Author Topic: 2013 Election  (Read 104841 times)

Offline regina

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #60 on: May 08, 2013, 10:59:45 PM »
This was omitted from the original article. I'll say it for you, Victor. Tsk, Tsk.

Rose Greenman

Profession: general practice attorney with emphasis on bankruptcy and immigration

Other relevant experience: secretary of the New Jersey State Bar Special Committee on Consumer Protection Law; Foreclosure Mediator, NJSBA  lecturer, businesswoman.

Q.  What steps will you take to improve openness and transparency in government?

A. To better enable communications between residents and city government, we will appoint ward representatives who will serve as liaisons for their wards and report on issues of concern particular to their area of the city.  Council meetings will finally be televised, so residents who were previously precluded from attending them for various personal reasons will have an opportunity to see the democracy in action.  The municipal website will be substantially updated and will provide easy access to public information that under the current regime required OPRA requests.  All municipal job openings are going to be posted on the website and open to best qualified candidates, not doled out to political appointees and opportunists.
 
 Q.  The city is dogged by the perception that favoritism and cronyism are prominent in government. How will you ensure fairness and the public’s trust?

A. We will not tolerate corruption, cronyism and favoritism that were part-and- parcel of the city's political regime for too many years.  Insidious back-room dealings of present political operatives that made our  proud and illustrious city the laughing stock of Bergen County will be disposed of promptly.  We will sweep the slate clean of those long-time political usurpers who held onto power and profited handsomely on the misery of many.  There will be zero tolerance to secrecy and political manipulations; no special breaks or shakedowns of big donors; no threats and intimidation of residents; no opagueness of political process, no special deals for the politically connected.  We are committed to creating an open and honest community where citizens are empowered and encouraged to bring their ideas, as well as concerns and criticism, to the table.  Our goal is to have a city government that is responsive to the residents and has their best interests in mind.

Q. What can, and should, the council do to improve the city’s downtown?

A. Our slate will restructure and improve the city building department's procedures to expedite Main Street and Downtown redevelopment.  We will open the redevelopment process to well-regarded and qualified developers with proven track records to give us a Downtown we can be proud of and which will boost tax ratables and lower our tax bills. We will create a well-designed and highly desirable Downtown with stores, restaurants and cultural venues that would bring visitors from Bergen County and beyond to shop, dine and be entertained in our Hackensack.  We project that this much  anticipated redevelopment will create a multitude of construction and permanent jobs and lead to a more prosperous and desirable place to live and do business.

Offline just watching

  • Long-time poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
  • Karma: -25
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #61 on: May 09, 2013, 08:04:10 AM »
Wow, The Record allowed almost all the candidates to give individual comments, except the Coalition for Open Government. THey only had a group comment. 

Offline regina

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #62 on: May 09, 2013, 08:59:50 AM »
Read the article. Open Government did not want to answer individually and chose to answer as a team. It would have been nice to hear their individual responses, but it was their choice to let someone else speak for the group. The answers were submitted by Mattei, not a candidate.

"They’ve campaigned on promises of transparency: to put more information online, televise meetings and to establish boards to review ethics and civil litigation. The candidates, however, declined to respond individually to a questionnaire sent by The Record on issues of redevelopment, corruption and transparency. One joint response was sent by campaign manager Roger Mattei, who said the slate chose to answer as a team."
« Last Edit: May 09, 2013, 09:10:41 AM by regina »

Offline Victor E Sasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
  • Karma: -21
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #63 on: May 09, 2013, 11:03:07 AM »
Excuse me, Regina. What are you saying I did?

Offline regina

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #64 on: May 09, 2013, 01:54:53 PM »
Sorry Victor, I did not say you did anything. The Record left out one whole candidate Q&A when article was posted online. I said tsk, tsk to them, not you.

Offline Victor E Sasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
  • Karma: -21
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #65 on: May 09, 2013, 03:31:29 PM »
OK, thanks.

Offline Editor

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4430
  • Karma: 17
    • View Profile
    • Hackensack Now
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #66 on: May 09, 2013, 11:05:05 PM »
For anyone who was paying attention:  I deleted an exchange between Regina and me at her request and upon further consideration of the circumstances. 

Offline just watching

  • Long-time poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
  • Karma: -25
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #67 on: May 09, 2013, 11:25:11 PM »
Regina is correct that Citizens for Open Government answered as a group. 

What is not necessarily correct is that they allowed someone else to answer for them.  How does Regina know how the group created their answers? There's a few scenarios (a) Did Mattei write it himself, as she implies, or (b) did the candidates get together as a group, decide their answers, and then direct Mattei to submit their group response to The Record. Or perhaps (c) Mattei drafted it, they reviewed it, changes were made, and then it was submitted.

She is presuming way too much.

Offline regina

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #68 on: May 09, 2013, 11:37:50 PM »
I quoted the article. What did I presume or imply? Maybe it was my choice of wording "let someone else speak for the group"? Well maybe he did not "speak" but Mattei submitted the answers, not the candidates.

Offline just watching

  • Long-time poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
  • Karma: -25
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #69 on: May 10, 2013, 07:14:16 AM »
If your friends, Citizens for Change, had submitted their answers as a group, I would have not have presumed that their campaign manager spoke for them. I would have presumed that they, the candidates, had formulated the answers, and the campaign manager did nothing but submit them to The Record.

Offline regina

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #70 on: May 10, 2013, 07:36:13 AM »
You are the one who is making presumptions. Do not put something there that is not. I never gave an opinion as to who formulated the answers and clarified my use if the word "speak" just for your benefit. Read both of my posts again. I quoted the article. I never presumed anything. That was in your own mind. But since you put out 3 scenarios, and so you do not have to presume anything, I am going with some version of (c). I think more changes were made by the person who does all their writing and then it was submitted.

I think you post just to slam me.

Offline BLeafe

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4162
  • Karma: 26
    • View Profile
    • Bob Leafe Photography
2013 City Council election literature mailing mistake
« Reply #71 on: May 10, 2013, 01:55:17 PM »
It's déjà vu all over again.

Issues aside, I think I'd prefer the slate that at least has the intelligence to put some effort in getting my mailing info correct. You may recall me posting about a stupid addressing error that was made by one group in last year's school board election. If not, go here:

http://www.hackensacknow.org/index.php/topic,2388

There's a common name in that election and this year's council election and the mistake is exactly the same. And, of course, they still give no contact info for me to use.

Considering that and everything else I've read, these people appear to be in a perpetual (C)FOG.
Like music? Like photography? Step into my office: http://xrl.us/BobL - - - - - - - http://xrl.us/BobsDarkness

Offline regina

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #72 on: May 10, 2013, 02:06:55 PM »
Yes, I remember that happening to you last election.

Here's some contact info

316 State Street
Hackensack, New Jersey 07601
.Phone (201) 414-8794
Email info@hackensackopengov.com

They took the info from the voter list and just merged people at the same address. I think CFC sends separate mailings to different names at the same address.

Offline BLeafe

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4162
  • Karma: 26
    • View Profile
    • Bob Leafe Photography
Re: 2013 City Council election literature mailing mistake
« Reply #73 on: May 10, 2013, 03:30:18 PM »
Thank you. I just emailed them.


They took the info from the voter list and just merged people at the same address.

If that's what they did, then this has probably occurred on a pretty wide scale. Given the number of multi-unit residential buildings in Hackensack, I'm guessing that a lot of people are not pleased.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2013, 03:36:18 PM by BLeafe »
Like music? Like photography? Step into my office: http://xrl.us/BobL - - - - - - - http://xrl.us/BobsDarkness

Offline regina

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 2013 Election
« Reply #74 on: May 10, 2013, 03:56:11 PM »
I get the same thing on their literature sent to my house, two different names on one piece, so it is not just you.