Burney's un-truthiness disappoints

In Plainfield's Democratic primary race, one has to wonder whether Councilor Burney is taking a page from the playbook of the late Bob Ferraro.

In two recent blog posts he has bent facts beyond recognition in his efforts to portray his council service positively and to cast one of his opponents (Rebecca Williams) in a negative light (interestingly, he has never mentioned his second opponent, Don Davis, at all).

REBECCA AND THE CABLE CHANNEL

Never one to be deterred by facts, Bob Ferraro often inflated the so-called salaries of those in his political crosshairs, as Burney has done in his attack on Williams (see his post here, and Rebecca's spirited retort here).

So, Burney starts by alleging Williams was paid $50,000 for a part-time job. Simply not true, as Rebecca rebuts (see here).

Next, Burney boils the whole complicated business of getting Plainfield's public access channel up and running (assessing equipment needs, buying equipment, developing policies and procedures, reaching out to the community for programming, setting up a community calendar and broadcast schedule) into a SINGLE issue, that of broadcasting Council meetings.

Never mind that there were significant technical issues with such broadcasts (including where a station would be physically located) and that the Council itself was not of one mind about the speed with which live broadcasts should be gotten up and running.

In spite of crowing that HE got broadcasts done (seemingly alone), Burney admits it took a further two years, and though the quality of the broadcasts ranges from execrable to mediocre, we still do not have LIVE broadcasts.

Unmentioned is any reference to scandals that have plagued the station under Burney's term in office: no mention of the tens of thousands of dollars in equipment that went missing after Williams was replaced by the Robinson-Briggs administration (what the station had when she left was carefully documented and receipted), and the failure of the Council under Burney's leadership to fund the station's operations with the franchise fees that Comcast pays the city, instead dumping them into the general fund.

DUDLEY HOUSE

Burney says that he discovered the Dudley House rehab center was costing the city almost $100,000 a year, and that 80% of the clients (shocking!) were not from Plainfield (see his blog post here).

Completely missing from his discussion is that the program has always been grant-driven and there have been reimbursements for provision of client services by the 'sending' county -- including Union County for Plainfield clients.

Burney also avoids any discussion of the embarrassment that the program lost its certification under his watch, that the Robinson-Briggs administration improperly transferred its workers to the Division of Public Works for over a year (about which Burney did not complain), and that when he had a clear opportunity to say that Plainfield should simply get out of the social services business altogether, Burney took the politically less challenging route of looking for a third party operator.

Why wouldn't he rather see Plainfield done with the whole business altogether, including owning the building?

I, for one, am disappointed that Burney has sunk so low in his efforts at getting re-elected.

---

• Burney: "One glaring difference"
• Williams: "Honest, ethical leadership: Setting the record straight"
• Burney: "Having your cake and eating it too!"
  

-- Dan Damon [follow]

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.