By Emory Layne
Here’s yet another of the countless things I’ve learned from Hard Knox University: the longer the explanation someone provides for why they did or didn’t do something, the higher the percentage of inherent cowflop in it.
At a certain point, it reaches 100% manure.
No, I’m not referring to Katherine Watt’s explanation; I’m referring to some of the commentary and positions it contains.
So we’re talking about the formation of a Shade Tree Commission as opposed to a Shade Tree Advisory Board.
From the available information, it seems that the difference between a ‘commission’ and an ‘advisory board’ here in town is that the former would actually have a reason for existence. The latter? Shoot, I’ve ‘advised’ any number of current North Plainfield politicians and employees, right here on this blog.
I’ve told ’em where they can go, how quickly they should go there, and what they can do once they arrive, and you can see how seriously my ‘advice’ has been taken. I’m thinking of Jim Mora coaching the New Orleans Saints: “Advice? Advice? Advice?”
Plain language:
If the current administration saw ANY benefit TO ITSELF (not necessarily the town) by having a S.T. Commission instead of a S.T.A.B., they would have done it years ago. The requirement of a simply majority on the Council would have been a breeze, back when just about anything passed with a unanimous 7-0 vote, including the lone Republican on the council, Mrs. M.M. Jones.
Proof? In Janice Allen & Co.’s own campaign flier from 2004, they state that they:
“Supported the planting of trees and just received from D.O.T. $20,000 worth of Spruce trees to plant along Krausche Field and Route 22.”
Let’s see.
It’s important enough to use valuable space on a campaign flier to announce that you received grant money to plant trees along Route 22 and an athletic field, AND that you “support” the “planting of trees.”
Yet when the opportunity to create a commission that would further “support” the planting of trees as well as fight the destruction of existing ones, AND obtain grant money … you do nothing.
My suspicion: “official” commissions in this town exist in their own little world of autonomous interest.
As Katherine Watt has shown, when some meet at all, they often behave more as social clubs than as handlers of important matters for borough taxpayers and residents.
Some don’t meet at all, or rarely.
Others have vacancies that go unfilled.
Still others have what amount to lifetime members.
Absolutely true story: Years ago, one member of an official commission, the Recreation Commission, decided that the borough’s sports programs weren’t ‘competitive” enough, and pushed long and loud for changes in rules and structure. ONE person. Those changes were adopted, and no one in the Mayor’s office or Council chambers so much as had to read through them. No petitions, no public debate, no input from the hundreds of parents whose kids also played in the program.
No, it would appear that the complete lack of action over the years in creating a Shade Tree Commission (which would join the, what is it, 22 other commissions we already have?) was something the current power brokers couldn’t abide.
As they’ve shown us over and over and over, when there’s something they WANT to do, they don’t let silly things like Sunshine laws and public opinion stand in their way. In this town, complete inattention clearly translates to “It is not in Her Majesty’s best interests.”
Something that stopped me dead in this chronological explanation is the statement that members of the S.T.A.B. “were strongly encouraged (by the NPCCR) to be the Committee of Petitioners, because they are the most knowledgeable and passionate tree advocates in the Borough,” but “they declined out of fear of retaliation.”
Plain language:
Please, folks, tell us more. MUCH more.
I’ve heard any number of residents talk about “retaliation” from the Mayor’s office (usually by way of different branches of Her Majesty’s Secret Service), and actually have been given documentation of this kind of behavior.
But this is the first time that people who were actually ON some kind of board or committee or whatever in town referred to it, in my experience.
WHY STOP THERE?
Tell us a little more about what you feared, i.e. what you’d experienced or witnessed that would lead to such concerns. PLEASE fill us in on this? What do you have to lose? They tried “retaliation” on Frank D’Amore, and he’s now an official candidate for Borough Council – fat lot of good their ‘retaliation’ did.
In other words, this ain’t the Mob, there’s no o muerta, and no one’s going to take you on a one-way ride. Heck, if Rodino was even assigned that task, his car would probably be at the car wash and he’d have to postpone it.
Another thing that kind of snags this whole discussion is the reappearance of the names Fred and Margaret Mary Jones. On this, I will be brief.
Plain language:
For a long time, Mr. Jones called the shots for the GOP attempts to achieve some input into the town’s operation. While he somehow managed to successfully help his wife, Mrs. Jones, win election and reelection to Council, everyone else was soundly beaten like a drum.
Mr. Jones had a rather questionable level of “expertise” qualifying him to be in this shotcaller position.
For example, he once claimed that the reason the democrats kept winning mayoral elections was that they fell in the same years as Presidential elections, and voters simply voted the party line – an explanation that works well in 1996 (Clinton) but sort of falls to the ground in 2000 and 2004 (Bush and Bush).
I have this in writing, guys, so don’t start a debate you’ve already lost.
Mrs. Jones served many years on the Borough Council.
One of her standard positions was that she was “only one” among six opponents.
But it’s funny; for the brief period Jenny Flynn was “only one,” she nonetheless managed to make a little noise in town. Currently, Barbara Habeeb is “only one” in the same position, yet she certainly appears to be using all possible avenues to address the concerns of her constituents.
Both of the above-mentioned Councilwomen availed themselves of their position to, at the very least, assist concerned citizens when asked to; Mrs. Jones was known to claim she “couldn’t do anything” without “being provided with the proof.”
Again, it’s in writing. Don’t get all huffy.
So what the eff are these two doing involved in this in the first place? I know it’s a nice and fair and loving concept to welcome one and all, but doesn’t someone’s “track record” come into play at any time? The Joneses, to me, fall into the same category as Mabel “Skip” Hansen, whose name also keeps coming up like indigestion in discussions and actions related to political topics in North Plainfield.
Your time is past.
You had your opportunities to do things for the public, and didn’t do them.
It’s that Jimmy Carter garbage at a lower level; be a miserable failure when you had the opportunity to do something, and then spend the rest of your life butting in where you aren’t needed or wanted. Give it up. Go blog on national issues or something, but stay out of North Plainfield’s business – you had your chance, and you chose not to do the right things.
Finally, though, the thing that would stick in my craw, if I knew what a craw was and whether or not I had one, is that it appears what we have here, in this whole Shade Tree issue, is failure to communicate (thanks, Strother).
And I find that almost expectable in the NPCCR. This is NOT an “official organization;” at their meetings, they have one microphone, not the personalized sound system Mr. Shevett referenced at Council meetings.
They don’t have a long-standing buddy system of “you line my pocket, I’ll line yours” that Borough Hall has maintained with its hiring and firing practices.
They are TRUE ‘volunteers,’ not the “look at my title” nudniks who bask in the glow of political office and then claim to be a bunch of poor Mother Teresas.
Plain language:
How come this has NEVER happened between/among the Mayor and Borough Council and the high-paid, high-perked officials in Borough Hall?
Never. En-ee-vee-ee-ar. Take the current crop of Council members, sans Mrs. Habeeb, pour in the 12-year Mayor, sprinkle in the Council members from the past who put in their time and remain active in the ‘background,’ and stir in the Borough Attorney, Administrator, Zoning Officer, Borough Clerk and Police Chief, and you have this Philosopher’s Stone concoction that agrees on EVERYTHING.
No dissension.
No contradiction.
No (God forbid) criticism.
How many lobotomies would one have to endure before this appeared to make sense? That for over 10 years in North Plainfield, there hasn’t been one single issue on which those holding authority differed?
It’s pretty obvious, isn’t it?
To use another cheap “Cool Hand Luke” pop, for the last 10 years, you have to have your mind right to be ‘given’ any power in North Plainfield. I doubt that the retaliation referenced earlier has anything to do with literally being asked what all that dirt is doing in the boss’ hole, but conceptually, it’s probably similar.
I’ve referred to it before, and I’ll refer to it again – whether it’s Shade Tree Commissions, or Villa Maria properties, or School Superintendent’s compensation, or $200,000 a year lawyers, or $2 million wasted on renovations, ALL of it can only be addressed AFTER we first remove the “cult” that has practiced it for all this time.
The stench that has been coming out of Borough Hall for years needs to be cleared, and votes, not trees, will be the means to accomplish that.
See you in November.
North Plainfield Citizens for Community Rights 