Friday, August 13, 2010

Email Correspondence with Councilman Matt Carrick

The following is an email exchange with Councilman Matt Carrick when I asked him to instead oppose  Ordinance #1415.  The body of the correspondence appears without editing.  Keep in mind that Councilman Carrick served on the Dumont BOE as a board member before he was elected to the borough council:

KC:  I am writing today regarding Ordinance #1415 that passed first reading at the July 20 council meeting.  I recall that you voted to oppose the resolution to approve the amended budget because you felt that the cuts at borough hall were not deep enough considering the steep cuts imposed on BoE.  Do you find it troubling that the CFO, who prepared the ordinance, was cited two years in a row by the auditor as deficient in internal controls and record keeping according to public records?  Would it be appropriate to reward this performance with a raise? 


KC:  I respectfully ask that you oppose #1415 on second reading so that you may show the residents you feel their pain and show your shared sacrifice in this difficult economic climate.


MC:  Mr Chen you are a funny man. Ordinance #1415 is just a guide line. The budget is what sets the Raises. As I remember I was the one that abstained from the Budget Vote. Also the MONEY I receive as a Councilman is given back in DONATIONS to families in Dumont that are need. I do not like that you attack my fellow Council People with your incorrect information please get your facts straight before you put pen to paper. If you can not get the correct information feel free to call me. As Council Members are job is to keep the public informed let's us do are job that we were VOTED into office to do 


KC:  Thank you for responding.  Are you objecting to my speaking out?  What are you suggesting?  Kindly cite the specific statements I made that you feel were incorrect.


MC:  I have no problem responding to you. Just don't try to bait me as you have on your BLOG. Ordinance #1415 is just a guide line the BUDGET is what sets raises.  Your article in the twin boro states that the Council received raises not true for the last 10 years the amount has been the same. I know for a fact that Councilman Stylianou and myself Donate are SALIERS back to people or organizations in Dumont who need it.  


MC:  As far as PAY to PLAY you were at the meetings and you how hard me and Harry fought for it. Instead of writing something negative try write something positive. I take pride in being on this Council and also put what's best for this town first.  


MC:  Freedom of Speech is great and I like that you use it.


KC:  The accusations pile on, yet I am unable to see specifics.  While everyone is entitled to their own opinion, there is only one set of facts.  


KC:  With all due respect, It seems now you are telling me what types of stories I should write.  Feel free to write your own if you don't like mine, or simply stop reading my posts.  No one is forcing you to do so.  All I wrote in the email is respectfully requesting you to oppose ordinance 1415.  Either respond yes, no or ignore my request.  


KC:  You claim you are responsive to my requests.  If so, then what is the disposition of my request and sample resolution to enter closed session I emailed the mayor and council members last month?  Was there any discussion in the meeting last month, or is this the 'bait' you claim I am setting for you?

KC:  Mr. Carrick, I was very hopeful and optimistic when you came on board in January.  Based on the O&R committee meetings and the recent email exchange; however, I am left disappointed.


MC:  I can see this only goes one way your way good luck sorry you are Disappointed

Keep in mind we elected this person into office just months ago.  I think the conversation speaks for itself; I wish I could make this up.

Monday, August 9, 2010

Salary "Stimulus" on Resident Backs?

With the Mayor selectively vetoing Public Contracting Ordinance #1411 making a splash on the headlines, one is led to believe that a majority of the council is fiercely battling the mayor and his council support member minority.  According to the council president, the council is looking to protect the residents.

If that would have been the whole truth...

With the sole abstention coming from councilman Freeman, Ordinance #1415 was otherwise quietly passed with no public discussion.  Shrouded in vague doublespeak, this ordinance gives the ability to award salary raises for elected officials and top managers employed at borough hall without further discussion or approval public input or review.

Nevermind that we are in the middle of the most serious recession in decades, a doubling of unemployment in Dumont from recent years and scores of foreclosures with more on the way.  In an economic boom, these awards would appear rich.  In this climate, these awards seem unconscionable:

Council President's Salary - up to 50% increase;
Councilperson Salary - up to 50% increase;
Mayor's Salary - up to 20% increase;
Managerial & Confidential Title Salary - up to 20% increase.

Just weeks ago, the municipality of Bell, Calfornia, size modestly larger than Dumont, made national news because top officials were earning mid 6-digit salaries.  Though the appointed officials resigned in disgrace, I do not blame them.  As an employee, one has the right to negotiate a maximum salary and benefit for themselves.  The blame falls squarely on the elected officials who approved the lavish pay packages for those officials.

As a resident, you can show your appreciation to the council in the following ways:

- Email the council members.  Tell them how much they deserve the salary increase, after extracting concessions from our teachers and custodians in the BOE budget.  Never mind the public contracting ordinance was crippled by the mayor, it's the effort that counts, right?  Approve the raises!

- Tell the council members in person how much you appreciate them helping themselves at the expense of taxpayers.  Brings a whole new meaning to "Dumont Delivers", does it not?

- Attend the next council meeting scheduled at 7:30PM on Tuesday August 17 at Borough Hall.  Cheer them on with chants like "Full Rewards for Half Work" would give them the needed encouragement.

Anyone care to join?

Friday, August 6, 2010

Letter to the Editor, Twin-Boro News

Dear Editor,

I read Council President Harry Stylianou's letter to the editor on August 5th with interest as I have been to most of the committee meetings and have the video recordings online for anyone interested in viewing them.


In the letter, he appeared to congratulate himself and the three council members who voted with him for approving ordinance 1411, the so-called Public Contracting Ordinance.  On the same day, a Record article "Dumont Mayor Vetoes Most of Pay-to-Play Ordinance" reported our mayor vetoed portions of that ordinance, rendering it lame.


Why did Mr. Stylianou appear so eager to declare "mission accomplished"?  Did he and the others who voted for it anticipate the mayor to exercise his powers as granted by law?


In the same Record article, he said "I'm looking to protect the taxpayers of Dumont".  If so, what was he thinking when he and four other council members voted to approve ordinance 1415, which, if it passes second reading on August 17, allows pay increases of up to 50% for elected officials like himself and up to 20% for top managers in borough hall?  Curiously, only council member Freeman voted to abstain ordinance 1415, which I refer to affectionately as the "pay me" ordinance.


The public contracting ordinance is now broken.  I hope Mr. Stylianou makes it his first priority to fix it.  I hope our elected officials take care of the taxpayers first, before taking care of themselves.  He needs to set aside the pay raises for himself and other top officials until next year, at the very least.


Sincerely,


Kai Chen
Dumont

Monday, July 5, 2010

Transparency in Government, Part 2 - Pay to Play for Residents?

In the previous post, it appears that council members want to make Dumont law stricter than that of NJ.

How nice. 

Is it mere coincidence that the council members pushing hardest also happen to be running for re-election this year? 

Is the motivation due to the sheer embarrassment from the Record expose or just plain smart re-election campaigning?

Meanwhile a recent letter to residents from our mayor hails the coming of long needed improvements to Dumont's infrastructure via NJEIT Phase 2 Project.

If the mayor wanted to promote all the wonderful infrastructure improvements, would it not be in his best interest to place all the documentation online for all the residents to see for themselves?  Why are the design documents from NJEIT Phase 1 or 2 absent from the website?

The other day, I visited the borough clerk's office to look at the NJEIT Phase 3 documents as I reside in one of the affected properties that would be impacted by heavy construction. When an attempt was made to record the documentation since the documents were not available for lending, I was asked immediately to cease recording and to leave the office if I had no further business with the clerk.  I was then assured by the borough attorney's office that I would receive my own copy of the document and plans.

Of course, the verbal assurance was just that.  In the interim, the borough attorney changed his mind.
 
It turns out that interested residents need to:
- Visit the borough clerk's office during office hours to review their copy of the documents;
- Pay for a resident's own copy of the documents.

Pay?  Correct.  T&M needs $63.50 for a paper copy or a whopping $276 for a searchable electronic copy of the design documents and plans.  This is the same T&M that, according to the Record expose, donated $38,000 to Dumont Democratic accounts in 2009 and $5,200 to Dumont council candidates, one of which is not running until 2011, this year.

For some reason, the clerk's office is unable to scan their copy of the documents and plans online.

I then went to NJDEP.  While the agency recommends submitting electronic copies with paper documents and plans, it is not a requirement and according to the NJDEP representative over the phone, electronic submittals for this type of application are rare.  Duh?  it's not a legal requirement.

So I paid $63.50 and received my copy.  Unlike the ever-shifting "transparency" coming from the current administration; however, I will not be keeping the documents and plans to myself...

Here they are:

- View NJEIT Phase III Environmental and Drainage Design Proposal (download here)
- View NJEIT Phase III Application to NJDEP (download here)
- Download Supplemental Drawings
- Download Construction Plans

Look them over.  Ask questions.

First of all, why is the current administration refusing to release any NJEIT project on the borough website?  It's easy to solicit questions when the residents have no official information - almost assured that any questions asked will be of the marshmallow type.
 
Good questions would include:

- How many properties will be disturbed and the extent of heavy construction on the properties;
- How long the disruption would last (duration of construction); 
- How much this project would cost as a separate assessment to all borough residents;

A better question would be whether the improvements would remedy the pooling of water to affected residents in the area every time it rains (the answer is no and can be found on page 7).  If not, residents in and out of the affected area should wonder whether this project is wothwhile, if the project is needed at all.

If you lived in the affected area, did you know that contractors can enter your property without your permission?

Finally, after all this, why are Dumont residents paying to remediate a problem that appears to originate from neighboring Haworth according to the FEMA map (Appendix E, pages 266 and 267)?

Yesterday we celebrated, as a nation, our independence from the British Empire and their oppressive taxes.  As a borough, would it be ironic if we discover we were held in bondage from those representing us in Dumont? 

How long would we allow this to continue?

Monday, June 28, 2010

Transparency in Government, Part 1 - Selective Transparency?

Our mayor seems to take nearly every turn trumpeting his accomplishment of bringing transparency to borough hall.

A recent Record article seems to have some Dumont council members supporting bold initiatives concerning public contracting.  The impression to the public is that council members want to go beyond that allowed by law.

How quaint.

What can the M&C show for after spending in excess of $45,000 on website services since 2008 besides posting council meeting agenda and minutes, hosting an events calendar and an emergency alert system that was absent during the March 13 storm when residents needed information most?  While I applaud the posting of ordinances and resolutions since April 2009, why have past ordinances and resolutions before then not appeared?  Why were the posting of commission and committee agenda and minutes intermittent or nonexistent?  Could a flurry of Joint Land Use Board meeting minutes have been motivated by this gentle reminder? 

Is it just me, or does it seem interesting that well-paid, full-time staff (who, by the way, appears to be receiving a 3.5% salary raise for 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 along with all permanent municipal staff) needs to be reminded by a resident to do their job?  What does that say about the teachers and janitorial staff from Dumont Board of Education who were pressured during the May budget talks, would they have agreed to concessions knowing the mayor had just signed some of those same collective bargaining agreements with borough employees around the same time?  I would not be surprised if these folks, many of whom are also Dumont residents, join the residents who voted down the BOE budget back in April to remind the council incumbents in November, justified or otherwise, how they enjoyed playing three card monte?

The contracts are public information.  They should be online for all to see from an official source.  No resident should have to file an OPRA request to access them.  No borough clerk should have to waste their time and taxpayer dollars servicing trivial OPRA requests other than to tell the requestor where on the website they can be found.  Sadly, this happens in Dumont more often than one would like to believe.

Why?  I forgot - the law does not require posting online.  So much for appearing to go beyond the law for the sake of election year politics.

Residents should ask why ABetterDumont.com, a privately operated website having no affiliation to the Borough of Dumont, is hosting public information that should be accessible via the official borough website?  How much public information will the current administration continue to withhold from the official website before residents see the facade for what it is and realizing money spent on this service, regardless of how small, is money wasted?  In other words, if it is not required by law, then why have one at all?

Oh, that's right - Dumont wants to provide more than what is required by law. 

Boy am I confused now.

Where can that transparent government, so often touted by the Mayor, be found again?