Jim Pivnichny wrote in his blog that to access the Mayor's office you have to ring a bell. Then someone will open the door to find out what you want. I suppose that is security, a great concern of this administration.
It was some time before 2006 that I had occasion to visit the Mayor's office. I can remember being able to walk in, note if the Mayor was in, and stop at the secretary's desk. Of course since 9/11 2001 and the Republican Administration times have changed.
JERRY posts "GOOD NEWS": Friday the Assemblyman posted a letter announcing a "$267,909 award from the ARRA – CSBG* – Non-Discretionary program. This award will provide funds for employment services for low-income individuals at or below 200% of the federal poverty guidelines in Plainfield City'.
Now we must find out how and by what agency the funds will be used. This is stimulus funds and was posted last month on the city site on the applications for ARRA funds as having been awarded as a 'Community Services Block Grant".
Jerry why is it now news? If this could be posted a month ago to demonstrate what the city administration is doing to receive "stimulus money" why is the state writing you a letter now? According to the posting on the city site the funds were not requested meaning amount but as "N/A Formula Grant". I hope you are not taking credit.
Food (or Oil) for thought: Today's Times has an article raising the question that Scotland's compassionate release of the PANAM 103 bomber was more to expedite an oil deal that was supposed to have been implemented 5 years ago. Note that it was the Scottish government that authorized the release. Scotland has a semi-autonomous Government subject to the overall British Government.
Does terrorism and governments coexist? Judge from this article in today's Times "Iran’s defense minister nominee is wanted in the bombing of a Jewish center in Buenos Aires, confronting Iran with another challenge to its reputation". And Obama say we can have normal relationships with Iran. So could France, England and Poland have had with Hitler's Germany in1940.
Clarification: In a Comment to Dan yesterday who was suffering from a cold I wrote"I am not licensed to treat patients.". I still have my license as a physician in New Jersey which was granted in 1946. Since I stopped all activity with patients on 1/1/2001 I have held a restricted license that prohibits me from treating patients outside my family. The last 10 years of my active medical life was spent in an administrative roll as the Medical Director of the CJIPA. Part of my job was to see that the doctor's charge s were fair and on the other side to make sure the insurance company was not cheating the patients or the doctors. The latter was the most difficult because Aetna and Cigna were always attempting not to pay for treatments or tests.
*The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act), Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Program.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi, Doc,
ReplyDeleteYes, this grant was noted a while ago. Perhaps Green is attempting to show that the state does have his address and does consider him important enough to write to. I think it's pro forma for a state entity like the DCA to make sure that district legislators are aware of money granted to municipalities by the state. This is just one letter, though, about one municipality. Are we to assume that this is the only letter that Green has received?
Also, something else "weird" is the assemblyman's request that the people who read his blog let him know what they think of the gay marriage bill. It would make MORE sense for Green to write his own stance on this bill. He must have an opinion, since it's been 6 years since he was asked about it. He has waffled ever since, saying he supports civil unions but not directly answering the question about gay marriage. If he's in favor of it, he can certainly say so, and give his reasons for supporting it. Why is he asking blog readers, many of whom may not even live in the district?
He asks, "Do you feel that a Legislator should vote for what is right or what their party stands for?" The simple answer is, the question is poorly phrased. He writes, "In the past, Republicans have voted for their party instead of the rights of the people." Doc, what does this even mean--the "rights of the people?" It seems like Green wants to accuse the Republicans of being against this bill, but he himself refuses to come out and say, "I, Jerry Green, support gay marriage." Those six words should be easy for him to say, instead of him asking on a blog. Perhaps he should hold a district town meeting on this topic, because this is a really unprofessional way to conduct constituent services and get constituent feedback from an entire assembly district consisting of so many towns. He could also conduct a poll. However, none of those things should preclude him from stating his support for gay marriage. My suspicion is that he is trying to bait his district opponents without having the courage to make his own stance clear first. That is what a leader does.
What is wieder is that the PowerPoint slides Face page states "Updated July 21, 2009.
ReplyDeleteThere is a second entry on the Stimulus program in which the status
f th CDBG is noted as "Awaiting Agency Guidance
(copied8/8/09).
Not knowing time frames which is to believe? Obviously JG was ignorant.
hmmm ring a bell and someone comes out to ask what you want....sounds a bit like the Wizard of Oz...
ReplyDelete