Most of the City Council an Embarassment is an under statement. I thought some of the Council at Large were having an outer body experience the other night!
However, at least we know now he lived at 331 Pavonia, for whatever that's worth! OMG.....it's truly an embarassment, I couldn't hardly beileve my eyes and ears.

Healy needs to also be part of the recall with the At Large Council. What should the next steps be here.
How about also having an investigation against the At Large Council, with the way they vote all the time there must be some link that they took money somewhere.

i agree with yvonne that the at-large candidates should be targeted for a potential recall....

but realistically ... if 25% of the registered voters need to sign a petition for recall that is in itself a threshold to pass .... and in a city where only 15% voted, i'd call it a small obstacle.

you've gotta love democracy....

People who live downtown should not target a recall of other wards. It would backfire. That is why I suggested the at-large candidates and mayor. Besides, honestly, I believe Richardson Ward F, does a good job. She votes her conscience. I attend most meetings.
Yvonne

We should target them all, except for Fulop. We all agree he is the only one that is educated, and works for the people.
I know this won't be easy, but if there is an slimmer of hope of making some changes, let's see if we can get the ball rolling on a recall. I'm sure Dan Levin and the One Jersey City would be part of this initiative.

Are you kidding?! JC politicians crooks?! DUH. In fact, there was a guy running recently for a JC council position who owes his Condo Association over $100,000 for non-payment of maintenance fees (my friend says over 2 years he has not paid his maintenance) and that he was a board treasurer at one time. Don't know if he won, but just shameful.

In the document I posted earlier, I found this:

RECALL DRIVE BEGINS
A recall committee of at least three registered voters forms to initiate proceedings under the law. The recall drive
may not commence before the 50th day preceding the completion of the elected official?s first year of the current
term in office.

They are sworn in the first or second of July, so I guess it'd be 50 days prior to then in 2010. This also says the drive can't begin - meaning the committee can't be formed and signatures can't be gathered - until then.

Also:

SIGNATURE COLLECTION EFFORT
Upon approval of the petition, the recall committee and registered voters in the jurisdiction of the recall
election may solicit signatures of other registered voters in that jurisdiction. Specific requirements on the
method of soliciting signatures are listed in the law. The recall effort is limited to 320 days for a Governor or
160 days for other elected officials from the date of the notice of intention. The petition requires the
signatures of 25 % of the registered voters in the jurisdiction, as of the last general election.

It's registered voters, not people who actually voted. I still think targeting ward representatives would be easier than trying to get 25,000 to 30,000 citywide signatures.

Here is the link to the recall procedures:

http://www.joemustgo.net/Assets/elect ... truction-sheet-123108.pdf

I don't know. I will be willing to research this point. However, it will probably take one year to gather signatures. I believe a group of people should start the process. The council does not represent the public, they represent developers. It might be easier to target the mayor and at-large candidates because any ward can sign.
Yvonne

The quality of the city council that newcomers see
is nothing new. I have lived here almost thirty
years, and in all that time, the only, I repeat,
only qualified and decent council member has been
Fulop.
If you think today's current councils are fun, you
should have been here back in the Cucci days.
His councils made this one seem like
Harvard, Yale and Stamford came to town
and sat down to government.
It is a given, unfortunately, that this city
has always been (and may always be?)
run by goons, mopes and thugs.

Yvonne - do you know if the year applies to how long you have to wait to have a recall election or if you can't initiate the process at all for one year? Meaning - could you file the petition and start gathering signatures prior to one year and just wait for the election so it's more than one year?

You must wait 1 year after an election to have a recall.
It is normal to collect signatures based on the last general election. If 30% of reigistered voters, voted in November, then you might need 25% of those register voters. This is something to consider.
Yvonne

whospeaksforyou - they did not make a difficult choice, they rubber stamped it!

Let me get this straight:

There is a toxic, proven cancer-causing waste site on Garfield Ave and virtually everyone who's posted thus far wants it to remain so? If you or members of your family lived near to the site, wouldn't you want it cleaned up?

Remember,
1. With the passage of the settlement, work begins immediately to clean up the site. Not shovels and face masks, but the crucial step of preparing for the shovels and face masks. This work starts today.
2. There is a federal lawsuit filed against PPG that is not materially affected by this settlement. This means that while PPG is cleaning the site and giving Jersey City cash for further environmental protection, they can still be held liable by a federal court for millions more.
3. The great majority of civic leaders in that Ward support the cleanup settlement. They know that their relatives and friends have been sickened by chromium and they would prefer that the cleaning begins now, not 10 years from after a lengthy litigation which the plaintiffs could potentially lose.
4. "The biggest health risk is to do nothing and wait while standards are debated and litigation goes on that may take a decade." That is a quote from Max Costa, Phd., from his oped the Jersey Journal yesterday. He is one of the foremost experts on heavy metal carcinogenesis in the world and was the chief expert witness in the Erin Brockavitch trial among countless others.

Some criticism of the Council might be valid on some of the issues, but on this issue they made a politically difficult but correct choice.

25% is just the threshold to force a recall election. You'd still need to win the election. But as I said - if they don't have endless money to throw around, the playing field is level. I can't imagine a more likely target than Gaughan. Who would rise up to defend him if they weren't getting paid to do so? He slept through a good chunk of the meeting last night and he (and Vega) were completely impervious to anything that was said.

Ok then, we need the perfect storm for the 25%. However as T-Bird mentions... If the revaluation comes this year and there is something else (like contributions from Fisher to buy the sweetened abatement) ..it could cause the outrage needed..

Tactically, I'd say it's as possible as it's ever going to be. The war chests were just cleaned out to buy the last election, so they'd be vulnerable. If the revaluation comes this year and there is something else (like contributions from Fisher to buy the sweetened abatement) that can be thrown in, they'd really have to scramble to amass a defense fund.

You need signatures from 25% of the registered voters, so unfortunately going after an at-large council member like Vega, Flood or Brennan (or Healy himself) might be too great a task - depends on how great the reval outrage is. But picking off a Gaughan or a Sottolano would conceivably be a much lighter lift if you only have to get 25% of the ward to sign the petition.

According to Wikipedia there have only been twelve successful recalls nationwide. But one was the mayor and two council members of River Vale, NJ in 1994.

Last night was a total embarrassment, except for Fulop of course. The rest just rubber stamped everything. I forget who were the other 2 council members to vote no on Crystal Pointe since I just left after hearing the BS reasons coming out of Gaughan and Vega.

Is the recall feasible? Please keep this post going.

I?ve lived here for less than a year but have become well-informed about this city?s politics. After attending last night?s council meeting, my worst fears were realized. Jersey City is indeed a Banana Republic just like my former home, New Orleans. Two councilperson?s antics are foremost in my mind. Lipski?s behavior was not only unprofessional but reprehensibly smug. In light of his recent drunken piss fest, one would think he would wish to stay quietly in the background as opposed to displaying the behavior of a vulgar buffoon. Brennan used every chance he could to waste valuable speaking time by verbally ass-kissing the mayor, showering him with adoration and glory (King?s New Clothes Syndrome). All save for Fulop should be ashamed of themselves. They are not deserving of the public office they hold. And finally, shame on those who voted to keep Healy and his cronies in office and shame on those who did not vote at all. World Class city in the making? Hardly.

Quote:

Absolutely.

Although according to Wikipedia there have only been twelve successful recalls (and two unsuccessful), one successful one was the 1994 recall of the mayor of River Vale, NJ and two council members.

Can a Mayor and members of the City Council be recalled..

Who can be recalled?
State representatives, state senators, the governor, the lieutenant governor, the secretary of state, the state auditor, the attorney general, supreme court judges, court of appeals judges, and district judges are all subject to recall.

I brought the Recall subject up a few years ago with Dan Levin while he was with Civic Jersey City.

We need to figure something out 4 years is too long to deal with these uneducated members of the City Council.

Simple 2 pager on the process

Seriously - tonight's Crystal Pointe vote would be tremendous ammo. If you can tie abatement votes to campaign contributions from the developer, in the midst of epic budgetary constraints and with a revaluation storm brewing.... if it could ever happen, you couldn't draw up a more fertile environment.

T-Bird, I'm on the same page - RECALL..Perhaps we should start planning soon on the strategy.

Quote:

I don't disagree with you - just that the issue wasn't as cut and dried as the abatement revision for Crystal Pointe. You could at least understand the frustration residents expressed over the fact that so much time has passed and they still had nothing to show for it. (Although it was funny how many of the people who stood up in favor weren't residents of the area covered by the settlement.)

As for putting up with these clowns for the next four years - when the revaluation comes and people finally wake up to what has happened while they were blissfully sleeping.... recall?

T-Bird who were the ones that voted no, I assume Fulop. I had to leave to prepare for work tomorrow.

Well we have four years to deal with these guys until we can get back out there with people like Fulop and Levin to work to vote these rubber stamps and poor excuse for a Mayor out of office. It will be a lot of work, and will need to start with a strategy soon to win the next election.

I saw most of the PPG "discussion" and it was a joke. Most of these people are entrenched and have to make no effort to get re-elected. It is a machine and a sad one at that. Fulop seems to be the only one with the capacity to step back from any issue and really see all sides. The rest of them are totally reactionary and I would not be shocked if they were taking pay-offs. I see why Fulop is disliked by other "factions" in this city. He is a thousand times smarter than them.

You know - I could see both sides on the PPG settlement. While I would have voted against it, you could make a plausible case for voting for it. I felt bad for Viola - she was in a tough spot. You're dead on though about Fulop - he made such a concise, empassioned case against the settlement.

The Crystal Pointe giveaway was an entirely different issue. There is no defense for giving away tax money to a developer so he can hit his target investment hurdles. Unfortunately, there were only 50 to 60 people left by the time the ordinance was introduced at some point around 10:30. About 20 people stood up and spoke fervently against. In the end though, the rubber stamps won - 6 to 3.

It will be interesting to see, if/when the information is ever available, who benefited from Fisher campaign contributions among the yes votes.

I attended the meetings at City Hall tonight and just can not believe how most of these clowns got elected. While listening to them vote on the PPG Industries to remediate the chromium contamination, they were all except Fulop a rubber stamp. While yes this needs to be done, it must be done accurately and safely. Fulop eloquently explained why Jersey City should not move forward at this time until it can be done right. The other Council Members babbled on coming off clueless. Gaughan look like he could care less and did not want to be there. Brennan babbled on and could not even articulate his point on why he voted yes. He is a total goon. The rest of them probably don't even know what they were voting yes on. How does a city like Jersey City that could become a world class city end up with these clowns. We can only hope the next for years goes by fast and the citizens if Jersey City wake the hell up and vote in educated and articulate council members such as Fulop.