UPDATES

Please note that I made several important changes and corrections to my latest blog.

DISCOURAGING corrected x 2

  A week of March Madness, time consuming appointments, and lack of any action in DC, and marked locally only by the Mayor’s SOC report and the advent of Spring has passed.

  This week began with the delivery of the Mueller Committee’s report to the Attorney General and we now wait for what we can be permitted to learn. This will be included Congressional hearings.       

  However, my week is marred by a long appointment this morning and appointments every morning this week except Friday when two dogs. Patti and Bob arrive for 4 days. In other words, do not expect any blogs this week.

  Although it is rumored reported that there was no indication of Russian interference in the 2016 election, despite Trump’s boasting “complete vindication” that may not be so. The report stated no confirmed collusion but did not address the subject of obstruction.

  As to the Mayor’s State of the City of Plainfield report given under theatrical conditions that reminded me of Trump’s speeches there are questions unanswered. How much true progress in revitalizing Plainfield has occurred? Will the changes in the city center bring in business that will cause outsiders to again frequent “downtown”? I doubt it.

  Will all the proposed apartment developments even with commercial space improve our tax base with affluent residents. Probably not since (a) the supposed demand may not happen since the “direct NYC rail access is years away if it ever happens, (b) other communities along the Raritan Valley RR corridor are way ahead of us-too little to o late, (c) Tax benefits to developers will not replace lost ratable especially if the projects are delayed and (d) what is there special here to attract new residents or outsiders?  

   We even plan to wipe out the Plainfield's few good restaurants with the on South Ave redevelopment. That is progress?

DAN'S COMMENTS !

 

  Dan wrote that there were 2 oddities about Wednesday’s Special Council meeting. I think he forgot a third; I cannot remember any previous “public hearing to submit a grant application”. 

  Yes, there may be such hearings to get public opinion on the need for a project, but not to ask for a grant for which administration asks Council’s approval by resolution after an Ordinance is acted upon.

  Dan's 2^nd oddity was the statement that no formal action will take place. He wrote:

“if no formal action will be taken -- that is, no resolution adopted -- how will the resolution be approved in time for the grant application's submission?"

  My suspicion is that this autocratic administration will have a department head based on time urgency apply for the grant and then ask for Councils retroactive approval.

  Dan finally acknowledged this Council disregard for the voters: He wrote:

“The first oddity is that this is a PUBLIC HEARING, at which the public is invited to speak concerning the grant and its uses -- and it is scheduled for 6:00 PM.
  It's hard enough for the public to make it to the new Council meeting time of 7:00 PM (many must skip dinner in order to attend a Council meeting), but 6:00 PM makes one think the public isn't even wanted at the meeting. Whoever's convenience this suits, it can't be the public's.”

 That is the point that I have been making for months. The people be damned! 

 As in any autocratic government, it doesn't matter that the tax payers put these 7 into their do nothing cushy positions.