D'ya really wanna go there, Flippy?
County Commissioner (neé Freeholder) John D'Amico, Jr. has accused Sheriff Kim Guadagno, candidate for Lt. Governor, of being too cozy with the unions.
The Honest Abe Research Foundation took a look at Sean Byrnes (Lil' Flippy), Democratic candidate for County Commissioner (neé Freeholder), who D'Amico backs, to find out how cozy he is.
So far, his only major contribution is:
$2,600.00 from the Local Union 400 PAC Fund, received on May 29th, 2009. This was filed as a 48 hour filing, received at ELEC by fax on June 9th. May 29th to June 9th. I guess in a party where up is down and down is up and wheeling isn't wheeling, 48 hours (2 days for us) can stretch out to nearly 2 weeks. Amazing.
NOTE: The Honest Abe Research Foundation will continue looking into Sean Byrnes. We told you it's not going away, Lil Flippy. See?
Friday, July 31, 2009
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
NJ NEEDS CHRISTIE - GUADAGNO
The arrest last week of 44 offenders by the FBI strongly reinforces New Jersey's need for the team of Chris Christie and Kim Guadagno. An outgrowth of the big Operation Bid Rig, the latest roundup nabbed a motley bunch of legislators, mayors, supposed men of the cloth and various hangers on and ne'er do wells. They even arrested a man selling human body parts. And Community affairs Commissioner Joseph Doria, who was not arrested but did get to watch SWAT live as they searched his house, resigned/retired.
How does this reinforce the need for Christie and Guadagno?
Chris Christie, as U. S. Attorney, has overseen the conviction of over 130 corrupt politicians of both major parties. The reaction of members of each party is markedly different. Most Republicans react with revulsion and horror, condemning the thugs and political corruption in general. Democrats normally circle the wagons, often condemning the prosecutor. Indeed, many Jersey Democrats do just that when they whine about Christie prosecuting more Democrats than Republicans, as if it is supposed to be a 1:1 ratio.
"Political affirmative action" cannot be used when pursuing the corrupt. Where corruption festers, it must be rooted out, the party affiliation be damned. No quotas.
If the Democrats were really interested in fighting political corruption, and if they truly feel that Christie's prosecutions have been politically one-sided, they have had a remedy for years. In 2001, Jim McGreevey was elected governor. He appointed David Samson as Attorney General; after Samson left the office went downhill with such hacks as Peter Harvey and Zulima Farber. Remember the Norcross tape? Although many said that Stuart Rabner was an improvement, it turned out that he was only looking for a stepping-stone to the Chief Justiceship. Anne Milgram, the incumbent AG, although a competent attorney, has been a disappointment as her office continues to avoid prosecuting corrupt politicians.
The Democrats have also controlled all 21 County Prosecutors' offices for a number of years. Likewise, little or no corruption investigations have come out of those agencies. So if the Democrats feel that too many of their party or not enough Republicans have been prosecuted for political corruption, and that Christie has been too partisan, they could have solved the problem through the State Attorney General or the 21 County Prosecutors. They have not done so, which leads me to believe that it was just political posturing.
Whoever takes the oath of office as Governor and Lieutenant Governor in January 2010 will also appoint the State Attorney General. I believe it's a pretty safe bet that Christie will appoint a serious crimefighter like Sheriff Guadagno and himself. We already know what the Bozo-coiffed Jon Corzine will appoint. Same goes for the County Prosecutors.
So the choice is clear. Corzine - Weinberg (pronounced WHINE-burg) and more of the same, or Christie - Guadagno and a commitment to fighting political corruption.
Real change begins with changing governors.
NOTE: The Honest Abe Research Foundation is still looking into Sean Byrnes. It's not going away, Lil Flippy. You didn't think we forgot, did you?
How does this reinforce the need for Christie and Guadagno?
Chris Christie, as U. S. Attorney, has overseen the conviction of over 130 corrupt politicians of both major parties. The reaction of members of each party is markedly different. Most Republicans react with revulsion and horror, condemning the thugs and political corruption in general. Democrats normally circle the wagons, often condemning the prosecutor. Indeed, many Jersey Democrats do just that when they whine about Christie prosecuting more Democrats than Republicans, as if it is supposed to be a 1:1 ratio.
"Political affirmative action" cannot be used when pursuing the corrupt. Where corruption festers, it must be rooted out, the party affiliation be damned. No quotas.
If the Democrats were really interested in fighting political corruption, and if they truly feel that Christie's prosecutions have been politically one-sided, they have had a remedy for years. In 2001, Jim McGreevey was elected governor. He appointed David Samson as Attorney General; after Samson left the office went downhill with such hacks as Peter Harvey and Zulima Farber. Remember the Norcross tape? Although many said that Stuart Rabner was an improvement, it turned out that he was only looking for a stepping-stone to the Chief Justiceship. Anne Milgram, the incumbent AG, although a competent attorney, has been a disappointment as her office continues to avoid prosecuting corrupt politicians.
The Democrats have also controlled all 21 County Prosecutors' offices for a number of years. Likewise, little or no corruption investigations have come out of those agencies. So if the Democrats feel that too many of their party or not enough Republicans have been prosecuted for political corruption, and that Christie has been too partisan, they could have solved the problem through the State Attorney General or the 21 County Prosecutors. They have not done so, which leads me to believe that it was just political posturing.
Whoever takes the oath of office as Governor and Lieutenant Governor in January 2010 will also appoint the State Attorney General. I believe it's a pretty safe bet that Christie will appoint a serious crimefighter like Sheriff Guadagno and himself. We already know what the Bozo-coiffed Jon Corzine will appoint. Same goes for the County Prosecutors.
So the choice is clear. Corzine - Weinberg (pronounced WHINE-burg) and more of the same, or Christie - Guadagno and a commitment to fighting political corruption.
Real change begins with changing governors.
NOTE: The Honest Abe Research Foundation is still looking into Sean Byrnes. It's not going away, Lil Flippy. You didn't think we forgot, did you?
Friday, July 24, 2009
CORZINE PICKS WEINBERG
The Bozo-coiffed Governor Jon Corzine has named a veteran Trenton insider, liberal State Senator Loretta Weinberg (pronounced WHINE-burg), D-Bergen as his running mate for Lieutenant Governor. She would be on the ballot opposite Kim Guadagno.
We don't know how well Corzine is going to hold up with all this "ethnicity". You see, back in 2000, when he was running for the U. S. Senate, Corzine said some really dumb things. Bidenesque things. Bad things.
It seems Corzine, while courting Italian-American voters, was introduced to an attorney named David Stein. Corzine is alleged to have said, ''He's not Italian, is he? Oh, I guess he's your Jewish lawyer who is here to get the rest of you out of jail.''
There's more. That same year, Corzine not only stuck his foot in his mouth, he stuck his whole leg in up to the hip, if you can believe that. Upon being introduced to an Italian-American man who was in the construction business, Corzine blurted, "Oh, you make cement shoes!" (Read the New York Times article here!)
The political left is fraught with ignorant people; Corzine used a spokesman to apologize.
Corzine's opponent, Chris Christie, is not a Jewish lawyer, but he is an Italian-American one. And he isn't known for getting crooks out of jail, rather he built a solid reputation for putting them in jail. Lots of them. No cement shoes here either, Governor, just steel bracelets.
Corzine has a well-deserved reputation for nastiness. Just look at the garbage his campaign has been churning out so far. Assuming Boss George Norcross doesn't replace Corzine on the ticket, the pressure could really get to him. He could then slip and say something stupid like back in 2000.
We don't know how well Corzine is going to hold up with all this "ethnicity". You see, back in 2000, when he was running for the U. S. Senate, Corzine said some really dumb things. Bidenesque things. Bad things.
It seems Corzine, while courting Italian-American voters, was introduced to an attorney named David Stein. Corzine is alleged to have said, ''He's not Italian, is he? Oh, I guess he's your Jewish lawyer who is here to get the rest of you out of jail.''
There's more. That same year, Corzine not only stuck his foot in his mouth, he stuck his whole leg in up to the hip, if you can believe that. Upon being introduced to an Italian-American man who was in the construction business, Corzine blurted, "Oh, you make cement shoes!" (Read the New York Times article here!)
The political left is fraught with ignorant people; Corzine used a spokesman to apologize.
Corzine's opponent, Chris Christie, is not a Jewish lawyer, but he is an Italian-American one. And he isn't known for getting crooks out of jail, rather he built a solid reputation for putting them in jail. Lots of them. No cement shoes here either, Governor, just steel bracelets.
Corzine has a well-deserved reputation for nastiness. Just look at the garbage his campaign has been churning out so far. Assuming Boss George Norcross doesn't replace Corzine on the ticket, the pressure could really get to him. He could then slip and say something stupid like back in 2000.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
FLIPPY SPEAKS OUT ON GUADAGNO
Yesterday (July 21, 2009), County Commissioner (nee Freeholder) John D'Amico, Jr., a/k/a "Flippy", expressed his opinion about Sheriff Kim Guadagno's bid for Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey. Flippy took the Sheriff to task on her dealing with public employee unions.
It was reported in the Asbury Park Press.
Here are the pertinent parts of the article:
D'amico said county officials decided in January to ask two-dozen unions to accept wage freezes that would prevent job losses, but Guadagno "essentially sabotaged the county's plan as it related to the unions within the Sheriff's office and made constructive dialogue with other groups virtually impossible," he said.
"For instance, there was a group within the Sheriff's Office about to accept the wage freeze, and she essentially talked them out of doing it. All this spilled over to the other unions," D'Amico said.
A Sheriff's Department spokeswoman denied that Guadagno persuaded a union to turn down an agreement. "That's just nonsense," said the spokeswoman, Cynthia Scott.
At a March 12 freeholder board meeting attended by hundreds of union members, Guadagno was openly defiant to the freeholders, telling them layoffs would lead to overtime costs that would outweigh the savings.
"I'm not going to stop serving warrants on violent criminals, and I'm not going to turn the lights out at the jail because I have fewer officers. I'm just going to run the department on overtime," Guadagno said at the meeting.
D'Amico says he recalls those comments vividly.
"She threatened that jail overtime would more than offset the savings. That was the threat clearly. She grandstanded at the public meeting. In fact, she turned her back on the freeholders, turned to the union members, and said essentially, 'You're right and the freeholders are wrong.' This was while we were trying in good faith to preserve as many jobs as possible," D'Amico said.
According to county figures, overtime within the Monmouth County Sheriff's Office has jumped 40 percent for the first two months since the county's work force was reduced by layoffs.
However, the overtime budgetfor the Sheriff's Office, year to date, is up only 3.6 percent. Guadagno had said the overtime numbers will fall as the department adjusts to the reduced manpower.
Okay, first of all, we know that D'Amico talks out of his ass half the time; I mean, he is known as Flippy, isn't he? He'll say anything to get press.
Secondly, The Monmouth County Republican Blog has reliable sources imbedded deep inside the Hall of Records, and we don't rely on Flippy to provide factual information.
Sheriff Guadagno had consistently attempted to find some common ground between the unions and the freeholders, and in that she clearly demonstrated statesmanlike behavior.
At the meeting in question, Guadagno pleaded with union members to accept the wage freeze so as to avoid layoffs. At the same time, far from being defiant to the freeholders, she simply stated that, for public safety reasons, certain levels of staffing are required to operate a jail and to serve arrest warrants, and that to provide those staffing levels, the Sheriff's department would rely upon overtime. If D'Amico is upset with the unions for not listening to the Sheriff and accepting the freeze, he should be equally upset with himself and his fellow Democratic freeholders in not heeding the Sheriff's warning that overtime would exceed savings.
At the same meeting, it was actually D'Amico who was castigated for interfering in the labor situation in the Sheriff's Department. We will also point out that D'Amico, who seems to think it's okay for prisons to be run on reduced staffing (maybe he feels that prison gangs are just a celebration of diversity), is also a disciple of the Union County Democrats. That's Union County, folks, where jailbreaks are not out of the question.
Finally, we will point to the third paragraph in the Press article, which says, "...Democratic Freeholder John D'Amico, Jr. said Guadagno was too cozy with the unions..."
Too cozy with the unions? Do you really want to go there, Flippy? Well, do you?
It was reported in the Asbury Park Press.
Here are the pertinent parts of the article:
D'amico said county officials decided in January to ask two-dozen unions to accept wage freezes that would prevent job losses, but Guadagno "essentially sabotaged the county's plan as it related to the unions within the Sheriff's office and made constructive dialogue with other groups virtually impossible," he said.
"For instance, there was a group within the Sheriff's Office about to accept the wage freeze, and she essentially talked them out of doing it. All this spilled over to the other unions," D'Amico said.
A Sheriff's Department spokeswoman denied that Guadagno persuaded a union to turn down an agreement. "That's just nonsense," said the spokeswoman, Cynthia Scott.
At a March 12 freeholder board meeting attended by hundreds of union members, Guadagno was openly defiant to the freeholders, telling them layoffs would lead to overtime costs that would outweigh the savings.
"I'm not going to stop serving warrants on violent criminals, and I'm not going to turn the lights out at the jail because I have fewer officers. I'm just going to run the department on overtime," Guadagno said at the meeting.
D'Amico says he recalls those comments vividly.
"She threatened that jail overtime would more than offset the savings. That was the threat clearly. She grandstanded at the public meeting. In fact, she turned her back on the freeholders, turned to the union members, and said essentially, 'You're right and the freeholders are wrong.' This was while we were trying in good faith to preserve as many jobs as possible," D'Amico said.
According to county figures, overtime within the Monmouth County Sheriff's Office has jumped 40 percent for the first two months since the county's work force was reduced by layoffs.
However, the overtime budgetfor the Sheriff's Office, year to date, is up only 3.6 percent. Guadagno had said the overtime numbers will fall as the department adjusts to the reduced manpower.
Okay, first of all, we know that D'Amico talks out of his ass half the time; I mean, he is known as Flippy, isn't he? He'll say anything to get press.
Secondly, The Monmouth County Republican Blog has reliable sources imbedded deep inside the Hall of Records, and we don't rely on Flippy to provide factual information.
Sheriff Guadagno had consistently attempted to find some common ground between the unions and the freeholders, and in that she clearly demonstrated statesmanlike behavior.
At the meeting in question, Guadagno pleaded with union members to accept the wage freeze so as to avoid layoffs. At the same time, far from being defiant to the freeholders, she simply stated that, for public safety reasons, certain levels of staffing are required to operate a jail and to serve arrest warrants, and that to provide those staffing levels, the Sheriff's department would rely upon overtime. If D'Amico is upset with the unions for not listening to the Sheriff and accepting the freeze, he should be equally upset with himself and his fellow Democratic freeholders in not heeding the Sheriff's warning that overtime would exceed savings.
At the same meeting, it was actually D'Amico who was castigated for interfering in the labor situation in the Sheriff's Department. We will also point out that D'Amico, who seems to think it's okay for prisons to be run on reduced staffing (maybe he feels that prison gangs are just a celebration of diversity), is also a disciple of the Union County Democrats. That's Union County, folks, where jailbreaks are not out of the question.
Finally, we will point to the third paragraph in the Press article, which says, "...Democratic Freeholder John D'Amico, Jr. said Guadagno was too cozy with the unions..."
Too cozy with the unions? Do you really want to go there, Flippy? Well, do you?
INSPECTOR GENERAL UPDATE
Tina Renna at The County Watchers has an update on the Union County Inspector General. Read about it here!
Is this what John D'Amico, a/k/a "Flippy" has in mind for Monmouth County?
Is this what John D'Amico, a/k/a "Flippy" has in mind for Monmouth County?
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
STILL FLIPPIN'
"...D'Amico, who has now completely reversed his May support of the Red Bank route..."
The Asbury Park Press, Wednesday July 14, 2009, article by Larry Higgs.
He's doing it again.
County Commissioner (neé Freeholder) John D'Amico, Jr. has flip-flopped again. He can't stop it. It's what he does. It's how he earned the sobriquet, "Flippy". Keeping track of this one is like watching a tennis match.
When he's not busy attempting to create new county bureaucracies, Flippy is wasting no time doing what he does best: flip-flopping.
Last week, at the freeholders' meeting, D'Amico not only voted yes on the reappointment of County Engineer Joseph Ettore, he heaped praise upon Ettore like you wouldn't believe. Now, we believe that reappointing Ettore is a good thing, and his conduct is certainly praiseworthy. He is a professional who has served the taxpayers of Monmouth County well.
Our criticism of D'Amico stems from the fact that in spite of his praise of Ettore, he and County Commissioner (neé Freeholder) Amy Mallet (a/k/a Hammerhead) attempted to replace him with a political crony. Their scheme fell through when their fellow Democrat, Director Barbara McMorrow, refused to participate, giving Republican freeholders Lillian Burry and Rob Clifton the votes needed to reappoint Ettore.
Flippy flipped again in an article in yesterday's Asbury Park Press, in which he completely reversed his stand supporting passenger rail service from Manchester to Red Bank. D'Amico purports to be something of an expert on transportation issues, but he's all over the page on this one. I mean, Jim Howard he's not! It was only in May that he supported the rail line coming into Red Bank, and now he opposes it.
He was for it before he was against it!
John D'Amico stands to become Freeholder Director if the Democrats retain the majority on the Board after the November election. They would actually solidify their control because Sean Byrnes (a/k/a Lil' Flippy) is not as willing to step across the aisle as McMorrow, and would provide a much-needed third vote for Flippy and Hammerhead. This would allow the Trenton Democrats and the Union County gang total control of Monmouth County.
The prospect of Director D'Amico is a scary one. This is a dangerous, vindictive, fickle man. He must be stopped. John D'Amico would make a better weathervane than a freeholder. Or let him stand out in front of a cigar shop or something. That's why it's imperative that we take back the majority on the Board of Chosen Freeholders this year.
COUNTY JOB OPENING!
At last week's freeholders' meeting, County Commissioner John D'Amico (a/k/a Flippy) announced that the county was taking applications for the position of In-House County Counsel. The job announcement is on the county's website. This three-year appointment would replace the current outside curmudgeonly county counsel, Malcolm V. Carton.
John P. Curley, our GOP standardbearer in this fall's freeholder race, addressed the board and expressed concern that creating a full-time legal department would potentially evolve into a new layer of bureaucracy. He added that creating new county government jobs would be inappropriate in light of the recent layoff of many county employees.
Here's the announcement from the county website.
Job Details
Title: In-House County Counsel
Hours/Week:
Title Code:
John P. Curley, our GOP standardbearer in this fall's freeholder race, addressed the board and expressed concern that creating a full-time legal department would potentially evolve into a new layer of bureaucracy. He added that creating new county government jobs would be inappropriate in light of the recent layoff of many county employees.
Here's the announcement from the county website.
Job Details
Title: In-House County Counsel
Hours/Week:
Title Code:
- Starting Salary: DOQ - up to $150,000 Annually
Job Description and Requirements:
•In-House County Counsel
The County Counsel serves as the chief legal advisor to the Monmouth County Board of Chosen Freeholders on a broad range of subject matters. The ideal candidate will be a trusted legal advisor with a professional demeanor who will be proactive in bringing issues to the Board’s attention, be creative and have good judgment, and be able to multi-task and function effectively in a large government environment with shifting priorities.
This position is in the unclassified service under the NJ Statutes Annotated [40A:9-43] for a three year term.
Salary DOQ – up to $150,000.
Essential job functions may include any of the following but are not limited to:
◦meets with and advises the Board of Freeholders with respect to both legal advise and representations at all Freeholder workshop, executive and public meetings;
◦provides timely and comprehensive responses and recommendations regarding requests from the Board , individual Board members or the County Administrator;
◦adheres to the highest ethical standards in the discharge of all responsibilities;
◦monitors and supervises support legal staff’;
◦researches, interprets and applies laws, court decisions, statutes, ordinances and other legal authorities for use in the preparation of legal opinions and briefs;
◦assists the Board of Freeholders in the development and implementation of Board policies, regulations and operating programs as needed;
◦may represent the County in civil litigation, including preparation and trial of cases before courts and administrative agencies;
◦performs other related duties as assigned. - Education & Experience:
Juris Doctorate Degree with a minimum of 10 years of experience in the practice of law including substantial responsible experience as Counsel for a public jurisdiction.
A Certificate of Good Standing from the New Jersey Board of Bar Examiners
Knowledge, Skills and Abilities
◦Knowledge of applicable County and State statutes, codes and procedures.
◦Knowledge of methods and procedures required to provide legal services to governing body of a public entity.
◦Knowledge of managing a legal department of a city, county, or state department or federal agency, or a law firm or corporate law office involved in civil litigation.
◦Ability to conduct legal research and draft legal documents.
◦Ability to conduct effective presentations.
◦Ability to resolve problems and make decisions.
◦Ability to use and communicate by means of computer network systems necessary.
Candidates must demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and abilities required in managing a legal department, the management of litigation in a cost-effective manner, and the technical and administrative direction of 2 in-house attorneys and outside special counsels.
Forward resume application in confidence to:
Mr. Robert M. Czech
Hall of Records
1 East Main St.
Freehold, NJ 07728
How to apply:•Individuals will only be considered if they possess the minimum requirements listed above.
•All applicants: In order to be considered for a job opening, an Application for Employment must be completed for each position. Resumes may be attached but are not considered as substitution for a fully completed job application form. E-mailed or faxed applications are not accepted.
•Mail: Completed applications referencing the job title code on the application to: County of Monmouth, Personnel Department, 1 East Main Street, Freehold, NJ 07728
•Phone: To request a Job Application be mailed to you, call 732-431-7300
•In Person: Monday – Friday 8:30 am – 4:30 pm
Saturday, July 11, 2009
HOWELL BACK TO NORMAL
Things in Howell had been pretty quiet until recently.
A group of independents, primarily a Republican faction (with some Dems) which opted to bypass the primary process, has held all seats on the Township Council. This group has had the backing of the Howell Democrats for the last few election cycles.
The honeymoon is over.
It appears that there has been a falling out between Mayor Robert Walsh and local Democratic Boss Steve Morlino. Walsh opines that Morlino is miffed that he was not considered for the council vacancy that occured when Walsh was elected mayor. Morlino denies this.
Although this is normally an off year in Howell politics, there will be two unexpired seats up for grabs this November: Walsh's vacancy, and that opened by the resignation of Councilman Michael Howell.
Morlino and the Democrats apparently believe that it is time to run candidates again, as evidenced by this posting on A Better Howell NJ:
With the recent resignation of Council Member Howell from the town council, I am looking for a strong 2nd candidate to round out the Democratic ticket in November. Anyone interested in running should send me a resume by July 15th. We need to make some very necessary changes in the direction Howell is being taken lately. One party (Independents) control is not working. We need to balance out the field. We are seeing the worst managment in Howell in the last 25 years. The I's are a disaster.
E-mail or phone me if you are interested.
Steve
Coupled with the Dems' falling out with the Independents is what appears to be at least a partial rapprochement between members of the Walsh group and the local Republican organization, for example, Mike Howell's support of a candidacy of former Mayor Joe DiBella for freeholder back in February. (DiBella never announced.)
Sooooo... we may be in for a rollicking, swashbuckling ride in Howell this fall. Just a note to the local GOP: Stick together, work together, win together.
Victory in the county could hinge on Howell.
A group of independents, primarily a Republican faction (with some Dems) which opted to bypass the primary process, has held all seats on the Township Council. This group has had the backing of the Howell Democrats for the last few election cycles.
The honeymoon is over.
It appears that there has been a falling out between Mayor Robert Walsh and local Democratic Boss Steve Morlino. Walsh opines that Morlino is miffed that he was not considered for the council vacancy that occured when Walsh was elected mayor. Morlino denies this.
Although this is normally an off year in Howell politics, there will be two unexpired seats up for grabs this November: Walsh's vacancy, and that opened by the resignation of Councilman Michael Howell.
Morlino and the Democrats apparently believe that it is time to run candidates again, as evidenced by this posting on A Better Howell NJ:
With the recent resignation of Council Member Howell from the town council, I am looking for a strong 2nd candidate to round out the Democratic ticket in November. Anyone interested in running should send me a resume by July 15th. We need to make some very necessary changes in the direction Howell is being taken lately. One party (Independents) control is not working. We need to balance out the field. We are seeing the worst managment in Howell in the last 25 years. The I's are a disaster.
E-mail or phone me if you are interested.
Steve
Coupled with the Dems' falling out with the Independents is what appears to be at least a partial rapprochement between members of the Walsh group and the local Republican organization, for example, Mike Howell's support of a candidacy of former Mayor Joe DiBella for freeholder back in February. (DiBella never announced.)
Sooooo... we may be in for a rollicking, swashbuckling ride in Howell this fall. Just a note to the local GOP: Stick together, work together, win together.
Victory in the county could hinge on Howell.
Friday, July 10, 2009
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT ACCEPTED INTO 287 (g)
"If you are an illegal alien and commit a crime in Monmouth County, you will be identified, turned over to federal authorities and deported if appropriate."
...Sheriff Kim Guadagno
We have covered illegal immigration and Sheriff Kim Guadagno's yeoman efforts to do her part to combat it here in Monmouth County. It went out over the Associated Press Wire Service this evening that the Monmouth County Sheriff's Department is one of 11 law enforcement agencies nationwide and two in New Jersey that have been accepted into the 287 (g) program.
The sheriff has kept a very important campaign promise.
If you really want to read the Asbury Park Press's expurgated version, in which they actually edit out all references to Guadagno, click here!
UPDATE!!! (Saturday, July 11th) The Press has had cub reporter Bob Jordan rewrite the article for today's paper. The sheriff is in it now. Click here!
UPDATED UPDATE!!!! Alyssa Passeggio has a great post this morning on the subject. Read All About It here!
...Sheriff Kim Guadagno
We have covered illegal immigration and Sheriff Kim Guadagno's yeoman efforts to do her part to combat it here in Monmouth County. It went out over the Associated Press Wire Service this evening that the Monmouth County Sheriff's Department is one of 11 law enforcement agencies nationwide and two in New Jersey that have been accepted into the 287 (g) program.
The sheriff has kept a very important campaign promise.
If you really want to read the Asbury Park Press's expurgated version, in which they actually edit out all references to Guadagno, click here!
UPDATE!!! (Saturday, July 11th) The Press has had cub reporter Bob Jordan rewrite the article for today's paper. The sheriff is in it now. Click here!
UPDATED UPDATE!!!! Alyssa Passeggio has a great post this morning on the subject. Read All About It here!
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
FREEHOLDERS FOUND ON WEST COAST!
While researching Freeholder John D'Amico's (Flippy) attempts to morph the Board of Chosen Freeholders into a Board of County Commissioners, the Honest Abe Research Foundation found some unrelated yet interesting and intriguing information.
Washington State has Freeholders!
That's right. Now, they don't run the counties, no, Washington has County Commissioners for that. Washington's freeholders are more like our Charter Commissions, when a county or municipality is looking to change its charter. Still, this is kind of like finding new planets revolving around a distant star.
Here are the relevant passages from the Washington State Constitution:
SECTION 4 COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND TOWNSHIP ORGANIZATION.
...Any county may frame a "Home Rule" charter for its own government subject to the Constitution and laws of this state, and for such purpose the legislative authority of such county may cause an election to be had, at which election there shall be chosen by the qualified voters of said county not less than fifteen (15) nor more than twenty-five (25) freeholders thereof, as determined by the legislative authority, who shall have been residents of said county for a period of at least five (5) years preceding their election and who are themselves qualified electors, whose duty it shall be to convene within thirty (30) days after their election and prepare and propose a charter for such county...
(and)
...Notwithstanding the foregoing provision for the calling of an election by the legislative authority of such county for the election of freeholders to frame a county charter, registered voters equal in number to ten (10) per centum of the voters of any such county voting at the last preceding general election, may at any time propose by petition the calling of an election of freeholders. The petition shall be filed with the county auditor of the county at least three (3) months before any general election and the proposal that a board of freeholders be elected for the purpose of framing a county charter shall be submitted to the vote of the people at said general election, and at the same election a board of freeholders of not less than fifteen (15) or more than twenty-five (25), as fixed in the petition calling for the election, shall be chosen to draft the new charter. The procedure for the nomination of qualified electors as candidates for said board of freeholders shall be prescribed by the legislative authority of the county, and the procedure for the framing of the charter and the submission of the charter as framed shall be the same as in the case of a board of freeholders chosen at an election initiated by the legislative authority of the county.In calling for any election of freeholders as provided in this section, the legislative authority of the county shall apportion the number of freeholders to be elected in accordance with either the legislative districts or the county commissioner districts, if any, within said county, the number of said freeholders to be elected from each of said districts to be in proportion to the population of said districts as nearly as may be.
SECTION 10 INCORPORATION OF MUNICIPALITIES.
...Any city containing a population of ten thousand inhabitants, or more, shall be permitted to frame a charter for its own government, consistent with and subject to the Constitution and laws of this state, and for such purpose the legislative authority of such city may cause an election to be had at which election there shall be chosen by the qualified electors of said city, fifteen freeholders thereof, who shall have been residents of said city for a period of at least two years preceding their election and qualified electors, whose duty it shall be to convene within ten days after their election, and prepare and propose a charter for such city...
SECTION 16 COMBINED CITY-COUNTY.
...Registered voters equal in number to ten (10) percent of the voters of any such county voting at the last preceding general election may at any time propose by a petition the calling of an election of freeholders. The provisions of section 4 of this Article with respect to a petition calling for an election of freeholders to frame a county home rule charter, the election of freeholders, and the framing and adoption of a county home rule charter pursuant to such petition shall apply to a petition proposed under this section for the election of freeholders to frame a city-county charter, the election of freeholders, and to the framing and adoption of such city-county charter pursuant to such petition...
Interesting, isn't it? I wonder whether the title pops up anywhere else in the country. Just think, if Flippy had had his way, Washington may have been the only state in the Union with freeholders!
NOTE: The Honest Abe Research Foundation is still looking into Sean Byrnes. It's not going away, Lil Flippy.
Washington State has Freeholders!
That's right. Now, they don't run the counties, no, Washington has County Commissioners for that. Washington's freeholders are more like our Charter Commissions, when a county or municipality is looking to change its charter. Still, this is kind of like finding new planets revolving around a distant star.
Here are the relevant passages from the Washington State Constitution:
SECTION 4 COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND TOWNSHIP ORGANIZATION.
...Any county may frame a "Home Rule" charter for its own government subject to the Constitution and laws of this state, and for such purpose the legislative authority of such county may cause an election to be had, at which election there shall be chosen by the qualified voters of said county not less than fifteen (15) nor more than twenty-five (25) freeholders thereof, as determined by the legislative authority, who shall have been residents of said county for a period of at least five (5) years preceding their election and who are themselves qualified electors, whose duty it shall be to convene within thirty (30) days after their election and prepare and propose a charter for such county...
(and)
...Notwithstanding the foregoing provision for the calling of an election by the legislative authority of such county for the election of freeholders to frame a county charter, registered voters equal in number to ten (10) per centum of the voters of any such county voting at the last preceding general election, may at any time propose by petition the calling of an election of freeholders. The petition shall be filed with the county auditor of the county at least three (3) months before any general election and the proposal that a board of freeholders be elected for the purpose of framing a county charter shall be submitted to the vote of the people at said general election, and at the same election a board of freeholders of not less than fifteen (15) or more than twenty-five (25), as fixed in the petition calling for the election, shall be chosen to draft the new charter. The procedure for the nomination of qualified electors as candidates for said board of freeholders shall be prescribed by the legislative authority of the county, and the procedure for the framing of the charter and the submission of the charter as framed shall be the same as in the case of a board of freeholders chosen at an election initiated by the legislative authority of the county.In calling for any election of freeholders as provided in this section, the legislative authority of the county shall apportion the number of freeholders to be elected in accordance with either the legislative districts or the county commissioner districts, if any, within said county, the number of said freeholders to be elected from each of said districts to be in proportion to the population of said districts as nearly as may be.
SECTION 10 INCORPORATION OF MUNICIPALITIES.
...Any city containing a population of ten thousand inhabitants, or more, shall be permitted to frame a charter for its own government, consistent with and subject to the Constitution and laws of this state, and for such purpose the legislative authority of such city may cause an election to be had at which election there shall be chosen by the qualified electors of said city, fifteen freeholders thereof, who shall have been residents of said city for a period of at least two years preceding their election and qualified electors, whose duty it shall be to convene within ten days after their election, and prepare and propose a charter for such city...
SECTION 16 COMBINED CITY-COUNTY.
...Registered voters equal in number to ten (10) percent of the voters of any such county voting at the last preceding general election may at any time propose by a petition the calling of an election of freeholders. The provisions of section 4 of this Article with respect to a petition calling for an election of freeholders to frame a county home rule charter, the election of freeholders, and the framing and adoption of a county home rule charter pursuant to such petition shall apply to a petition proposed under this section for the election of freeholders to frame a city-county charter, the election of freeholders, and to the framing and adoption of such city-county charter pursuant to such petition...
Interesting, isn't it? I wonder whether the title pops up anywhere else in the country. Just think, if Flippy had had his way, Washington may have been the only state in the Union with freeholders!
NOTE: The Honest Abe Research Foundation is still looking into Sean Byrnes. It's not going away, Lil Flippy.
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
HERE IT IS
Some readers may wonder why we keep calling Flippy D'Amico and the other Democratic freeholders, "county commissioners". It's because Flippy wanted to be called that. He brought it up at the September 11, 2008 Work Session, and it seemed to have fallen flat. (insert rimshot) So, we thought you, our readers, might want to see it for yourselves, from the minutes of the board itself.
Here it is, campers:
WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEM # 7-DISCUSSION RE: FREEHOLDER TITLE CHANGE
Freeholder D'Amico brought up the idea of changing the title of "freeholder". He explained why he was undertaking this effort in asking the Board to endorse a resolution for submission to the legislature to change the title keeping in mind that other states have County Commissioners. Director Burry read a statement opposing a change in the title. Freeholder McMorrow supported Freeholder D'Amico's request and stated that although school children are well versed it appears that the term "freeholder" is misunderstood by the general public. Freeholder Clifton indicated that we should keep the title as it allows for the opportunity to educate the public. He added that although the County demographics have changed the title "freeholder" is not as elitist an acronym as it was in the past. In fact, we have a number of women on the Board, we have our first woman Director, and we have had an African-American freeholder. Freeholder Clifton indicated however that he would raise the issue at a future NJAC Board of Directors meeting and get a feeling for the position of that organization. Freeholder Barham stated that sometimes people call them worse names than freeholder. He further indicated that the Board should concentrate on more meaningful issues such as property tax relief and effective state government. Following the discussion Freeholder D'Amico concluded that the resolution would not be acted upon tonight but felt it would be appropriate for it to go to NJAC for review.
Here it is, campers:
WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEM # 7-DISCUSSION RE: FREEHOLDER TITLE CHANGE
Freeholder D'Amico brought up the idea of changing the title of "freeholder". He explained why he was undertaking this effort in asking the Board to endorse a resolution for submission to the legislature to change the title keeping in mind that other states have County Commissioners. Director Burry read a statement opposing a change in the title. Freeholder McMorrow supported Freeholder D'Amico's request and stated that although school children are well versed it appears that the term "freeholder" is misunderstood by the general public. Freeholder Clifton indicated that we should keep the title as it allows for the opportunity to educate the public. He added that although the County demographics have changed the title "freeholder" is not as elitist an acronym as it was in the past. In fact, we have a number of women on the Board, we have our first woman Director, and we have had an African-American freeholder. Freeholder Clifton indicated however that he would raise the issue at a future NJAC Board of Directors meeting and get a feeling for the position of that organization. Freeholder Barham stated that sometimes people call them worse names than freeholder. He further indicated that the Board should concentrate on more meaningful issues such as property tax relief and effective state government. Following the discussion Freeholder D'Amico concluded that the resolution would not be acted upon tonight but felt it would be appropriate for it to go to NJAC for review.
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Friday, July 03, 2009
INDEPENDENCE DAY
On this Independence Day 2009, let's stop and reflect on the events of 233 years ago. We all know that the Declaration of Independence was ratified on July 4th, 1776, but that was actually a result of the Resolution of Independence approved by the Second Continental Congress on July 2nd. This resolution had been introduced by Richard Henry Lee (VA) several weeks before; the vote was delayed while delegates worked up support for independence from the Britain. It is believed that the signing of the Declaration was not completed until August 2nd.
Regardless of the details, we all know the major result: Great Britain was defeated by the 13 Colonies; the Colonies, as the United States of America, would go on to become not only a major world power militarily, but an example of freedom, democracy and prosperity that would rise to any challenge. A shining city on a hill.
Which makes one wonder... If today's politicians were running the Revolution, would we all be driving on the left today? Or, worse, would European powers like Spain or Bonaparte's France opportunistically step in and carve up the fledgeling USA? We all know that the political leaders back then, like today, had to drum up support for their views. In spite of that, it is said that only about one third of Americans actually supported the Independence movement, with another third opposing it and the rest ambivalent.
Knowing the way our Congress operates today, would a Nancy Pelosi in 1776 make a trip to London to meet with George III? Would a Harry Reid whine that the Revolutionary War was "lost"? Would the Declaration be weighed down by innumerable social program amendments and pork projects? A post-road to nowhere? Would it even be called a Declaration of Independence, or the "Omnibus" something or other? Or would the Continental Congress degenerate into a dysfunctional body loaded with egos, as the New York State Senate has?
These are all speculative "what ifs". Obviously, the Founding Fathers were all human, and flawed like the rest of us. They all made mistakes. Some passionately hated each other.
But, in spite of that, they got it done.
They were the right people at the right time. A few years later, the French Revolution overthrew an absolute monarchy. After the idealism wore off things went horribly wrong, and a few years later France was under the thumb of the dictator Napoleon Bonaparte. We should thank our lucky stars that something like that didn't happen here.
Today, like 1776, we need the right people for our time, in Washington, Trenton and Freehold.
Have a Happy 4th!
Regardless of the details, we all know the major result: Great Britain was defeated by the 13 Colonies; the Colonies, as the United States of America, would go on to become not only a major world power militarily, but an example of freedom, democracy and prosperity that would rise to any challenge. A shining city on a hill.
Which makes one wonder... If today's politicians were running the Revolution, would we all be driving on the left today? Or, worse, would European powers like Spain or Bonaparte's France opportunistically step in and carve up the fledgeling USA? We all know that the political leaders back then, like today, had to drum up support for their views. In spite of that, it is said that only about one third of Americans actually supported the Independence movement, with another third opposing it and the rest ambivalent.
Knowing the way our Congress operates today, would a Nancy Pelosi in 1776 make a trip to London to meet with George III? Would a Harry Reid whine that the Revolutionary War was "lost"? Would the Declaration be weighed down by innumerable social program amendments and pork projects? A post-road to nowhere? Would it even be called a Declaration of Independence, or the "Omnibus" something or other? Or would the Continental Congress degenerate into a dysfunctional body loaded with egos, as the New York State Senate has?
These are all speculative "what ifs". Obviously, the Founding Fathers were all human, and flawed like the rest of us. They all made mistakes. Some passionately hated each other.
But, in spite of that, they got it done.
They were the right people at the right time. A few years later, the French Revolution overthrew an absolute monarchy. After the idealism wore off things went horribly wrong, and a few years later France was under the thumb of the dictator Napoleon Bonaparte. We should thank our lucky stars that something like that didn't happen here.
Today, like 1776, we need the right people for our time, in Washington, Trenton and Freehold.
Have a Happy 4th!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)