly known as MDPV that are being sold over the counter as "bath salts" and are easily available at gas stations, convenience stores or head shops.
It would make it a crime of the third degree in New Jersey to manufacture, distribute, dispense, or possess products containing mephedrone or methylenedioxpyrovalerone. The offense would be punishable by a three to five year term of imprisonment, a $15,000 fine or both.
Some of the after affects of using these products, which are believed to be highly addictive, include high blood pressure, increased heart rate, agitation, hallucinations, extreme paranoia, delusions, and suicidal thoughts.
Users experience an intense high, extreme energy, hallucinations, insomnia and are easily provoked to anger, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which is currently investigating the drugs.
These products have emerged as legal alternatives to cocaine and methamphetamines, and one or both have already been banned in the European Union, Australia, Canada, and Israel.
In the United States, Florida, Louisiana, and North Dakota have all recently banned the substances.
(Trenton) - Assembly members John F. McKeon and Linda Stender today praised the state Attorney General's Office and the Division of Consumer Affairs for adding bath salts to the list of controlled dangerous substances, a move that will pack a powerful one-two punch along with legislation the lawmakers are sponsoring to combat the dangerously misleading substance.
McKeon and Stender announced plans in March to introduce legislation to crackdown on the dangerous practice of selling illegal drugs disguised as bath salts.
"This is a smart move to get these dangerous substances off the market immediately," said McKeon (D-Essex). "I'm glad the Attorney General's Office and the Division of Consumer Affairs have moved quickly to address the problem. I'm looking forward to introducing our legislation next week so we can codify the measure into law and ensure that stiff penalties are in place."
"It's truly unnerving the way these substances were slipped onto the market disguised as 'bath salts,'" said Stender (D-Middlesex/Somerset/Union). "Given the dangerous and deadly side effects that have been reported, it is comforting to see the Attorney General and Consumer Affairs acting swiftly to address the issue. While this will get it off the market immediately, our legislation will help ensure that stiff penalties are in place for anyone selling or buying the substance."
The measure, which McKeon and Stender are expected to introduce next Thursday, would criminalize the possession and sale of products containing narcotic substances such as mephedrone or methylenedioxpyrovalerone, commonly known as MDPV that are being sold over the counter as "bath salts" and are easily available at gas stations, convenience stores or head shops.
It would make it a crime of the third degree in New Jersey to manufacture, distribute, dispense, or possess products containing mephedrone or methylenedioxpyrovalerone. The offense would be punishable by a three to five year term of imprisonment, a $15,000 fine or both.
Some of the after affects of using these products, which are believed to be highly addictive, include high blood pressure, increased heart rate, agitation, hallucinations, extreme paranoia, delusions, and suicidal thoughts.
Users experience an intense high, extreme energy, hallucinations, insomnia and are easily provoked to anger, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which is currently investigating the drugs.
These products have emerged as legal alternatives to cocaine and methamphetamines, and one or both have already been banned in the European Union, Australia, Canada, and Israel.
In the United States, Florida, Louisiana, and North Dakota have all recently banned the substances.
Job-Creating Greenwald, Milam, Spencer & Pou Democratic Corporate Tax Reform Now Law
(Trenton) - Job-creating Assembly Democratic corporate tax reform legislation sponsored by Lou Greenwald, Matthew W. Milam and L. Grace Spencer to create jobs and economic growth was signed into law on Thursday by the governor.
The law (A-3869) modifies the business tax formula used to determine the corporate income subject to tax by the state from a three-factor formula to a single sales factor formula.
It's a slightly revised version of a measure (A-1676) approved in January by the Legislature, only to be vetoed by the governor, then included in his budget plan four days later.
"It's unfortunate that the governor turned this into a soapbox tussle that delayed its implementation and hurt businesses, but we weren't going to waver from our commitment to helping businesses create jobs," said Greenwald (D-Camden). "This change will, quite simply, give New Jersey businesses significant tax relief as they continue to work through the recession. Ensuring our businesses have the flexibility then need to create and retain jobs and reinvigorate our economy is a priority."
"Anything we can do to give businesses the ability to hire, expand and invest in New Jersey is a smart approach," said Milam (D-Atlantic/Cape May/Cumberland). "We need to make certain New Jersey businesses have the confidence needed to spark economic development. This change will help provide that confidence at a time when businesses need it most."
"Businesses need to know that operating in New Jersey will give them the competitive edge they need to grow and prosper," said Spencer (D-Essex). "New Jersey's workers also need that confidence. With this law, we will be giving the businesses that employ hard-working New Jerseyans a greater chance to succeed."
"We continue to fight for job creation, and this law is a key part of that effort," said Pou (D-Passaic/Bergen). "Businesses need the flexibility provided by this law to create jobs and stay competitive with other states. It's disappointing the governor delayed its benefits, but economic growth is our priority."
Each state that imposes a corporate income tax determines the portion of the total income of a corporation subject to state tax using by using formulas that measure specific activities of the corporation assigned to that state. The portion of the income of the corporation subject to tax by a state is determined by the proportion of some activity in the state to the total of such activity of the corporation.
This law replaces the three-factor formula with a single sales factor formula.
The change is phased in over three years, beginning with privilege periods beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2012 but before Jan. 1, 2013.
The law (A-3869) modifies the business tax formula used to determine the corporate income subject to tax by the state from a three-factor formula to a single sales factor formula.
It's a slightly revised version of a measure (A-1676) approved in January by the Legislature, only to be vetoed by the governor, then included in his budget plan four days later.
"It's unfortunate that the governor turned this into a soapbox tussle that delayed its implementation and hurt businesses, but we weren't going to waver from our commitment to helping businesses create jobs," said Greenwald (D-Camden). "This change will, quite simply, give New Jersey businesses significant tax relief as they continue to work through the recession. Ensuring our businesses have the flexibility then need to create and retain jobs and reinvigorate our economy is a priority."
"Anything we can do to give businesses the ability to hire, expand and invest in New Jersey is a smart approach," said Milam (D-Atlantic/Cape May/Cumberland). "We need to make certain New Jersey businesses have the confidence needed to spark economic development. This change will help provide that confidence at a time when businesses need it most."
"Businesses need to know that operating in New Jersey will give them the competitive edge they need to grow and prosper," said Spencer (D-Essex). "New Jersey's workers also need that confidence. With this law, we will be giving the businesses that employ hard-working New Jerseyans a greater chance to succeed."
"We continue to fight for job creation, and this law is a key part of that effort," said Pou (D-Passaic/Bergen). "Businesses need the flexibility provided by this law to create jobs and stay competitive with other states. It's disappointing the governor delayed its benefits, but economic growth is our priority."
Each state that imposes a corporate income tax determines the portion of the total income of a corporation subject to state tax using by using formulas that measure specific activities of the corporation assigned to that state. The portion of the income of the corporation subject to tax by a state is determined by the proportion of some activity in the state to the total of such activity of the corporation.
This law replaces the three-factor formula with a single sales factor formula.
The change is phased in over three years, beginning with privilege periods beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2012 but before Jan. 1, 2013.
Assemblyman Gordon Johnson: Governor's Cut in Food & Nutrition Programs Once Again Push Burden Onto New Jersey's Working Class
(Trenton) - Assemblyman Gordon Johnson (D-Bergen) released the following statement on Thursday as the Assembly Budget Committee heard testimony on Gov. Chris Christie's cuts in food and nutrition services:
"It's amazing - and unfortunate - that the governor continues to vow to protect tax cuts for millionaires yet doesn't hesitate about cutting food and nutrition assistance for families and children suffering in this difficult economy.
"The governor's budget aims to cut the food assistance program by $100,000 and continues to fail to fund the school breakfast program so vital to the ability of many children to properly learn and succeed in school.
"Like so many of the governor's proposals, these short-sighted decisions will only cost taxpayers more - a lot more - down the road.
"If we're to be judged by our ability to care for the least fortunate among us, then the governor's budget plan will once again fail to pass that test. It deserves an 'F.'"
"It's amazing - and unfortunate - that the governor continues to vow to protect tax cuts for millionaires yet doesn't hesitate about cutting food and nutrition assistance for families and children suffering in this difficult economy.
"The governor's budget aims to cut the food assistance program by $100,000 and continues to fail to fund the school breakfast program so vital to the ability of many children to properly learn and succeed in school.
"Like so many of the governor's proposals, these short-sighted decisions will only cost taxpayers more - a lot more - down the road.
"If we're to be judged by our ability to care for the least fortunate among us, then the governor's budget plan will once again fail to pass that test. It deserves an 'F.'"
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Assemblyman Coughlin: "Demonizing Toll Collectors During Privatization Debate is Unprofessional and Unnecessary"
(Woodbridge) - After attending a rally held by toll workers opposed to privatizing toll collection on New Jersey's toll roads Wednesday, Assemblyman Craig J. Coughlin (D-Middlesex) issued the following statement:
"Enough is enough. Every working class group that has an ideological disagreement with the Christie administration does not deserve to suddenly be painted as the root cause of everything that is wrong with New Jersey. Continuing to describe them as such is both unprofessional and unnecessary.
"The toll workers offered up a serious series of compromises totaling $35 million in savings to taxpayers to keep their jobs and prevent a move to privatization. It should be considered.
"The current privatization plans being discussed will do two things: toss hard-working middle class men and women onto the state's unemployment lines and bring a fresh crop of green workers into Turnpike and Parkway toll booths just in time for the summer rush of shore traffic. Neither outcome benefits taxpayers or makes any sense, unless - like the Christie administration - you count yourself a champion of privatization for privatization's sake.
"As one of the legislators who represents the district where the Turnpike and Parkway meet, on behalf of my constituents I urge the Turnpike Authority and the Governor to reconsider this mad rush towards privatization, before it's too late.
"Enough is enough. Every working class group that has an ideological disagreement with the Christie administration does not deserve to suddenly be painted as the root cause of everything that is wrong with New Jersey. Continuing to describe them as such is both unprofessional and unnecessary.
"The toll workers offered up a serious series of compromises totaling $35 million in savings to taxpayers to keep their jobs and prevent a move to privatization. It should be considered.
"The current privatization plans being discussed will do two things: toss hard-working middle class men and women onto the state's unemployment lines and bring a fresh crop of green workers into Turnpike and Parkway toll booths just in time for the summer rush of shore traffic. Neither outcome benefits taxpayers or makes any sense, unless - like the Christie administration - you count yourself a champion of privatization for privatization's sake.
"As one of the legislators who represents the district where the Turnpike and Parkway meet, on behalf of my constituents I urge the Turnpike Authority and the Governor to reconsider this mad rush towards privatization, before it's too late.
Assemblyman Giblin: "Ignoring Past Record of Failure, Republicans Again Rushing to Embrace Privatization
(Montclair) - Assemblyman Thomas P. Giblin (D-Essex), a member of the Assembly Transportation, Public Works and Independent Authorities Committee, issued the following statement on the Christie administration's attempt to privatize toll collection services on the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway:
"To say that Republicans in New Jersey have a less than stellar record on privatization of transportation services would be charitable.
"The State Commission of Investigation called the 1998 privatization of motor vehicle inspections under Parsons, which wasted tens of million of dollars and caused huge lines at state inspection station, a 'massive boondoggle' in one of several critical audits.
"And implementation of E-ZPass on the Turnpike in 2000 only occurred after $16 million in cost overruns and a two and a half year delay.
"With that kind of abysmal track record, there is nothing indicating that the Republicans' latest attempt at privatization - handing New Jersey's toll collection services over to private industry - will have any different results than their previous attempts.
"The main goal of a public works project, like toll collection, is there in the title - to work for the benefit of the public - whereas the main goal of a private company is to make money for its owners.
"This is something the administration should take to heart and it's something New Jersey residents should remember as they watch their taxes continue to rise while seeing the quality of the services they're receiving continue to decrease.
"To say that Republicans in New Jersey have a less than stellar record on privatization of transportation services would be charitable.
"The State Commission of Investigation called the 1998 privatization of motor vehicle inspections under Parsons, which wasted tens of million of dollars and caused huge lines at state inspection station, a 'massive boondoggle' in one of several critical audits.
"And implementation of E-ZPass on the Turnpike in 2000 only occurred after $16 million in cost overruns and a two and a half year delay.
"With that kind of abysmal track record, there is nothing indicating that the Republicans' latest attempt at privatization - handing New Jersey's toll collection services over to private industry - will have any different results than their previous attempts.
"The main goal of a public works project, like toll collection, is there in the title - to work for the benefit of the public - whereas the main goal of a private company is to make money for its owners.
"This is something the administration should take to heart and it's something New Jersey residents should remember as they watch their taxes continue to rise while seeing the quality of the services they're receiving continue to decrease.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
ASSEMBLY PANEL TO EXAMINE BUDGET PLANS FOR MILITARY & VETERANS, AGRICULTURE & JUDICIARY
(TRENTON) – The Assembly Budget Committee on Thursday will review proposed spending for Military and Veterans’ Affairs, Agriculture, Banking and Insurance and Judiciary.
The hearing with the Department of Military and Veterans’ Affairs is set for 10 a.m.
The Department of Agriculture hearing is scheduled to begin at 11:30 a.m.
The Judiciary is slated for 2 p.m.
All hearings will in Committee Room 11 of the State House Annex.
Audio from the hearings will be streamed live at http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/media/live_audio.asp.
The public can also keep informed of the hearings by signing up for Assembly Democratic e-mail alerts at www.assemblydems.com/Subscription/SubscriptionSignIn.asp.
The hearing with the Department of Military and Veterans’ Affairs is set for 10 a.m.
The Department of Agriculture hearing is scheduled to begin at 11:30 a.m.
The Judiciary is slated for 2 p.m.
All hearings will in Committee Room 11 of the State House Annex.
Audio from the hearings will be streamed live at http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/media/live_audio.asp.
The public can also keep informed of the hearings by signing up for Assembly Democratic e-mail alerts at www.assemblydems.com/Subscription/SubscriptionSignIn.asp.
Today in Trenton 4/27/11
SPEAKER OLIVER: TOLL WORKERS PLAN TO SAVE MONEY & JOBS MUST BE CONSIDERED
(TRENTON) – Assembly Speaker Sheila Y. Oliver (D-Essex/Passaic) on Wednesday released the following statement after attending a rally with toll collectors concerned about the administration’s plan to privatize toll collections:
“It’s outrageous that toll collectors are being demonized as the ones responsible for the economic problems facing our state, when in fact they’ve contributed to the state’s success through their commitment and dedication to their difficult jobs.
“I applaud the toll workers for offering $35 million in painful concessions to help the state fight through this difficult economy. The workers know they must share in the sacrifice and have offered a plan to save money and jobs.
“It was the right thing to do.
“What concerns me deeply is the administration’s continued refusal to negotiate seriously to find a way to help taxpayers while saving jobs. Their refusal to do so can only mean they place conservative ideology over the well-being of taxpayers and toll workers.
“That is the wrong thing to do..
“The toll workers are not pawns. They’re real people with families, homes and responsibilities who have devoted their working lives to this state. They’ve offered a plan to save money and jobs. Their plan deserves consideration.”
GREENSTEIN, DeANGELO, BENSON CALL FOR CEASEFIRE IN ASSAULT AGAINST TOLL WORKERS
14TH District Legislators Urge Turnpike Authority, Administration to Accept Unions’
Olive Branch to Help Achieve Savings
(TRENTON) – Senator Linda Greenstein and Assemblymen Wayne DeAngelo and Dan Benson today called on the NJ Turnpike Authority and the Christie administration to stop the assault against toll collectors and instead work with them to achieve the cost savings they are aiming for through a hasty privatization plan that could impact nearly 700 workers on both the Turnpike and Parkway.
The 14th District Legislators noted that toll collectors unions have agreed to roughly $35 million in concessions to help save the state money and preserve existing jobs.
“It’s unconscionable to try and balance this budget, or future budgets, by chipping away at the livelihoods of working class residents,” said Greenstein (D-Middlesex/Mercer). “Toll collectors have not caused our budget problems. In fact, they have helped bring in an enormous amount of revenue to support our transportation needs and are proving that they are willing to be part of the solution through collective bargaining. We’ve seen enough privatization plans to know that the salt-of-the-earth workers are the ones who suffer.”
“This administration needs to re-examine its approach to cost savings. Time and again, we see a one-sided attack approach employed, rather than coming to the table in a productive manner to reach a workable compromise,” said DeAngelo (D-Mercer/Middlesex). “With the unions readily offering up major concessions it makes more sense to work with them through collective bargaining to achieve the cost-savings the state is seeking right now.”
“Even after holding a hearing on this issue last week, we still have little answers in terms of how a privatization plan will affect existing employees or how much it will ultimately save the state,” said Benson (D-Mercer/Middlesex). “Toll workers have demonstrated an extraordinary willingness to sacrifice right now. This administration should hear them out and make a good faith effort to achieve savings and efficiencies through negotiations, rather than a hasty move towards privatization.”
(TRENTON) – Assembly Speaker Sheila Y. Oliver (D-Essex/Passaic) on Wednesday released the following statement after attending a rally with toll collectors concerned about the administration’s plan to privatize toll collections:
“It’s outrageous that toll collectors are being demonized as the ones responsible for the economic problems facing our state, when in fact they’ve contributed to the state’s success through their commitment and dedication to their difficult jobs.
“I applaud the toll workers for offering $35 million in painful concessions to help the state fight through this difficult economy. The workers know they must share in the sacrifice and have offered a plan to save money and jobs.
“It was the right thing to do.
“What concerns me deeply is the administration’s continued refusal to negotiate seriously to find a way to help taxpayers while saving jobs. Their refusal to do so can only mean they place conservative ideology over the well-being of taxpayers and toll workers.
“That is the wrong thing to do..
“The toll workers are not pawns. They’re real people with families, homes and responsibilities who have devoted their working lives to this state. They’ve offered a plan to save money and jobs. Their plan deserves consideration.”
GREENSTEIN, DeANGELO, BENSON CALL FOR CEASEFIRE IN ASSAULT AGAINST TOLL WORKERS
14TH District Legislators Urge Turnpike Authority, Administration to Accept Unions’
Olive Branch to Help Achieve Savings
(TRENTON) – Senator Linda Greenstein and Assemblymen Wayne DeAngelo and Dan Benson today called on the NJ Turnpike Authority and the Christie administration to stop the assault against toll collectors and instead work with them to achieve the cost savings they are aiming for through a hasty privatization plan that could impact nearly 700 workers on both the Turnpike and Parkway.
The 14th District Legislators noted that toll collectors unions have agreed to roughly $35 million in concessions to help save the state money and preserve existing jobs.
“It’s unconscionable to try and balance this budget, or future budgets, by chipping away at the livelihoods of working class residents,” said Greenstein (D-Middlesex/Mercer). “Toll collectors have not caused our budget problems. In fact, they have helped bring in an enormous amount of revenue to support our transportation needs and are proving that they are willing to be part of the solution through collective bargaining. We’ve seen enough privatization plans to know that the salt-of-the-earth workers are the ones who suffer.”
“This administration needs to re-examine its approach to cost savings. Time and again, we see a one-sided attack approach employed, rather than coming to the table in a productive manner to reach a workable compromise,” said DeAngelo (D-Mercer/Middlesex). “With the unions readily offering up major concessions it makes more sense to work with them through collective bargaining to achieve the cost-savings the state is seeking right now.”
“Even after holding a hearing on this issue last week, we still have little answers in terms of how a privatization plan will affect existing employees or how much it will ultimately save the state,” said Benson (D-Mercer/Middlesex). “Toll workers have demonstrated an extraordinary willingness to sacrifice right now. This administration should hear them out and make a good faith effort to achieve savings and efficiencies through negotiations, rather than a hasty move towards privatization.”
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Today in Trenton 4/26/11
WATSON COLEMAN: CHRISTIE’S TIRADES ARE ‘TIRESOME AND COWARDLY’
(TRENTON) – Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-Mercer) released the following statement Tuesday on Gov. Chris Christie’s tirade at one of his taxpayer-funded sideshows in Hamilton:
“The governor can rant and rave all he wants and try to blame me for two murders, but then he must take responsibility for the 71 percent increase in Newark’s homicide rate and overall 21 percent increase in Newark’s crime rate that followed his state aid cuts last year.
“My legislation was meant to save taxpayer dollars and improve lives. The governor’s budget cuts, on the other hand, were patently irresponsible and designed to destroy the progress made in many of our great cities.
“But don’t worry – people in our cities may fear for their safety under Gov. Christie’s budget policies, but millionaires are at least enjoying their Christie tax cut. Boosting the wealthy seems to be the only policy the governor seems to truly care about.
“The governor’s tirades are tiresome and cowardly. It would be nice if he decided to act like a leader once in a while and engage in an adult conversation about the issues. This governor’s behavior demeans our state and the office he holds.”
LESNIAK, CRYAN, & QUIJANO TO INTRODUCE BUDGET RESOLUTION TO PREVENT CHRISTIE’S PROPOSED NURSING HOME MEDICAID CUTS
(TRENTON)- The representatives of the 20th legislative district announced today they will be introducing budget resolutions to prevent impending Medicaid cuts targeted to nursing homes in the FY 2012 budget. If passed, the Governor’s budget plan would cut $70 million in state aid from reimbursements, aid to special nursing facilities, and would not account for inherent inflationary budget increases. This would lead to a subsequent loss of an additional $70 million in matching federal funds.
“New Jersey is facing a truly challenging financial dilemma right now,” said Senator Raymond Lesniak (D-Union). “However, these cuts would have profoundly negative consequences for our state’s ill, disabled, and elderly nursing home residents and the dedicated nursing home employees. It is wrong to saddle these people with the burden of fixing the state’s fiscal problems.”
Since 2005, there have been $425 million in cuts to Medicaid reimbursements, despite a nursing home provider tax levy that supplements the state treasury with $136 million each year. The 2012 cuts will place a variety of stresses on nursing homes throughout the state, forcing a decrease in nursing home admission rates, and cuts to staff pay and/or personnel.
“These cuts could lead to more costs for the state down the road,” warned Assembly Majority Leader Joseph Cryan. “Displaced caregivers may seek to collect unemployment benefits from the state, and patients who are denied nursing home admission may be forced to seek emergency care in hospitals at an exponentially higher cost to the state. Additionally, the cut in state funding means New Jersey will lose the federal matching funds, doubling the losses for these facilities, their employees, and their patients. We simply cannot afford to leave that money on the table.” In all, these cuts would affect 88,000 nursing home workers and patients.
“These cuts are counter-productive in every way” stated Assemblywoman Annette Quijano. “Once again, the Governor is using the banner of ‘shared sacrifice’ to end programs that are crucial to our state’s vulnerable populations. Solutions to our budget problems exist, but not through raiding the nursing homes of our state’s sick and elderly.”
EGAN, BENSON & DeANGELO BILL TO ENSURE CONTINUED UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS FOR NEW JERSEYANS SIGNED INTO LAW
(TRENTON) – Legislation sponsored by Assembly Democrats Joseph Egan, Daniel Benson and Wayne DeAngelo to take advantage of a federal law that allows laid-off workers in New Jersey to continue to receive extended unemployment benefits for much, if not all, of 2011, has been signed into law.
The bill (A-3795) implements an option provided by the federal Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 to allow extended benefits.
The federal option makes it likely that extended benefits will be continued, because the unemployment rate in New Jersey would have to be no more than 110% of the 2008 jobless rates of between 4.2 percent to 6.0 percent, far below the current rate of 9.1 percent.
The continuation of benefits under this bill will incur no costs to New Jersey’s unemployment fund or employers in the state, because the federal act provides 100 percent federal funding of the benefits through Dec. 31. Under the federal act, both the 100 percent federal funding and the greater availability of benefits under the trigger option, as implemented by this bill, expire simultaneously.
“Ensuring continued assistance for out-of-work New Jerseyans is an absolute must,” said Egan (D-Middlesex). “This an important step toward ensuring working class New Jerseyans get sustained help when they need it most.”
“Given the prolonged high unemployment rate in our state, extending these benefits throughout most, if not all, of this year, is the right thing to do,” said Benson (D-Mercer/Middlesex). “We can’t sit idly by. We need to take advantage of any federal program that will help our workers in their time of need.”
For Benson, who recently joined the Assembly in January, today’s signing marks the first bill he has sponsored that has been signed into law.
“We must utilize every opportunity we can to keep out-of-work New Jerseyans afloat until the economy rebounds,” DeAngelo said. “We cannot turn our backs on a simple step that can extend benefits. We must ensure workers who find themselves unemployed for long periods can they help they so direly need.”
The bill was approved unanimously by both houses of the legislature earlier this year.
VAN DREW, ALBANO & MILAM CONTINUE EFFORTS TO CONTROL GOVERNMENT SPENDING & PROTECT TAXPAYERS
Sponsor Bill to Require Review of all Government Purchasing
(1st LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT) – As part of their continued effort to control government spending and protect taxpayers, Sen. Jeff Van Drew and Assemblymen Nelson Albano and Matthew Milam are sponsoring legislation to require a review of all purchasing activities by New Jersey governments.
The bill (S2735-A3853) would require the state comptroller to review and make recommendations to improve the procurement process of the state and local governments, public colleges and universities, independent authorities and school boards.
“It’s time to make sure all levels of New Jersey government are doing the right thing when it comes to spending taxpayer money on goods and services,” Van Drew said. “Taxpayers deserve to know they’re getting the utmost protection and this bill can help give them that confidence.”
“Taxpayers have had enough with tale after tale of wasted money, and while sometimes this waste is abusive, other times it may be that government officials are using outdated approaches that need improvement,” Albano said. “The goal here is to make sure every level of New Jersey government is as smart as possible and using the most modern standards to make the best decisions on behalf of taxpayers.”
“Billions of dollars are spent every years by New Jersey governments, and clearly we need to make sure that spending is more efficient,” Milam said. “Overburdened taxpayers need to know that their governments are doing the right thing when it comes to spending their money, and with this report, we’re guaranteed to see improvements that save money across our state.”
Under the bill, the comptroller is required to conduct a review of the various laws, regulations, practices and procedures governing the procurement process undertaken by state government, public institutions of higher education, independent authorities, units of local government and boards of education for purposes of making or entering into contracts, purchases or agreements for goods and services.
The bill provides that the comptroller must make a report regarding the review.
The report must, at a minimum, detail the approach utilized by the comptroller in reviewing the laws and regulations, practices and procedures governing the procurement process, and enumerate any findings or recommendations that the comptroller considers will improve the efficiency, transparency, or accountability of the process.
The report, including any findings and recommendations, must be filed with the governor and the Legislature on or before the date the Governor’s annual budget message is presented to the Legislature in 2012.
(TRENTON) – Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-Mercer) released the following statement Tuesday on Gov. Chris Christie’s tirade at one of his taxpayer-funded sideshows in Hamilton:
“The governor can rant and rave all he wants and try to blame me for two murders, but then he must take responsibility for the 71 percent increase in Newark’s homicide rate and overall 21 percent increase in Newark’s crime rate that followed his state aid cuts last year.
“My legislation was meant to save taxpayer dollars and improve lives. The governor’s budget cuts, on the other hand, were patently irresponsible and designed to destroy the progress made in many of our great cities.
“But don’t worry – people in our cities may fear for their safety under Gov. Christie’s budget policies, but millionaires are at least enjoying their Christie tax cut. Boosting the wealthy seems to be the only policy the governor seems to truly care about.
“The governor’s tirades are tiresome and cowardly. It would be nice if he decided to act like a leader once in a while and engage in an adult conversation about the issues. This governor’s behavior demeans our state and the office he holds.”
LESNIAK, CRYAN, & QUIJANO TO INTRODUCE BUDGET RESOLUTION TO PREVENT CHRISTIE’S PROPOSED NURSING HOME MEDICAID CUTS
(TRENTON)- The representatives of the 20th legislative district announced today they will be introducing budget resolutions to prevent impending Medicaid cuts targeted to nursing homes in the FY 2012 budget. If passed, the Governor’s budget plan would cut $70 million in state aid from reimbursements, aid to special nursing facilities, and would not account for inherent inflationary budget increases. This would lead to a subsequent loss of an additional $70 million in matching federal funds.
“New Jersey is facing a truly challenging financial dilemma right now,” said Senator Raymond Lesniak (D-Union). “However, these cuts would have profoundly negative consequences for our state’s ill, disabled, and elderly nursing home residents and the dedicated nursing home employees. It is wrong to saddle these people with the burden of fixing the state’s fiscal problems.”
Since 2005, there have been $425 million in cuts to Medicaid reimbursements, despite a nursing home provider tax levy that supplements the state treasury with $136 million each year. The 2012 cuts will place a variety of stresses on nursing homes throughout the state, forcing a decrease in nursing home admission rates, and cuts to staff pay and/or personnel.
“These cuts could lead to more costs for the state down the road,” warned Assembly Majority Leader Joseph Cryan. “Displaced caregivers may seek to collect unemployment benefits from the state, and patients who are denied nursing home admission may be forced to seek emergency care in hospitals at an exponentially higher cost to the state. Additionally, the cut in state funding means New Jersey will lose the federal matching funds, doubling the losses for these facilities, their employees, and their patients. We simply cannot afford to leave that money on the table.” In all, these cuts would affect 88,000 nursing home workers and patients.
“These cuts are counter-productive in every way” stated Assemblywoman Annette Quijano. “Once again, the Governor is using the banner of ‘shared sacrifice’ to end programs that are crucial to our state’s vulnerable populations. Solutions to our budget problems exist, but not through raiding the nursing homes of our state’s sick and elderly.”
EGAN, BENSON & DeANGELO BILL TO ENSURE CONTINUED UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS FOR NEW JERSEYANS SIGNED INTO LAW
(TRENTON) – Legislation sponsored by Assembly Democrats Joseph Egan, Daniel Benson and Wayne DeAngelo to take advantage of a federal law that allows laid-off workers in New Jersey to continue to receive extended unemployment benefits for much, if not all, of 2011, has been signed into law.
The bill (A-3795) implements an option provided by the federal Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 to allow extended benefits.
The federal option makes it likely that extended benefits will be continued, because the unemployment rate in New Jersey would have to be no more than 110% of the 2008 jobless rates of between 4.2 percent to 6.0 percent, far below the current rate of 9.1 percent.
The continuation of benefits under this bill will incur no costs to New Jersey’s unemployment fund or employers in the state, because the federal act provides 100 percent federal funding of the benefits through Dec. 31. Under the federal act, both the 100 percent federal funding and the greater availability of benefits under the trigger option, as implemented by this bill, expire simultaneously.
“Ensuring continued assistance for out-of-work New Jerseyans is an absolute must,” said Egan (D-Middlesex). “This an important step toward ensuring working class New Jerseyans get sustained help when they need it most.”
“Given the prolonged high unemployment rate in our state, extending these benefits throughout most, if not all, of this year, is the right thing to do,” said Benson (D-Mercer/Middlesex). “We can’t sit idly by. We need to take advantage of any federal program that will help our workers in their time of need.”
For Benson, who recently joined the Assembly in January, today’s signing marks the first bill he has sponsored that has been signed into law.
“We must utilize every opportunity we can to keep out-of-work New Jerseyans afloat until the economy rebounds,” DeAngelo said. “We cannot turn our backs on a simple step that can extend benefits. We must ensure workers who find themselves unemployed for long periods can they help they so direly need.”
The bill was approved unanimously by both houses of the legislature earlier this year.
VAN DREW, ALBANO & MILAM CONTINUE EFFORTS TO CONTROL GOVERNMENT SPENDING & PROTECT TAXPAYERS
Sponsor Bill to Require Review of all Government Purchasing
(1st LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT) – As part of their continued effort to control government spending and protect taxpayers, Sen. Jeff Van Drew and Assemblymen Nelson Albano and Matthew Milam are sponsoring legislation to require a review of all purchasing activities by New Jersey governments.
The bill (S2735-A3853) would require the state comptroller to review and make recommendations to improve the procurement process of the state and local governments, public colleges and universities, independent authorities and school boards.
“It’s time to make sure all levels of New Jersey government are doing the right thing when it comes to spending taxpayer money on goods and services,” Van Drew said. “Taxpayers deserve to know they’re getting the utmost protection and this bill can help give them that confidence.”
“Taxpayers have had enough with tale after tale of wasted money, and while sometimes this waste is abusive, other times it may be that government officials are using outdated approaches that need improvement,” Albano said. “The goal here is to make sure every level of New Jersey government is as smart as possible and using the most modern standards to make the best decisions on behalf of taxpayers.”
“Billions of dollars are spent every years by New Jersey governments, and clearly we need to make sure that spending is more efficient,” Milam said. “Overburdened taxpayers need to know that their governments are doing the right thing when it comes to spending their money, and with this report, we’re guaranteed to see improvements that save money across our state.”
Under the bill, the comptroller is required to conduct a review of the various laws, regulations, practices and procedures governing the procurement process undertaken by state government, public institutions of higher education, independent authorities, units of local government and boards of education for purposes of making or entering into contracts, purchases or agreements for goods and services.
The bill provides that the comptroller must make a report regarding the review.
The report must, at a minimum, detail the approach utilized by the comptroller in reviewing the laws and regulations, practices and procedures governing the procurement process, and enumerate any findings or recommendations that the comptroller considers will improve the efficiency, transparency, or accountability of the process.
The report, including any findings and recommendations, must be filed with the governor and the Legislature on or before the date the Governor’s annual budget message is presented to the Legislature in 2012.
TAX INCREASES IN THE GOVERNOR’S BUDGET
Republicans raised plenty of taxes last year, including income taxes – but only on the working poor... This is not criticism, just pointing out the facts. As for double-standards, I present for your viewing pleasure the Republican tax increases of 2010.
- Increasing property taxes through $1 billion in school aid cuts and $445 million in municipal aid cuts. Helped spark 4.1 percent property tax hike.
- Increasing college tuition through higher education cuts – Total cuts $171 million
- Eliminating Homestead Rebates in Calendar Year 2010; Reducing homeowner rebates in Calendar Year 2011; eliminating tenant rebates -- $848 million.
- Increasing income taxes on the working poor - $45 million.
- Raising “cap” on hospital assessment -- $38.7 million.
- Raising “cap” on ambulatory care facility assessment -- $6.5 million.
- Increasing NJ Transit fares by 25 percent.
- Increasing co-payment for early intervention services -- $12 million.
- Reducing kinship care grants -- $1.8 million.
- Increasing the number of recipients that will have co-payment for “Abbott wrap around” (afterschool/summer programs) -- $5.3 million.
- Increasing premiums for adults in FamilyCare -- $1.2 million.
- Freezing Senior Freeze (no new applicants and no increase for current applicants)-$27.8 million
- Reducing High Tech Tax Credits -- $30 million
- Reducing Film Production Tax Credits -- $15 million
- Increasing Insurance Special Purpose Assessment -- $20 million
- Increasing property taxes through $1 billion in school aid cuts and $445 million in municipal aid cuts. Helped spark 4.1 percent property tax hike.
- Increasing college tuition through higher education cuts – Total cuts $171 million
- Eliminating Homestead Rebates in Calendar Year 2010; Reducing homeowner rebates in Calendar Year 2011; eliminating tenant rebates -- $848 million.
- Increasing income taxes on the working poor - $45 million.
- Raising “cap” on hospital assessment -- $38.7 million.
- Raising “cap” on ambulatory care facility assessment -- $6.5 million.
- Increasing NJ Transit fares by 25 percent.
- Increasing co-payment for early intervention services -- $12 million.
- Reducing kinship care grants -- $1.8 million.
- Increasing the number of recipients that will have co-payment for “Abbott wrap around” (afterschool/summer programs) -- $5.3 million.
- Increasing premiums for adults in FamilyCare -- $1.2 million.
- Freezing Senior Freeze (no new applicants and no increase for current applicants)-$27.8 million
- Reducing High Tech Tax Credits -- $30 million
- Reducing Film Production Tax Credits -- $15 million
- Increasing Insurance Special Purpose Assessment -- $20 million
Assembly Dems on Gov. Christie's do-nothing town hall
“The governor’s lack of leadership is appalling and sadly more bad news for New Jerseyans enduring his property tax increases. The governor has been a repeated failure, whether it be his hiking property taxes, stalling job creation, denying women health care or attacking education. He should be working with the people’s representatives to solve problems rather than engaging in immature whining. This much is clear about this governor clearly panicking over his inability to lead – he loves giving tax breaks to millionaires while hurting the working class, and the buck surely doesn’t stop with him.”
Gov. Christie has failed by:
Increasing property taxes by 4.1 percent, the highest increase since 2007.
Eliminating property tax rebates in 2010 and planning to cut them by 75 percent at some point in 2011.
Giving a tax cut to millionaires while increasing state taxes and fees by more than $1 billion.
Overseeing a loss of 6,000 jobs since taking office while vetoing numerous job creation efforts and eliminating business tax credits.
Implementing policies that led to new school taxes for families with children in extracurricular school activities.
Twice killing efforts to provide vital health care for women and their babies.
Botching a federal application for $400 million in education funding because he would rather fight with teachers.
Increasing income taxes on working poor families.
Increasing fares on commuters by 25 percent.
Failing to make a payment into the state pension system, negating the benefits of reforms passed by the Legislature in 2010.
The so-called tool kit:
·Of the 33 proposals, 22 bills were introduced.
·Of the 22 bills introduced, 15 have been certified by the Office of Legislative Services as needing fiscal notes.
·Thus, only two-thirds of the bills even have a fiscal impact. That means that a full one-third of the bills would have absolutely no impact on property taxes.
·Of the 15 bills requiring fiscal notes, fiscal information from the Administration has been received by OLS on only 3.
·Of these 3 for which information has been received, one shows State savings of $140,000 annually and indeterminate potential local savings; one shows additional State revenue of $440,000; and one shows additional State costs of $292,000 to $331,000.
·In summary, the fiscal information provided by the Christie Administration on toolkit measures shows a net State savings/revenue increase of $249,000 to $288,00.
·OLS has done fiscal estimates on 3 additional bills, absent administration information as the bills were moving. Of these, one is cost neutral; one shows indeterminate potential local revenue gains; and one shows indeterminate potential State and local costs as well as indeterminate potential restraint of growth rate in property tax levies.
·Gov. Christie cut state aid to schools and municipalities by $1.5 billion. That’s why property taxes increased 4.1 percent last year, the highest increase since 2007.
Gov. Christie has failed by:
Increasing property taxes by 4.1 percent, the highest increase since 2007.
Eliminating property tax rebates in 2010 and planning to cut them by 75 percent at some point in 2011.
Giving a tax cut to millionaires while increasing state taxes and fees by more than $1 billion.
Overseeing a loss of 6,000 jobs since taking office while vetoing numerous job creation efforts and eliminating business tax credits.
Implementing policies that led to new school taxes for families with children in extracurricular school activities.
Twice killing efforts to provide vital health care for women and their babies.
Botching a federal application for $400 million in education funding because he would rather fight with teachers.
Increasing income taxes on working poor families.
Increasing fares on commuters by 25 percent.
Failing to make a payment into the state pension system, negating the benefits of reforms passed by the Legislature in 2010.
The so-called tool kit:
·Of the 33 proposals, 22 bills were introduced.
·Of the 22 bills introduced, 15 have been certified by the Office of Legislative Services as needing fiscal notes.
·Thus, only two-thirds of the bills even have a fiscal impact. That means that a full one-third of the bills would have absolutely no impact on property taxes.
·Of the 15 bills requiring fiscal notes, fiscal information from the Administration has been received by OLS on only 3.
·Of these 3 for which information has been received, one shows State savings of $140,000 annually and indeterminate potential local savings; one shows additional State revenue of $440,000; and one shows additional State costs of $292,000 to $331,000.
·In summary, the fiscal information provided by the Christie Administration on toolkit measures shows a net State savings/revenue increase of $249,000 to $288,00.
·OLS has done fiscal estimates on 3 additional bills, absent administration information as the bills were moving. Of these, one is cost neutral; one shows indeterminate potential local revenue gains; and one shows indeterminate potential State and local costs as well as indeterminate potential restraint of growth rate in property tax levies.
·Gov. Christie cut state aid to schools and municipalities by $1.5 billion. That’s why property taxes increased 4.1 percent last year, the highest increase since 2007.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
STENDER, CONAWAY, SCHAER SEEK DETAILS AT HEARING ON ADMINISTRATION’S PLAN TO PRIVATIZE TURNPIKE, PARKWAY TOLL COLLECTIONS
(TRENTON) – The Assembly State Government Committee convened a hearing today to discuss the New Jersey Turnpike Authority’s plans to privatize toll collections along the Turnpike and Garden State Parkway, a move that could impact nearly 700 workers between the two major highways.
Among those that testified at the hearing today were NJ Department of Transportation Commissioner James Simpson, NJ Turnpike Authority Executive Director Veronique Hakim, NJ State AFL-CIO President Charles Wowkanech, Local 194 President Fran Ehret, Dolores Gorczyca, International Rep for IFPTE & Recording Secretary of the Coalition of Labor Union Women National Council, and Dr. Jeff Keefe, Rutgers University Professor, School of Management and Labor Relations.
“Despite the appearance of both the Transportation Commissioner and the Turnpike Authority Executive Director, we have been able to glean very little information on how these plans will impact both motorists and public employees currently collecting tolls. My biggest concern is that the administration is rushing into this plan blindly without thoroughly thinking through the long-term consequences or the impact it will have on our dedicated and long-standing public employees.
“Often times, hidden or indirect costs can significantly add to the price of a contract. When it comes to privatization deals, 60 percent of governments that eventually brought the service back in-house reported that the quality of service provided by the private operator was the main motivator. Privatization requires substantial oversight and monitoring, otherwise it can open the door to unscrupulous business operators and lucrative contracts paid for at the taxpayers’ expense,” said Committee Chairwoman Linda Stender (D-Middlesex/Somerset/Union).
“Over the years we’ve seen plenty of examples of privatization plans that have gone awry, costing taxpayers more money and aggravation in the long-run. One of my biggest concerns is that the administration did not take into consideration the importance of including a living wage for toll collectors when they crafted the RFP for this privatization plan. If toll collectors’ wages are lowered, not only will it significantly impact their quality of life, but they may also become eligible for various public benefits, which will ultimately cost the state more in the long-run. Essentially, the administration would just be shifting costs from one place to another. These are the types of things that need to be studied before the administration capriciously moves ahead with any privatization efforts,” Vice-Chair Herb Conaway, M.D. (D-Burlington/Camden).
“Any effort to privatize is always about the bottom line. When a private company is hired to do a job previously performed by the public sector they are ultimately looking to make a profit. We need to find out where that profit will be coming from. Will it be through reduced services, lower wages for working class employees, or some other means that might directly impact taxpayers and motorists? These are all details that the administration should be providing before moving forward with these plans,” said Assemblyman Gary S. Schaer (D-Bergen/Essex/Passaic), the other Democratic member on the committee.
Among those that testified at the hearing today were NJ Department of Transportation Commissioner James Simpson, NJ Turnpike Authority Executive Director Veronique Hakim, NJ State AFL-CIO President Charles Wowkanech, Local 194 President Fran Ehret, Dolores Gorczyca, International Rep for IFPTE & Recording Secretary of the Coalition of Labor Union Women National Council, and Dr. Jeff Keefe, Rutgers University Professor, School of Management and Labor Relations.
“Despite the appearance of both the Transportation Commissioner and the Turnpike Authority Executive Director, we have been able to glean very little information on how these plans will impact both motorists and public employees currently collecting tolls. My biggest concern is that the administration is rushing into this plan blindly without thoroughly thinking through the long-term consequences or the impact it will have on our dedicated and long-standing public employees.
“Often times, hidden or indirect costs can significantly add to the price of a contract. When it comes to privatization deals, 60 percent of governments that eventually brought the service back in-house reported that the quality of service provided by the private operator was the main motivator. Privatization requires substantial oversight and monitoring, otherwise it can open the door to unscrupulous business operators and lucrative contracts paid for at the taxpayers’ expense,” said Committee Chairwoman Linda Stender (D-Middlesex/Somerset/Union).
“Over the years we’ve seen plenty of examples of privatization plans that have gone awry, costing taxpayers more money and aggravation in the long-run. One of my biggest concerns is that the administration did not take into consideration the importance of including a living wage for toll collectors when they crafted the RFP for this privatization plan. If toll collectors’ wages are lowered, not only will it significantly impact their quality of life, but they may also become eligible for various public benefits, which will ultimately cost the state more in the long-run. Essentially, the administration would just be shifting costs from one place to another. These are the types of things that need to be studied before the administration capriciously moves ahead with any privatization efforts,” Vice-Chair Herb Conaway, M.D. (D-Burlington/Camden).
“Any effort to privatize is always about the bottom line. When a private company is hired to do a job previously performed by the public sector they are ultimately looking to make a profit. We need to find out where that profit will be coming from. Will it be through reduced services, lower wages for working class employees, or some other means that might directly impact taxpayers and motorists? These are all details that the administration should be providing before moving forward with these plans,” said Assemblyman Gary S. Schaer (D-Bergen/Essex/Passaic), the other Democratic member on the committee.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
SPEAKER OLIVER APPOINTS MEMBERS TO NEW PANEL TO STUDY CLOSURE OF STATE PSYCH HOSPITALS, DEVELOPMENTAL CENTERS
Co-Chair Vainieri Huttle Calls on Christie Administration to Halt Plans to Close Vineland Center Until Panel Completes Review
(TRENTON) – Assembly Speaker Sheila Y. Oliver (D-Essex/Passaic) today announced the appointment of Assembly members Valerie Vainieri Huttle, Cleopatra Tucker and Lou Greenwald to the Legislative Review Panel on State Psychiatric Hospitals and Developmental Centers, a bipartisan body that was recently created by legislation to study issues relating to the care and costs of providing services to clients in these facilities.
“This is an issue of utmost importance that impacts some of our most vulnerable residents. Any decisions as to the future of these facilities should not be made lightly. I have every confidence that the members I appointed today will undertake their responsibilities in earnest,” said Oliver.
Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen), who will serve as one of the panel’s co-chairs, noted that the Department of Human Services is already in the process of closing the Vineland Developmental Center as proposed by Governor Christie in his FY 2012 budget.
“As the new co-chair of this panel, I am requesting today that the administration place a moratorium on the closure of the Vineland Developmental Center until the panel has had an opportunity to make recommendations on the issue. At the very least, the administration should hold off on this decision until the FY 2012 budget is passed by the legislature since we have not approved this closure yet,” said Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen), who is also the lead Assembly sponsor of the measure that created the panel.
In doing so, Vainieri Huttle sent a letter today to Department of Human Services Commissioner Jennifer Velez formally making this request and detailing a litany of questions that she would like answered by the administration prior to a joint Senate and Assembly committee hearing on the issue, which will take place at the Vineland facility on May 17.
In addition to Oliver’s appointments today, the legislation requires the review panel to be comprised of 10 members - five from the Senate appointed by the Senate President and five from the General Assembly appointed by the Speaker, with no more than three from either house being from the same political party.
Under the bill, the Legislative Review Panel on State Psychiatric Hospitals and Developmental Centers will:
· Study issues relating to the care and costs of providing services to persons who are currently patients in state psychiatric hospitals and developmental centers;
· Develop a plan for the effective functioning of state psychiatric hospitals and developmental centers that will ensure that the current and long-term needs of patients and residents are met in the most cost-effective manner and in the setting most appropriate to the person's circumstances; and
· Review all relevant patient data for state psychiatric hospitals and developmental centers, and examine those issues that relate to state psychiatric hospitals, short-term care facilities, county psychiatric hospitals, and community-based care for persons with mental illness throughout the state, and to community-based services, supports, and residential options throughout the State for persons with developmental disabilities.
Finally, the resolution directs the review panel to report its activities, findings, conclusions, and recommendations for legislation or administrative action to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the General Assembly within one year after the organization of the panel, but no later than 60 days before the close of the legislative session in which the resolution was adopted.
The measure (ACR-156/SCR-136) was also sponsored by Assembly members Cleopatra Tucker and Patrick J. Diegnan, Jr.
“As a society, we should be judged on how we treat our most vulnerable residents, including residents with developmental disabilities and psychiatric concerns. No one can deny our system needs improving, but as we move to do so, we need to know exactly where we stand in caring for people with disabilities and mental health problems. That’s the goal of this panel,” added Vainieri Huttle
(TRENTON) – Assembly Speaker Sheila Y. Oliver (D-Essex/Passaic) today announced the appointment of Assembly members Valerie Vainieri Huttle, Cleopatra Tucker and Lou Greenwald to the Legislative Review Panel on State Psychiatric Hospitals and Developmental Centers, a bipartisan body that was recently created by legislation to study issues relating to the care and costs of providing services to clients in these facilities.
“This is an issue of utmost importance that impacts some of our most vulnerable residents. Any decisions as to the future of these facilities should not be made lightly. I have every confidence that the members I appointed today will undertake their responsibilities in earnest,” said Oliver.
Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen), who will serve as one of the panel’s co-chairs, noted that the Department of Human Services is already in the process of closing the Vineland Developmental Center as proposed by Governor Christie in his FY 2012 budget.
“As the new co-chair of this panel, I am requesting today that the administration place a moratorium on the closure of the Vineland Developmental Center until the panel has had an opportunity to make recommendations on the issue. At the very least, the administration should hold off on this decision until the FY 2012 budget is passed by the legislature since we have not approved this closure yet,” said Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen), who is also the lead Assembly sponsor of the measure that created the panel.
In doing so, Vainieri Huttle sent a letter today to Department of Human Services Commissioner Jennifer Velez formally making this request and detailing a litany of questions that she would like answered by the administration prior to a joint Senate and Assembly committee hearing on the issue, which will take place at the Vineland facility on May 17.
In addition to Oliver’s appointments today, the legislation requires the review panel to be comprised of 10 members - five from the Senate appointed by the Senate President and five from the General Assembly appointed by the Speaker, with no more than three from either house being from the same political party.
Under the bill, the Legislative Review Panel on State Psychiatric Hospitals and Developmental Centers will:
· Study issues relating to the care and costs of providing services to persons who are currently patients in state psychiatric hospitals and developmental centers;
· Develop a plan for the effective functioning of state psychiatric hospitals and developmental centers that will ensure that the current and long-term needs of patients and residents are met in the most cost-effective manner and in the setting most appropriate to the person's circumstances; and
· Review all relevant patient data for state psychiatric hospitals and developmental centers, and examine those issues that relate to state psychiatric hospitals, short-term care facilities, county psychiatric hospitals, and community-based care for persons with mental illness throughout the state, and to community-based services, supports, and residential options throughout the State for persons with developmental disabilities.
Finally, the resolution directs the review panel to report its activities, findings, conclusions, and recommendations for legislation or administrative action to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the General Assembly within one year after the organization of the panel, but no later than 60 days before the close of the legislative session in which the resolution was adopted.
The measure (ACR-156/SCR-136) was also sponsored by Assembly members Cleopatra Tucker and Patrick J. Diegnan, Jr.
“As a society, we should be judged on how we treat our most vulnerable residents, including residents with developmental disabilities and psychiatric concerns. No one can deny our system needs improving, but as we move to do so, we need to know exactly where we stand in caring for people with disabilities and mental health problems. That’s the goal of this panel,” added Vainieri Huttle
Explanation on the Plainfield Pipe Issue
I am happy to hear from a former City employee, who after all these many years, stepped up to the plate to explain this issue dealing with the pipe situation. Wouldn’t it have been nice, when this question was asked on numerous occasions, to have Councilman Storch present this answer, being that he questions department heads repeatedly on various Council sessions? I am pretty sure these pipes costs more than $20,000, wherein the City’s UEZ funding was also used in this project.
Here is Mrs. Fox’s explanation:
The reason there are concrete pipes left over from the North Ave. Industrial Road and Drainage Construction Project is when the contractor opened the road in certain areas they found utilities in the way. The pipes had been designed for a certain configuration but the presence of the utilities required another. Our engineers had designed the project using utility maps and chose to make this discovery during construction rather than digging test pits during the design phase to see if there were utility conflicts that needed to be addressed in the final design. As none of us were engineers we had to rely on the consulting engineers' strategies. Believe me we learned a lot about civil engineering from this project. Funds for the road project were from the Feds, State of NJ and UEZ. We tried to sell the pipes to other communities and reached out to many towns. Since they were customized to our design configurations they were difficult to market. The PMUA graciously allowed us to store them at the Transfer Yard while be tried to find buyers. I don't know if this effort continued after I left the city employment. ~ Pat Fox
So I would like to sincerely thank Mrs. Fox in bringing this issue to the public eye, but also maybe Councilman Storch can explain to the public, why one of these engineer firms that worked for the City during that time, is still owed over $40,000 in fees, and has not been paid. Maybe because he was not familiar with the project, or maybe he does not even realize that the current admin is still paying of debts that were accumulated by the past admin.
It seems like it is only a matter of time before this engineer firm takes us to court to not only get their $40,000, but also interest and monies for their legal team. It seems to me that Mr. Storch is more concerned about his campaign, and talking about letters that were distributed in City Hall, wherein no one can prove, than discuss the budget, potential police and fire layoffs, or any positive issues facing this City.
He and his campaign manager spend more time writing articles in their blogs referring to me as a dog. I have no intentions of feeding into this nonsense, so that is why I will not pursue it, nor waste taxpayer’s time or money, responding to what I consider gutter politics.
Ps
I am happy that one of Cory’s supporters was kind enough to apologize on behalf of he and Dan’s friends, and I will publish his quote:
Assemblyman Green, I am not a fan of yours. In fact, I believe that your approach to politics has truly hurt our city. That being said, please accept my apology on behalf of my fellow resident(s) for referring to you as a "dog". We can disagree on the issues, we cannot resort to the dehumanization of others.
Here is Mrs. Fox’s explanation:
The reason there are concrete pipes left over from the North Ave. Industrial Road and Drainage Construction Project is when the contractor opened the road in certain areas they found utilities in the way. The pipes had been designed for a certain configuration but the presence of the utilities required another. Our engineers had designed the project using utility maps and chose to make this discovery during construction rather than digging test pits during the design phase to see if there were utility conflicts that needed to be addressed in the final design. As none of us were engineers we had to rely on the consulting engineers' strategies. Believe me we learned a lot about civil engineering from this project. Funds for the road project were from the Feds, State of NJ and UEZ. We tried to sell the pipes to other communities and reached out to many towns. Since they were customized to our design configurations they were difficult to market. The PMUA graciously allowed us to store them at the Transfer Yard while be tried to find buyers. I don't know if this effort continued after I left the city employment. ~ Pat Fox
So I would like to sincerely thank Mrs. Fox in bringing this issue to the public eye, but also maybe Councilman Storch can explain to the public, why one of these engineer firms that worked for the City during that time, is still owed over $40,000 in fees, and has not been paid. Maybe because he was not familiar with the project, or maybe he does not even realize that the current admin is still paying of debts that were accumulated by the past admin.
It seems like it is only a matter of time before this engineer firm takes us to court to not only get their $40,000, but also interest and monies for their legal team. It seems to me that Mr. Storch is more concerned about his campaign, and talking about letters that were distributed in City Hall, wherein no one can prove, than discuss the budget, potential police and fire layoffs, or any positive issues facing this City.
He and his campaign manager spend more time writing articles in their blogs referring to me as a dog. I have no intentions of feeding into this nonsense, so that is why I will not pursue it, nor waste taxpayer’s time or money, responding to what I consider gutter politics.
Ps
I am happy that one of Cory’s supporters was kind enough to apologize on behalf of he and Dan’s friends, and I will publish his quote:
Assemblyman Green, I am not a fan of yours. In fact, I believe that your approach to politics has truly hurt our city. That being said, please accept my apology on behalf of my fellow resident(s) for referring to you as a "dog". We can disagree on the issues, we cannot resort to the dehumanization of others.
SDA / School Construction
In reading Maria’s blog today, I am happy to see that she had followed up on the issue pertaining to the $17 million that was promised to the City by the former Corzine administration during budget negotiations. The Corzine administration at that time made it clear that they could not or would not fund a $65 million project for a middle school in the 4th Ward of Plainfield.
During the course of these negotiations wherein I was accused by Cory Storch and the New Democrats with interfering with the Plainfield Board of Education’s businesses, I was only trying to help the City in obtaining these funds which would directly helped our children here in Plainfield. The Plainfield Board of Education, Councilman Storch, and the Council have done a great job in sweeping this matter under the rug as if it does not exist.
When I had a meeting with the Superintendent, his staff, and the State, the Council, led by Storch, the BOE and Superintendent dropped the ball. The information the State needed regarding this project was incomplete. So we lost $65 million. The following year, when the School Development Authority was restructured by the Corzine administration, I was again allowed to sit in on a meeting with the State and Plainfield BOE to discuss the Jefferson School and Cook School projects. Both those facilities needed upgrading.
There was a commitment by Corzine’s administration to commit $17 million to upgrade those two schools. Again, the ball was dropped. Only recently I have learned that the new Christie administration has taken that $17 million out of the budget. Nobody at the Plainfield Board of Education has questioned the Christie administration, wherein there are some Republican connections on the BOE. When it comes to them trying to find something illegal I am accused of doing, they have no problem calling. Yet, when it comes to securing $17 million for our kids, they fail to make a call.
All across the State, people recognize the fact that the Plainfield BOE is controlled by Republicans, but I have yet to hear Cory or the New Democrats question how and why we have lost $17 million in school construction funding. This is one of the reasons why I did not support last year’s State budget; because I feel that since those monies were promised to Plainfield, the City should have received it. To make matters worse, we have yet to receive any reasons as to why and how we lost the funding.
I agree with Maria that a lot of these questions should be answered, whether these answers come from the BOE itself, the Superintendent, or the Cory-led City Council. Maybe the trade off might be that the Cory-led Council and the BOE closed their eyes to the $17 million, and in return there was no cut in funding for the organization that Cory works for, being that it depends on Federal and State funding.
If we are going to pay for investigations, we need to not only be concerned about the issues people feel the Mayor has misused City funding, but also whether or not the Federal and Sate funds that the County agency Cory Storch is in charge of, is legitimately dispersing those funds throughout Plainfield. Whether he votes on these issues or not, he still has control over the majority of the Council members when it comes to voting. We are not talking about $20,000, we have talking about millions over the past years.
The public should ask Cory if he is more interested in the agency he works for, or the taxpayers here in the City of Plainfield, and how the millions that come through his agency are spread throughout Plainfield. Whether he votes on this matter or not, he still has a lot of influence over the voting members.
Ps
I have asked for the last six months as to what Cory has done as a Council person, other than pick up his check every week. For eight years, he cannot point to one project he has done, other than the Teppers site which is a low-income facility in downtown Plainfield.
His record for dealing with the public is only walking around election time, being critical of me, but yet and still, cannot prove anything productive as a Plainfield councilman. He has one of the worst attendance records as a Council person when compared to any other council person for the last eight years.
I want to make it very clear for the record, Tony Rucker is running as a 2nd Ward council person, but the difference in my support for him and Cory is that he is going to be a council person for the people in the 2nd Ward, as well as serve everyone in Plainfield. We have both agreed that I have no intentions on influencing how he votes or how he serves the 2nd Ward. That is why his campaign is going to be managed and run by people in the 2nd Ward who have independent minds and have the experience to help move this City in the right direction. That was part of our agreement, and I plan on living up to that agreement.
The reason why I am giving him my support and the line is because I thought he was the best candidate for the 2nd Ward. So as far as my endorsement and the line go, that is where my influence for Tony Rucker ends. So I am hoping that the 2nd Ward would look at him as their candidate, and not my candidate.
During the course of these negotiations wherein I was accused by Cory Storch and the New Democrats with interfering with the Plainfield Board of Education’s businesses, I was only trying to help the City in obtaining these funds which would directly helped our children here in Plainfield. The Plainfield Board of Education, Councilman Storch, and the Council have done a great job in sweeping this matter under the rug as if it does not exist.
When I had a meeting with the Superintendent, his staff, and the State, the Council, led by Storch, the BOE and Superintendent dropped the ball. The information the State needed regarding this project was incomplete. So we lost $65 million. The following year, when the School Development Authority was restructured by the Corzine administration, I was again allowed to sit in on a meeting with the State and Plainfield BOE to discuss the Jefferson School and Cook School projects. Both those facilities needed upgrading.
There was a commitment by Corzine’s administration to commit $17 million to upgrade those two schools. Again, the ball was dropped. Only recently I have learned that the new Christie administration has taken that $17 million out of the budget. Nobody at the Plainfield Board of Education has questioned the Christie administration, wherein there are some Republican connections on the BOE. When it comes to them trying to find something illegal I am accused of doing, they have no problem calling. Yet, when it comes to securing $17 million for our kids, they fail to make a call.
All across the State, people recognize the fact that the Plainfield BOE is controlled by Republicans, but I have yet to hear Cory or the New Democrats question how and why we have lost $17 million in school construction funding. This is one of the reasons why I did not support last year’s State budget; because I feel that since those monies were promised to Plainfield, the City should have received it. To make matters worse, we have yet to receive any reasons as to why and how we lost the funding.
I agree with Maria that a lot of these questions should be answered, whether these answers come from the BOE itself, the Superintendent, or the Cory-led City Council. Maybe the trade off might be that the Cory-led Council and the BOE closed their eyes to the $17 million, and in return there was no cut in funding for the organization that Cory works for, being that it depends on Federal and State funding.
If we are going to pay for investigations, we need to not only be concerned about the issues people feel the Mayor has misused City funding, but also whether or not the Federal and Sate funds that the County agency Cory Storch is in charge of, is legitimately dispersing those funds throughout Plainfield. Whether he votes on these issues or not, he still has control over the majority of the Council members when it comes to voting. We are not talking about $20,000, we have talking about millions over the past years.
The public should ask Cory if he is more interested in the agency he works for, or the taxpayers here in the City of Plainfield, and how the millions that come through his agency are spread throughout Plainfield. Whether he votes on this matter or not, he still has a lot of influence over the voting members.
Ps
I have asked for the last six months as to what Cory has done as a Council person, other than pick up his check every week. For eight years, he cannot point to one project he has done, other than the Teppers site which is a low-income facility in downtown Plainfield.
His record for dealing with the public is only walking around election time, being critical of me, but yet and still, cannot prove anything productive as a Plainfield councilman. He has one of the worst attendance records as a Council person when compared to any other council person for the last eight years.
I want to make it very clear for the record, Tony Rucker is running as a 2nd Ward council person, but the difference in my support for him and Cory is that he is going to be a council person for the people in the 2nd Ward, as well as serve everyone in Plainfield. We have both agreed that I have no intentions on influencing how he votes or how he serves the 2nd Ward. That is why his campaign is going to be managed and run by people in the 2nd Ward who have independent minds and have the experience to help move this City in the right direction. That was part of our agreement, and I plan on living up to that agreement.
The reason why I am giving him my support and the line is because I thought he was the best candidate for the 2nd Ward. So as far as my endorsement and the line go, that is where my influence for Tony Rucker ends. So I am hoping that the 2nd Ward would look at him as their candidate, and not my candidate.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
CHRISTIE ADMINISTRATION’S INDIFFERENCE PROMPTS CRYAN & GREENWALD TO SEEK TO CLOSE TAX ‘LOOPHOLES’ BEING EXPLOITED BY NJ’S WEALTHIEST
(TRENTON) – Assembly Majority Leader Joe Cryan and Budget Committee Chairman Lou Greenwald today took the first step toward closing any potential loopholes in New Jersey’s tax structure that might be exploited by the state’s wealthiest residents, as detailed by Christie administration officials in Sunday’s Star Ledger story.
The article focused on the impact that a millionaire’s tax may or may not have in forcing some of the state’s wealthiest to flee New Jersey. Treasury Department officials claim the millionaire’s tax would do little to increase revenue for the state because, “Once you start taxing people, they start finding ways to get more exemptions.”
In response, the legislative leaders today sent a letter to State Treasurer Andrew Sidamon-Eristoff today asking for a detailed explanation of the exemption “loopholes” that are being exploited so that the Legislature can craft measures to help end this exploitation.
“If the Treasury Department is well aware of these loopholes and has done nothing to close them, it would appear that the Christie administration is turning a blind eye to this exploitation in yet another attempt to protect their rich friends,” said Cryan (D-Union).
“It’s disturbing that the administration has taken such a laissez-faire approach to the known exploitation of our tax system by some of the state’s richest residents,” said Greenwald (D-Camden). “It’s time we put an end to this practice.”
A full copy of the letter is below.
The article focused on the impact that a millionaire’s tax may or may not have in forcing some of the state’s wealthiest to flee New Jersey. Treasury Department officials claim the millionaire’s tax would do little to increase revenue for the state because, “Once you start taxing people, they start finding ways to get more exemptions.”
In response, the legislative leaders today sent a letter to State Treasurer Andrew Sidamon-Eristoff today asking for a detailed explanation of the exemption “loopholes” that are being exploited so that the Legislature can craft measures to help end this exploitation.
“If the Treasury Department is well aware of these loopholes and has done nothing to close them, it would appear that the Christie administration is turning a blind eye to this exploitation in yet another attempt to protect their rich friends,” said Cryan (D-Union).
“It’s disturbing that the administration has taken such a laissez-faire approach to the known exploitation of our tax system by some of the state’s richest residents,” said Greenwald (D-Camden). “It’s time we put an end to this practice.”
A full copy of the letter is below.
April 19, 2011
After reading Dan Damon’s blog today, I brought these issues pertaining to the petitions to the attention of the clerk, which is my job as Chairman, to go over every petition. I questioned some of the signatures on various petitions, which I have the right to do. I questioned whether various signatures were valid because there were different signatures for the same name on various petitions.
Since the clerk brought to my attention that that is the responsibility of the court, I have decided not to pursue this issue any longer. So this will not cost the taxpayers one dime. I think what I have accomplished has served its purpose; that anything the New Democrats and Council present to the City, I will challenge. The issue is a dead issue. I will leave it up to the voters in the June primary.
Also, I have Hispanic candidates on my petitions. So to try and say that I am against Hispanics is not true. Within the last month, I have met with over 150 Hispanics to discuss education and job opportunities, ways to help benefit their community.
I find it very amusing that Dan Damon, the New Democrats, and their newfound friends, the Tea Party, would complain about any response they receive from the public in a negative way when the picture on his blog refers to me as a pitbull. Dan even posted a comment by an anonymous writer was that of calling me a dog. So I am not going to turn Plainfield upside down like they did when something was said about their friends. This is because people have their rights, and understanding that within the political arena, people from the gutter will cross the line and I have to accept that.
However, I am a human being, not a dog. As an elected official, I have to accept the fact that there are people within this City that were born and raised in the gutter, have a gutter mindset and will make these sorts of attacks. But keep in mind, in life, there is a two-way street.
So again, it is obvious that Dan is trying to make this campaign all about me, which is not going to happen. For the past six months, I have been asking some very simple questions:
1. The real estate deal that dealt with Cory and his family (these are questions I am asking, not accusing, but I do have a right to ask questions). Since he has been elected, how many real estate deals has his family benefited from?
2. We have a vendor who has been owed over $40,000 from the past administration of which Cory was a councilman. What going on?
3. We have pipes that were ordered and hidden from the public by the past administration of which Cory was a part of. How much did they cost and how much of a loss did the City take?
4. Dan Damon worked in City Hall for $65,000/yr, and to this day, no one knows what he did on a daily basis.
5. Cory and the past administration had over 13 projects on the table, in which we spent thousands of dollars in fees, and I would like to know which projects materialized.
So these, along with others, are questions I will be asking in the next eight weeks. What has Cory Storch done for the City of Plainfield for the last eight years?
Oh yes, let’s not forget about the train that the City of Plainfield paid for to Washington, D.C. When the train arrived in Washington, the majority of them arrived drunk. How much did this train ride cost the taxpayers of Plainfield?
Since the clerk brought to my attention that that is the responsibility of the court, I have decided not to pursue this issue any longer. So this will not cost the taxpayers one dime. I think what I have accomplished has served its purpose; that anything the New Democrats and Council present to the City, I will challenge. The issue is a dead issue. I will leave it up to the voters in the June primary.
Also, I have Hispanic candidates on my petitions. So to try and say that I am against Hispanics is not true. Within the last month, I have met with over 150 Hispanics to discuss education and job opportunities, ways to help benefit their community.
I find it very amusing that Dan Damon, the New Democrats, and their newfound friends, the Tea Party, would complain about any response they receive from the public in a negative way when the picture on his blog refers to me as a pitbull. Dan even posted a comment by an anonymous writer was that of calling me a dog. So I am not going to turn Plainfield upside down like they did when something was said about their friends. This is because people have their rights, and understanding that within the political arena, people from the gutter will cross the line and I have to accept that.
However, I am a human being, not a dog. As an elected official, I have to accept the fact that there are people within this City that were born and raised in the gutter, have a gutter mindset and will make these sorts of attacks. But keep in mind, in life, there is a two-way street.
So again, it is obvious that Dan is trying to make this campaign all about me, which is not going to happen. For the past six months, I have been asking some very simple questions:
1. The real estate deal that dealt with Cory and his family (these are questions I am asking, not accusing, but I do have a right to ask questions). Since he has been elected, how many real estate deals has his family benefited from?
2. We have a vendor who has been owed over $40,000 from the past administration of which Cory was a councilman. What going on?
3. We have pipes that were ordered and hidden from the public by the past administration of which Cory was a part of. How much did they cost and how much of a loss did the City take?
4. Dan Damon worked in City Hall for $65,000/yr, and to this day, no one knows what he did on a daily basis.
5. Cory and the past administration had over 13 projects on the table, in which we spent thousands of dollars in fees, and I would like to know which projects materialized.
So these, along with others, are questions I will be asking in the next eight weeks. What has Cory Storch done for the City of Plainfield for the last eight years?
Oh yes, let’s not forget about the train that the City of Plainfield paid for to Washington, D.C. When the train arrived in Washington, the majority of them arrived drunk. How much did this train ride cost the taxpayers of Plainfield?
Monday, April 18, 2011
Please check your facts regarding the Armory
I recently read a blog comment in Bernice’s blog from Rebecca Williams regarding the Armory. I was totally shocked at the misinformation that Rebecca gives to the public. As a council person this is why the council has become a joke in the state of New Jersey. After reading the comments I reached out for READ’s – the company that is working with the State and the charter school in trying to put this deal together. So for the councilwoman to say that the city will be on the hook is a total lie. In fact her comments are totally misleading. It is obvious that this council does not want to see anything accomplished with the current administration.
If you have read her comments on the blog and you read the letter that was sent to me from the READ’s group, you will find why Gov Christie is complaining about teachers like Rebecca Williams getting tenure and in reality if this is the way she teaches her students to conduct themselves as citizens then you can understand why the teachers are getting such a hard time.
I find it very offensive that someone that has been elected by the city of Plainfield blatantly puts out lies and misleads the public, when in reality any dummy would recognize that someone is going to do their homework on this issue.
1. The city is not going to be on the hook.
2. The city is not going to be financially responsible because the city has made its mind up that it is not going to support the children of Plainfield by not supporting a project that will help the children.
I am sure that the majority of you have read her comments. After reading her comments, I reached out to the developer to find out if anyone had changed their position on this issue. I was told they are still in negotiations with treasury department and the State to find ways of accomplishing this without any input from the city of Plainfield. Not one time did they mention that the city would be on the hook or that they needed the city to make this happen. Please be clear that in no place in this letter does it state that the city is responsible for anything.
Currently the State is negotiating with the charter school and the developer. I have posted the letter below that I received today from the developer.
Dear Assemblyman Green:
I wanted to let you know that we had a chance to speak with the NJ State Department of Treasury’s Division of Property Management and Construction about the Plainfield Armory. The Division of Property Management and Construction had the following to say about the Armory:
•The City of Plainfield still has the ability to negotiate for the sale or lease of the property I believe through June 30, 2011;
•However, the Division of Property Management and Construction is most interested in transferring ownership of the property and is willing to convey the property to a nonprofit owner directly such as our organization, READS;
•Should READS wish to buy the property, the State House Commission has the authority to sell the property to us directly; and
•Should the Armory sell for more than $500,000, a legislative act will also be necessary. Should the building sell for less than $500,000, the State House Commission has final authority.
I hope this clarifies the discussion with the NJ State Department of Treasury’s Division of Property Management and Construction.
Best,
Keith
It is obvious that Rebecca did not speak to anyone and she is clueless. The two parties involved – the developer and the State, make it very clear that there are ongoing discussions and the city is not involved.
If you have read her comments on the blog and you read the letter that was sent to me from the READ’s group, you will find why Gov Christie is complaining about teachers like Rebecca Williams getting tenure and in reality if this is the way she teaches her students to conduct themselves as citizens then you can understand why the teachers are getting such a hard time.
I find it very offensive that someone that has been elected by the city of Plainfield blatantly puts out lies and misleads the public, when in reality any dummy would recognize that someone is going to do their homework on this issue.
1. The city is not going to be on the hook.
2. The city is not going to be financially responsible because the city has made its mind up that it is not going to support the children of Plainfield by not supporting a project that will help the children.
I am sure that the majority of you have read her comments. After reading her comments, I reached out to the developer to find out if anyone had changed their position on this issue. I was told they are still in negotiations with treasury department and the State to find ways of accomplishing this without any input from the city of Plainfield. Not one time did they mention that the city would be on the hook or that they needed the city to make this happen. Please be clear that in no place in this letter does it state that the city is responsible for anything.
Currently the State is negotiating with the charter school and the developer. I have posted the letter below that I received today from the developer.
Dear Assemblyman Green:
I wanted to let you know that we had a chance to speak with the NJ State Department of Treasury’s Division of Property Management and Construction about the Plainfield Armory. The Division of Property Management and Construction had the following to say about the Armory:
•The City of Plainfield still has the ability to negotiate for the sale or lease of the property I believe through June 30, 2011;
•However, the Division of Property Management and Construction is most interested in transferring ownership of the property and is willing to convey the property to a nonprofit owner directly such as our organization, READS;
•Should READS wish to buy the property, the State House Commission has the authority to sell the property to us directly; and
•Should the Armory sell for more than $500,000, a legislative act will also be necessary. Should the building sell for less than $500,000, the State House Commission has final authority.
I hope this clarifies the discussion with the NJ State Department of Treasury’s Division of Property Management and Construction.
Best,
Keith
It is obvious that Rebecca did not speak to anyone and she is clueless. The two parties involved – the developer and the State, make it very clear that there are ongoing discussions and the city is not involved.
Urge Governor to Retract Statement and Apologize
I have not heard any of the fans of Gov. Chris Christie (Republican and Democrat) respond the the governor's verbally beating up on a 75 year old grandmother - my November opponent Joan Van Pelt has been especially quiet.
This type of behavior is not acceptable. Please join Asw Huttle, Wagner and I in urging the Governor to retract his comments and apologize to Sen. Weinberg.
VAINIERI HUTTLE & WAGNER ASK LEGISLATORS TO DENOUNCE GOVERNOR’S THREATENING COMMENTS TOWARD SEN. WEINBERG
(TRENTON) – Assemblywomen Valerie Vainieri Huttle and Connie Wagner on Friday sent letters to every New Jersey legislator asking them to publicly denounce Gov. Chris Christie’s threatening language toward Sen. Loretta Weinberg.
They also urged the governor to make a public retraction and apology for his offensive remark.
On Wednesday, during a news conference, the governor urged reporters to “take the bat out” against Weinberg, a 76-year-old Democratic senator from Bergen County.
“The governor’s offensive and disturbing language has no place in decent society,” said Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen). “Let’s be clear - this isn’t an issue of partisan politics. This is an issue of the governor’s lack of common decency. The Legislature needs to speak as one in denouncing the governor’s comments as unacceptable, not only toward women but to every New Jerseyan of good will who understands threatening language is wrong.”
“The governor’s comments are indefensible,” said Wagner (D-Bergen). “No one, no matter their role, should be advocating violence against a 76-year-old woman, or anyone for that matter. The governor may enjoy his rants, but the Legislature needs to make clear that the governor’s disturbing comment sets the worst example for everyone, particularly when it comes to respect toward women. New Jerseyans deserve better.”
PLEASE SEE LETTER BELOW
April 15, 2011
Dear colleague:
On Wednesday, April 13, during a public media availability, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, in reference to Democratic state Senator Loretta Weinberg, asked the assembled press corps, "Can you please take the bat out on her for once?"
No matter how the governor may try to spin his comments, what he said advocated violence against women. It is not part of his charm. It is not straight talk. It is not the tough talk New Jersey needs to hear. It is offensive speech, plain and simple.
As women, we were shocked, dismayed and disgusted that anyone, let alone the governor of the New Jersey, would make these kinds of comments. With domestic violence accounting for more than a third of all crime committed in the state,[1] we would have hoped that the governor was more attuned to the harm an individual in his position could cause by cavalierly calling for
violence against women.
As legislators, we were shocked that the governor would so flippantly and easily lend his voice to those who would like to undermine the efforts made by the New Jersey Legislature to provide equal compensation, representation and protections for women under the law. For all of us who have advocated for protecting the rights of women, particularly battered and abused women,
the governor's words were bone chilling.
And as New Jersey residents, we could not help but think of the example the governor is setting at home and across the rest of the country. What kind of message does his comment send to the thousands of children across the state who count the governor as a role model? What kind of example does it set for those who view Gov. Christie as a rising star in politics? Will they see his usage of violent imagery against women as a tacit endorsement that they may do the same?
The governor should know better. He should especially know better after signing the anti-bullying legislation earlier this year, a measure the governor has not seen fit to follow himself.
Yet, time and time again, Gov. Christie's actions prove otherwise, such as his continued opposition of critical health care funding for working class and poor women.
Allowing this type of hateful rhetoric to stand unchallenged is tantamount to lauding and encouraging it. And that is something we cannot allow.
If you believe, as we do, that women demand and deserve equal treatment from any and all individuals in any and all situations, we ask that you join us in condemning the governor's comments and demanding not just that he apologize but that he make a public retraction of his deplorable and misguided statement.
Let Gov. Christie know that you stand with us and women across New Jersey by publicly condemning the governor's comments and calling for him to make an immediate public apology and retraction.
Please register your support by calling Asw. Vainieri Huttle's office at (201) 541-1118 or by emailing aswvainierihuttle@njleg.org by 5 p.m. Wednesday.
Respectfully,
Assemblywoman Valerie Vainieri Huttle
District 37
Assemblywoman Connie Wagner
District 38
This type of behavior is not acceptable. Please join Asw Huttle, Wagner and I in urging the Governor to retract his comments and apologize to Sen. Weinberg.
VAINIERI HUTTLE & WAGNER ASK LEGISLATORS TO DENOUNCE GOVERNOR’S THREATENING COMMENTS TOWARD SEN. WEINBERG
(TRENTON) – Assemblywomen Valerie Vainieri Huttle and Connie Wagner on Friday sent letters to every New Jersey legislator asking them to publicly denounce Gov. Chris Christie’s threatening language toward Sen. Loretta Weinberg.
They also urged the governor to make a public retraction and apology for his offensive remark.
On Wednesday, during a news conference, the governor urged reporters to “take the bat out” against Weinberg, a 76-year-old Democratic senator from Bergen County.
“The governor’s offensive and disturbing language has no place in decent society,” said Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen). “Let’s be clear - this isn’t an issue of partisan politics. This is an issue of the governor’s lack of common decency. The Legislature needs to speak as one in denouncing the governor’s comments as unacceptable, not only toward women but to every New Jerseyan of good will who understands threatening language is wrong.”
“The governor’s comments are indefensible,” said Wagner (D-Bergen). “No one, no matter their role, should be advocating violence against a 76-year-old woman, or anyone for that matter. The governor may enjoy his rants, but the Legislature needs to make clear that the governor’s disturbing comment sets the worst example for everyone, particularly when it comes to respect toward women. New Jerseyans deserve better.”
PLEASE SEE LETTER BELOW
April 15, 2011
Dear colleague:
On Wednesday, April 13, during a public media availability, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, in reference to Democratic state Senator Loretta Weinberg, asked the assembled press corps, "Can you please take the bat out on her for once?"
No matter how the governor may try to spin his comments, what he said advocated violence against women. It is not part of his charm. It is not straight talk. It is not the tough talk New Jersey needs to hear. It is offensive speech, plain and simple.
As women, we were shocked, dismayed and disgusted that anyone, let alone the governor of the New Jersey, would make these kinds of comments. With domestic violence accounting for more than a third of all crime committed in the state,[1] we would have hoped that the governor was more attuned to the harm an individual in his position could cause by cavalierly calling for
violence against women.
As legislators, we were shocked that the governor would so flippantly and easily lend his voice to those who would like to undermine the efforts made by the New Jersey Legislature to provide equal compensation, representation and protections for women under the law. For all of us who have advocated for protecting the rights of women, particularly battered and abused women,
the governor's words were bone chilling.
And as New Jersey residents, we could not help but think of the example the governor is setting at home and across the rest of the country. What kind of message does his comment send to the thousands of children across the state who count the governor as a role model? What kind of example does it set for those who view Gov. Christie as a rising star in politics? Will they see his usage of violent imagery against women as a tacit endorsement that they may do the same?
The governor should know better. He should especially know better after signing the anti-bullying legislation earlier this year, a measure the governor has not seen fit to follow himself.
Yet, time and time again, Gov. Christie's actions prove otherwise, such as his continued opposition of critical health care funding for working class and poor women.
Allowing this type of hateful rhetoric to stand unchallenged is tantamount to lauding and encouraging it. And that is something we cannot allow.
If you believe, as we do, that women demand and deserve equal treatment from any and all individuals in any and all situations, we ask that you join us in condemning the governor's comments and demanding not just that he apologize but that he make a public retraction of his deplorable and misguided statement.
Let Gov. Christie know that you stand with us and women across New Jersey by publicly condemning the governor's comments and calling for him to make an immediate public apology and retraction.
Please register your support by calling Asw. Vainieri Huttle's office at (201) 541-1118 or by emailing aswvainierihuttle@njleg.org by 5 p.m. Wednesday.
Respectfully,
Assemblywoman Valerie Vainieri Huttle
District 37
Assemblywoman Connie Wagner
District 38
Friday, April 15, 2011
Cleaning Up the Local Potpourri
Reading Doc’s blog today, I would like to make myself VERY clear. Often when people read something they like to put spins on the content, and the spin they place on it makes no sense whatsoever.
When I mentioned the investigation regarding the Mayor and $20k, it would have been very simple on everyone’s part, the Council and even Doc yourself, to pick up the phone and call the Attorney General’s office to file a complaint as a taxpayer in the City of Plainfield. That office would have taken the appropriate steps to bring in professional investigators to investigate the matter. If anything criminal was to come out of it, it is obvious that the individuals involved would leave themselves wide open for criminal charges.
That is no different than the ‘Scarlet Letter’ matter; the same steps could have been taken. Leave that up to the professionals in law enforcement to investigate these matters. If anything criminal has been done, then it is up to them to use the system for these individuals to pay for their crime.
What I see and hear is a lot of grand-standing, and Doc this what I mean when I say this is small when compared to the budget problems in which the City is facing. The Council has spent the first three months of this year on issues that really should be reported to the AG’s office or the Prosecutor if they feel something has been done wrong. Why are we wasting taxpayers’ time and money by hiring lawyers that will ultimately send this issue to the AG’s office or Prosecutor’s office?
There have been some Council members who have voted and supported activities that have cost this City considerably more monies than that which they are accusing the Mayor. I am not supporting or defending any of the Mayor’s or Council’s actions. Whether it is the $20k, the ‘Scarlet Letter’, or the pipes that were bought and hidden from the taxpayers wherein there was no use for them.
When the Council from the past administration financed a train ride to Washington with taxpayer’s dollars, appointed members to the PMUA and benefited from those things which they now criticize… We can go on and on but the bottom line is that no matter how many lawyers we hire, the Prosecutor is still going to be the final voice in deciding whether or not we pursue this issue. I guarantee you that just about all of these issues have been brought to his attention.
So now to use this as a political issue, I say to the Council, let’s start talking about issues that the City is facing. Do not use the excuse that you will only have a week to make a decision on the budget, when I have been telling you for over a year that you cannot change the bottom-line but you can make line item changes.
Let’s stop trying to make fools out of the public by passing special resolutions that go nowhere, especially Cory Storch, who thought I did something wrong, and went to the Prosecutor. After the Prosecutor investigated his concerns and interviewed me regarding this matter, he concluded I did NOTHING wrong.
So Councilman Storch knows the process because he has used it before. It is time now to talk about the future of Plainfield, and how we are going to deal with this year’s budget.
So Doc, no disrespect, but I have yet to hear you talk about whether we are going to have to lay off police officers, are we going to have to cut services, or will the quality of life issues be negatively affected by the cuts in Trenton. Not one time have any of the bloggers brought to the attention of the Plainfield residents, like other towns have, how the unions are being crippled, the teachers being disrespected, people no longer receiving homestead rebate checks, how healthcare services are going to be cut back, how UEZs are going to be eliminated…
I can go on and on, so I do not have time to be critical of anyone other than the fact that as a City, we should keep our eyes on the big picture. We should be talking about how the Republican Party in Washington is disrespecting the President, and how cities like Plainfield, not just low-medium income residents, but the average taxpayer is under attack.
So let’s change the conversation and start talking about these issues, rather than talk about something that is going nowhere. For if you feel there is something out there that you can prove, please take it to the Prosecutor. It is sad that Plainfield has a council person that for eight years has done nothing but spend his time on nonsense. He personally had me investigated, but he will not print that because he knows I did nothing wrong.
Ps
I should have mentioned that his campaign manager was also one of the individuals that were complaining. So they can spend the next eight weeks talking about a letter and an investigation while I will spend the next eight weeks talking about the issues that affect the people here in the State of New Jersey, especially the 22nd District. Unfortunately, some people are clueless and cannot even discuss the issues, let alone discuss solutions.
When I mentioned the investigation regarding the Mayor and $20k, it would have been very simple on everyone’s part, the Council and even Doc yourself, to pick up the phone and call the Attorney General’s office to file a complaint as a taxpayer in the City of Plainfield. That office would have taken the appropriate steps to bring in professional investigators to investigate the matter. If anything criminal was to come out of it, it is obvious that the individuals involved would leave themselves wide open for criminal charges.
That is no different than the ‘Scarlet Letter’ matter; the same steps could have been taken. Leave that up to the professionals in law enforcement to investigate these matters. If anything criminal has been done, then it is up to them to use the system for these individuals to pay for their crime.
What I see and hear is a lot of grand-standing, and Doc this what I mean when I say this is small when compared to the budget problems in which the City is facing. The Council has spent the first three months of this year on issues that really should be reported to the AG’s office or the Prosecutor if they feel something has been done wrong. Why are we wasting taxpayers’ time and money by hiring lawyers that will ultimately send this issue to the AG’s office or Prosecutor’s office?
There have been some Council members who have voted and supported activities that have cost this City considerably more monies than that which they are accusing the Mayor. I am not supporting or defending any of the Mayor’s or Council’s actions. Whether it is the $20k, the ‘Scarlet Letter’, or the pipes that were bought and hidden from the taxpayers wherein there was no use for them.
When the Council from the past administration financed a train ride to Washington with taxpayer’s dollars, appointed members to the PMUA and benefited from those things which they now criticize… We can go on and on but the bottom line is that no matter how many lawyers we hire, the Prosecutor is still going to be the final voice in deciding whether or not we pursue this issue. I guarantee you that just about all of these issues have been brought to his attention.
So now to use this as a political issue, I say to the Council, let’s start talking about issues that the City is facing. Do not use the excuse that you will only have a week to make a decision on the budget, when I have been telling you for over a year that you cannot change the bottom-line but you can make line item changes.
Let’s stop trying to make fools out of the public by passing special resolutions that go nowhere, especially Cory Storch, who thought I did something wrong, and went to the Prosecutor. After the Prosecutor investigated his concerns and interviewed me regarding this matter, he concluded I did NOTHING wrong.
So Councilman Storch knows the process because he has used it before. It is time now to talk about the future of Plainfield, and how we are going to deal with this year’s budget.
So Doc, no disrespect, but I have yet to hear you talk about whether we are going to have to lay off police officers, are we going to have to cut services, or will the quality of life issues be negatively affected by the cuts in Trenton. Not one time have any of the bloggers brought to the attention of the Plainfield residents, like other towns have, how the unions are being crippled, the teachers being disrespected, people no longer receiving homestead rebate checks, how healthcare services are going to be cut back, how UEZs are going to be eliminated…
I can go on and on, so I do not have time to be critical of anyone other than the fact that as a City, we should keep our eyes on the big picture. We should be talking about how the Republican Party in Washington is disrespecting the President, and how cities like Plainfield, not just low-medium income residents, but the average taxpayer is under attack.
So let’s change the conversation and start talking about these issues, rather than talk about something that is going nowhere. For if you feel there is something out there that you can prove, please take it to the Prosecutor. It is sad that Plainfield has a council person that for eight years has done nothing but spend his time on nonsense. He personally had me investigated, but he will not print that because he knows I did nothing wrong.
Ps
I should have mentioned that his campaign manager was also one of the individuals that were complaining. So they can spend the next eight weeks talking about a letter and an investigation while I will spend the next eight weeks talking about the issues that affect the people here in the State of New Jersey, especially the 22nd District. Unfortunately, some people are clueless and cannot even discuss the issues, let alone discuss solutions.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Clark School District is Awarded SDA Grant
I am happy to share the below announcement of a $213,502 grant awarded through the Schools Development Authority's (SDA) Regular Operating District Grant Program. I am very proud of the administration, the student body and the parents and I commend them on their continued hard work and efforts.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
April 12, 2011
I have spent the last month working with leadership on the redistricting of the new legislative map for the State of New Jersey. I am happy that the 22nd District will stay the same. Also, as Chairman of the local party, I spoke to all of the candidates that were seeking an opportunity to be elected on Council for the June Primary. The only person I did not talk to was Delois Dameron. Although I have had a long working relationship with her as a campaign worker for the Democratic Party over the years, it was her decision not to call me or talk to me about her intentions. I find her to be a nice person, and I wish her the best of luck.
Four years ago, I gave the line to Cory, and last year, upon Rebecca Williams asking for my support, I did not give it to her. So I find it very odd that from the beginning, they have a problem with me supporting Tony Rucker as the candidate for this year’s Primary race. In the past, I also supported Al McWilliams. As a matter of fact, I have support just about all of the New Democrats who have basically asked for my support. Being that I thought they were the best candidates at that time, I supported them. The two years the New Democrats and the late Al McWilliams controlled the Plainfield Democratic City Committee, they used the same process I used this past committee meeting. If I recall correctly, Rebecca Williams was the campaign director, at that time she said nothing, and she did not speak out against the process. Now that I am using the same process, in every comment in which she references the City Committee, she wants to make me sound like a dictator. I guess in her mind, the rules change when they are convenient to her.
So I feel that it is very unfair to be critical of Tony Rucker, because I feel he is the best candidate for the second ward. He made it very clear to me that he will not be a rubber stamper, and that he is running to make life better for ALL of the residents of Plainfield, including the second ward. He made no promises to me, and I made no promises to him.
At the committee meeting, we heard from a council person who has represented the second ward for eight years, but could not speak of one thing in which he has done as a council person. After hearing his presentation, I knew I was making the right decision by supporting a new face, a person with new ideas, and a person who wants the best for the City of Plainfield.
Already, some of the negative comments that have been said lead me into the next issue in which I would like to bring clarification.
Number one, when I mention the Prosecutor, I have taken to him numerous letters and blog comments that I felt had crossed the line, and some have been investigated, but none of them crossed the line. Just like I did not support those anonymous letters, I do not support the recent letter that has been circulated within City Hall. If anyone used City equipment, or did this on City time, then they deserve to be prosecuted.
I just feel that some people will try to make an issue that they have no proof as to who did or even where it was done, but will try to makes others feel guilty. Already, I see council members spending more time talking about investigation. Whether it is the $20,000 the Mayor spent, or other issues I feel are minor when compared to this year’s budget. They have already had three months to sit down with the Board of Education, where the council members and board members have joint meetings to see where they could consolidate services that will avoid negatively impacting the classroom and teaching staff.
So I would like the City of Plainfield to wake up today and hold their elected officials accountable to the millions of dollars the City will lose in this year’s budget. I have not yet heard from the Board nor the Council, nor have they asked for any meetings to discuss what we can do regarding avoiding the cutting of services that will negatively impact the quality of life for the citizens of Plainfield.
In the campaign that I plan on running this year, I have no intentions of feeding into the ‘feel-good’ comments made by the anonymous bloggers. The majority of them I know are Republicans or connected to the Republican Party. Just recently, we lost millions of dollars in education funding, and are on the brink of losing millions in transportation funding, but I am not surprised that these Tea Party members, which include some Democrats, will never speak out against anything when it comes to the Republican Party.
So I am hoping that we can talk about the budget, crime, education, the condition of the downtown area, quality of life issues, as well as the quality of the streets and roads of Plainfield, because I have no intentions of ignoring these issues in this year’s campaign.
Ps
The Council cannot use the excuse that they used last year by saying that they only had a week to look at the budget when they have had over 90 days this year’s to sit with the BOE to discuss the budget. The Council has spent those 90 days doing nothing. They probably could have saved the tax payers money by being more concerned with tax dollars than paying attention to what they have been doing for the last eight years; knocking on doors and being critical of government, but never stating what they could do to improve government.
Four years ago, I gave the line to Cory, and last year, upon Rebecca Williams asking for my support, I did not give it to her. So I find it very odd that from the beginning, they have a problem with me supporting Tony Rucker as the candidate for this year’s Primary race. In the past, I also supported Al McWilliams. As a matter of fact, I have support just about all of the New Democrats who have basically asked for my support. Being that I thought they were the best candidates at that time, I supported them. The two years the New Democrats and the late Al McWilliams controlled the Plainfield Democratic City Committee, they used the same process I used this past committee meeting. If I recall correctly, Rebecca Williams was the campaign director, at that time she said nothing, and she did not speak out against the process. Now that I am using the same process, in every comment in which she references the City Committee, she wants to make me sound like a dictator. I guess in her mind, the rules change when they are convenient to her.
So I feel that it is very unfair to be critical of Tony Rucker, because I feel he is the best candidate for the second ward. He made it very clear to me that he will not be a rubber stamper, and that he is running to make life better for ALL of the residents of Plainfield, including the second ward. He made no promises to me, and I made no promises to him.
At the committee meeting, we heard from a council person who has represented the second ward for eight years, but could not speak of one thing in which he has done as a council person. After hearing his presentation, I knew I was making the right decision by supporting a new face, a person with new ideas, and a person who wants the best for the City of Plainfield.
Already, some of the negative comments that have been said lead me into the next issue in which I would like to bring clarification.
Number one, when I mention the Prosecutor, I have taken to him numerous letters and blog comments that I felt had crossed the line, and some have been investigated, but none of them crossed the line. Just like I did not support those anonymous letters, I do not support the recent letter that has been circulated within City Hall. If anyone used City equipment, or did this on City time, then they deserve to be prosecuted.
I just feel that some people will try to make an issue that they have no proof as to who did or even where it was done, but will try to makes others feel guilty. Already, I see council members spending more time talking about investigation. Whether it is the $20,000 the Mayor spent, or other issues I feel are minor when compared to this year’s budget. They have already had three months to sit down with the Board of Education, where the council members and board members have joint meetings to see where they could consolidate services that will avoid negatively impacting the classroom and teaching staff.
So I would like the City of Plainfield to wake up today and hold their elected officials accountable to the millions of dollars the City will lose in this year’s budget. I have not yet heard from the Board nor the Council, nor have they asked for any meetings to discuss what we can do regarding avoiding the cutting of services that will negatively impact the quality of life for the citizens of Plainfield.
In the campaign that I plan on running this year, I have no intentions of feeding into the ‘feel-good’ comments made by the anonymous bloggers. The majority of them I know are Republicans or connected to the Republican Party. Just recently, we lost millions of dollars in education funding, and are on the brink of losing millions in transportation funding, but I am not surprised that these Tea Party members, which include some Democrats, will never speak out against anything when it comes to the Republican Party.
So I am hoping that we can talk about the budget, crime, education, the condition of the downtown area, quality of life issues, as well as the quality of the streets and roads of Plainfield, because I have no intentions of ignoring these issues in this year’s campaign.
Ps
The Council cannot use the excuse that they used last year by saying that they only had a week to look at the budget when they have had over 90 days this year’s to sit with the BOE to discuss the budget. The Council has spent those 90 days doing nothing. They probably could have saved the tax payers money by being more concerned with tax dollars than paying attention to what they have been doing for the last eight years; knocking on doors and being critical of government, but never stating what they could do to improve government.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)