1) I do a lot of work with the city and the Mayor’s vindictive,
2) I don’t believe in recalls,
3) The recall committee didn’t print their reasons on the ballot,
4) I don’t know whose running,
5) It will cost the city money,
6) I work for the Mayor.

The first thing to remember is that the recall petition isn’t even a vote to recall. It’s simply a request to formally put the question forward. It’s quite possible that if the recall petition drive is successful, we’ll have a special election and Tony Mack will win the special election. The recall committee and the 8000 or so people that have already signed think there’s enough doubt though to warrant a vote on the subject.

Therefore I’d like to address the reasons not to sign, one by one:

First “The Mayor is vindictive and he’ll hurt my business”. Well, that should tell you something. Aren’t we done with bullies in this society? If you’re not the one to stand up to a bully, then who is? And who’s to say the Mayor’s not bullying someone else that is less able to stand up to it than you. This is exactly the reason to put the Mayor’s status up for a vote.

Second, “I don’t believe in recalls”. What’s not to believe in? The NJ legislature has provided this very democratic method for correcting terrible mistakes. The fact is that a Mayor can do significant damage to a city through mismanagement without doing anything illegal. In four years that damage can become irreparable. That’s where Trenton is heading. If you think our Mayor has behaved ethically, is managing the city well and has a plan for its recovery, that’s one thing. If you don’t then not believing in recalls is like believing your city is doomed.

Third, “The recall committee didn’t print their reasons on the ballot”. I actually heard this. Hopefully, the committee has hand-outs. But if not, their web site is trentonrecall2011.wordpress.com. Let me also suggest kevin-moriarty.com.

Fourth, “I don’t know whose running”. You should venture out from under your rock. Jim Golden has announced. Eric Jackson may be in the race. I didn’t support Jackson in the first campaign because he was a re-hash of Doug Palmer. However, he was worlds more suitable than Mack and did run the public works department. Golden is interesting. He comes across as thoughtful and it doesn’t hurt that he’s run the police department. I’ve not met with Jim to discuss all of his policy thoughts but from I know so far, we’re on the same page.

Fifth, “It will cost the city money”. A recall election will cost about $100,000. That’s small change compared to the $2M in transitional aid we already didn’t get this year because the Mayor has consistently thumbed his nose at DCA. It’s small compared to the ground we’ve lost in our efforts to revitalize because we don’t have a plan, or the misspending of our budget that’s happened either because of fraud or, more importantly, because we don’t have a high quality set of department Directors in place. Trenton’s budget is $185,000,000 next year. $100,000 is a small price to pay to get a Mayor qualified to spend that amount to our mutual benefit.

Sixth, “I work for the Mayor”. If you do, I apologize on behalf of all voters. You probably shouldn’t sign unless you’re looking forward to getting to know “wrongful termination” lawyer George Doherty a lot better.

There’s hardly a reason not to sign the recall petition. It’s only a petition to request a vote. If during the special election Tony still winds up being the best choice, then so be it. But, if you think Trenton is on a terribly wrong course, then recall is the only rational answer.

We’re laying off 105 police officers because our municipal budget is over $200M and Trentonians already pay the highest tax rate in NJ just to contribute $70M of that amount. Contrary to popular belief, the State of NJ would pay almost that same total, plus almost ALL of our $300M school budget.

Trenton’s taxpayers are nowhere close to being able to pay for their own government. The state currently owns roughly 25% of property value in Trenton and pays over 40% of the cost of municipal and school budgets.

We could keep the police officers but our property taxes would have to go up an additional 12% or so, thereby bankrupting many of us.

How did we get here?

Its been ignorance and pride that have brought us to this point. At some point Trentonians will have to do the hard work of taking responsibility for their city. The State can be a partner but Trentonians must cooperate in good faith. We must show a plan for recovery. We need to lead.

* BTW – According to COAH’s Guide to Affordable Housing Trenton has 7799 affordable housing units (even before including Trenton Housing Authority or section 8). Readers should be aware that there are only 22,000 or so households in Trenton. This means that over 1 out of every 3 homes in Trenton is affordable housing.

The Fix Trenton’s Budget Committee’s efforts have been mainly targeted at helping the city to be more responsive. However, over the years, I’ve also dedicated this blog to many of the fundamental economic principles that could lead Trenton to revitalization. Many of these ideas are difficult for citizens to get excited about. Most people’s eyes simply glaze over when they read about money.

Certainly my ideas have fallen on deaf ears in both the previous and current administrations and for the most part on both the previous and current city council. Math and fiscal discipline aren’t fun. I get that.

However, allow me to point out another economic truism that should get everybody’s attention.

Civil unrest is bad for business.

The racial intolerance and threatening language that the Recall Mack campaign workers experienced this week from the Mayor’s supporters including his brother, is a sign of a civil unrest in Trenton. It belies an undercurrent of hate that’s been stoked by the Mayor’s supporters that could easily lead to violence.

Rarely do vibrant economies flourish in this kind of atmosphere. Can you imagine a white family wanting to move to Trenton when city workers and the Mayor’s political supporters shout racial epitaphs at their white neighbors? Would black families of good nature come here? Hispanics or Asian? If I had seen this 11 years ago when I was deciding to invest in Trenton I know I would have reconsidered.

With this kind of attitude in City Hall, how will ideas meant to attract investment (some of it from white developers) ever win public support. Anything a white person suggests will be met with suspicion by a populace emboldened by their leadership to think “black first”. We just can’t have that.

It’s difficult for me to feel good about suggesting economic ideas to help the city when I think that my neighbors and perhaps even our city leaders will discount them because I’m white.

Trenton is a difficult situation and it’s going to take the best ideas in this country to fix it. We don’t have the luxury of wallowing in a pit of racial hatred.

In fact, I’ll go further and suggest that one of the key ingredients to reinventing Trenton is for this city to be seen as a bastion of racial harmony. New residents and investors like racial harmony and avoid the kind of hate speech that’s happening in Trenton today.

That’s the claim Mayor Mack’s aid, Lauren Ira, made in her op-ed piece in the Trenton Times.  Along with that she criticized people like me for questioning the Mayor’s ELEC habits, the city’s poor contracting, it’s improper and misguided attempt to sell city homes.  We are chastised for complaining about the Mayor’s failure to discipline his brother, delays in appointing a cabinet and lack of a city budget along with other public missteps. 

She says that activists hoping to help the city should stand loyally behind the Mayor.

Is that what the citizens of Trenton want?  Do you want people like Jim Carlucci, Kevin Moriarty and Robert Chilson to hold their tongues?  Would you prefer to have elections paid for with illegal contributions?  Would you prefer “Pay to Play”?  Would you prefer that our contracts go to firms who win popularity contests rather than skills contests?

I hope not.   Because if you do, you also want a Trenton that continues in the ways of the past; a past that has driven us to the brink of moral and fiscal ruin.

For the first time in a long time we have a City Council that on occasion has a spine.  We have a city attorney who’s decided not to be a lap-dog.  And, we have newspapers that are reporting investigative news for a change.  All this has happened because we also have citizens who are watching our government carefully. 

This brings me to Ms. Ira’s “rebirth” comment.

It’s this kind of thing that really gets a guy like me.  I’ve spent quite a bit of time trying to examine Trenton’s economic situation.  I’ve done this without much help from the city and as a volunteer.  The evidence, and your tax bill, shows we are not currently in any kind of turnaround.  Instead, we have laid off a significant portion of our city staff and are in the process of raising our taxes by 15%.   Our per capita income is among the lowest in NJ and Trenton’s lost population. 

This is measurable evidence of an anemic economy.  It’s not rebirth, its decline.  Knowing the difference is the first step in fixing the city.

So what was Ms. Ira saying?  As the Mayor’s spokesperson, what’s her message to the citizenry?

It seems as though she’s trying to say.  “Close your eyes cover your ears and shut your mouth. Stay stupid and everything will be all right.   You won’t even know how bad it is.”

Let me respectfully suggest that this is not a good approach.

Rather than complain about honest volunteer activists trying to help Trentonians regain control of their government; embrace them.  Admit your mistakes, beg forgiveness and become the most open and transparent government in the country.  What would all the watchdogs do if they had no hidden ELEC reports to analyze or no messy contracts to protest?

I can tell you what I’d do if my watchdog services were rendered obsolete.  I’d spend all my time working on the city’s budget and budget process.  If the administration could answer emails, keep commitments and show up for meetings, we’d make pretty short work of fixing our finances.  If working with the city were easier, then maybe I could do other things like organize my S. Broad St. block to clean itself up in order to attract more business.  If the city really starting working well, I could work on what I really want to do: like raising a Trenton investment fund to develop new projects in our town.

But before we get working on all these positive things, we need to work first on cleaning up the bad things.  Mayor Mack and Ms. Ira have put blinders on and can’t see how bad the city looks to us, to normal Trentonians and to outsiders.  All they have to do is read the blogs and the papers.  None of us have an interest in embarrassing Trenton.  In fact, many of us have roundly criticized Mr. Stoolmacher (the writer Ms. Ira complains about in his article last month) for going too far.  However, we’re not going to let our city be taken advantage of.  We’re going to hold the administration to a high standard befitting a great city.

I want Trenton to be in rebirth.  I just want it to be true when I say it and I want to work with the administration to make it happen.

Neither of our candidates, Manny Segura or Tony Mack have a real plan for Trenton.  They both talk revitalization gibberish so it’s really a bit of a ugly toss-up from a policy perspective. 

Both want to go begging to the state for more money without offering anything in return.  If asked, both oppose the water sale even though they don’t have a good reason why.  Both would support the new HOPE VI project at Miller Homes even though they have no idea whether or not it will have a positive economic impact.  Both talk about selling off Trenton’s foreclosed homes though they have no clue as to how or whether it will matter.

If there’s no real difference between the candidates, then how can voters make their choice?

Voters need to consider the ethical character and financial motivations for Segura and Mack.

Consider Segura who wants no financial commitment from Trenton.  He’s on full disability and therefore says he won’t take a salary.  Ok, great but how can a person on full disability perform a demanding full time job like being mayor.  Mr. Segura won’t talk about this even when asked point blank.  A reasonable person would think he’s hiding something.   

So how will Mr. Segura make a buck as mayor?

Turns out he’s taken a big pile of money in the form of campaign contributions from politicians in North Jersey.  He won’t explain why those politicians felt so generous to him so here’s a guess.  As mayor of Trenton,  Mr. Segura will be in control of nearly $500M in municipal and school spending.  Let’s say contracts happened to go to companies friendly with those same North Jersey politicians.  And in return, those companies made generous donations to the same politicians.  How would we ever detect this form of pay to play?  Is this just a wild allegation?  Perhaps;  but it makes sense and since Manny won’t explain himself and say anything different, we have to go with the most likely story.

Now let’s turn to Tony Mack. 

Tony is apparently hard up for cash.  That by itself is no crime and we can only hope that he finds better financial times.  However, he shouldn’t be doing it on the backs, or behind the backs, of Trenton residents.

Mack owes back property taxes which again wouldn’t be a serious problem, except that he’s running for the job of chief tax collector.  It’s at least a conflict of interest for a mayor of the city to be in charge of foreclosing on his own house. 

So here’s a guy with some serious financial problems and he’s running for mayor, which is a very expensive proposition.  It seems that desperate times call for desperate measures.  Enter Jo Jo Giorgianni. 

Jo Jo is famous in Trenton as the quarter ton rapist.  There’s a long saga from back in the 1980’s where he was convicted for raping a 14 year old girl.  Furthermore, if you ask long time Trenton residents, he’s also been connected to other types of illicit activity. Why does this matter? 

Turns out, Jo Jo is a major contributor to Tony Mack’s campaign.  Election records show that he has donated $2600 (the maximum allowed).  In addition, it is widely rumored that the $20,000 Tony loaned to the campaign actually came from Jo Jo.  It couldn’t have come from Tony because he owes the back taxes, right?

So what does Jo Jo want for all that money?

Tony wouldn’t answer that.  He won’t address the charges.  We can only assume the worst.

Here’s the summary.

One candidate is defrauding the government and owes favors to North Jersey politicians.  The other candidate owes back taxes and owes favors to a convicted rapist.  With only two days to the election and no other options, why bring all this up?

The papers have let us down by not explaining these issues and the candidates have done nothing to explain themselves (I personally asked both candidates to address the allegations).  Somebody needs to let the people know what kind of candidates they’re voting for.  Voters have a difficult moral choice to make.   

As for me, Reinvent Trenton advises on revitalization policy not moral judgments.   You’re on your own.

Eric Jackson, Frank Weeden, John Harmon, Keith Hamilton and Annette Lartigue are left on the Island along with me.

Don’t even consider voting for any of the others. They have policies and / or personalities that are dangerous to Trenton’s future.

So where are we with these five? I’ll use the Trenton Times, Fix Trenton’s budget survey and Mill Hill forum responses to compare and contrast.

Jackson and Lartique are the most Developer friendly
Hamilton, Harmon and Weeden seem to think forcing developers to hire Trenton workers is the way to encourage development. Jackson and Lartique are less clear about this. Furthermore Hamilton is the only candidate who favors forcing developers to pay prevailing wages. Increasing ratables is our #1 priority and to make life complicated for the developers that might make that happen is the ultimate in counter-productivity. It also demonstrates an attitude that government can and should control the economy. This is currently the Palmer Admin policy and look where its gotten us. People wonder why I’m running and this is it. We can’t afford to have four more years of anti-business policy in city hall.

Lartique is the most aggressive on the budget
Weeden says he will cut budget and hopes unions and Governor will cooperate. He opposed the reassessments necessary to correct our tax policy at the Mill Hill Forum.

Lartique is probably the most open and aggressive in her stance on re-working the budget, creating a strategic plan and doing reassessments. She’s not quite 100% correct on her explanation of zero based budgeting but she’s trying and I’d be glad to help her.

Jackson is the second most aggressive in his stance. He’s a bit more vague in his approach and doesn’t support zero-based budgeting. But he’d at least try. He told Mill Hill he opposing reassessments but changed his mind on the Fix Trenton’s Budget survey.

Harmon keeps saying he can’t explain his policy to reduce costs in limited space. What he doesn’t realize is that by not being able to simply express his approach he’s fairly much saying he doesn’t have one. He opposed reassessments at the Mill Hill forum and was tentative about it in the survey.

Hamilton says he’ll be able to find a $40M surplus. That kind of crazy talk gets people voted off the Island. His answers on reassessment show that he hasn’t thought about it.

Finally I’d have to say Jackson has the best temperament to be Mayor, in 2014
Jackson appears to be as serious and earnest as he comes across. Harmon, wants to be everbody’s friend and keeps talking about resources he’d bring to Trenton. I don’t even know what that’s supposed to mean or why he hasn’t brought those resources before. Lartigue has had some troubling and well documented anger management issues. Weeden is a “lone wolf” and hasn’t solidified support among the very people he thinks should support him, including me. Hamilton doesn’t seem to have serious notions about running a city and his policies don’t seem to be based on a philosophy.

As for me.You can be sure that developer hiring practices would be left to developers. Our city budget would undergo zero-based budgeting which means each department STARTS with no budget and has to prove why they need one given goals agreed by the Mayor and Council. And while I’m sure my temperament isn’t perfect for Mayor it is pretty good for making “by the numbers” business decisions. I won’t care about my political future, just about turning around the city.

For At Large
Jim Carlucci for his knowledge. Al Ward for his smarts. Christine Donahue for her process based business background.

For West Ward
Moriarity for his tenacious exploration of our financial issues and for exposing LA Parker and WIMG.

For North Ward
Roland Laird for making reassessment central to his campaign

For East Ward
Kesner Dufresne for talking about the wage tax and about being pro-business

For South Ward
Carlos Avilla for doing well on the budget survey even though he complained

However, I live in Trenton and own enough property so that high taxes and declining value could be a substantial economic blow.  I am not alone in this precarious situation.  Every home and building owner in Trenton is at risk as our city’s budget comes closer to falling into the financial abyss.

I’ve listened to the candidates and just don’t hear a serious “by the numbers” explanation of how they think we can rescue ourselves.  Instead, I hear a lot of blame being laid on the State.

I also know that many of our candidates have been in public life for many years but have never jumped up and down screaming about the fact that we were so dependent on the State.  Even now, several of the candidates are asking for votes so they can do more for the poor citizens of Trenton.  We’re sinking, as a city, and yet there are candidates talking about new social programs.

There are candidates who either believe or know that citizens want to hear, “that fixing the schools will revitalize Trenton”.  That notion is absurd and tells me that I’m listening to a “Know Nothing”  politician.  In order to magically fix the schools, we’d have to start with the young kids and put them into some magical environment that hasn’t even been invented, wait 12 years, and then perhaps we’d have a graduation rate worth bragging about.  It could be decades before Trenton’s schools are better than surrounding suburbs.  Nobody moves to a city for the schools that are “almost as good”.  Trenton schools need to be “as good, or better”, but we can’t make that happen in time to save our city.

We need a no-nonsense, and dare I say pragmatic (another word for Republican) approach to our problem.  We need a “Bull in the China shop” much like Chris Christie has become for NJ.  We need to do the opposite of what we’ve been doing in Trenton for the past 20 years.

We don’t need balance, we need imbalance.  Trenton has gone out of its way to be attractive to the poor for quite some time and has done little to attract middle class and high income residents.  We’re going to have to change that balance.  We’re actually going to have to find a way to appeal to people with disposable income and lots of them.

As I look at the candidates and at myself,  I’ve come to the conclusion that I have something to offer Trenton.  As a Management Consultant, my job is often to help organizations improve and to do the best things first.  We help our clients manage by the numbers.  As a volunteer in Trenton, I find myself drawn towards the challenging problem of urban revitalization.  It’s one of the great challenges of our time and I want to be a part of meeting that challenge.  ReinventTrenton.com is all about that as is TrentonLofts.com and FixTrentonsBudget.com.

Running for mayor is a thankless job and being mayor would involve some personal and financial pain for me and Michelle (Michelle doesn’t like the idea).  However, if voters look around and decide they just can’t tie their futures to any of the existing candidates and would prefer to take the opposite approach, I will serve.  Probably only for one term, but I’d serve long enough to give the opposite approach a chance to take shape.

I understand that many Trentonians have been fed a diet of rhetoric on revitalization over the years and I’ve written quite a bit to debunk much of it. But, just so there aren’t any surprises, a few of the ingredients a Dodson administration include are listed below.  If you can’t depart with the notion that these sacred cows need to be cast out, then don’t vote for me:

• Create and institutionalize a meaningful budget process
• Reassess on a 5 year cycle and adjust our tax rate accordingly
• Lift the residency requirement for all city workers (we need the best minds possible on the case)
• Call in outside law enforcement support to augment our police
• Reinvent our city processes to enable our staff to have a bigger impact for less
• Make every aspect of Trenton the MOST business and development friendly in the US
• No support at all for subsidized, deed restricted, housing
• Negotiate a fair deal with the State, to gradually get us off of state aid
• Lobby, maybe through the US Justice Dept., for integration of schools in Mercer County and NJ (that equates to busing)

For those that have read my blog over the years, none of this is new.  I just want to make it clear that my firm belief is that protecting the above “sacred cows” is in the way of Trenton’s progress.  Adopting the above is the “opposite” of what we’ve been doing and the “opposite” of the positions for many of the current candidates.

In the end, it’s the voters choice. If called I’d serve and would love the challenge.

Dealing with Trenton’s budget in the long term means

• Having clear goals and focused priorities,
• Turning Trenton into a developer-friendly city,
• Re-tooling our tax system to stimulate investment and to be fair
• Putting a budget process in place that lets our city adapt to change

We weighted the question areas as follows

• Budget goals and levels at 30%,
• Development issues at 40%,
• Re-balancing at 20% and
• Budget process at 10%.

Scores were between 1 and 10.  “No answer” got a zero.

Below are the results of our Scorecard survey.

Christine Donahue and Jim Carlucci both scored well in the At Large race.  Carlos Avila was the only respondent from the South Ward.  Eric Jackson and Frank Weeden did best in the Mayor’s race.  Roland Laird gave the best responses in the North Ward.  Kevin Moriarity was the only respondent in the West Ward.  Verlina Reynolds-Jackson was the only respondent in the East Ward but is far out of alignment with our budget priorities.

Candidates who didn’t respond either don’t have clear positions and know it or are don’t consider it a priority.  The survey took 15 minutes to complete, shorter than many canvassing visits.  The Budget Committee doesn’t recommend any of these candidates.

In this cycle the situation has improved dramatically.

All eight of the mayoral candidates have web sites and 16 of the 27 city council candidates have sites.  Most of the candidates appear to also have a Facebook presence and I’m Facebook friends with many of them or have “Liked” their campaign pages.

In addition several of them are showing up on blogs in town (Keith Hamilton has a recent comment on Reinvent Trenton).

I’d like to think my chastising the group has had something to do with it but I suspect that’s not it.  Rather, the politicians are following the voters onto the web, have availed themselves of relatively inexpensive web solutions (Kevin Moriarity’s blog is an effective mechanism for communicating his views on campaign issues) and are following their Barrack Obama’s example of effective grassroots use of the Internet.

This is a good thing.

It’s inexpensive for the candidates and that’s good for them and for us as voters as they are less beholden to non-citizen funding interests.  It’s good for voters because we get to quickly read more about a candidate’s position than they’ll ever be able to communicate verbally or with their printed material.  Furthermore, many of the websites enable online donations.  I appreciate all of this.

Candidate Websites

With the tax hike as currently proposed our tax rate will go from $4.69 / $100 with an effective rate of $2.784 / $100 to a rate of $5.49 / $100 and an effective rate of $3.26 / $100.  On a $100,000 home tax would go from $2784 to $3260 or up $476.

We will move into 4^th place in NJ for highest taxes and 1^st place for towns over 25k residents.

That’s all very nice, but we as citizens still have some high finance to sort through.

1)        First, a new administration could decide to abandon the sale all together.  We may not have

2)        If the issue does go to a referendum (and I think it should despite the new administration)

• The ONLY question you should have as Trentonians is: is it a fair price?
• Despite all the risks and loss of future revenue, there is a price at which we should sell.
• The question is, “Is $80M that price?”
• Astute financial analysts should presumably be deployed on both sides of the debate to convince the public as to the correct valuation
• Since the general public, doesn’t typically understand what a valuation is, both sides will resort to non-financial arguments, that will no doubt distort the issue (as they already have)

3)       In reality, you would be voting one way or another because you either trust the people who negotiated the deal to have negotiated in good faith, or you don’t trust them

In the long history of this debate, I’ve not found a single person who would turn down the deal if it were priced at $1B.  OK.  What about $500M?  $100M?

See how it’s really about valuation.

There are plenty of risks:

• Will the company actually buy water from us in 20 years?
• Will our neighbors be mad at us?
• Might our neighbors agree to pay us more money for water in the future, and we would have lost out on our opportunity to squeeze them?
• All future cash flows carry some risk and therefore need to be discounted and turned into a present value

All of these risks can be factored in to a proper valuation and hopefully they were.  An intelligent question for the administration would have been, and may still be, could you show us your math for valuing these risks.

As for whether this is a stop-gap or not, that’s a different issue.

The current plan was to use 80% of the proceeds to pay down long term debt.  When selling off a long term asset, it’s generally wise to pay off corresponding long term debt.  We could argue about whether 80% or 100% should be applied to debt, but the effect will generally be to reduce Trenton’s future interest expense.  This should offset the loss of net income from the water wholesale business.

I understand how this issue got to be emotional, but really it should have just been a business deal.  That said, it’s a BIG business deal and the owners should have had a vote.