Well, next Tuesday we get to go to the polls to elect a Mayor and three Council members here in Downtown Edison. I put up a poll so you can share who you think will be the next Mayor. We have the sitting Mayor, two sitting Councilmen and a former township employee vying for the spot - three Dems and one Republican. With apologies to Inder J. Soni (Houses Tax Break), an additional candidate for Mayor which I inadvertently left out of this post (11/2/13). Added a new poll to the right to include him. As of today, they were only 2 votes cast on the old poll and they were for Guy Gaspari.
Now that the 1 hour debates are over and campaign fliers are in full bloom - it's important to recognize that this is a very important election.
If you strip away all the political in-fighting, self-inflicted wounds, self-serving rhetoric, hyperbole and juxtapositions, who is the best candidate of the bunch and why? Who has the best ideas for the town to deal with the myriad of opportunities and problems facing us? What are the most important issues, did the candidates address them and who do you think has the best solutions?
To encourage a conversation on the candidates' position on these issues and the future of Edison, feel free to share your thoughts and comments here on what's most important to you, what are the most important issues that you see facing us and why you support any particular candidate and their slate.
Feel free to support whoever you want but share the reasons why. If you're a person like me who votes for people and not columns, feels free to split up the tickets. It will be helpful to all to hear differing opinions before stepping into the voting booth on November 5th.
Anyhoo, the only thing I ask is that you keep it civil, and stick to the issues and the candidates' positions on the issues.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
WCTC's Edison Mayoral Debate!
Just an additional 1 hour debate hosted by WCTC on October 30th - you can find the info here.
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Edison Mayoral Debate - October 24, 2013!?!
Well, looks like there's going to be a debate next Thursday at 7:00PM at Edison High School. According to the flyer, it's sponsored by the Edison Chamber of Commerce in cooperation with the Edison School District and moderated by, Deborah Macmillan - League of Women Voters of New Jersey.
It's open to the Public and Pre-event questions are welcome - Email info@edisonchamber.com.
Confirmed candidates:
The debate runs from 7:00 - 8:00PM and there's a Meet & Mingle with the Candidates from 8:00 - 8:30PM.
Now, I'm happy to see they're going to debate and to hear their views & plans to deal with both the problems & opportunities facing our town. Certainly, there are both.
However, herein lies the concern - with only a one hour debate with four candidates participating, that leaves only 15 minutes for each candidate to make his case and answer questions along with opening & closing remarks!
Just doesn't seem like there's ample time for them to get to their positions and plans on the substantive issues. I hope I'm wrong and that this isn't going to be just another 'Live' campaign flyer.
Anyhoo, you should attend if you can.
It's open to the Public and Pre-event questions are welcome - Email info@edisonchamber.com.
Confirmed candidates:
- Gaetano V. Gaspari (Republican)
- Thomas Lankey (Democrat)
- Mayor Antonia Ricigliano (Ricigliano 2013)
- Sudhanshu Prasad (Your Independent Voice)
The debate runs from 7:00 - 8:00PM and there's a Meet & Mingle with the Candidates from 8:00 - 8:30PM.
Now, I'm happy to see they're going to debate and to hear their views & plans to deal with both the problems & opportunities facing our town. Certainly, there are both.
However, herein lies the concern - with only a one hour debate with four candidates participating, that leaves only 15 minutes for each candidate to make his case and answer questions along with opening & closing remarks!
Just doesn't seem like there's ample time for them to get to their positions and plans on the substantive issues. I hope I'm wrong and that this isn't going to be just another 'Live' campaign flyer.
Anyhoo, you should attend if you can.
Friday, October 18, 2013
Local Dem-Party infighting here in Downtown Edison!?!
Well, it's the Silly season again here in Downtown Edison and I'm reminded of some of these thingies that go on (after reading this piece today in the Star Ledger), which place form over substance;
- Elections are about Winning not the truth
- Politics is political theater-the theater of the Absurd
- Spin is all well and good, just as long as you don't believe it
- Glossy campaign flyers so uninformative that they only make the Printers happy
- Let's attack the Candidate rather than the Candidate's position on the issues
- Dem-Party in-fighting benefits the few at the expense of all of us
Now, here's my point - ever since Jun 'RforMe' Choi knocked George Spadoro off in the primary a few years back, the people of this town have been treated to the worse of the worst in power grabbing that I have ever seen. And, it doesn't seem to be going away any time soon.
Dem-Party Politics at it's worst that benefits the few at the expense of all of us. Who would of thought that the Perils of one-party government that have turned into reality over the years here in Downtown Edison would be trumped by the Perils of Dem-Party in-fighting?
A Dem Mayor and a Dem Council that live for blocking each others efforts, for one-upping each other every chance they get or for pulling every trick in the book to trip each other up and for what?
How is it helpful to the people of this town when they spend all their time positioning themselves for and defending against each others' attacks? Aren't there some more serious issues going on in this town that need to be addressed and fixed? Don't see anyone describing the problematic issues that need to be addressed and how they're going to fix them.
Anyhoo, as for putting the 14 new firefighters on now, what's the freakin' problem? This is Edison! Ricigliano has the 'Bully Pulpit' and is taking advantage of it and Lankey is complaining about the timing of it. That's what they do in the Silly Season here in Downtown Edison.
Of course, I did notice that they both agreed that it was necessary to add the 14 new firefighters but didn't notice anyone say how we're going to pay for it when the federal grant for 10 of the new firefighters expires at the end of 2015. Now, that's something that's more important to know than how the timing of these new hires worked out!
You know, as a life-long Dem here in Downtown Edison, it's embarrassing to watch this stuff go on. It's time the Dem-Party Candidates put the real issues facing this town before the people and what their plans are to fix them - it's time to place substance over form, where all too often in the past, form has prevailed.
So, Mayor Ricigliano, Council Members Lankey & Prasad - who wants to step up to the plate?
Friday, September 13, 2013
Top 10 'Could be' Replies to Charlie's hacked email account!
10. Doc here - not now Charlie. Will get back to you after the election. Got enough problems going on here.
9. Rob 'March on Trenton' Karabinchak here - sorry Charlie, already spent that $100,000 to keep my single seat for a single year against that $3,000 republican challenge.
8. Mayor Ricigliano here - Hi Charlie, nice to hear from you.
7. Alvaro "KaraMia' Gomez here - Hi Charlie, will get back to you right after I check with Rob.
6. Bob 'See No Conflict' Diehl here - Hi Charlie, I still remember how you helped me out so I want to return the favor now. Will get back to you after I become Superintendent in Edison.
5. George Spadoro here - sorry Charlie, still remember that infamous 'I was for using that $10 million in surplus during the primary only to be against it after I lost the race.
4. Jun 'RForMe' Choi here - like to help but you can't do anything for me anymore.
3. Edison Light House Keeper here - sorry Charlie, I'm still looking for those $50 paver stones.
2. Oak Tree Pond Park Manager here - sorry Charlie, still busy cleaning up that $5.6 million piece of dirt & mud puddle called the Oak Tree Pond.
1. Clerk here - sorry Charlie, you can't Phone Home CT. It didn't work last time you tried while making Smores around the camp fire!
9. Rob 'March on Trenton' Karabinchak here - sorry Charlie, already spent that $100,000 to keep my single seat for a single year against that $3,000 republican challenge.
8. Mayor Ricigliano here - Hi Charlie, nice to hear from you.
7. Alvaro "KaraMia' Gomez here - Hi Charlie, will get back to you right after I check with Rob.
6. Bob 'See No Conflict' Diehl here - Hi Charlie, I still remember how you helped me out so I want to return the favor now. Will get back to you after I become Superintendent in Edison.
5. George Spadoro here - sorry Charlie, still remember that infamous 'I was for using that $10 million in surplus during the primary only to be against it after I lost the race.
4. Jun 'RForMe' Choi here - like to help but you can't do anything for me anymore.
3. Edison Light House Keeper here - sorry Charlie, I'm still looking for those $50 paver stones.
2. Oak Tree Pond Park Manager here - sorry Charlie, still busy cleaning up that $5.6 million piece of dirt & mud puddle called the Oak Tree Pond.
1. Clerk here - sorry Charlie, you can't Phone Home CT. It didn't work last time you tried while making Smores around the camp fire!
Monday, August 26, 2013
Yet another 'Un-enforcable Ordinance here in Downtown Edison?!?
Well, it looks like the Edison Township Council is finally putting up their version of what they'd like to see in police hiring and promotion criteria and procedures on tonight's agenda.
Hence O.1841-2013 - 'An Ordinance Revising Police Hiring And Promotions Criteria And Procedures.'
Now, maybe it's me, but I don't see this thing any anything more than political 'gamesmanship' by the Council in an election year. I just can't get past how they think they can legislate mayoral duties & responsibilities. Last I looked, the Faulkner act gives hiring and firing responsibilities to the Administration not the Council.
And if that's true, then how can they pass a local law that trumps state law??
So, what is this supposed to be? Yet another law passed by the Council that gets vetoed by the Mayor and then overridden by the Council - that's apparently not enforceable anyway??
Is this what our Democratic Republic here in Downtown Edison has come to - because they can't figure out a way to play nice with each other? I thought these people were supposed to represent our interests, not their own. It's certainly not in my interest for them to try and usurp each others duties and responsibilities. This stuff is just out-of-control and quite simply embarrassing.
Rather than going through each section of this ordinance, I'll just highlight a couple of thingies that concern me the most.
First and foremost, is Section 2-29.9(B) - 'The Mayor shall select the Chief of Police. In the event that a promotion to Chief of Police must take place in the final year of the Mayor's term, the Committee as described in 2-29.5(f)3 shall select the Chief of Police.'
And here's what 2-29.5(f)3 reads:
'In the selection of candidates to the rank of Sergeant the Mayor shall utilize the 'rule of three'. The three ranking candidates from the list established above shall be interviewed by the Mayor, the Chief of Police, or their designees, and a Retired Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey (hereinafter 'The Committee'). The Retired Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey shall be chosen by the Township Council. A reasonable fee may be paid to the Retired Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey. In the event a Retired Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey cannot be retained, the Township Council shall select a qualified replacement. At the time of the interview the candidate's personnel file shall be reviewed. The Committee shall select from the 3 candidates interviewed.
Really?!? So, the Mayor can no longer pick the Chief of Police - it has to be done by the 'Committee' - majority rules too. Doesn't it strike anyone how embarrassing this thing is? The Council thinks the Mayor shouldn't decide who should be Chief of Police so they want to form a Committee. A Committee that's made up of an outsider who's going to read three files and decide which of the three files is the best?!? Aren't there more thingies that need to be considered than just what's in a person's file?
Further, I like Chief Bryan, always did - but is it really his or any other Chief's place to have a vote on who the next Chief is going to be, if that circumstance ever arose? No doubt, their opinion should be heard and considered but certainly not weighed equally on a majority-vote based decision.
This majority 'rule of three' is silly and just an attempt to usurp the responsibility and duty of the Mayor.
Finally, just one other section for now;
Section 2-29.2(7) on Entry level Criteria Established - 'Shall possess a minimum of sixty (60) credits from and accredited college or university. In lieu of the minimum of sixty (60) college credit requirement, an applicant (i) shall have completed two (2) years of active military service with an honorable discharge; or, (ii) shall be PTC (New Jersey Police Training Commission) certified and have been a police officer in good standing for a period of one (1) year.
Now, when you compare this with Section 2-29.3 Entry Level Officers, you'll find there appears to be an inconsistency in Option 1 and 2 in 2-29.3 (B) on the hiring procedures.
Anyhoo, there's more but I'm boring myself with this silliness. So, looks like the Edison Council will pass this ordinance and we'll most likely go through the veto and veto-override process and we'll have another local law on the books that won't be enforced. And how does that address the problems much less fix them?
Just kind of think you can't legislate yourself somebody else's job! The Mayor should do her job and the Council should do their job - and the voters will decide who is or isn't doing their job.
Hence O.1841-2013 - 'An Ordinance Revising Police Hiring And Promotions Criteria And Procedures.'
Now, maybe it's me, but I don't see this thing any anything more than political 'gamesmanship' by the Council in an election year. I just can't get past how they think they can legislate mayoral duties & responsibilities. Last I looked, the Faulkner act gives hiring and firing responsibilities to the Administration not the Council.
And if that's true, then how can they pass a local law that trumps state law??
So, what is this supposed to be? Yet another law passed by the Council that gets vetoed by the Mayor and then overridden by the Council - that's apparently not enforceable anyway??
Is this what our Democratic Republic here in Downtown Edison has come to - because they can't figure out a way to play nice with each other? I thought these people were supposed to represent our interests, not their own. It's certainly not in my interest for them to try and usurp each others duties and responsibilities. This stuff is just out-of-control and quite simply embarrassing.
Rather than going through each section of this ordinance, I'll just highlight a couple of thingies that concern me the most.
First and foremost, is Section 2-29.9(B) - 'The Mayor shall select the Chief of Police. In the event that a promotion to Chief of Police must take place in the final year of the Mayor's term, the Committee as described in 2-29.5(f)3 shall select the Chief of Police.'
And here's what 2-29.5(f)3 reads:
'In the selection of candidates to the rank of Sergeant the Mayor shall utilize the 'rule of three'. The three ranking candidates from the list established above shall be interviewed by the Mayor, the Chief of Police, or their designees, and a Retired Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey (hereinafter 'The Committee'). The Retired Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey shall be chosen by the Township Council. A reasonable fee may be paid to the Retired Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey. In the event a Retired Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey cannot be retained, the Township Council shall select a qualified replacement. At the time of the interview the candidate's personnel file shall be reviewed. The Committee shall select from the 3 candidates interviewed.
Really?!? So, the Mayor can no longer pick the Chief of Police - it has to be done by the 'Committee' - majority rules too. Doesn't it strike anyone how embarrassing this thing is? The Council thinks the Mayor shouldn't decide who should be Chief of Police so they want to form a Committee. A Committee that's made up of an outsider who's going to read three files and decide which of the three files is the best?!? Aren't there more thingies that need to be considered than just what's in a person's file?
Further, I like Chief Bryan, always did - but is it really his or any other Chief's place to have a vote on who the next Chief is going to be, if that circumstance ever arose? No doubt, their opinion should be heard and considered but certainly not weighed equally on a majority-vote based decision.
This majority 'rule of three' is silly and just an attempt to usurp the responsibility and duty of the Mayor.
Finally, just one other section for now;
Section 2-29.2(7) on Entry level Criteria Established - 'Shall possess a minimum of sixty (60) credits from and accredited college or university. In lieu of the minimum of sixty (60) college credit requirement, an applicant (i) shall have completed two (2) years of active military service with an honorable discharge; or, (ii) shall be PTC (New Jersey Police Training Commission) certified and have been a police officer in good standing for a period of one (1) year.
Now, when you compare this with Section 2-29.3 Entry Level Officers, you'll find there appears to be an inconsistency in Option 1 and 2 in 2-29.3 (B) on the hiring procedures.
Anyhoo, there's more but I'm boring myself with this silliness. So, looks like the Edison Council will pass this ordinance and we'll most likely go through the veto and veto-override process and we'll have another local law on the books that won't be enforced. And how does that address the problems much less fix them?
Just kind of think you can't legislate yourself somebody else's job! The Mayor should do her job and the Council should do their job - and the voters will decide who is or isn't doing their job.
Thursday, August 22, 2013
What's the latest with TJ - here on the South-side of Downtown Edison?!?
If anyone has any info they care to share, sure would like to know:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)