CLERKS AND LAWYERS

 Before next Mondays Council Agenda session I plan to explain my suggestions on at least three essential changes in the structure of our city government. Two are essential if we can have a working Mayor/Council format; our present form. 

The third is logical and concerns the appointment of the City Clerk.

If the City Clerk remains a Mayor’s appointment he can still function although it will be incongruous with article 2.13 of the Charter which reads in part:”The Council shall appoint the city clerk or some other qualified person to serve as clerk of the Council”. 

3.5(a) of the Charter “The mayor shall appoint and remove officers and employees as authorized by the Charter or administrative code and with the advice and consent of the council, make all appointments for which no other provisions is made by or  pursuant to the charter”. This apparently has been the authorization for the Mayor to appoint the Clerk. 

However according to NJ State 40A:9-133. a. In every municipality there shall be a municipal clerk appointed for a three-year term by the governing body of the municipality. Commencing January 1 following the third anniversary of the effective date of P.L.1997, c.279 (C.40A:9-133.9 et al.), no person shall be appointed or reappointed as a municipal clerk unless that person holds a registered municipal clerk certificate issued pursuant to section 3 or section 4 of P.L.1985, c.174 (C.40A:9-133.3 or C.40A:9-133.4).

The key phrase “by the governing body” can mean the Council who passes Resolutions and Ordinances. The Mayor supposedly “administers” those “laws which the Council has passed.

Although Charter 2:13 states that the Council shall appoint the City Clerk or some other qualified individual as its secretary; a clerk’s duty noted in 40A:9-133.

Also in the Faulkner Act in the description of the Mayor/Council form of government 40:69A-38 reads: “The council shall appoint a municipal clerk **”. 

Even if we remain independent of the Faulkner Act; since such municipalities are not bound by its provisions, it is justification to have a similar regulation.

Therefore the Charter should be made consistent with NJ40A:9-133a and specifically require the City Clerk to be appointed by the Council of which he is an officer. This is a logical and should be a not debatable change

More critical is the need to revise the Corporation Counsel office and the Department structure. The Department structure is more complex and will be subject of a separate blog.

 Our Charter calls for (4.7) a Corporation Council appointed by the Mayor with “advice and consent” “who shall be the chief legal advisor to the mayor and the council”.  

This is nonsense! The counsel’s status and income is beholden and dependent on the mayor who hired and can fire him without cause. In case of dispute between Council and Mayor he will be in a conflict of interest position and it would be an unusual individual that would rule against his employer.   

I could find no state regulation that requires the mayor to provide the legal representative of the Council. It may exist other then our specific charter representation. 

The Council can be empowered to have separate legal advice and the charter should so reflect. There are municipalities in which the Council does have its own counsel.   It is not prohibited under any legislation. Therefore our Charter should provide for a separate Counsel for the Council.

The entire structure of Plainfield’s legal services must be reexamined. We have no proof of need of a full time Corporation Counsel who is a generalist and we employ some on retainer, specialist for various legal functions. The exact costs for all legal services including insurance perks were given should be analyzed and determined if  a part time  service based or retainer contracted attorney will be  more cost effective.

That may be a recommendation of a Charter Study Commission.It may be addressed after the adoption of any Charter revisions.

To Summarize: (1) City Clerk to be appointed by Council (2) Separate legal Counsels for Administration and Common Council. (3) Restructuring of legal services to eliminate full time “Corporation Counsel”

WORDS/ THOUGHTS

Today is supposed to be one of those weather days when being in the house is best. Snow early then sleet succeeded by rain which will freeze early and I hope not bring down wires. By evening we will be in the first stages of a heat wave Wednesday when the temperature may hit 60!

Winter will return next week.

I am going to continue my thoughts on charter revisions and hope you all will add your own which I am sure will be of value to the Commission.

Today however I am going to skip the next installment. Too much bad has happened in the world the last few days. Some will affect us, but most have occurred continents away and only the locals suffer.

Locally; the cost of mailing a letter has gone up 1cent. I can remember when I paid 3cents and I still have in some box of old papers a dog-eared 1cent postcard. The electronic world is killing the postal service as it has done to the newspapers.  

There has been another r shooting in Plainfield. Was it because it was near the Fire Headquarters that ShotSpotter picked it up?

A scandal in the school system! People forget that even teachers are human; have human urges, and they too may respond to them inappropriately. This is not a reflection on the Plainfield schools; just a sad event.

And one that rankles me, our state legislature has voted to permit merchants to add up to 4% to the cost of goods if a credit card is used. The public is penalized if they do not wish to become vulnerable by carrying large amounts of cash. The laws of our neighbors New York and Connecticut prohibit this practice.

Seriously; in Brazil a nightclub fire with hundreds of young college students killed. Same cause as the one in New England as few years ago; human stupidity and negligence.

In Egypt a year ago in Port Said a riot at a soccer match killed about 80 spectators from Cairo. This weekend after judges had sentenced about 21 rioters to death; at Port Said there was a major uprising in which at least 30 were killed and over 300 injured. Buildings were set on fire. All of this over a sports event.

Violence is the norm all over. In Syria the “rebels” are fighting among themselves as well as with the government. In Mali, Myanmar (Burma), Sri Lanka there is active warfare between rebels and governments. And today the British warned their civilians to get out of Somalia. Mexico has its Drug Cartels in conflict with authority. There are riots in Venezuela, continued bombings of civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. To mention only a few spots on Earth

I don’t think that all this means that the world is going to the devil; it is just a result that with our present state of communications there is no place on earth that is not more than a few seconds away. Whereas a few decades ago place could be days apart and before WW1 weeks or months apart.

What is the moral of this potpourri? I am not sure; perhaps you can tell me. But it is an escape from Oz.

CHARTER STUDT #2 WARDS AND COUNCIL

I believe that it was Alan Goldstein who at the public participation period at the Charge Study Commission’s Jan 8 meeting## who suggested revamping the ward structure to be 9 in number; creating a Council of 9 with no members at large.

Months ago when the question of revising the Charter first was broached I had reviewed the Faulkner Act, which in its Strong Mayor/Council template permitted the option of a 5, 7, or 9 member Council. Therefore the concept is not abnormal.

The solution however is not a simple one but has two facets; the first being the number of representative wards in the city and the second is the composition of the Council membership. Both are intertwined but the ward issue must be resolved first.

The “One citizen one vote” **principle   is the basis for our democracy; although in practice it often has not been respected. No where could that distortion be more evident in our own 4 ward division as demonstrated by the registration and voting records from the 2012 general election.

First Ward: - -   7972 eligible—5285    registered  -3507 voted (66%)

Second Ward-  11583 eligible—6616 - registered-  4649 voted (70%)

Third Ward—- 10394 eligible—6260 - registered   4335 voted (69%)

Fourth Ward—   7824 eligible—4394 - registered - 2827 voted (64%-)

Our overall voting record among registered voters is good, but only 40% of those who could have did so.

There is a great variation in the districts varying from 726 to2414 eligible voters. Obviously a voter in one district could have 3 times the impact as one in the larger district.

Also since at present the 1:4 At Large Councilor represents approximately 16000 eligible voters and the 2:3 Councilor a total of 22000(approx) this is too great a discrepancy (37.5%) to merit equality.  

With that in mind restructuring of the wards would provide are more equable representation. Indeed that must occur.

There could be two new configurations; a 5 ward or a 6 ward plan. The 5 ward setup could work with a 7 member Council of 1 member from each ward and 2 at large. A problem here could result from an asymmetrical reelection plan no matter what the term length would be; a problem that can be easily avoided with 6 wards.

If 6 wards were considered, 3 perhaps north of a population median line and three south; the smaller units might provide a greater demographic identity for each ward. Perhaps minorities such as Hispanics would have representation on the Council which they have lacked.  It should be noted that the wards cannot be just geographically determined but must be within I believe a 5% population equality.

It is the population requirement that will determine ward boundaries.

Following such a reconstruction of the ward pattern; the Council could then effectively consist of 9 members; 1 from each ward and 3 at large (city wide). The 6 specific ward Councilors could better represent their smaller number of constituents; whereas the 3 at large would provide for a better city wide representation then at present. With a 9 member Council; logical 1/3 could be elected each year including 1 of the “at-large”. That would mean 3 year terms.

Although for a better politically representative Council I suggest the 3 year term; I believe that the Mayor’s term should still be 4 years, but also with a term limitation clause.

I am an advocate of term limits; preferably 3 consecutive terms. Prolong power tends to corrupt, and no politician is indispensable.
## It was Alan ; See minutes on Charter Study Commission site. (http://plainfieldcsc.blogspot.com/)
**The "one man, one vote" rule (also called "one person, one vote") derives from the US Supreme Court ruling in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 US 533 (1964) that held state political districts of unequal size resulted in under-representation of some citizens' interests and over-representation of others'. This was considered "unrepublican," per Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution, and also unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause. In order to meet constitutional standards, districts had to be reapportioned so each had approximately equal population.   

CORRECTED VOTER FIGURES

Thanks to Bernice’s reporter instincts the mystery between the 37700 eligible voters and the 22555 registered voter figures has been cleared.

She discovered that according to the 2010 census figures Plainfield’s population was 49,808 with 25.6 percent under 18. Simple math reveals that Plainfield’s eligible population to vote amounts to the about the 37000 figure.

If only 22555 registered; only 60% of those who could have voted would have been able to cast a ballot.  Although about 69% of those registered did vote but that represents  only about 41% of those that could took advantage of their rights as a citizen. A sad commentary.

These revised numbers should affect the number of signatures needed for a recall petition. 25% of those who voted would about 3800 signatures a workable but difficult number. 10% of those registered would be about 2250 voters. I believe that this is a number that would make the recall option vote a valuable tool for the people.

Think about it.