General Category > Hackensack Discussion

Underwood Case

(1/4) > >>

Editor:
A recent article in The Record reports that the State Local Finance Board censured Mayor Zisa for his role in "Underwood".  Click here to read the article.

Many people have tried to explain Underwood to me, but I still don't quite get it. The chronology of events (according to the Record):
 
1.    City needs parking
2.    City buys State Street lot for parking spaces. 3/00
3.    Underwood buys nearby property from College. 6/00
4.    Underwood requests 45 spaces for property from the City. 8/00
5.    County leases building from Underwood for $1.6M. 9/00.  (Why lease back a building it just sold?) [Update: I understand there are several different county entities (Special Services School District being one) and that one entity did not necessarily know what the other was doing.  Also, there were issues of timing that influenced the decision. -  More on this later.]
6.    City leases 45 spaces to College. 10/00.
7.    City votes to pave lot. 11/00.  
8.    City votes to pay contractor 5 times in 2001. (What does this have to do with it? - simply because Mayor Zisa had an interest?)
 
The Record article says the deal cost city taxpayers $213,031. How is this figure calculated?  Didn't the city benefit from the leased spaces at $55 per month?  How did this deal cost the City money?
 
Did the County do anything wrong?
 
Did the mayor push the city into purchasing the State Street property knowing full well that the county would be interested in leasing that space if it had adequate parking?  Or, - did the mayor simply benefit from the city's decision (with or without his vote or influence) to purchase that property?  
 
In short, what is the net harm of the transaction(s)?  I'm trying to understand the level of Mayor Zisa's alleged culpability.  What did he know and when did he know it?  What should he have done?  What is his defense?

I hope the comments to follow address these concerns in a reasonable way.  I would also hope to hear from some Mayor Zisa supporters.  

Also: Please note that the determination by the Local Finance Board is only the first step in rendering a final decision.  

Ruffio:
It seems to me that if anything, Mayor Zisa should be applauded for renting spaces from the city, thus helping to fill the city's coffers.
After looking at the chronology of the events, nothing illegal or unethical could have taken place. It would also seem apparent that the ethics board that heard the case didn't fully take the time to go over the chronology. I believe that when all is said and done, Mr. Zisa will be fully exonerated of these basesless charges.

Eric Martindale:
For better or for worse, today's article about Underwood is probably not the GRAND FINALE regarding the issue. I am privy to information that would be best not to air fully on this website. Simply put, there are much higher authorities than the State Ethics Board who are actively looking into what happened with the Underwood real estate deal. Underwood isn't over.

The editor had one major error in his analysis in the prior post. The Mayor didn't "push the city into purchasing the State Street property knowing full well that the county would be interested in leasing that space if it had adequate parking. " It was Zisa himself, via his corporation UNDERWOOD, that was interested in leasing those parking spaces. And they did lease them. Whether or not Zisa pushed the city into purchasing the State Street property specifically so his own corporation could use the parking spaces (the parking spaces were a necessary condition of a very lucrative real estate deal), is the essence of the controversy. As for my opinion on Zisa's guilt or innocence on that specific matter, it really doesn't matter. State and Federal authorities will have their own opinions, and that's what matters.

There's another agenda going on here that has deeply troubled me. And that agenda is to destroy the Mayor of Hackensack so that county and private social service organizations can build homeless shelters, low income housing, drop-in centers for the mentally in, AIDS housing, and YOU NAME IT in every corner of the City of Hackensack. This battle is what really matters right now in the City of Hackensack, not the Underwood Scandal. Issues should always be more important than politics. And when the time comes for politics, (Spring 2005 city election), will there be credible opposition candidates? Will these candidates PLEDGE TO THE RESIDENTS OF HACKENSACK to continue Zisa's fight in the ongoing battle against the subversion and destruction of Hackensack by social service agencies. If those opposition candidates can't or won't, does anyone expect me to vote against the Zisa administration?

Kath1948:
I've known Jack Zisa for about 20 years, and in all that time, his behavior has always been that of a very compassionate, caring person.

   I couldn't think of anyone else that I would want to be mayor of this very complex city, that I have lived in for 55 years now.

   Jack has always been honest & ethical and it would be hard for me to imagine that he would involve himself in anything that would be for his own personal good.

   I feel privileged to have him as my mayor. Thank you, Jack Zisa.

                                 Sincerely,
                                  Kath1948

tuscany:
the underwood scandal is only the " tip of the
iceberg". the mayor is in office too long &
is out of control.it is time for a change, 15 years
is long enough. john gotti was boss only 1/2
that time.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page