No Bidding Bergen: Ferriero Goes Down

This is long overdue. Papa Joe Ferriero has been convicted.

While I've written a couple dozen times about Papa Joe, and could only hope they throw the 40 year/$500,000 book at him to send a message; the Record Editorial about the conviction makes me less enthused than I thought I would be. Here's the important part:

However, it is too early to break out the champagne. New Jersey’s culture of corruption has not been dismantled. It has been slowed down, nothing more. The steady stream of public officials hauled before judges and juries has not been diminished by high-profile arrests.

In Bergen County, the Democratic Party has operated with barely a blip since Ferriero’s arrest. The same candidates are seeking office; the same county committee people control the process. Removing the king, while the rest of the kingdom remains firmly in place, is more show than substance. What happens next is what is important.

Democrats in Bergen have a choice to make, keep doing things the same corrupted way or follow the path of State Senator Loretta Weinberg and win based on principle. They only have to look at the BCRO to see how quickly things can fall apart following a corruption bust. Unfortunately, as the Record pointed out, they haven't even attempted to reform themselves.

The no-bid contracts associated with corruption cost all of us money. And although people barely list corruption as one of their concerns when voting, they're fooling themselves if they think high property taxes and high corruption are unrelated. When the public finally puts two and two together, if the BCDO hasn't changed their ways, they won't be able to win an election for dog catcher.

Garrett Backer Busted

Since coming to Congress, Representative Scott Garrett has been the darling of the American Conservative Union, receiving a 100 percent rating from the group for the duration of his career. Garrett even acknowledges their stance on issues when explaining his own, most recently with regard to the Cap and Trade Bill. As it turns out, they're simply a corrupt money making proposition.

Politico delivered the bombshell:

The American Conservative Union asked FedEx for a check for $2 million to $3 million in return for the group’s support in a bitter legislative dispute, then the group’s chairman flipped and sided with UPS after FedEx refused to pay.

To make it even better, Politico posted the letter on-line. Here's a part of the letter from the ACU:

Through our projects and activities, we support and defend the doctrine of original intent of the framers of the Constitution, and we support America’s businesses and entrepreneurs. We are proud to promote the principles of capitalism and the pursuit of the American dream.

[snip]

For the activist contact portion of the plan we will contact over 150,000 people per state multiple times at a cost of $1.39 per name or $2,147,550 to implement the entire program.

[snip]

If we incorporate the targeted, Senator-personalized radio effort into the plan, you can figure an additional $125,000 on average, per state.

Adding the radio, ACU was basically shaking down Fed Ex for $3.4 million. When they didn't pony up, they went with UPS. Of course they deny that now.

One would like to believe after Conservatives got burned by Ralph Reed and Jack Abramoff, when they turned out Christians against gambling while being funded by competing casinos, they wouldn't be duped by such systematic fraud. However, the ACU seemed confident they could do this.

That said, the folks over at Sean Hannity's forum are talking about this:

Yes, but the services offered actually took the price tag up to 3.5 million (charges such as $1.39 per name email contacts). The fact that a supposed advocacy group was basically selling their endorsement of a specific issue is ridiculous. What next? Another million if they keyvoted it?

[snip]

They are (were) a pretty damned big deal as far as congressional rankings went especially. If the ACU keyvotes a subject, a lot of people jump.

Key votes are the ones that Garrett's reputation as a 100% voter are based on. As mentioned earlier, Garrett mentions them in his official communications. He also mentions them in his fund raising appeals. If it ever comes to light they've been selling key vote status, there will be even more hell to pay for Garrett and the others that place this organization so highly in their own communications.

If Garrett releases a statement on any of this I'll post it in full.

Happy Sunshine Week

For those that hadn't heard, this is Sunshine Week. For those that are unfamiliar, here's the description from the website:

Sunshine Week is a national initiative to open a dialogue about the importance of open government and freedom of information. Participants include print, broadcast and online news media, civic groups, libraries, non-profits, schools and others interested in the public's right to know.

There's a lot of useful information gathered by government at all levels which could, and likely would, help shape our direction forward on a number of issues. Unfortunately, much of this information is either not available or difficult to access and compile.

As an example, our state recently received high marks for making things available on-line. However, anyone who wants to compile how much an individual receiving a no-bid contract has donated to the powers that be must compile it themselves. Hardly encouraging for citizen participation.

There's a long way to go for us to get all the information out there that we the people are entitled to. As I mentioned earlier, Bloomberg News has had to sue the Fed to find out where all of our bailout money is going. Under enormous pressure, AIG, disclosed who received some of their bailout money today after people went crazy they were giving out an estimated $450 million in bonuses to the very people who ran the company into the ground. Without public pressure, they may never have yielded.

This week promises to showcase the unveiling of several new initiatives and pieces of legislation nationwide aimed at providing we the people with our information. Should be interesting to see what comes out of it, but a good government is a transparent government.

Will Garrett Return Abramoff Money Now?

Back in 2006, people called on Representative Scott Garrett to return the $1,000 in donations his campaign recieved that were connected to Jack Abramoff. No dice to date, but with Abramoff getting another 4 years, this time directly tied to his Federal lobbying activities, maybe now will be the time.


Abramoff represents all that is wrong with politics today. Four years was way too light a sentence for what he did. The fact that Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist aren't going to jail with him is a travesty of justice. All those who see Garrett as a stand up, independent guy should demand more of their guy than to keep Abramoff's scum money. Granted, at this point that money is long spent, the symbolism of the act wouldn't be lost.

Ferriero's War Chest

Oshrat Carmiel of the Record, who sadly is leaving for Bloomberg, delivers yet again in holding BCDO boss Joe Ferriero accountable. It seems Ferriero has one heck of an unregulated slush fund.

Ferriero has maintained and controlled a fund called “Ferriero for County Chairman” since 2004, according to four years of disclosure forms he filed with the Internal Revenue Service last month.

The fund — which is not subject to state campaign disclosure laws because Ferriero is not a publicly elected official — collected tens of thousands in unlimited donations from some of the county’s and state’s biggest professional contractors. They include partners in the Teaneck law firm of DeCotiis Fitzpatrick Cole & Wisler, PMK Group and Neglia Engineering.

This is a loophole that needed to be closed yesterday. As a county and a state we cannot have faith that our leaders are serving our best interests when this sort of activity persists. Every decision is brought into question, and with good reason.

When the party boss can solicit funds to host meet and greets between his chosen and the donors they need in the name of his Committee Chairmanship re-election fund, the old wink & nod is clearly at play here. Taxpayers end up suffering because of it.

As a state we have the highest tax burden in the nation, and so long as we turn a blind eye to this garbage it won't get any better.

Congrats Sen. O'Toole

PolitickerNJ reports that State Senator Kevin O'Toole has been tapped to lead the NJ Republican County Chairs. Maybe he'll be able to help out new BCRO Chair Bob Yudin finally break the lock of Joe Ferriero.

No one doubts it's an uphill battle. Ferriero used his pay-to-play mastery to raise over $300K to squash the challenge of the Real Bergen Democrats this spring.

Bergen Reformers Bloodbath

Well, the Real Bergen Democrats went down in flames yesterday:

With 93.5 percent of Bergen County votes counted late Tuesday, the incumbents appear to have defeated the challengers by about 3 to 1.

According to the returns, Ganz received 18,383 votes, McPherson received 19,276, and Walton got 18,890.

On the challengers’ slate, Skiba got 6,302 votes, Hoernlein got 6,468 votes and Rasul got 5,476.

"The results show a mandate for the Bergen County Democratic Organization," said Bill Maer, a spokesman for the county Democrats. "This shows that the voters are comfortable with the leadership we’ve shown over the last few years."

Maer's statement is a little misleading. What he should be saying is that 11.8% of registered Democrats are comfortable with the leadership, because that's how many people actually voted for McPherson when compared to registered Democrats.

But, credit where credit is due, you don't win elections with the people that decided to stay home. Inside Bergen highlights the beating The Real Bergen Dems also took at the County Committee level. And the pay-to-play goes on...

Same As the Old Boss?

Well, in a statement re-posted on Blue Jersey, the Real Bergen Democrats have called for the resignation of BCDO Chairman Joe Ferriero and Attorney Dennis Oury:

The time is now for the Bergen County Democratic Organization to remove Ferriero and Oury from any positions of authority within the party's structure. We're calling upon the Chairman and the Party's chief counsel to put the integrity and the good name of all Democrats ahead of their individual personal and professional agendas of wielding their positions of power for their own gain.

For those with a memory of Bergen County politics, this isn't the first time a party chairman has been faced with calls for his resignation. BCRO Chairman Berek Don was forced to resign following his involvement in a money funneling scheme to former Senator Torricelli.

From the NY Times circa 1997:

Mired in personal and professional scandal, the leader of New Jersey's largest county Republican party has resigned, party officials said.

[snip]

The county Republican vice-chairwoman, Rita Kirk, said that Mr. Don, who resigned Monday, wanted to avoid bringing negative publicity to the county organization.

Unlike Don who pled guilty in 1999, it's important to mention, again, that there have been no indictments in the Ferriero situation.

However, US Attorney Chris Christie seems to have been more prudent when issuing his subpoenas since the Menendez debacle. It should be interesting to see how this plays out.

No Bidding Bergen: Subpoenas

For those that hadn't heard, subpoenas are flying out of US Attorney Chris Christie's office as part of his investigation of the BCDO's pay-to-play loving lawyer Dennis Oury and Chairman Joe Ferriero. I can't help but smile about this one.

Here's how The Record describes the scope:

In all, seven municipalities, one school district and a county agency have been served with subpoenas relating to Oury since last Wednesday.

The Star Ledger added this tonight:

But while the initial round of subpoenas made it seem as though Oury was the focus, two people familiar with the investigation said it was really centered on Ferriero. Oury and Ferriero are partners, along with Leonard Kaiser, executive director of the Bergen County Utilities Authority, in the consulting company.

Until there are indictments, there's really not much to talk about (remember the Menendez investigation?). But, one can only hope this is a step toward a cleaner government. With that in mind:

Profiting from Eminent Domain

The Record ran a must read story today for anyone interested in how pay-to-play works, or at least the questions raised by it continuing. At issue is the relationship between a large donor to the BCDO and his work for the Freeholders as a no-bid real estate agent/consultant. From the article:

Robert Pimienta, a registered Republican from Franklin Lakes, gets a cut every time the Democratic-controlled county government signs a lease or buys property.

[snip]

A week after county freeholders added that provision to his contract, Pimienta received $91,000 in connection with a Teterboro site the county condemned via eminent domain for a new juvenile detention center.

[snip]

Pimienta, 48, said in an interview last week that there is no connection between his county contract and the $90,000 he and his PAC have bestowed on Democratic candidates and groups in Bergen County since 1999.

If that's dried out, we would have the best fertilized county parks in the nation.

There's no doubt Mr. Pimienta is a big time player and donor. In addition to the BCDO, he's aparantly given $61,400 to federal candidates. Previous to 2000, when Republicans ruled Bergen County, it was mostly Republicans like Bob Dole and Steve Lonegan. After 2000, it's the Democrats ranging from Hillary Clinton to Paul Aronsohn.

It's bad enough that we have no-bid contracts on non-emergency tasks, depriving county taxpayers the confidence they are getting the most value for their dollar. Now, we have an individual receiving a near reimbursement in fees for eminent domain seizure as political contributions made to the BCDO.

With the BCDO unwilling to reform itself, my hope is that the BCRO will resolve it's recent spat of ineptitude and bring the hammer down on pay-to-play. This sort of activity, with the budget crisis we face, is absolutely unacceptable.

Ferriero's Dare...Any Takers?

After Tuesday's story by Charles Stile about the BCDO planning to sue to eliminate pay-to-play restrictions, State Senator Loretta Weinberg fired off a letter challenging Papa Joe Ferriero's ability to do this without the consent of the other leadership of the BCDO. Stile had his own follow-up column on the subject today, where Papa Joe had this to say:

"It's an absolute absurd assertion to say that because people contribute to an election that it increases the costs,'' Ferriero said. "And I would defy anyone to prove that."

Anyone? Am I anyone? Are you anyone?

I'm not sure if Papa Joe was talking strictly about Bergen County or not, but there is plenty of evidence where the politically connected donor has padded a no-bid government contract at taxpayer expense. We'll give Ferriero the benefit of the doubt that he hasn't read any of the GAO reports on Iraq or Katrina, but those are a good place to start.

I won't have time to compile those this weekend, maybe someone else will, but I know the evidence is out there. If he's strictly talking about Bergen County, I've already raised some questions about the no-bids.

I'm sure with the time I could find more, but I simply don't have it right now. Hopefully, the Record will take Papa Joe up on his dare. Or someone. It's this sort of sheer arrogance that brought down Tom Delay and Jack Abramoff. Time will tell if Papa Joe will suffer the same fate.

BCDO to Fight For Pay-to-Play

As reported by Charles Stile of The Record, Papa Joe's Bergen County Democratic Organization is going to go to court to fight on behalf of pay-to-play. Their logic, polling shows it doesn't rank highly on people's priorities and the ban has hurt donations from contractors. Toward the end of the article, BCDO lawyer Dennis Oury says the following:

"What makes people think that because I made a contribution, I'm not a good lawyer?" he asked. "Why can't I contribute to a campaign and be a good lawyer and do a good job for the community? Why is it mutually exclusive?

"I think the borough has an obligation to get the best that they can get."

The borough does have that obligation, and handing out contracts on a no-bid basis to donors doesn't ensure that. Whether it's a no-bid contract in Iraq or a no-bid contract for County Jail health care services; without a bidding process there is no guarantee the government is getting "the best they can get."

Suing to support corruption in an election year? Are they kidding?

Reform Quote of the Day

This from Senator Barak Obama, as reported by the AP:

"Part of the problem here is not just George Bush and the White House," Obama told a crowd of hundreds gathered at a park in Cedar Falls. "We can't just change political parties and continue to do the same kind of things we've been doing. We can't just go about business as usual and think it's going to turn out differently."

Amen to that.

We need reform in politics badly. The corruption and no-bid contracting running rampant in Washington under the Republicans over the last few years has been mirrored by pay-to-play and corruption in Hackensack by the Democrats. Corruption seems to be a truly bi-partisan problem, and candidates need to address the issue in a substantive manner.

Among the "top" candidates:

You can read Obama's plan for reforming government.

John McCain has always been solid about reform, and here's his plan.

Hillary has a plan as well.

Rudy Giuliani has made reform part of his pledge to voters, but hasn't released his plan yet.

I looked through the key issues sections of each, and was disappointed to see that neither John Edwards nor Mitt Romney have presented a plan, an outline, or even listed reform as a priority.

No-Bidding Bergen: $125,000 Grapevine

Today, The Record ran a story about the new lobbying firm started by former NJ Transit Chief George Warrington, along with former McGreevey Cheifs of Staff Jamie Fox and Eric Shuffler. Turns out, the Democrats running Hackensack awarded these three a $120,000 no-bid contract to act as our county's lobbyists. Their firm was the only one to apply for the job:

Shuffler said his firm heard about the advertisement "through the grapevine," and later checked the county's Web site for details. Its principals had no contact with county officials before the contract was advertised, Shuffler said.

The corruption of the Papa Joe Ferriero run Bergen County Democratic Organization makes the first instinct when you hear something like this to think they must have given a campaign donation. When the grapevine thing came through, then you almost have to think that Papa Joe pulled some strings. After checking the ELEC website, as of right now it doesn't appear the donation theory holds.

Instead, this appears to be a case of the Democratic party paying back Democratic operatives (Fox & Shuffler) for years of service, and using taxpayer dollars to do it. We already pay over $1.4 million in salaries for state legislators to handle Trenton, and $330,000 for Representatives Scott Garrett and Steve Rothman down in Washington. Are they not advocating for us?

What about the Freeholders themselves, or our County Executive? They can't get their behinds down to Trenton or Washington to advocate on our behalf? It was noted in the article that the county has been disappointed with their ability to get funds in the past; there are a lot of ways to improve upon that, but using taxpayer dollars for lobbyists is politics as usual garbage.

There is simply something perverse about politicians hiring lobbyists to lobby politicians.

Campaign Finance Reform, Garrett Style

Representative Scott Garrett has done a lot of things I disagree with, and some things I think are pretty good. Part of following him is following what he co-sponsors on behalf of our District, after all this is what he would like to see as law and Federal programming. Sometimes it's a good co-sponsorship add, such as HR 1157, which will establish centers to study environmental factors with regard to breast cancer. Then, there are the majority of what he sticks our name on. HR 71 is such a bill, which would allow corporations and unions to make direct political donations AND take away the reporting requirements on spending on behalf of a candidate. HR 71's catchy title is the "First Amendment Restoration Act."

First, a primer on campaign finance law. Corporations, labor unions and foreign persons and entities are prohibited from making campaign contributions. In addition, if a political action committee or individual are spending money on brochures, mailers, TV or radio ads or websites on behalf of a candidate, they have to report it to the Federal Election Commission when it goes above a threshold. This lets people like me and you keep track of who is backing which candidates. So, for example, various Right to Life PACs spent almost $15,000 on behalf of Garrett in addition to their cash donations last election cycle.

Maybe it's because he was part of the political establishment in Trenton that Garrett would like for corporations and labor unions to be able to donate to political campaigns. If you look at the way political donations lead to contract awards here in Bergen County and throughout the State, wreaking havoc on various taxes; you would be forgiven if you scratch your head and wonder how a fiscal conservative can seek to enact the bedrock principal of pay-to-play on the House floor.

Let's be real, most of us don't have lobbyists running around on Capitol Hill on our behalf, and this bill would give corporations and unions even more influence over the political process by allowing direct donations. The even bigger issue of this is that reporting requirement. In the particular section of the code Garrett would like to see amended, all donors are referred to as persons, including political action committees. By lifting the ban on corporate donations, Garrett's also eliminating their being required to report what they're spending on behalf of a candidate.

Eisenhower had it right when he said "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence." He was talking about the military industrial complex, and the idea that those who make their money off of defense spending could spend a million here or a million there on television ads for members of Congress overseeing procurement for the armed forces without any accountability is insane.

We can also look at economic policy, and individuals who make their money by betting against the US economy. They'd now be able to spend whatever they want on candidates who subvert the national economic interest, either intentionally or through incompetence, and the donor makes a killing without anyone knowing where the funds for the attack ads came from. In addition, international corporations with US subsidiaries, seeking to weaken America's domestic competitiveness would have the same opportunity.

You can look at recent history and see this as especially dangerous when accountability for smear ads is already a question. Take the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, who spent $24 million on spreading a lie about John Kerry. Had the FEC not stepped in, we wouldn't know how much they had spent or who gave them the money to spend. The fines they were hit with came well after the damage was done, however the FEC can take this experience and learn from it to prevent future abuses of the system. Garrett apparently wants to take that power of accountability away from the FEC and trash the system.

Many of the current problems, both in trust and practice, within the Federal government and all levels of government in our state are due to the influence of cash above the what the voice of the people can muster. Instead of looking for ways to curtail the "unwarranted influence" of money in politics, this bill opens the floodgates. To be fair, Garrett didn't write this bill. Since it was introduced a few months back Garrett's had time to read it and think about it. After having that time, Garrett signed on to let the lunatics run the asylum.

No-bidding Bergen

I was struck on Friday, while perusing the Public Notices in the Record (page B-9) at the sheer amount of non-competitive bid (no-bid) contracts the Bergen County Freeholders handed out on April 18th. An astonishing $797,220, all without bid. Here's the way the Freeholders get to do it, and yes it's perfectly legal (NJSA 40A:11-5(1)(a)):

Professional services. The governing body shall in each instance state supporting reasons for its action in the resolution awarding each contract and shall forthwith cause to be printed once, in the official newspaper, a brief notice stating the nature, duration, service and amount of the contract, and that the resolution and contract are on file and available for public inspection in the office of the clerk of the county or municipality, or, in the case of a contracting unit created by more than one county or municipality, of the counties or municipalities creating such contracting unit

Two of the bids raised questions for me. The first is $50,000 for David S. Lafferty, a lawyer and municipal judge, who is being paid to "Provide Legal Services Related to Bail Bond Forfeitures." Now, Mr. Lafferty may be the premier Bail Bond Forfeiture expert in the Northeast; but we wouldn't know it without a competitive bid. Without having an open explanation either on the Clerk's website or the Freeholders' website we actually don't know much. The Freeholders see is it fit to put up Commemorative Resolutions, but not ones allowing no-bid contracts.

The other one that struck me as odd was $663,720 to "Provide Healthcare Management Services" at the Bergen County Jail for a year. Once again, Correctional Health Services, Inc. (CHS) could be the best qualified provider, but because they didn't win a competitive bid we can't be sure. The County Watchers, a blog following Union County, doesn't give them particularly high marks. What makes it even more odd is that today on Page S-13 of the Record, a competitive bid for food service at the jail was announced. Why bid one and not the other?

Without knowing if they're the best for the job, we're left to speculate. Hmmmm. One thing both contract winners have in common is heavy political donations. With Papa Joe's affinity for giving contracts and patronage jobs to donors, could there be a connection? I can't say for sure.

According to ELEC, Mr. Lafferty has contributed nearly $24,000 to the Bergen County Democratic Organization since 1999. The folks over at fairlawnonline.com put the total for he and his law firm at nearly $30,000. With CHS, it's something to watch for. They have been very active in Union and Essex County. In addition, former CEO and current Verona Councilman Robert Detore cut a check for $27,000 to the State party back in 2001. It does make one wonder.

In a state known as a worldwide punch-line for political corruption, no-bid contracts like those listed above don't help things. A way to close the credibility gap of the process is getting the resolutions on-line, either at the Clerk's or Freeholders' website. List the qualifications and the reasons and let voters decide if we're getting a good bang for the buck.

In the long run, taxpayers would best be served by eliminating the exception listed above. It nullifies the $17,500 threshold that is supposed to trigger a bidding process, and opens the door to abuse and the credibility issues of our County leadership. It's going to take elected officials with the moral fortitude to make the change, or the Republican Party to stop imploding and start offering credible opposition. One way or another, this process needs to come to an end.

Raging Against the (Bergen) Machine

I make no secret of the fact that I loathe machine politics on principle. Corruption and cronyism go hand in hand once someone is established as a party boss. Whether it be no-bid contracts given to preferred political donors (pay-to-play), or loyalists to the Boss being promoted over dedicated civil servants, machine politics is the antithesis of what the Founding Fathers envisioned when they created our fair Republic. It allows authoritarians to create their own little fiefdoms, often at the expense of the people's will and tax dollars .

Such is the case in our little corner of New Jersey known as Bergen County. The boss in question is Joe Ferriero. He rules with a nearly iron fist, replacing party committee delegates who do not see things his way. His backing is what propelled Paul Aronsohn to the Democratic nomination, and why Aronsohn was agreeable with skipping the primary and having the results of the Bergen County Democratic convention be binding. The success of Ferriero is amplified by the failing Bergen County Republican Organization, chaired by Guy Talarico. Now, comfortable with his hold on Bergen, it appears Ferriero's looking to spread his wings into Sussex County as well.

However, all of this strong arming is not without resistance. I first saw this bit of resistance on BlueJersey, and it was, supposedly, sent to media outlets. I think it's important to repost in it's entirety. The more people that know what's going on, the better for our system of government and the chances for change.

I am a Bergen County Democratic Committeewoman from Tenafly. I am writing this to let the public know about a change being brought about by the Bergen County Democratic Chairman, Joseph Ferriero. I also will explain what has been going on behind the scenes that has caused a State Senator to use the unprecedented step of having a rally months before the Primary for her re-election campaign.

As a Tenafly Democrat I don't easily forget that this was the home of Elizabeth Cady Stanton. We don't take kindly to folks who would have our vote NOT count, whether it is for State Senator or Assembly, or even County Committee. We have a right to choose who represents us. In NJ, we don't vote for the Governor of NY, and likewise, we don't want folks from outside District 37 choosing the state senator to represent district 37. We picked a State Senator who won 75% of the popular vote in a general election. I think we did the people's bidding. We represented our Democrats well. Loretta Weinberg has made us all proud.

It wasn't easy to elect Senator Weinberg to the NJ state senate even though she is so popular. Consider what occurred in the past year and a half:

1. Someone actually forged signatures to deny County Committee men and women from Bergenfield the right to vote for Loretta Weinberg after they openly supported her.

2. Challengers at the Bergen County Democratic Organization tried to deny five of our Tenafly Committee men and women from voting for Loretta Weinberg after we openly supported her before the special election. It took a court case to get our votes counted.

3. Even AFTER the court battle, challengers tried to deny nearly ALL the Tenafly and Teaneck County Committee men and women the right to vote at the special election for Valerie Huttle after we brazenly supported Valerie Huttle for Assembly against Michael Wildes. I watched personally at that election when the press was not allowed access - as nearly every African American member of the county committee as well as almost all my Tenafly county committee men and women were challenged to vote (The Black Caucus as well as Tenafly openly endorsed Loretta Weinberg). I know this because they challenged ME until I started to argue too much. It also explains why there are some Democrats who did NOT support Mr. Wildes last year. They still remember the undemocratic way that special election was carried out in Hackensack in his name to punish Valerie Huttle for her support of Senator Weinberg.

4. As retribution for trying to do the will of the voters, in the Primary election this past June, the Chairman personally threw ANY open supporter of Loretta Weinberg off of the County line - the Democratic ticket - EVEN if they were an incumbent. I know this because I was one of them. The primary was held only ONE week before Mr. Ferriero's re-election vote. He moved even County Committee Chairs to column 4 on the ballot and found his own loyal picks to place in column 2. Only a few of his plants got elected that way. Nearly all of us who supported Senator Weinberg retained our seats.

5. Only one week after the attempt was made to eliminate us from the County Committee by placing us in Column 4 of the ballot, Mr. Ferriero was re-elected. After all I had seen as a newly elected Democratic County Committeewoman, I had to stand up and nominate an opponent at Mr. Ferriero's re-election in June, even though I knew it was a protest vote. I wanted to send a message. That we are vigilant and we will do everything in our power to make sure our Party Chairman answers to the Democrats of Bergen County. Not the other way around. I stood and watched democracy here die, as Ferriero supporters shouted down Mr. Robert Gulack, the opponent, during his speech. Before the mayhem began, Mr. Ferriero's staff was so busy placing placards with his name on them all over the gym, that they forgot to place our nation's flag in the front of the room. How fitting, for when we went to pledge allegiance, the only thing we had in the front of the gym to pledge allegiance to was a smiling Joe Ferriero.

6. And now Chairman Ferriero and attorney Dennis Ourey, Esq., wish to change the bylaws of the Bergen County Democratic Organization so that the election to choose our district 37 State Senator - Loretta Weinberg - is done on a county-wide basis instead of just District wide. So his friends in other districts can choose our State Senate candidate for us. I pray this undemocratic tactic too will fail.

At the risk of airing our party's dirty laundry, I must let Democrats in Bergen County know that there are those of us fighting and fighting hard to make sure their voices are heard even though the Chairman is trying to take democracy AWAY from us. NJ doesn't vote for NY's governor, why should someone OUTSIDE my legislative district be allowed to vote for MY state senator?

What is at stake here? Everything we hold dear. The ONLY way to get the politics out of government and the money out of politics is to give control of the Bergen County Committee back to the people of Bergen County. It is the only way we can retain control of our own elected officials so that we can appoint our own professionals based on merit and service to the community - not party loyalty. It is nothing less than government BY THE PEOPLE that we are trying to preserve.

Democratic voters in each town are supposed to tell their Democratic County Committeemen and women what they want. The County Committee members then based on that, choose the Democratic candidates for their own towns and convene at the district level to choose Democratic candidates for their legislative district and at the county level to choose the Democratic candidates for the county and state.

That is how Democracy is supposed to work. I don't know what Mr. Ferriero has in mind but I don't think Democracy has anything to do with it. I promise I will fight tooth and nail to make sure those bylaws changes he initiated to strengthen his hold on power do not pass. And I will do everything in my power to spread the word far and wide to every county committee rep everywhere that you MUST vote NO to the proposed change in the bylaws. We saw what a disaster a unitary US presidency is. A powerful unitary Party Boss is no better.

Carol A. Hoernlein, P.E.
Bergen County Committee - Tenafly District 7