From The Editor’s Desk
From The Editor’s Desk (Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Feb. 9,
2011)
Before the state Department of Education (DOE) took-over
school-construction management for the 31 Abbott or “special needs” school districts, Perth
Amboy’s district managed a massive $75 million construction program that led
to quality schools at lower cost.
With the Abbott program on-hold and loosening-up of centralized control
under Gov. Christopher Christie, the Board of Education voted unanimously at
its last meeting to authorize an application to DOE requesting the district be
“named eligible” to manage its own school-construction projects.
“I believe the district’s track-record speaks for itself: the new Wilentz
School, and renovations to two middle schools and three elementary schools,”
Superintendent of Schools John Rodecker declared. “We’ve demonstrated our
ability to manage and build our own projects.
“We took a district where the average age of its schools was closing-in on
100-years-old to one of the most-modern districts in the state in terms of
its schools,” he said.
Mr. Rodecker pointed out that “under the Schools Construction Corp. (SCC),
we supplied the plans for the first two schools, the Richardson School and
the Cruz Early Childhood Learning Center.
“The only school constructed solely by the state — the Hmieleski Early
Childhood Learning Center — took a-lot-longer because there were a-lot-more
delays,” he stated. “This makes sense.
“The big point now is finding the funds to allow us to do this,” Mr.
Rodecker added.
During the public portion, former Board member Greg Diaz pointed out that
even-though DOE is “allowing the school-system to do its own construction, we
still have to go to the state for funding.”
“Even with us managing our own construction, the SDA (Schools Development
Authority) will still remain as the bank,” Mr. Rodecker agreed. “Even if we
approve the hiring of our own professionals, we’re not going to get-out from
under the state’s approval process.
“But if we manage our own construction projects, we WILL be more-efficient,
in my opinion.” he stated.
We agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Rodecker and the Board. Instead of
economies-of-scale, DOE’s construction program brought inefficiency and corruption.
In the past, Perth Amboy’s district was able to “bank” its surplus and set
those funds aside, to be used for school-construction purposes. However,
former Gov. Jon Corzine forced all school districts to utilize most of their
remaining surplus in their operating budgets by reducing their state-aid by a
like amount.
Local districts must again be permitted to utilize any excess surpluses
they have to build their own schools, saving taxpayers millions and speeding-up
completion of needed schools.
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Jan. 12, 2011)
Late last year, the Middlesex County Board of Freeholders backed-off from
its previous principled opposition to plans to run a natural-gas pipeline
through Perth Amboy and parts of neighboring municipalities, some of the
most-densely-populated areas in the county.
The Freeholders chose not to take any action on a Resolution urging
Liberty Natural Gas LLC to “redesign” its proposed 36-inch pipeline, which would
travel through Perth Amboy under only three feet of soil with virtually no
security before crossing-into Woodbridge Township on its way to a terminal in
Linden.
The massive Liberty Gas pipeline would have its genesis at an LNG
conversion facility, located 16 miles off the swimming-beaches of Monmouth County,
before turning northward, rounding Sandy Hook and dropping to the bottom of
Raritan Bay, surfacing in Perth Amboy at the foot of Second Street and
traveling along the NJTransit right-of-way through heavily-populated residential
sections of the historic “City by the Bay.”
As proposed, the pipeline would follow a route passing near the Wilentz
School on its way to the Perth Amboy train station, go through Hidden Village,
past the Patten School, run along Harbortown and under the Outerbridge
Crossing, and continue past Kinder-Morgan, Chevron, Hess and the Northeast
Redevelopment Area.
The route proposed for this pipeline — passing tank-farms containing
petroleum products and other dangerous chemicals — is recognized as one of the
highest-potentially-hazardous routes along the East Coast.
A united front is needed to do whatever must be done to block construction
of this pipeline. Mounting a successful effort will require alliances with
officials and residents of neighboring communities, as well as the county.
One answer is to continue the pipeline’s track underwater, where there’s
less-chance of sabotage or even just a design-failure, but it appears that
Liberty has given no consideration whatsoever to the potential danger of r
unning-through the heart of Perth Amboy.
As for the county going AWOL on this issue, rumors abound that politics is
rearing its ugly head, and it’s not because Perth Amboy hasn’t continued to
produce substantial victory-margins for successful county Democrats.
County Democrats reportedly are still smarting over Mayor Wilda Diaz
taking-out former Mayor Joseph Vas, one of the party’s biggest fundraisers, who
was later indicted and convicted on corruption charges.
They’re not saying that, but sources indicate they are instead sniping-at
her Administration behind-the-scenes for “letting the Republicans run
things,” referring to Business Administrator Gregory Fehrenbach and City Law
Director Mark Blunda, who are rumored to be Republicans.
We sincerely hope that this kind of petty backstabbing isn’t true, but we
don’t buy the “official” line that county government has “no authority” to
take-a-stand on this issue.
(From The Editor’s Desk, Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Dec. 22,
2010)
As we conclude our 17th year of serving the Middlesex County Bayshore,
we’re looking-forward to continuing to bring our readers the best-possible
coverage of events in Perth Amboy, South Amboy and surrounding areas affecting
residents of our primary communities.
For 2011, we intend to improve our efforts to reach-out to our readership
area with the best-possible coverage of events, as befitting Middlesex County
’s largest weekly newspaper, which we’re proud to say we’ve become.
In order to do this, we’re planning to improve the marketing of our product
with all the tools that are available to us.
As we’ve noted previously, advertising serves two purposes affecting the
public interest: it provides revenue to enable a publication to continue
publishing news-stories that keep its readership informed, and it presents
information directly-highlighting activities by those entities themselves.
The Amboy Beacon remains second-to-none in its presentation of “hard news”
to residents of the two cities which are our primary focus of coverage.
However, we do recognize that “hard news” isn’t everything, and we do run
feature-stories and human-interest pieces as we become aware of such information.
At the same time, we pledge to continue publishing the “hard news” which
our readers have come to expect to see in these pages. You are the people who
pay the bills, and public officials must be expected to adhere to the
highest ethical standards in the performance of their duties. If they do not,
then it’s up to the media to bring such matters to the attention of their
consumers as well as to those authorities designated to enforce the laws.
We won’t shirk our responsibilities even if it means losing advertising
from public entities which have been designated to carry-out their duties in a
trustworthy and above-board manner.
We depend-upon our readers to respond to our advertisers, which in-turn
provides us with the revenues needed to continue publishing.
The launching of our blogsite (amboybeacon.blogspot.com) marks what we
expect to be an exciting new phase for the Amboy Beacon, the ONLY newspaper ever
to have been honored with the N.J. Society of Professional Journalists
Stuart & Beverley Awbrey Award for Distinguished Public Service (2001 and 2008).
Will that be the end of our quest for recognition? We doubt it!
We wish everyone a healthy and happy holiday season as we prepare to take a
week off to rest-up for another year of publishing
From The Editor’s DeskFrom The Editor’s Desk
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Dec. 15, 2010)
Isn’t it a “no-brainer” that if you have the opportunity to hire the top
person to whom other city Business Administrators and the N.J. League of
Municipalities turn for advice for under $200,000, without having to pay any
benefits whatsoever?
Apparently, four members of Perth Amboy’s City Council thought-so when they
voted last week to confirm the appointment of Gregory Fehrenbach as
Business Administrator by Mayor Wilda Diaz.
The Resolution was moved by Councilman William Petrick, seconded by
Councilman Kenneth Gonzalez and adopted 4-1.
The lone holdout, Councilman Fernando Gonzalez, explained that he voted
“no” on the confirmation because Mr. Fehrenbach would be granted a waiver from
the city’s residency requirement as part of his employment package.
“Due to the residency, I do not waive it,” Councilman Fernando Gonzalez
declared. “I vote ‘no.’”
Mr. Fehrenbach’s experience spans nearly four decades and includes numerous
stints as Sussex County Administrator and work for Dover Township, Edison,
Lakewood, New Brunswick, Ocean Township and Piscataway, and consulting in
Bergen and Union Counties.
“His knowledge-base is such that he’s acknowledged as one of the
most-recognized municipal-government people in the State of New Jersey,” said City
Law Director Mark Blunda, who was called-upon by Mayor Diaz to do independent
research on Mr. Fehrenbach.
“He has frequently testified before the State Legislature on loca
l-government matters as well as the League of Municipalities,” Mr. Blunda went-on.
“When he telephones state officials, they call him back and they listen.”
Mr. Fehrenbach’s ability to understand and analyze complex financial
matters, and to explain them to laymen, is often cited by city officials in
dealing with the man referred to by Mr. Blunda as “the Derek Jeter of the
profession.”
“He announced a tax-increase on July 1, and he got a standing-ovation,”
Council President Kenneth Balut said of Mr. Fehrenbach, who was first
brought-aboard in an “acting” capacity — along with Mr. Blunda — by Mayor Diaz, a
newcomer to elective public office, at her first Council Reorganization on
July 1, 2008, following her defeat of 18 year-incumbent Mayor Joseph Vas by
about 1,200 votes less than two months earlier.
Mr. Fehrenbach served as Interim Business Administrator through Jan. 5,
2009, when former Trenton Business Administrator Jane Feigenbaum was appointed
as Business Administrator by Mayor Diaz at a $130,000 salary, plus the usual
benefits that go with that job.
Mr. Fehrenbach continued to work on an “as-needed” basis as a consultant
on various projects requiring his expertise, returning as Interim Business
Administrator on Sept. 22, following his presentation of “a session on
budgeting in New Jersey local government” at a Council Special Meeting to get
newly-elected Councilmen Kenneth Gonzalez, Joel Pabon Sr. and Petrick
up-to-speed on financial issues they would be facing.
As predicted in the Amboy Beacon’s Sept. 8 edition, Ms. Feigenbaum
resigned, and the Council voted to confirm the Mayor’s appointment of Mr. Fehrenbach
on a 90-day contract through Government Management Advisors LLC at the
monthly rate of $17,500 and to waive the residency requirement on 3-1 vote, with
Councilman Fernando Gonzalez again opposed because of the residency-waiver,
and Council President Balut absent.
Under his newest contract with Perth Amboy, Mr. Fehrenbach is to be paid
for the next six months at the hourly rate of $125 “for no more than an
average of 133 hours per month,” but with no benefits package.
Mr. Fehrenbach “will be paid only for the hours that he works,” Mr. Blunda
said.
Our position over the years has been to favor enforcement of the city’s
residency requirement and to oppose waivers because we strongly-believe that,
ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, the city’s top officials should live in the
city.
Moreover, we don’t think it’s fair to harass a laborer about residency
when a department head can live outside the city.
However, in the case of Mr. Fehrenbach, we don’t believe that there’s
anyone-else comparable to him living in Perth Amboy.
Perhaps resident Alan Silber said it best.
“It’s not a matter of whether someone lives in Perth Amboy, although I
invite Mr. Fehrenbach to move here,” he said. “We had people who lived here,
and they’re going to jail. Living here doesn’t make you a good person.”
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Dec. 8, 2010)
We hate to say, “We told you so,” but we predicted that the Perth Amboy
City Council’s 4:30 p.m. Monday Caucus session would be a flop.
It was easy to predict. During the Otlowski Administration, similar
afternoon meeting were held, and very-few residents were there.
Why is it that governments never get-it? It’s like repeating the same
mistake with the Susan B. Anthony dollar after the 20-cent piece flopped.
Following-up on comments made by resident Alan Silber at the City Council’s
first 4:30 p.m. Monday Caucus session on Oct. 25, Reinaldo Aviles called
the afternoon session “a waste-of-time.”
Besides Department heads and other city officials, and newspaper reporters,
the only “member of the public” in the audience on Oct. 25 was Mr. Silber,
a frequent attendee at Council and Board of Education meetings, who asked,
“What makes this a public meeting? Where’s the public?”
But the Nov. 22 session was not much-better. Mr. Aviles looked-around and
saw that there was only one other “member of the public” besides himself.
“What’s this meeting for?” he asked at its conclusion. “It seems to be a
waste-of-time.”
Mr. Aviles had advocated holding a Caucus, but what he envisioned was “a
working session where you’re actually working, where the directors come to
you, where the public comes to you, and you hash things around.”
We don’t remember Mr. Aviles or anyone-else, for that matter, proposing
that the Council hold a Caucus session in the afternoon, while most of the
public is working.
“Having a public meeting at 4:30 isn’t encouraging the public to attend,”
Mr. Silber noted in October, pointing out that he’s retired, so he’s able
to make-it to the meetings, but far-more residents are working at 4:30, and
most get-off their jobs at 5 p.m. or later.
“What part of the public’s going to come?” he asked Council members. Good
question!
“We’re trying something different,” Council President Kenneth Balut
replied. “If it doesn’t work, we can always try something-else.”
Speaking of trying something-else, we have to commend the Council for
finally getting-it-right by having public portions — opportunities for the public
to speak — at both the beginning and the end of its regular meetings.
This way, the public can speak on agenda items — other than Ordinances,
which have their own public hearings — before the governing body takes-action
on them, and the public can speak on all other subjects under city
jurisdiction at the end.
So-far, it seems to be working fairly-well as a compromise with the
Council’s previous practice of allowing public discussion on EACH Resolution as it
came-up, which was taking a lot of time.
However, it would have been nice if the Council had forewarned the public
instead of springing the change on everyone.
The City Clerk’s announcement at the Council’s last meeting that
Handicapped Parking Amendments to the city’s Parking Ordinance will be done quarterly
beginning in January because “advertising and affidavits are
just-too-expensive” was an interesting twist.
If the Council had continued publishing them in this newspaper — as the
statutes clearly require them to do — the issue of “excessive-cost” never
would have arisen.
Instead, the Council voted on July 1, 2010 to designate a newspaper
published out-of-county as the city’s sole Official Newspaper, thus precluding not
only themselves, but also the Board of Education, Community Development and
the Redevelopment Agency, among others, from being able to choose their
publication while also realizing tremendous savings.
We don’t want to hear any squealing by the Council about how-difficult it
is to operate within a two-percent budget “cap,” so long as this misguided
decision stands.
From The Editor’s Desk
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Dec. 1, 2010)
Some holidays tend-to bring-out the best in people. Christmas is one
obvious example of this; another is Thanksiving. We don’t believe that it’s just
a coincidence for both of these holidays to be considered “family” holidays.
In Perth Amboy, this Thanksgiving seemed to provide more than the usual
example for this proposition. We don’t know whether or not it was just our
perception, but it just appeared to us that this Thanksgiving saw more sharing
than we’ve seen in previous years.
As a community newspaper, we try to reflect what’s going-on in the
community we cover, which stretches from Sewaren in the north to Cliffwood Beach in
the south. That includes photographic and writing-about the happenings
within this large area, encompassing the entire Middlesex County Bayshore.
Whether it’s really-true or not, it just seemed to us like there were more
FREE and open-to-the-public traditional Thanksgiving turkey dinners this
year, particularly in Perth Amboy, where some 2,000 dinners were served to many
of those less-fortunate among us.
Such an outpouring of charity prompted local developer and BID Advisory
Board Chairman Barry Rosengarten to refer-to Perth Amboy as the “City of G
iving,” which the Amboy Beacon has picked-up in our photographic coverage of this
phenomenon.
Many churches and organizations that are particularly-known for doing this
— such as the Salvation Army — participated in this spirit of giving,
supported by the generosity of those who could afford to donate money and/or food.
We’d like to thank all of these groups for carrying-on, throughout the
year, to help our fellow human beings through adverse circumstances, whether of
a temporary nature or not. With double-digit unemployment the norm and not
the exception in most areas, those of us who do hold a job should dig a
little deeper to assist the others, for loss of income could happen to
almost-anyone.
With all of this in-mind, we’d like to call particular attention to a
successful businessman who’s doing something substantial to give-back to the
people of Perth Amboy, where he was able to make a more-than-just comfortable
living as a developer, a real estate investor and a supermarket-owner.
Eddie Trujillo, a partner in Supremo Food Market, Smith Street, and his
family sponsored the largest mass-feeding of the season, the 2010 Thanksgiving
Friendship Feast honoring the memory of his late mother, Andrea Trujillo, at
St. Demetrios’ Greek Orthodox Church Hall, Wisteria Street.
With the support of White Rose Foods and other food-suppliers, plus dozens
of volunteers from St. Vincent dePaul Food Pantry, Christian Brothers
Academy and local businesses, the Trujillo family was able to provide traditional
Thanksgiving dinners for a crowd of almost 600, accommodated with two
seatings (12:30 to 3 p.m. and 3:30 to 5:30 p.m.).
Not only was everyone who came to the door fed, but also many of them left
with over 100 prizes, including major appliances and electronics.
Andrea Trujillo, who lived in Perth Amboy for almost 40 years, came from
very-humble beginnings but always gave to those less-fortunate than her.
Andrea Trujillo’s favorite holiday was Thanksgiving, and Eddie made a promise to
honor her memory in this way.
“It’s too-bad that others who have the means to do this choose not-to,”
Councilman Kenneth Gonzalez said, as he stared in awe of what was happening
around him.
We know that Mr. Trujillo didn’t do this to gain recognition, but we’d
like to bring this to everyone’s attention anyway in hopes that others might
emulate what he’s done for the past two years for his “extended family.”
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Nov. 24, 2010)
It was a patient Monmouth County Superior Court Judge who finally convinced
the wavering former Perth Amboy Mayor Joseph Vas last week to take a
plea-deal offered by the state Attorney General’s Office.
Observers regarded the deal as a no-brainer because it meant a
drastically-reduction in his prison time, but Mr. Vas hesitated several times throughout
the afternoon, apparently not wanting to admit that he committed several
crimes — a requirement when you enter a guilty-plea. Eventually, however, he
did agree to accept the deal.
As a result of the delays by Mr. Vas, the Monmouth County Courthouse,
Freehold, had to be kept-open after-hours, and Judge Anthony Mellaci Jr., Court
personnel and Sheriff’s officers assigned to the courtroom had to stay late.
Even Assignment Judge Lawrence Lawson stopped-by.
On the other hand, his longtime Mayor’s Aide Melvin Ramos quickly accepted
a similar deal in the morning under terms outlined by Deputy Attorney
General Diane Deal.
Mr. Ramos pleaded guilty to one count each of Money-Laundering and
Conspiracy in exchange for a seven-year prison sentence, of which he must serve
about a year and four months before becoming eligible for parole.
The sentence for the state charges would run concurrently with any prison
term Mr. Ramos receives for his Oct. 8 federal conviction conviction in U.S.
District Court, Newark, when he is sentenced by Judge Susan Wigenton in
March for accepting illegal campaign contributions for the 2006 Vas campaign for
the Democratic nomination in the 13th Congressional District.
The remaining 10 counts against Mr. Ramos in the two state indictments
would be dismissed under the plea-deal.
But Mr. Vas got-up and left Judge Mellaci’s courtroom after the Judge would
not allow Mr. Vas another two-week delay to make-up his mind.
Under Deputy Deal’s terms, Mr. Vas would plead guilty to two counts of
Pattern of Official Misconduct and one count each of Theft and Money-Laundering
in exchange for an eight-year prison sentence, of which he must serve five
years before becoming eligible for parole.
The sentence for the state charges would run concurrently with any prison
term Mr. Vas receives for his Oct. 8 federal conviction when he is sentenced
by Judge Susan Wigenton in March.
Mr. Vas was convicted for using his influence as Mayor to make a $290,000
profit from the sale of an apartment building by promising the buyer $350,000
in state affordable housing funds and accepting illegal campaign
contributions for his 2006 Congressional campaign.
The remaining 24 counts against the former Mayor in the two state
indictments would be dismissed under the plea-deal.
All of this had been explained two weeks earlier to both men by Judge
Mellaci, plus the alternatives should they decide to reject the state’s offer and
go to trial instead.
But after returning to the courtroom at 3:35 p.m., when he told the Judge
that he would not take the plea-deal but needed more time, Mr. Vas had to be
reminded again by Judge Mellaci of the consequences he could face by not
accepting the state’s offer and going to trial.
Defense attorney Alan Zegas informed the Judge that his client, Mr. Vas,
was once-again ready to accept the plea-deal.
But in his elocution (statement describing the crimes he committed), Mr.
Vas did not simply outline what it was that he did that formed a basis for
pleading guilty. He had to be questioned by Deputy Deal — and at times, by Mr.
Zegas — point-by-point.
With that process, the former Mayor finally admitted to a string of
criminal offenses, but then balked at admitting he had used $289 in city funds to
pay-for refreshments at his father’s funeral, blaming others.
“In memory of my father, I cannot accept responsibility for doing that,”
Mr. Vas declared.
However Judge Mellaci was satisfied that the former Assemblyman had
testified to enough to sustain his plea to a Pattern of Official Misconduct, a law
thjat Mr. Vas had sponsored in the Assembly.
Would anyone-else have had the patience and restraint that Judge Mellaci
exercised? We think not.
For this act of arrogance, we believe that Mr. Vas deserved to receive the
full effect of the law.
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Nov. 17, 2010) Assemblyman Assembly Transportation, Public Works & Independent Authorities Committee Chairman, Deputy Speaker and State Democratic Chairman John Wisniewski, D-19, has repeatedly criticized Gov. Christopher Christie’s decision to halt construction of a third Hudson River commuter rail tunnel to New York City.
At times, his criticism of the Governor gets intemperate and exceeds the bounds of normal political discourse.
“In one massive careless swoop, Governor Christie has destroyed economic development in the region, crushed job-creation in New Jersey, and put public safety at-risk for decades to-come,” Assemblyman Wisniewski said in one prepared statement. “It’s hard to imagine a more-irresponsible decision. The Governor has failed the people of New Jersey.
“A true leader would do what’s right for New Jersey, instead of playing games with the transportation system in one of the nation’s most-important states,” he continued. “A true leader would make the tough decisions needed to get things done, not throw-in-the-towel and skulk-away helplessly when the issues get complicated.
“This devastating blow will hurt our state and its economy for generations-to-come,” Assemblyman Wisniewski declared.
In another statement, Assemblyman Wisniewski claimed that Governor Christie knew for nearly two weeks that federal cost-overrun estimates for the new Hudson River commuter rail tunnel project “were no more than $1 billion, even as he continued to cling to blatantly-inflated figures.
He then contradicted his own statement by citing an “Oct. 5 NJTransit status memo that showed the tunnel project was on-budget at the $8.7 billion mark.”
Assemblyman Wisniewski filed an Open Public Records Act request demanding all documents related to Governor Christie’s decision to halt building the new Hudson River commuter rail tunnel.
“Governor Christie’s decision will go-down as one of the worst a Governor has ever made, yet the only information we have describing how he came to it is a three-page memo by his hand-picked committee,” Assemblyman Wisniewski said. “That’s unacceptable. We need to know how he came to this decision and whether, as we’ve seen in other instances, the Governor twisted the facts to meet his own ideology rather than what’s best for New Jersey.”
Assemblyman Wisniewski filed the request with the Governor’s Office, the state Department of Transportation (DOT) and NJTransit, adding that the Assembly Committee he chairs would then hold a public hearing on Governor Christie’s decision.
“This irresponsible decision appears to be based-upon nothing more than a three-page memo lacking substantive details,” Assemblyman Wisniewski said.
“The public hasn’t seen any information on the alleged cost-overruns and what Governor Christie did — if anything — to try to restructure this project to cut and share costs and save money..”
Assemblyman Wisniewski released another statement after federal and state officials agreed to spend two weeks considering options for the tunnel Governor Christie moved to cancel.
“I thank (U.S. Transportation) Secretary (Raymond) LaHood for returning sanity to this issue,” he said. “Everyone except Governor Christie knows this project is too-important to the region and the nation to discard without a real effort to solve the concerns facing it. I look-forward to the effort to get this project back-on-course for the benefit of everyone.
“The ball is back in the Governor’s court. Let’s hope he does the right thing and works with everyone involved to keep this vital economic development and transportation project alive. Much of New Jersey’s economic future depends-upon the Governor’s willingness to work with others here to successfully-solve this problem.”
The problem is that New Jersey cannot afford to accept $3 billion in federal funding by agreeing to shoulder the burden of cost-overruns that could easily exceed three times as much while New York, which stands to benefit the most from this project, is unwilling to share in paying for such overruns — and recent polling shows that 70-percent of New Jerseyans agree with Governor Christie on this, as do we.
At the same time, we agree with Assemblyman Wisniewski that, with the tunnel project canceled, a toll-increase the Turnpike Authority voted to impose-upon motorists two years ago to help pay for the tunnel should be canceled as-well.
Disagreements need to be tempered, and decisions reasonable.
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Nov. 10, 2010)
Late last week, South Amboy City Council President Fred Henry was declared
the winner of a four-way race for Mayor after 12 of the city’s 21
provisional election-ballots were counted by the Middlesex County Board of Elections
at its New Brunswick headquarters, putting Mr. Henry over the top with one
vote more than Independent challenger Mary O’Connor.
This was but another example of showing that your one vote DOES count.
Ms. O’Connor was expected to file her request for a recount sometime before
Friday, the deadline for her to do so, which would reopen the question of
validity of the votes which were counted in the Nov. 2 election of a
successor to Mayor John O’Leary, who decided in March not to seek an unprecedented
seventh four-year term as Chief Executive of the “Pleasant Little City.”
A recount would encompass a review of the tapes from the voting-machines,
including any discrepancies between the number of voting-authorities and the
number of recorded votes; the mail-in ballots, formerly “absentee votes,”
and the provisional ballots.
Stay-tuned for the recount’s results to be reported in these pages!
The Amboy Beacon doesn’t endorse candidates for public office for reasons
which we’ve reiterated here several times. Mr. Henry was the recipient of an
endorsement by a daily newspaper published in Monmouth County that
circulates in South Amboy.
More than just running the risk of being on the losing side in elections,
media endorsements open the door to a lot of problems that go way-beyond
that, especially when statements are made in them with no basis in fact.
In endorsing Mr. Henry, the daily cited “the misguided decisions, the
unsavory patronage, the sweetheart pay-toplay deals, the failed promises” and
“the massive tax-hikes” of his predecessor, totaling 50 percent in just two
years, while acknowledging that “Henry offers little explanation beyond a
failure to plan more-efficiently during better economic times.” Yet, that paper
still endorses his election.
Is it being a “leader” to follow in the footsteps of an Administration
described in those terms? The daily seems to think-so.
The daily goes-on to credit the previous Administration for doing good
“when the city cleaned-up its red-light district.” Having published this
newspaper for the past 17 years and being-acquainted with South Amboy for decades
before that, we’re unaware of any problems with prostitution there. Where the
editorial-writer got this insult to the people of South Amboy is beyond our
comprehension.
In a follow-up editorial, instead of apologizing for that obvious gaffe,
the daily describes Mr. Henry as “a disciple of departing and even-longer-time
Mayor Jack O’Leary, and best-prepared to run the show.” What “show” are
they talking-about?
In our view, these editorials are just a continuation of the daily’s
ongoing prejudice against female non-incumbents. Of course, we oppose endorsements
per-se on-principle, but it seems like there’s a real inclination to
come-down on the side of male incumbents.
If you don’t believe us, look at the insulting editorials opposing Wilda
Diaz and supporting Joseph Vas in Perth Amboy’s 2008 election. How is someone
supposed-to gain “experience” without being elected? And what is it about
the importance of “experience” being raised to such a level?
To the best of our knowledge, the multi-billion-dollar media giant that
owns the daily has no female publishers of its newspapers. Looking at the
daily’s own 10 top staffers as listed in its pages, there are only three women in
positions of authority there.
Is this a case of preaching what they’re practicing?
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Nov. 3, 2010) It’s with great sadness that I mark the recent passing of my good friend, Joseph “Chubby” Keenan Jr. at his home in the Rossmoor Community of Monroe Township.
Chubby, who worked as a custodian for the Sayreville Board of Education for
25 years before his retirement many years ago, served with distinction on Sayreville’s Borough Council.
Always “a man of the people,” Chubby saw himself as a true public servant answerable to the will of the people and not beholden to the political bosses and other powers-that-be.
In 1979, I was covering Sayreville as a reporter for a now-defunct daily newspaper when Chubby, who was at the height of his popularity, related to me that he had been promised the top spot on the Democratic ticket if he wanted to run for Mayor that year. Chubby said he was told that the incumbent, John “Chunky” Czernikowski, would step-aside and retire, giving him a clear shot at the Democratic nomination.
At that time, Sayreville had not elected a Republican in decades, so getting the Democratic nod was tantamount to getting elected, the General Election being little-more than a mere formality.
Chubby thought it over and discussed it with his family before deciding to go-through with it, but it turned-out that, in his words, he was “double-crossed.” Mayor Czernikowski was pushed by the party leadership into running again.
As an “old-school politician,” Chubby believed that “a man’s word is his bond,” so he decided — again, after thinking it over and discussing it with his family — to run against Mayor Czernikowski in the Primary Election for the Democratic nomination.
Chubby worked his heart out, but that wasn’t enough to defeat the party machinery, and he lost by something-like 50 votes, if I remember correctly.
In the meantime, a tall red-haired man who had been coming to Borough Council meetings and raising issues caught everyone’s attention, including Chubby’s. Richard Vitkauskis would go-on to become the candidate for Mayor of the borough’s small-but-growing Republican Party.
Despite being members of different political parties, Mr. Vitkauskis and Chubby became good friends, and it was assumed by many residents that the two of them would be rivals in the November election, both men running civilized, issue-oriented campaigns to become Sayreville’s Chief Executive.
After Chubby’s loss (I believe that Mr. Vitkauskis ran unopposed in the GOP Primary), the two of them remained friends.
Keep-in-mind that these were the days when political rivals — even members of the same party — could argue vehemently at a Council meeting, and then have a beer together after the Council meeting.
Anyway, Chubby had a few issues that he felt-strongly-about, and he tried to interest Mayor Czernikowski in adopting them for the General Election, but that didn’t happen. So Chubby did the “unthinkable” and endorsed Richard Vitkauskis for Mayor.
Well, Mr. Vitkauskis didn’t make it that year, either, and Mayor Czernikowski went-on to win in November.
In the meantime, I was covering the Sayreville elections at a time when the political landscape was undergoing some changes that weren’t evident to the casual observer. Sayreville was gradually becoming politically-competitive, and campaign methods were undergoing some changes, too.
Mr. Vitkauskis was willing and able to spend money on his campaign, win, lose or draw, and he laid the groundwork for other Republicans who would follow him and get elected in formerly-solid-Democratic Sayreville.
My recognition and reporting of what was happening to Sayreville politics almost cost me my job because the powers-that-be held-back Sayreville’s advertising to get my bosses’ attention. One evening, I was called-into the Editor’s office to explain what was going-on.
Mr. Vitkauskis was issuing campaign statements emphasizing the issues that he felt would get him elected, but Mayor Czernikowski wasn’t, nor would he respond to his opponent’s. Fortunately, I was able to document my attempts to contact both sides.
As for Chubby, he soon retired from the political game, and I moved-on to cover other towns, but we became friends and stayed-in-touch for many years afterward.
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct. 27, 2010)
We believe that the time has come for newspapers to kick a bad habit.
Ordinarily, with an election just days away, most newspapers publish endorsements of candidates for public office, a practice which has become commonplace over the course of many generations.
Mindful of our responsibility to the public, and after carefully-reviewing the matter of endorsements, we have concluded that it is in the best interests of both the public and the democratic process that we refrain from this practice.
Our reason for this determination is rooted in the nature of the process by which democracies govern themselves. The foundation of that system is that the public delegates authority to governments, which it holds accountable primarily through means of the franchise.
The assumption is that a well-informed public will, as a body, successfully manage its own affairs. This fundamental principle is the life-force behind other great principles: freedom of assembly, of expression and of the electoral process. We strongly-believe in these principles, and we express our f aith in the people in doing so.
We believe further that it is our function to contribute to the knowledge of the people by providing an objective digest of the news so that they might better-exercise authority over their own destiny. We believe that a newspaper’s attempt to influence the manner in which a vote is cast by expressing support for a candidate on its editorial page, under the guise of “editorial endorsement,” is inherently-improper, because such support makes readers lose confidence in the newspaper’s credibility in covering government in-general and political campaigns in-particular.
Thus, by supporting a candidate for public office, a newspaper makes itself vulnerable to criticism of its news coverage. To avoid this conflict, our editorial position toward the election of candidates must be one of strict neutrality.
The fact that other newspapers have published endorsements for decades merely-means that they have prolonged committing an error. As for ourselves, we will have no part of it — preferring, instead, to reaffirm our commitment to presenting the facts as clearly and completely as we can.
We hereby renew our faith in a well-informed electorate that makes its own decisions. Accordingly, we urge every voter to go to the polls on Tuesday, Nov. 2, and make your own choice.
NOTE: This is a slightly-modified version of an editorial I wrote that appeared in another newspaper on May 7, 1992, but the principles remain just-as-valid today.B.G.
(Editorial, Oct. 20, 2010)
Apparently, the South Amboy City Council reluctantly voted at a Special
Meeting last week to adopt an Amendment to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget and
the Budget itself without including $800,000 as “anticipated revenue,”
leading to a massive tax-increase this year.
All Council members voted for this, except First Ward Councilman Donald
Applegate, who abstained.
The Amendment to the CY 2010 Budget increases local taxes by another
$722,576, which is on top of the $39 hike previously-announced by the
Administration and the Council, on a home assessed at $266,000, the average in South
Amboy, from the unamended spending plan. Using the numbers provided with the CY
2010 Budget as introduced, the amended Budget increases the municipal
portion of taxes on the average home by $268.
Now, the Administration is saying that the increase is “only” $251, but
that doesn’t follow mathematically if one accepts the previously-announced $39
figure. Let’s say that it IS $251. That’s STILL two triple-digit
tax-increases in two consecutive years! Last year’s tax-hike was an undisputed $571.
What happened to the four-percent “cap” on local property-tax increases?
This year’s tax-hike is $251 or $268 (take your pick). What happened to the
two-percent “cap” on local property-tax increases?
We really don’t want to get into the middle of an election, but isn’t over
$800 in tax-increases over a two-year period, uh, EXCESSIVE?
Last year, South Amboy officials had two different reasons for that
tax-increase: residents’ opposition to a proposed garbage fee, and a shortfall in
money the Redevelopment Agency was scheduled to turn-over to the city. This
year, South Amboy officials have two different reasons for the current
tax-increase: the state’s aid-cutback/pension-cost shift, and an “anonymous
telephone-call” that convinced state finance officials not to approve a one-time
$800,000 fix.
Someone should remind city officials that “anticipated revenue” isn’t
supposed-to be relied-upon as a budget bailout. To get state approval for it,
you’re supposed-to have very-convincing evidence that it’s a sure-thing. To
allow otherwise would cause local governments to collapse financially. It’s
also part of the reason for neighboring Perth Amboy’s fiscal problems.
Does anybody REALLY believe that an “anonymous telephone-call” is going to
convince state officials not to approve something they would have approved
otherwise? If so, I’ve got a bridge to sell you!
Despite a state requirement that the final CY 2010 Budget be approved by
the Mayor and Council no later than Friday, Sept. 24, why was no action taken
by the Council at its regular meeting the previous week?
At another Special Meeting held on Sept. 27, the three Council members
in-attendance — the barest number for a quorum — refused to take any action on
the spending plan. Why?
That Council inaction subjected the three members in-attendance at that
Special Meeting to the possible assessment of individual $25-a-day fines. Of
course, those fines were dropped after they met an extended deadline.
The O’Neill Properties Group is a highly-capitalized Pennsylvania-based
firm that specializes in redeveloping contaminated properties known as
“brownfields,” such as the 400-plus-acre former NL Industries site in neighboring
Sayreville, where an elaborate multi-million-dollar Redevelopment Plan is
being implemented.
Why didn’t the Redevelopment Agency vote to designate O’Neill Properties
as redeveloper of “the restaurant site” in the first place, instead of a
Limited Partnership that didn’t even exist when the first Agreement was signed?
The Agency’s vote to change the contract to O’Neill apparently wasn’t
enough to convince state officials to allow South Amboy to include the $800,000
as “anticipated revenue” in the CY 2010 Budget. Why?
Why weren’t City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO)
Terance O’Neill present for the Council’s Special Meetings dealing with the
CY 2010 Budget? Wouldn’t it have been prudent to have instant access to
legal and financial advice?
If the deal had been in-the-works “for three months,” as Mr. Applegate
stated, why was everything left hanging until the 11th hour to complete?
And what does former Gov. Christine Whitman’s Administration have to do
with ANY of this?
We’re not going to draw any conclusions, but we’ll leave that to the
citizens of South Amboy.
From The Editor’s Desk (Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct. 13, 2010)
A U.S. District Court jury sitting in Newark late last week found former
Perth Amboy Mayor Joseph Vas and longtime Mayor’s Aide Melvin Ramos guilty of
eight of the 12 counts in the superseding indictment of their federal
corruption trial.
As a result of that verdict, Mr. Vas faces a maximum prison term of 56
years and fines totaling $950,000, while Mr. Ramos faces a maximum prison term
of 51 years and fines totaling $800,000, when they’re sentenced in January by
Judge Susan Wigenton.
Surely, Mr. Vas and Mr. Ramos should — and will — be punished for their
misdeeds, as will longtime political advisor Raymond Geneske and former Human
Services Director Jeffrey Gumbs, who pleaded guilty to related offenses and
testified against Mr. Vas and Mr. Ramos as part of their plea-agreements.
But what-about the other enablers, such as former Councilman Frank Sinatra,
who will escape unscathed except for a tarnished reputation, and the
“straw-donors,” some of whom are still collecting paychecks from the City of Perth
Amboy, all of whom were identified by-name only in the Amboy Beacon, but
who will now fade back into the shadows of infamy?
Also, what-about the daily newspaper published in Monmouth County and
circulating in Perth Amboy, which also enabled Mr. Vas and Mr. Ramos in its
omission of facts which might reflect negatively upon the former Administration
in its coverage of Perth Amboy?
For example, on Oct. 24, 2007, the Beacon printed the front-page story that
helped to make “DeKalb Avenue” synonymous with political corruption. On
Oct. 26, 2007, a daily newspaper published in Essex County and circulating in
Perth Amboy printed a follow-up story, but the daily newspaper published in
Monmouth County didn’t print a story about DeKalb Avenue until Oct. 27,
2007.
And what-about the enablers in the Middlesex County and New Jersey state
governments who provided the means for Mr. Vas and Mr. Ramos to leave the City
of Perth Amboy in financial shambles?
Here, we single-out for special scrutiny the state Local Finance Board,
formerly a bulwark of fiscal responsibility, which has become in recent years a
haven for political hacks.
These are the same people who allowed Mr. Vas to use bond money to pay for
employee health insurance current expenses in his last municipal budget —
something that’s illegal to do under normal circumstances, but which was done
with this Board’s permission.
These are the same people who allowed Mr. Vas to anticipate questionable re
venue — which was never collected — in another of his municipal budgets
with their permission.
Perth Amboy’s taxpayers are forced to pay for this Board’s mistakes while
its members continue to call-the-shots on municipal fiance in New Jersey
just like nothing happened.
Last year, the Local Finance Board gave its permission to South Amboy Mayor
John O’Leary to raise local taxes by 38-percent despite a four-percent
“cap” on local property-tax increases.
This year, the Local Finance Board is being-asked by Mayor O’Leary to allow
the anticipation of questionable revenue in the city’s Calendar Year 2010
Budget with its permission.
Do we see a pattern here?
We call-upon Gov. Christopher Christie to immediately replace the current
members of the Local Finance Board with REAL financial people and to seek an
investigation to hold current and former Board members accountable for any
financial abuses they’ve perpetrated-upon the residents of this state.
It’s not-enough to punish Mr. Vas and Mr. Ramos without holding others
accountable, too.
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Sept. 29, 2010)
At a sparsely-attended Special Meeting last week, the South Amboy City Council conducted a scheduled public hearing on amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget which would increase local taxes by $722,576 but took no action on the spending plan, voting instead to schedule another Special Meeting to be held early this week at 6 p.m. at City Hall, N. Broadway.
City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance O’Neill were absent from last week’s Special Meeting, called specifically to hold a public hearing and take a final vote on the CY 2010 Budget. No legal counsel attended that Special Meeting.
The amendments as introduced earlier would increase the total amount of the CY 2010 Budget by $1,553,543, from $13,993,033 to $15,546,576, and the amount to be raised by local taxes by $722,576, from $7,129,425 to $7,852,001.
But City Auditor Gary Higgins said that “hours before” the Special Meeting last week, certain unnamed “developers” had provided the city officials hope that they might be able to anticipate an additional “$800,000” in new revenues. “If the $800,000 comes-through, there will be about a $30 increase for this calendar-year,” he stated.
Mr. Higgins indicated that a state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) official would have to approve the “other revenues” in order for the city to include them in the CY 2010 Budget. “Normally, DCA doesn’t let you anticipate funds,” City Council President Fred Henry stated. “Talking with the DCA people today, they said they’d allow us to do it.” “It appears that the developers are providing us with the documents we need so we can move-forward,” Mayor John O’Leary said. A source familiar with municipal budgeting indicated to the Amboy Beacon that DCA will allow municipalities to anticipate revenue from developers “only if there’s signed contracts.”
In anticipating revenues, a municipal government runs the risk of not collecting that revenue — part of the reason for neighboring Perth Amboy’s fiscal problems, left for another Mayor to try to solve.
The document attached to the meeting-agenda last week appeared to be identical to the earlier one distributed to the public. The new tax-increase shown there would be on top of the $39 hike previously-announced by the Administration and the Council on a home assessed at $266,000, the average in South Amboy. Using the numbers provided with the CY 2010 Budget as introduced, the new tax-increase would result in a $268 tax-hike on the average home. According to the amendments introduced the previous week, 38 of 49 line-item accounts would be increased, while only 11 line-item accounts would be decreased.
In addition to the eight-page Budget Resolution attached to the meeting-agenda, Mr. Higgins provided a 20-page Budget Presentation which he said “complied with” the “Best Practices Checklist” due to be submitted to state officials by Oct. 1. Some of the numbers included in the Higgins document differed from the Budget Resolution, including the amount to be raised by local taxes, showing an increase of $694,138, from $7,157,863 to $7,852,001 — NOT $722,576. Business Administrator Camille Tooker had noted at the last regular meeting that the final CY 2010 Budget had to be approved by the Mayor and Council no later than Friday, Sept. 24. There was no specific mention of an extension being granted by DCA, although Mr. Higgins said, “We’ll be working on it the next couple of days.” Unless city officials are successful in convincing DCA that the $800,000 is legitimate, South Amboy’s taxpayers face the prospect of a second year of triple-digit tax-hikes on the average home. Last year’s $571 average tax-hike would be followed by a $268 tax-hike on the average home — a total increase of $839 in just two years!
What happened to last year’s four-percent “cap,” or this year’s 2.5-percent “cap,” both of which were supposed-to prevent such things from occurring? Whoever is elected in November is going to have to come-to-grips with this fiscal crisis.
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Sept. 22, 2010)
The South Amboy City Council voted unanimously last week to introduce amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget which would increase local taxes by $722,576. Normally, that wouldn’t be a problem. The next regular Council meeting would follow in two weeks, and the public, fully-informed of what’s happening,
would respond. But this year, the spending plan’s approval by the state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) has been delayed — by whom is open to question — to the point where tomorrow is the deadline for its final adoption. OK, so the Council would vote on it today, and the public would still be fully-informed of what’s happening. But that’s NOT what happened. The Council voted last week to schedule the public hearing at a Special Meeting to be held yesterday at 6 p.m. at City Hall, N. Broadway. The amendments as introduced would increase the total amount of the CY 2010 Budget by $1,553,543, from $13,993,033 to $15,546,576, and the amount to be raised by local taxes by $722,576, from $7,129,425 to $7,852,001.
That new tax-increase would be on-top-of the $39 hike previously-announced by the Administration and the Council on a home assessed at $266,000, the average in South Amboy. Using the numbers provided with the CY 2010 Budget as introduced, the new tax-increase would result in a total $268 tax-hike on
the average home. According to the amendments introduced last week, 38 of 49 line-item accounts would be increased, while only 11 line-item accounts would be decreased. A Special Meeting was scheduled despite the fact that Council President Fred Henry announced at the Sept. 1 meeting that a public hearing would be held on amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget at last week’s Council meeting.
The calling of a Special Meeting to adopt amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget was specifically rejected when it was suggested at the Sept. 1 meeting by former Councilman Stanley Jankowski, now a Board of Education member.“You can’t pass it (the Budget) that night,” he insisted at that time.
“You have to have two readings.” “They can do it the same night,” attorney Thomas Lanza, sitting-in for his
brother, City Law Director John Lanza, stated. Well, why DIDN’T the Council do that? We would hope that the Council didn’t decide to hold a Special Meeting yesterday to preclude most of the public from knowing about the hearing and about the upcoming increase in local taxes. Reporters for the two out-of-county daily newspapers that cover the meetings were absent from last week’s Council meeting, and the reporters for the two weekly newspapers that cover the meetings don’t publish on Tuesdays. We say this action by the South Amboy City Council doesn’t pass the smell test. The people of South Amboy have a right to know if the amended Calendar Year 2010 Budget is going to increase local taxes by another $722,576, for a $268 tax-hike on the average $266,000 South Amboy home. And let’s not forget that this would be on-top-of last year’s onerous $571 tax-hike — the one where city officials told two different stories, one to the residents and another to the state Local Finance Board, as to WHY there was such a huge increase in local property taxes.Why would Council President Henry want to risk jeopardizing his candidacy for Mayor by going-along-with a stunt like this? We believe that public officials need to be held strictly-accountable to the people who pay their salaries.Accordingly, we request that an investigation by DCA be conducted as quickly as possible to determine whether South Amboy’s governing body acted in accordance with the law.
(Editorial, Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Sept. 15, 2010)
Those who attend the Perth Amboy Board of Education’s meetings are provided with insight into some of the issues that surface later on the statewide level. By now, everybody and his uncle has read-about and/or heard-about New Jersey losing-out on $400 million in federal “Race To The Top” money — $100 million per year for four years — because of a dumb clerical blunder, and the subsequent feud between Gov. Christopher Christie and (now former) state Education Commissioner Bret Schundler over whose fault it really-was. Perhaps we’ll NEVER know for-sure who it was who told a fib about what was said when the two men met in-private. However, it’s a certainty that when there’s a feud between a Governor and a Commissioner, the Governor ALWAYS wins because the Governor can fire the Commissioner, but the Commissioner can’t fire the Governor. That’s why it’s ALWAYS bad form to take-on the Boss in-public, and it just isn’t done. It’s also interesting to note that the Obama Administration JUST HAPPENED TO HAVE a videotape of the meeting held with Mr. Schundler and his Education Department bureaucrats, where New Jersey was given a heads-up but still muffed it. Of course, the Democrats in-charge-of the State Legislature are having a great time, salivating over the opportunity to score some “cheap political points,” as commentator Steve Adubato put it (as a former Democratic Assemblyman, Steve knows of what he speaks). But the Governor Christie/ Commissioner Schundler thing is only PART of the story.
Lost in all the uproar is the role played by the N.J. Education Association (NJEA), once known as the single-most-powerful labor organization in the Garden State. You see, New Jersey missed-out on being in the Top 10 contestants for federal “Race To The Top” money by ending-up just THREE POINTS SHY of the 500 points needed to win, right-behind Ohio. If New Jersey had received the FIVE POINTS it lost by submitting budget-numbers for the wrong time-period, it would have edged-out Ohio for the 10th spot and gotten the money. But what nobody seems to be talking-about is the fact that New Jersey is likely to have won by an even-greater margin if NJEA hadn’t decided to oppose the application for federal funding in the first-place. That’s right! NJEA was against applying-for the federal “Race To The Top” money because there were educational reforms like (gasp) merit-pay for successful teachers included in the regulations.
Here’s where Mr. Schundler comes-in again. The (former) Education Commissioner decided to loosen-up the rules in New Jersey’s proposal without clearing it first with the Boss. Naturally, Governor Christie overruled his Commissioner on this and had the proposal revamped to include the reforms opposed by NJEA. THIS was an earlier run-in, also on “Race To The Top,” between the two men. The lesson that Mr. Schundler apparently didn’t learn is that a state can’t have more than one Governor. Now, don’t get me wrong. I admire much of what Mr. Schundler was able to accomplish as Mayor of Jersey City, and many of the ideas that he’s expressed on shaking-up the educational establishment. How does all of this go-back to Perth Amboy? In January, the Board voted, in the face of NJEA opposition, to participate in the state’s application for a “Race To The Top” incentive grant available from the U.S. Department of Education. The Board’s action followed extended discussion about this opportunity, with the announcement that the three parties required to sign-off on the application — Superintendent of Schools John Rodecker, then-Board President Kenneth Gonzalez and Perth Amboy Federation of Teachers (PAFT) President Donna Chiera — had all done so. Meanwhile, NJEA was “advising their local affiliates not to vote in-favor of applying” for the “Race To The Top” incentive grants, Mr. Rodecker said. As a result, he said that districts whose teachers were represented by NJEA unions couldn’t obtain the “three signatures needed” in-order to complete their applications.
