Rich T. on the Hoboken Budget
28
June
6/28/2008 Update:
Here’s a thoughtful follow up to Hoboken’s current budget crisis from Rich T.
Citizens deserve more explanation from the State
“According to recent news reports, state supervision means the Department of Community Affairs will install its own business administrator who will “make sure the community is run in an efficient and legal matter.” For example, regarding efficiency, will the DCA perform the city’s Operational and Efficiency review? Will this be solely by the “new business administrator” or by a team? Will the hard decisions be made? Will the state require additional legal advice in view of the concern in this area? It is common knowledge that a budget must be balanced. It is a good example for the state to violate sound budgetary practices? Is this such an emergency that the state goes on a path that appears to be violating municipal budget law? In deferring the deficit to the new fiscal budget, is this misdirection that will puzzle the public as to the real financial impact caused by this budget crisis? Will the DCA have such broad powers so as to increase the revenue stream in any manner they seem necessary? For example, can they change ordinances to produce more license income without the city council’s approval?
The residents of Hoboken deserve more detailed information as to the operational controls and oversight. The state and not the mayor and council, who have presently disappointed all of us, should be forthcoming with this information. The state has to show leadership and communication skills and insure that our tax dollars are well spent. Our elected officials have to try to regain the trust of the people they represent. It’s time for them to do their job and deal with this situation!”
Richard Tremitiedi
Concerned Taxpayer
Read previous Rich Tremitiedi commentary after the jump…
6/13/2008:
Here’s another good example of the VIP’s in Hoboken taking advantage of Hoboken411’s “Equal Time Policy.”
Richard Tremitedi: Cammarano Party & State sanctions
“In regards to the letter you posted on Peter Cammarano’s party attendees, I would like to state that some of the remarks and labels put on individuals could be considered “humorous”, but are not factual in expressing on whom to vote for….for example, I support Peter Cunningham and Beth Mason in their strong call for a detailed operational audit of the positions and functions of all city operations. I expressed a difference of opinion with Cammarano on his recent vote on the budget. In this regard, I would appreciate if you would inform your viewers of my most recent comments on the Hoboken Budget and possible state sanctions. Thank you for your very fair equal time policy.”
Regards,
Rich T.
Rich T. Says:
Hoboken’s tax rate and state sanctions
“One of the governing body’s duties is to approve the Mayor’s budget. They did not approve the budget since it had an 11.7 million dollar deficit and violated the “cap” law of the State of New Jersey.
Accordingly, the Department of Community Affairs must now strike the tax rate so that the city has the financial capacity to provide for the essential service to the public. Hoboken’s taxpayer will get a sizable increase in the tax rate until the deficiency is paid up.
What else can happen? One possibility is that the Division of Local Government Finance may allow the city to spread out the payments. Such a plan is currently being considered for Bayonne, N. J. In such an event, the piper will have to be paid in the future. Deferred payments are one of the reasons for Hoboken’s current financial mess.
Since a law was not followed, what are some sanctions that the state may order: (1) DCA approval of all future professional service contracts. (2) DCA approval of all ordinances that the city council wants to enact. This is a way to hold the Mayor and Council accountable for its actions and control costs. This is not a state takeover.
Since the current fiscal year ends June 30, 2008, it is imperative that some of the advice given by the public, progressive council members and this writer be considered. There has to be a detailed operational audit of the entire city operation. The Mayor has publicly agreed to this. It has to be started now! When preparing the new budget, we have to forecast two to three years in the future. Every department and division head must manage with this in mind and be held strictly accountable. If they don’t measure up to this standard, they must be replaced. The same goes for our elected officials.”
Richard Tremitiedi
Concerned Hoboken Taxpayer
June 13th 2008 - 15:03:36 |
Rich T makes a lot of sense here…
I’m not sure if he only supports Mason as a candidate, or just her “call for an audit”.
Either way, I’m a Mason booster, and I’m happy to have Rich T supporting at least some of her reform ideas.
Login or Register to reply
June 13th 2008 - 15:39:04 |
Richard T. wrote: ‘Deferred payments are one of the reasons for Hoboken’s current financial mess’.
With that statement I absolutely aggree. I might add to that Peter Cammarano is one of the council persons who voted consistently in the past to allow the Mayor
to borrow against City assets with bonding to pay for operating expenses. In essence he is partially culpable as well since he gave Mr. Roberts a blank check which the Mayor turned around and spent irresponsibly.
Richard-
Now if it true that you showed up at his fundraiser then that is great as it is democracy in action (the right to assemble). Your appearance at the fundraiser if true also doesn’t necessarily mean he has your vote or support for Mayor or Council at large.
I am glad that you support Beth Mason and Peter Cunningham on the need for an efficiency audit as well as what seems to be a pay as you go perspective on fiscal policy. I would also encourage you to share this letter to Peter Cammarano and drill some fiscal common sense into him.
If you do intend to support Mr. Cammarano I would ask you examine whether in your opinion his voting record matches the soundness of the fiscal responsibility espoused by you on numerous occassions in addition to this letter. I have come my conclusions, but as they say ‘opinions vary’.
Login or Register to reply
June 13th 2008 - 17:41:40 |
I actually tend to agree with the spirit of Rich T’s letter here.
From the letter Mayor Roberts wrote to the Hoboken Reporter a couple of weeks back:
“Last Sunday’s vote at the emergency budget meeting by City Council members Mason, Russo, Castellano, Zimmer and Cunningham was a calamity for the taxpayers of Hoboken. And their subsequent decision to not even entertain a vote at the following meeting on Wednesday only confirmed their poor judgment…
…These five members of the City Council have abandoned the opportunity to work with the State to spread any tax increases over a longer period of time.”
Let me get this straight (and it appears Rich T. agrees): We are going to fix this year’s budget debacle by pushing things off into the future. No, don’t worry about next year yet, that’s not until later. I’m sure it will fix itself by then. And if not, well, we can always push it off until the year after.
It doesn’t appear that Dave Roberts has learned a darn thing from this sobering wake-up call with the 2008 budget.
In essence, what it amounts to is this: Dave Roberts wants to raise your taxes for next year, and the year after that – even before he’s put pen to the paper on next year’s budget.
By the way, the 2009 fiscal year starts in a couple weeks.
I wonder how long we’ll have to wait for a budget.
Login or Register to reply
June 28th 2008 - 13:34:26 |
Trem asks some very good questions in this letter:
Red Haven wrote:
The Hudson County political hacks who run the Department of Community Affairs and Local Finance Board seem to have no problem trying to force the council to violate the law if it means keeping control of the Hoboken cash machine. So far all we seem to be getting from the state are comments from Joe Doria designed to help pull Dave Roberts’ butt out of the fire.
Some have accused the city council of being more concerned about the 2009 election than about the 2008 budget. Sadly, it seems to be DCA and LFB that are playing politics here while the council is trying to get a handle on a Dave Roberts budget that is under-funded by at least $11.7 million dollars.
Login or Register to reply
June 28th 2008 - 15:29:09 |
beamrider9 wrote:
Let’s be clear. This predicament is thanks to Dave Roberts and his many years of lining his pockets at the public’s expense. He screwed us all in a big way.
Previous city councils are also complicit, in that they allowed him to run amok (thinking, I assume, that there was plenty to go around for everyone).
Thank goodness we got a few bona fide reformers on the council last year, providing the votes needed to drag the mayor’s recklessness out in the open. If we can get a few more, and elect a decent mayor next year, maybe we can end this cycle of fiscal fraud once and for all.
Login or Register to reply
June 28th 2008 - 17:39:29 |
Hmmm. Rich T poses some good questions.
On another note, anyone catch the ridiculous full-page attack ad on Beth Mason in the Hoboken Reporter from Dave Roberts? Talk about a sign of desperation.
Login or Register to reply
June 28th 2008 - 20:45:03 |
To be clear the council did meet with DCA and got no where. All DCA wanted was to get the council to vote on a budget. However, there were 5 council members who couldn’t, Why? Because they never knew what the right numbers were from Roberts. As for the rest of the council who voted for a budget remeber all 4 of them were backed by the Mayor when they ran and always voted for the Mayor budgets for the last 6 years, that is why we are in this mess. Richard T is a no body who collects a state pension and gets free health benefits from the city for his wife and himself. By the way his wife works for the BOE. Give me a break Rich
Login or Register to reply
June 28th 2008 - 20:59:37 |
oceanbloo wrote:
Wait a second, didn’t Beth do the same thing in last weeks reporter. Sounds like good old fashioned payback to me.
Login or Register to reply
June 28th 2008 - 21:46:38 |
Yes… Using an absurd, baseless ad to get her back for her ad’s completely accurate account of Roberts’ malfeasance.
Sh*t for tat.
Login or Register to reply
June 29th 2008 - 00:11:38 |
YuppieSteve wrote:
Agreed.
roberts is seeming deperate with the ad in the reporter this week.
No one with half a brain in their head is buying his malarkee.
(ooh. I got to use the work Malarkee!)
Login or Register to reply
June 29th 2008 - 01:34:54 |
oceanbloo wrote:
The City Council does not have enough information to make the decision to pass the budget. All that’s going on is political posturing by the mayor – especially rich is his full-page ad in the Reporter today. The man is the epitome of irresponsibility and finger pointing instead of taking accountability. In the lead story he says he gave the Council the budget and they could have found out the exact numbers. Does he hear himself? So the Council had to go on a wild goose chase to find the real numbers because he wouldn’t supply them. The cheek. Throw the bum out.
In order to inform those in my building who aren’t up on the political scene, I’ve put a notice on the noticeboard about Monday’s meeting as well as a few Reporter letters to bring them up to speed. One was the first letter; and one was the Zimmer/Cunningham letter. To make a difference, please do the same with your notice boards. Even if one new person attends the meeting, that’s progress.
The Council needs to hold fast, stick to their principles and not pass this budget. They don’t have the information needed to pass it, nor should the $12,000,000 overage be swept under the carpet of the next budget.
Login or Register to reply
June 29th 2008 - 07:14:51 |
I am seriously looking for an explanation. This just seems so wrong to me. The way I see it, the council works all year on trying to get numbers (that keep changing) to pass a budget but can’t agree to do it and so then Joseph Doria comes in and says you HAVE TO pass the budget. Do they really have to? It appears then that Mr. Doria is judge and jury. It’s like a jury not being able to agree on a verdict and the judge simply saying, “Well, you can’t agree so I’m going to say you all have to vote, innocent.” Does he really have the power to do that and what happens if they don’t agree? I remember reading something about a $25 a day fine and even that seemed wrong. It would seem to me that if the state wants the budget passed then they should pass with their own powers that be but don’t demand that the council do something they don’t want to do. You can hear it now. If the budget is passed by the council, months from now when the dust settles, the Mayor will come back and blame certain things on the council saying, “But, you passed the budget.” Damned if you do damned if you don’t?
Login or Register to reply
June 29th 2008 - 08:49:58 |
Friedupright is correct.
It would be irresponsible of City Council to pass a budget based on the flimsy and inaccurate support they were given.
They should hold firm and vote “no”.
Doria should be front-page news in the Hoboken Reporter for demanding the Council vote this way.
Login or Register to reply