I was referring to the Fulop introduction e-mails only. We are in complete agreement on the Healy/Dwek introductions.

Quote:

It all depends on what the introductions and alternatives are about. in the case of the Fulop emails, it seems that they were introductions and nothing more.

Contrast this to the introduction Ed Cheatam, Leona Beldini, and Jack Shaw made, of Jerry Healy to Solomon Dwek. (Plus who knows how many other introductions and "alternatives" they brokered.)

Fulop made his introductions directly, through the front door, leaving a paper trail which could be checked. he had zero influence over subsequent dealings.

Healy's Three Amigos got him away from City Hall precisely so there would be no record, and others would not be aware of the relationship. If it weren't for the FBI there would be NO RECORD of this meeting, except for the $30,000 in donations Dwek was making to grease his fraudulent project. And on the tape you clearly hear Healy assenting to Dwek's request for expedited handling of his approvals.

I guarantee you that is NOT the kind of introductions and alternatives the people of Jersey City hired Jerry Healy to pursue on our behalf.

Healy was in it for himself. He obviously broke the law and broke faith with the public trust he swore to pursue.

MAY 14.

Only in Jersey City politics could someone making introductions and suggesting alternatives be construed as detrimental to the decision making process. These school board members were elected to make these decisions and Mayor Healy suggests that there is something wrong with pointing out alternatives. Heaven forbid they should weigh alternatives and make changes to the way they used to be done under Healy!

I am glad to see Fulop taking such an active role in reforming the schools. It was a herculean task to wrest control of the Board from the hacks. Steve invested years of political capital and effort. Of course he continues to care how the Board moves forward. The school Board spends as much as all other city agencies combined. It has been a failure. It needs leadership.

As for improper influence, all we have seen is that Steve provided a small number of his legal and disclosed campaign contributors with introductions to members of the School Board. That is the least he can do. I mean that literally. Short of completely ignoring his supporters (which would not bode well for his continued effectiveness), introducing qualified firms to potential clients is the VERY LEAST he could have done. There is no sign he pressured the school board to hire the firms he introduced. They were contenders on the merits.

Compare this situation to Healy's illegal and secret acceptance of $30,000 from a phony real estate developer who wanted to get to the "top of the pile" in terms of the many city approvals he needed. This man was an FBI informant with no actual project. The Mayor insists he did nothing wrong because he was not indicted. But the core of his re-election campaign, his closest political allies and personal friends were indicted and convicted.

Is that the standard we want? Hey--I wasn't indicted, only the closest aides in my campaign were. Mayor Un-indicted Co-Conspirator? Mayor Skate? No thanks.

Quote:



That was a lot of ink to get to the real point. While there were smoke screens and distractions, the point is that Steve never did anything unethical. Healy owns that landscape all by himself.

The emails show that:

* Fulop worked hard to get rid of the ineffective school's superintendent -- Charles Epps, who was a disaster for Jersey City. This is what the meeting with Cerf was all about -- showing that Jersey City was taking responsibility for fixing the schools, and advocating for the return of local control of the schools. Steve accomplished the first part -- ridding us of Epps in the schools (although Healy is trying to re-introduce "the disaster" by putting Epps on his ticket).

* Although Steve was vindicated, Healy is sticking the Board of Ed (hence taxpayers) with the bill for this fishing expedition

* Steve is hands-on in trying to fix the schools. Healy thinks everything is fine.

You?ve got mail
Hundreds of Fulop-school board messages released; what was learned?

by E. Assata Wright - Reporter staff writer
Apr 28, 2013

In January, Ward F City Councilwoman Diane Coleman stood before a crowd of 250 or so supporters as Team Fulop opened its campaign headquarters at 2175 Kennedy Blvd.

?Anyone who knows Steve Fulop knows that if he is elected mayor, you can expect him to be involved,? Coleman told the crowd. ?And not just involved, hyper-involved.?

The jubilant crowd laughed and cheered, well aware that the Ward E Councilman and mayoral candidate who bills himself as a government reformer, could often be found banging out an e-mail or text on one electronic device or other.

At the time that Coleman made this remark, Fulop?s chief rival in the upcoming mayoral election, Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy, was trying to force the Board of Education to release hundreds of e-mails between Fulop and several school board trustees.

The Healy campaign, which at the time was still in its infancy and looking to gain some momentum, hoped the e-mails would uncover a pattern of misconduct in which Fulop used his relationship with school board members to help his friends and campaign supporters get contracts in the school district.

Team Healy waged a battle with the school board attorney, a Fulop friend who initially refused to give up the e-mails, despite numerous requests under the Open Public Records Act (OPRA). Hundreds of e-mails were eventually turned over only after an attorney for Healy took the matter to court.

Several of the e-mails showed that Fulop introduced key board members to friends, fundraisers, or contributors who later received contracts ? but no e-mails show him specifically directing the board to award those contracts.

In the end, what, if anything, was learned from the inquiry and the mountains of correspondence that was released? Like almost everything else in this divisive mayoral race, it depends on who you ask.

Differing spin

With just two weeks left before the municipal election, both sides are eager to put their own spin on the months-long e-mail controversy.

For Fulop and his allies, the inquiry was a long, drawn-out, make believe scandal engineered to hurt him at the polls. The Fulop campaign argues that nothing of significance was learned as a result of the hundreds of e-mails that were ultimately released.

For the Healy camp, it was enough that Fulop introduced key board members to people who got contracts.

?This is a classic Hudson County Democratic Organization tactic that?s been used for years to keep a corrupt machine in power,? said Fulop spokesman Bruno Tedeschi. ?The tactic is to manufacture a story, push it on the press, get the headlines, then use those headlines in negative mailers. That?s exactly what Healy did as part of his political smear campaign to try to malign the only true reformer in this race, Steven Fulop.?

Hyper-involved

If there is one picture that emerges of Fulop through the e-mails that were released, it is one of ? to use Coleman?s term ? a hyper-involved elected official determined to set the course of a school board that he helped put in place. While some may applaud Fulop?s stewardship of the school board, others might wince at the councilman?s role.

E-mails that were eventually released due to Healy?s petition to the court, show Fulop expressing to school trustees his opinion on everything from whether they should use the New Jersey School Boards Association (NJSBA) to find a new superintendent,. to the budget.

In an October 9, 2011 e-mail to Sterling Waterman, who at the time was board president, Fulop wrote: ?I know you are all considering having the national school board association help with the search. I can?t tell you what a big mistake this is. There is one shot at this and only one shot. If these government bureaucracies did the right job then there would not be a need for these firms that specialize in this sort of thing for big cities. This is what Jersey City deserves.?

He added, ?Please don?t be penny wise and pound foolish. If you are not attracting big names, then you have failed. If you wait till March to find out what I am saying is accurate you will look horrible, with a bad impact to the city. Please think about it.?

At the time, the school board had hammered out a separation agreement with Dr. Charles Epps, the superintendent of schools, and knew they would need to conduct a search for his replacement.

A second e-mail, also sent from Fulop to Waterman, followed several weeks later on November 1, 2011. ?Are you hiring a firm to do the search? What is the status? Time is ticking, let me know if you need help.?

Later that day, Waterman responded with an e-mail in which he confirmed, ?Firm will be hired, no NJSBA.?

The school district ultimately hired two firms ? West Hudson Associates and Young, Attea, and Associates ? to assist with the superintendent search.

In a March 23, 2011 message that appears to have been posted online and circulated among Fulop?s Base Camp group ? a network of Fulop-allied activists in Jersey City ? he weighs in on a procedural move by longtime school board member Sue Mack.

Presumably addressing Bill LaRosa, Waterman?s predecessor as board president, Fulop wrote: ?I just want to comment on the motion to table by Sue?The motion to table is nonsense. She was the fifth vote for the budget and thus had all the leverage. She presented a choice to the rest of the BOE of either ?pass the budget? or ?table it.? Of course, the majority would side with pass the vote in that situation/choice. Had she presented the choice as ?table the vote? or she will vote ?no,? I promise you the majority would have tabled it and set the special meeting. This vote was wrong.?

He then goes on to give his own personal thoughts on the budget.

?This contract had zero concessions from the union, included teacher layoffs, a tax increase to the public, an Epps $270K salary, zero public input time, programs with increased management and personnel despite declining enrollment, etc., etc., etc. It is frustrating, to say the least. We put a committee in place and [Sue] was selected, as people thought her experience is an asset?As a side note, there is a lesson for us as a team. When this is done, we need to be more engaged in making sure we have a cohesive team there and not just leave it to be the assumption that all will work itself out.?

According to Waterman, school board presidents grew accustomed to working closely with Fulop and weighing his opinions on nearly every policy decision.

?I know that when I was the board president I was like a conduit. Steve would contact me, or sometimes me and Marvin [Adames], and we would be the ones to then carry that message back to the rest of the team,? said Waterman.

Since he thought everyone was working together for the same purpose and goals, Waterman said he did not mind this working relationship with Fulop initially. The two later had a falling out, however, when, according to Waterman, their views on how best to improve public education diverged.

A return to the ?secret meeting?

It was through a leaked e-mail that this newspaper was able to report last July on a confidential meeting between Fulop, school board members, Christopher Cerf, who at the time was the acting commissioner of education for New Jersey, school choice advocates, and education activists who were part of Fulop?s inner circle.

The e-mail, dated May 2, 2011, and titled ?Cerf Meeting,? was sent to Waterman; Carol Lester, vice-president at the time of the meeting; Carol Harrison-Arnold and Marvin Adames, who had been elected to the board just days earlier, on April 27, but had not been sworn in yet; Ellen Simon, founder of Parents for Progress; and Shelley Skinner, deputy director of Better Education for Kids, a school choice advocacy group. Fulop?s e-mail was also sent to Leda Duif Shumbris, Mohamed Akil, and Tine Pahl.

In the e-mail, sent from Fulop?s personal Gmail account, he wrote, ?Please keep in confidence as always. We are meeting at 274 Arlington Ave. tomorrow (Tuesday) at 6 p.m. See you then.?

The timing of the e-mail and Arlington Avenue meeting are significant because they came just one week after Fulop-backed candidates won control of the Board of Education. These events also took place at a time when the Board of Education was gearing up to oust Dr. Epps as the superintendent of schools and conduct a national search for his successor.

School board members Suzanne Mack, Angel Valentin, and Sean Connors were not invited to the meeting.

This e-mail was not part of the larger inquiry that followed months later. But it again shows Fulop?s willingness to steer the board?s business.

?Close to the end of my first year on the board, Steve was setting the agenda for the board,? Waterman told the Reporter.

While the Arlington Avenue meeting was the only meeting that took place in person, Waterman said there were a few conference calls between himself, Fulop, Cerf, and Dave Hespe, Cerf?s chief of staff. At least one conference call included these same players and board members Adames and Harrison-Arnold.

Only one topic was discussed during these conference calls, Waterman said: ?How to get rid of Epps.?

No one outside Fulop?s close circle of intimates is included in the ongoing correspondence regarding policy matters that affect students throughout the school district.

A little help for his friends?

Healy?s inquiry may have failed to prove a pattern of blatant misconduct, since no smoking gun e-mail was uncovered in which Fulop directed board members to give contracts to his friends. Still, Fulop allies and supporters were introduced to Waterman and other trustees. A small handful of these companies were later given contracts.

One e-mail dated Feb. 29, 2012 in which Ryan Graham, a principal with Fairview Insurance, told Waterman to ?vote down? a contract to Princeton-based insurance firm G.R. Murray. School Board attorney Ramon Rivera was copied on this e-mail, which was leaked by an anonymous source to NJ.com.

Graham is a friend of Fulop?s who has helped raise money for Fulop?s mayoral campaign. Last spring Graham?s company was selected to serve as the insurance broker for the school district.

(Fulop is not the only local politician to receive funding from Graham. He also donated to Healy?s 2009 re-election campaign and has in the past given money to several Jersey City candidates to the City Council and School Board.)

In October 2011, the law firm of Florio Perrucci Steinhardt & Fader received a one-year contract for $50,000, about 15 months after Fulop introduced Waterman to Lester E. Taylor, a partner at the firm. The contract was increased twice and topped out at $125,000

Paul Fader, a partner with Florio Perrucci, has helped Fulop raise money for his campaign.

In another e-mail to Waterman, dated Nov. 19, 2010, Fulop introduced the school board president to Linda Quentzel and her client Philip Johnston.

In that re-mail, Fulop writes: ?I wanted to introduce you to Philip Johnston of Johnston Communications. He has a large communication business on multiple fronts and has been a long time friend of Senator [Robert] Menendez. I think it will be an intro that is great for both of you. I have also CCed Linda Q from the [Hudson County Schools of Technology] and she has been a terrific resource for me navigating the mine fields. She is someone who introduced Phil and I ? worthwhile for you to make her acquaintance as well. Hope you can coordinate calendars.? In a separate e-mail to Waterman dated Feb. 7, 2011, Linda Quentzel wrote: ?A pleasure speaking with you Thursday about my strategy company. I would like to set up a meeting with my client Johnston Communications to discuss opportunities at the Jersey City school system. Let me know any days/times after 3:30 p.m. you are available to meet.?

Fulop and Johnston are copied on this e-mail.

Quentzel has contributed to Fulop?s campaign. And although Johnston Communications was on the school board?s list of approved vendors dating back to at least 2006, it appears the company did not start receiving contracts until after Fulop introduced Waterman to Quentzel and Johnston.

In March of 2011, the Board of Education paid Johnston $237 for telephone services. Later that that year, in August, the school board approved $22,350 for Johnston.

Fulop has said in the past that such introductions were rare and that most of the introductions he made to the board went nowhere and did not result in any business.

?The public now knows Fulop was flat-out lying when he said he didn?t interfere with BOE business, as the e-mails that came to light show Fulop not only involved up to his eyeballs, but also steering six-figure contracts into the pockets of his top campaign contributors, the very definition of pay-to-play,? said Healy campaign spokesman Joshua Henne.

The end... or just the end of the beginning?

While Fulop has taken some heat for the May 2011 meeting and for introducing his friends to key board members, perhaps little else is likely to come from this inquiry. Voters who have paid attention to the Fulop e-mail drama can draw different conclusions about the mayoral candidate based on the same information that was uncovered.

?Anyone who was actually following this story can see that after more than 1,000 emails released by the Board of Education, not a single one showed Steven ever attempted to influence any board member on any contract, as Healy?s smear campaign suggested,? said Tedeschi.

For their part, the Healy campaign is trying to use the worst of what was uncovered to gain traction in the election. Last week, the Healy campaign released an ad featuring school children frolicking in what the commercial calls ?Steve Fulop?s Pay to Playground.? The spot derides Fulop for allegedly using ?his influence to steer a school contract to one of his top campaign contributors, even though they weren?t the low bidder or best qualified?When it comes to pay to play, Steve Fulop think our schools are his playground.?

Yet, Fulop is not the only politician to get involved in school politics lately. Healy recently showed up at a Jersey City Education Association meeting and told the membership that, if elected mayor, Fulop would privatize public education in the city. Fulop said it was a false allegation meant to scare teachers into voting for Healy.

One Healy confidant suggested there could be information still to be uncovered, since school board attorney Ramon Rivera refused to release some e-mails between Fulop and school trustees on the grounds that they were outside the scope of Healy?s e-mail request.

On April 21, an attorney for the Healy campaign filed a new OPRA request with the school board seeking all e-mails and text messages between Fulop, Waterman, and Adames regarding Fairview Insurance, Ryan Graham, Florio Perucci, or Paul Fader.

?It?s clear that Healy will say or do anything to deflect from the continuing scandal that rocked his administration,? said Tedeschi, referring to the 2009 Operation Bid Rig sting that saw the arrests of 46 public officials and religious leaders.

While Healy was never arrested or indicted in the sting, several of his key allies ? including former Deputy Mayor Leona Beldini, Jersey City Council President Mariano Vega, and political consultant Jack Shaw ? were. Healy has repeatedly defended his reputation, stating that he never did anything that was illegal and noting he was not arrested for any crime.

In the meantime, one activist is trying to use this episode to lobby for a stricter pay to play policy at the school board. In an e-mailed letter sent to school board members last week, Riaz Wahid wrote, ?[It] is very important that we close this loop hole in the board?s current pay to play policy. Without closing the loop hole, the Jersey City Public Schools has advertised for broker services, [applications for which are] due on April 30. There are firms that have given money to Jersey City mayoral and municipal council committees. I request you to put this bid on hold till the loophole has been closed.?

http://www.hudsonreporter.com/view/fu ... ce=lead_story_left_column

FULOP SAYS IN "SECRET" EMAILS EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID IN PUBLIC!

Healy's bs fishing expedition did nothing except waste taxpayer dollars, throw around false accusations, and DISTRACT PEOPLE FROM HIS OWN RECORD OF FAILURE.

Healy's accusations were false, and all the legal bs served only to prove that Fulop did nothing wrong. In fact, Fulop said exactly the same thing in the "secret" emails as he was saying in public. Sounds like good testimony to his integrity.

On the other hand, "With Election Day just a month away, the public has a right to know..." that Healy's got nothing:
no record to run on,
no vision for the future,
no hope for another term.

Throw in the fact that the judge ruled last week that the BOE has to pay Healy's legal expenses and it's perfect. Healy, desperate to deflect attention from his non-record and taint Fulop as the only realistic route to keeping his job, decides to go fishing. Nothing there, which most reasonable people knew all along. And now the schools (read: taxpayers) get to pay for this piss-poor campaign ploy. Stay classy, Jerry.

It's official, and I called it. There's no there there in the BOE emails. So there!

Jersey Journal: New Fulop emails show councilman congratulating BOE on choice of schools chief

By Terrence T. McDonald/The Jersey Journal
on April 19, 2013 at 3:49 PM, updated April 19, 2013 at 5:58 PM

After months of back of back-and-forth between Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah Healy and City Councilman Steve Fulop over emails Fulop has sent to Board of Education members, the controversy may end with a whimper, not a bang.

The Healy campaign contends that the emails would prove Fulop used his influence over the school board to steer lucrative contracts to his political supporters. A Healy operative sued the BOE to force the release of the emails, and continued with the case after a BOE attorney with ties to Fulop handed over hundreds of emails, many heavily redacted.

This week, the attorney, Ramon Rivera, handed over four of those emails unredacted to comply with a court order issued by Judge Lawrence Maron, who was overseeing the case. The four emails are unrelated to any contracts awarded by the BOE, and instead show Fulop congratulating board members last June after they settled on hiring Marcia V. Lyles as the school district?s new superintendent.

?There are moments that confirm that your vote actually can evoke progress,? Fulop writes in one of the emails, dated June 29, 2012. ?Right now is one of those moments and it wouldn?t be possible had you not believed that change can happen.?

More at NJ.com

UPDATE: Fulop responds to Healy e-mail probe

Mar 25, 2013

JERSEY CITY ? An attorney working for the re-election campaign of Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy was expected to head back to Hudson County Superior Court Monday afternoon in the next round of an ongoing attempt to get a series of e-mails released between Board of Education trustees and City Councilman Steven Fulop.

The Healy campaign has been trying to uncover evidence that Fulop ? who endorsed eight of the school board?s current trustees ? has used his relationship with the Board of Education to get lucrative contracts for his campaign donors and other supporters of his candidacy for mayor. In addition, they are also trying to document the extent to which Fulop allies in the private sector guided school board decisions.

While hundreds of e-mails were eventually released last month, many were heavily redacted and attorneys for Healy have argued in court that some e-mails that should have been released were not. Among the e-mails that that were not released by the Board of Education are some that have been leaked to local media.

Among the leaked e-mails is one to then-school board President Sterling Waterman, dated November 19, 2010. In it, Fulop introduced the school board president to Linda Quentzel and her client Philip Johnston of Johnson Communications. It is believed to be one of the e-mails that will be discussed in court today.

?This email is a great example of Healy trying to distract voters from his failed record as mayor,? Fulop responded Monday evening. ?Johnston Communications has been with Board of education for 10 years long before I was elected to the council. The next part of the e-mail on this issue that Healy doesn't reference to the voters clearly stated I was recommending a free cost-cutting audit to save taxpayer money. Also, to further strengthen my point, Johnston Communications has not bid or proposed to do any business with the Board of Education.?

For more details on this story, see this weekend's paper. ? E. Assata Wright

Jersey City candidate Fulop calls on ex-schools chief to allow release of unredacted e-mails

By Terrence T. McDonald/The Jersey Journal
March 20, 2013 at 3:01 AM

Jersey City mayoral hopeful Steve Fulop?s campaign is calling on former schools superintendent Charles T. Epps Jr. to allow the release of emails related to Epps? separation with the school district.

Epps, who retired in December 2011 after being forced out by Fulop allies on the Board of Education, signed a settlement agreement with the district that bars either side from discussing the terms of his deal. But Epps should sign a waiver allowing the emails to be released, Fulop?s campaign says.

The request comes as Fulop?s campaign battles with the re-election campaign of Mayor Jerramiah Healy over emails Fulop has sent to Board of Education members. Healy?s campaign believes the emails will show Fulop urged BOE members to favor his political supporters with school district contracts, a charge Fulop denies.

On Feb. 15, BOE attorney Ramon Rivera released hundreds of emails to satisfy a public-records request submitted by a Healy campaign operative. But dozens were heavily redacted, leading Healy?s campaign to claim Rivera, who has acknowledged a friendship with Fulop, is hiding emails that could embarrass the Fulop campaign.

Rivera has said the redacted emails were censored because otherwise they would reveal information about Epps the district agreed not to disclose.

Fulop, who will face Healy in the May 14 citywide race, said the emails will show Epps? ?poor performance? and ?greed for taxpayer dollars.?

Epps, who is running for City Council on Healy?s ticket in the May 14 citywide race, declined to say whether he would sign a waiver allowing the emails to be released.

?I don?t want to comment on anything that Mr. Fulop says,? Epps said.

http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index ... y_candidate_fulop_ca.html

Healy and Fulop campaigns joust over emails
By Politicker Staff | March 19th, 2013 - 11:53pm

Jersey City Councilman-at-Large candidate Omar Perez wants his opponents ? Rolando Lavarro, Daniel Rivera and Joyce Watterman ? to besiege mayoral candidate Steve Fulop to release all emails showing correspondence between Fulop, his campaign contributors, and Jersey City Board of Education members.

Fulop, for his part, says he has no problem with that, already called for the email discharge, and dismissed the communiqu? as distraction for the real issues of the campaign.

?Jersey City taxpayers deserve to know the truth about how six-figure Board of Ed contracts were steered to Steve Fulop?s contributors,? said Perez. ?I call on Rolando Lavarro, Daniel Rivera and Joyce Watterman to demand that Steve Fulop release all emails showing correspondence between Fulop, his benefactors and BOE members.

?In the spirit of transparency and sensible pay to play legislation, I challenge my opponents to stand up for what they believe in by providing the residents and taxpayers with the truth,? the candidate added. ?True reformers do not hide from transparency, they embrace it and lead by example. The residents want full disclosure, not the ?same old do as I say not as do? type of politics that Steve Fulop wants to unleash on Jersey City. Being on Team Fulop, doesn?t mean they have to silently stand by as Fulop seeks to continue blocking Jersey City taxpayers from learning the truth.?

Last month, Hudson County Superior Court Judge Lawrence W. Maron validated the Healy campaign?s contention that the public has a right to know the full story regarding Fulop directly connecting his campaign contributors with Jersey City Board of Education members.

The judge expressed concern over the missing and incomplete emails, and on Monday, March 25th, the BOE must explain why the partial emails released were heavily redacted. The judge is requiring certifications from current BOE members, former board members, and the BOE?s IT person - compelling them to explain measures taken to look for the documents and retrieve the emails.

?Steve has called for full disclosure of the emails all along. It's their own candidate, Charles Epps, who is standing in the way of full disclosure,? said Fulop campaign manager Bruno Tedeschi, parrying the Healy salvo.

Fulop last week called on Team Healy?s Ward A Council Candidate and former Schools Superintendent Epps to give his permission to the Jersey City Board of Education to fully release all the BOE emails, without redaction, to the public.

The board released 500 pages of emails last month that were requested under the Open Public Records Act, but redacted certain emails dealing with the failed tenure of Dr. Epps. The emails were redacted because Dr. Epps has refused to waive a separation agreement between him and the Board of Education.

Dr. Epps' separation agreement is all that stands in the way of allowing the public to have full access to the unredacted emails, Team Fulop said.

?Fulop supports the full release of the emails, Mayor Healy supports the full release, the only person standing in the way of email transparency is Dr. Epps,? said Tedeschi.

Read more at http://www.politickernj.com/64107/hea ... over-emails#ixzz2O3kGS7pY
or sign up for a free trial of State Street Wire at http://www.politickernj.com/freetrial

Judge orders Jersey City BOE to explain why they redacted emails

By Michaelangelo Conte/The Jersey Journal
February 20, 2013 at 2:11 PM

This morning a judge ordered four Jersey City Board of Education members and a former member to explain why emails they provided for a public-records request were redacted and to document their efforts to provide all relevant emails.

The emails are the focus of a lawsuit between the BOE and Adam Herbsman, a political operative for the re-election campaign of Mayor Jerramiah Healy. The suit is a battle by proxy between Healy and his longtime rival, Ward E City Councilman Steve Fulop.

This morning the judge also ordered BOE attorneys to justify their claim that some emails are exempt from Herbsman's Open Public Records Act request. The Jersey Journal reported yesterday that it has at least three emails involving Fulop and BOE members that were not part of the 234-page package of emails released last week.

"The law says if you want to redact the document or claim exemption, you have to prove why," Herbsman's attorney, Thomas Jardim, said this morning after the hearing. "Frankly, I think they redacted because they were embarrassing to the school board ... I'm doubtful they will comply completely because of what I saw in The Jersey Journal this morning."

Both camps claimed victory today, with Fulop?s spokesman saying he ?couldn?t be happier? with the judge?s decision and Healy?s camp saying the hearing "validated? the Healy campaign?s view of Fulop.

The two men will face each other in the May 14 city election. Healy is seeking a third full term.

Herbsman claims in his suit that the school district stonewalled when asked to release emails between Fulop and BOE members, documents that he requested in November. Hundreds of emails, many of them heavily redacted, were finally released last week.

Fulop's opponents say he used his influence on the nine-member BOE to convince the board to approve contracts for his donors. Fulop has denied the allegation.

BOE attorney Ramon Rivera said earlier this week that the redacted emails contain information about former schools superintendent Charles T. Epps Jr., who resigned in December 2012. Epps was forced out after Fulop-backed BOE members won a majority on the nine-member board.

Epps signed a legal agreement with the district that precludes the district from releasing any information regarding his retirement, according to Rivera.

Fulop campaign spokesman Bruno Tedeschi said today that the Fulop "campaign couldn't be happier with the judge's ruling because it finally ends the smoke screen that the Healy campaign has been using to distract residents from his poor record of raising taxes and allowing crime to fester throughout the city."

Healy campaign spokesman Joshua Henne, meanwhile, said today's hearing "validated what we've been saying all along."

?The people have a right to know the role Steve Fulop and his allies played in guiding Board of Ed contracts to his political contributors at taxpayer expense," Henne said.

Superior Court Judge Lawrence Maron has given BOE lawyers two weeks to comply.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... y_boe_t.html#incart_river

1. Fulop isnt the one releasing the email. Its the BOE.

2. There are laws that respect third party's privacy, Let the courts decide what the BOE needs to release and what information it needs to protect...

3. Your newcomer comment is about as dumb an explanation as Healy's statement.

Also,notice that none of you has anything to say about the actual substance of my comment. That is:

- The Fulop email dump is incomplete as evidenced by both the JJ and JCI. Meanwhile, Fulop claims to have shown all the cards. The record now proves otherwise. No response to that from you guys.

- asking about the Dwek money is immaterial to my point, which is that Steve Fulop does not walk the walk he claims to. I AGREE that the Dwek stuff is an albatross for Healy. I AGREE that there may be unresolved questions surrounding it. What I don't agree with is the way Fulop's army plug their ears and sing "la la la" when their guy is revealed to be equally questionable.

I'm a "newcomer" here by Healy's standards, but I don't think he meant people like me. I think he meant folks who show up here thinking that well-heeled financiers and hedge fund managers have the magic spell that will fix America's cities. You know, because they know better than people who have been here for generations.

I've voted in every municipal election here since I moved to JC in 2002. I lived downtown for 6 years,then moved to another neighborhood. I get my bread at Pecraro and my mozz at Andrea. I am a playground parent and a member of my neighborhood association. You are wrong.

Quote:

You won't be voting for Fulop because 1) you don't live here and 2) you are paid by Healy (to post here and other places, usually as JCFree.) That is settled business from a couple months ago. JCFree posted the exact same stuff you are saying here on NJ.com. JCFree - the paid blogger for the Healy campaign. You are surprisingly not very good at this Josh.

How about releasing all the emails and correspondence including account records and bank account statements for the Dweck money ?

Its true, not all of the progress made is from newcomers. Everyone can have their opinion.

you sound like you have a chip on your shoulder...

According to both he JJ and JCI, the Fulop emal dump is incomplete and NOT because of Epps-related emails. I mean, come on - emails not included in the dump have already been revealed by NJ.com. Are you Fulop-bots so blinded your allegiance than you are now engaging in selective reading of the very words before you? It's sad - you just can't conceive that your golden god is not who he claims to be; it's understandable - no one likes to admit being suckered. NO, this is no an endorsement of Healy, and NO I don't work for his campaign (
Unlike some pseudonymous posters here who only reveal their skin in the game once forced to).

Those of you who say the only improvement in JC is because of newcomers are offensive. You prove exactly right all the suspicions people have about Fulop and his supporters when you make statements like this. And I am NOT a JC old timer - I've been here about 10 years.

And I won't be voting for Steve Fulop. He is deceptive, petulant, and a hypocrite. He cannot be trusted, and if he is elected mayor, it is a certainty that most of you cheerleaders will be saddled with either 1) buyers remorse, or 2) a patronage job offered so you keep your mouth shut.

Quote:

it is my understanding that majority of the 'redacted' sections have to do with former school's superintendent Epps. I think there is something about these being confidential as part of Epps' severance agreement. Epps, I believe, could agree to release them.

But, most of what I am seeing in these emails are discussions of how Steve Fulop was doing a good job, holding board members feet to the fire to get things done, and trying to get materials and programs for the schools.

The whole thing is a non-story, since this was a fishing expedition by a Healy operative to try and get dirt on Steve (by requesting the emails). This obviously failed, since the emails put Steve in a good light and show him doing work that Healy should have been doing.

Absolutely. Dr. Epps should agree to waive the provision in his separation agreement that is preventing the full release of the emails and the desperate Healy/Levin charade can end.

In the interest of open, transparent government, the BOE emails should be released in their entirety. Withholding information is a form of lying.

Just two comments.

1. They make really boring reading.

2. Fulop can't have that much juice with the Board's attorney, otherwise he would have had these things released a lot sooner.

Jersey City election 2013: Fulop emails released, Healy camp not satisfied
By Terrence T. McDonald/The Jersey Journal
on February 19, 2013 at 11:39 AM, updated February 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM

The mayoral campaign of Jersey City Ward E City Councilman Steve Fulop late last week released hundreds of emails Fulop exchanged with members of the Board of Education in the past two years.

The emails are the focus of a lawsuit between the BOE and a political operative for the re-election campaign of Mayor Jerramiah Healy, Fulop?s longtime rival. Adam Herbsman, the operative, claims in the suit that the school district stonewalled by stalling when asked to release the documents, which he requested in November.

Predictably, the Healy and Fulop campaigns regard the emails differently, with Fulop?s camp saying they prove the Downtown councilman had no hand in awarding contracts to his political donors and Healy?s saying the release is incomplete.

At least three emails obtained by The Jersey Journal that show Fulop engaging in school-district business with BOE members are indeed missing from the 234 pages of emails released last Friday. BOE attorney Ramon Rivera said the district has produced ?all the documents that were sent to us that were related to board business.?

That does not make the Healy campaign happy, and they plan to continue with the lawsuit filed by Herbsman.

[More in original article.]