Mayor Sharon lost it in front of the large audience at Wednesday evening's candidate forum, but don't let me get ahead of myself.
The Plainfield Public Library's meeting room was jammed to the rafters for Wednesday evening's candidate forum (though at perhaps 150-60, the turnout was less than half that at the Shiloh forum on May 12).
There were several jaw-droppers during the course of the evening.
Folks (including even most of the Mayor's claque) were startled upon arriving to find Assemblyman Jerry Green sitting smack dab in the middle of the crowd of candidates.
This had, after all, been billed as a MAYORAL candidates' forum.
Jawdropper #2: It turns out Rick Smiley, running against Jerry as the New Dem candidate did NOT receive an invitation to the event. A quick-witted attendee called him (what ever did we do before cell phones?) and Smiley rushed over from a campaign event in another 22nd District community.
Arriving after the others had made their opening remarks, Smiley related how he came to know of the forum, saying everything he knew about it was that it was supposed to be a MAYORAL forum. He continued, asking where the 4th Ward candidates were, and why Linda Stender was not present since she is also running in the 22nd District and -- technically -- Smiley is running against both she and Green. He concluded his review of the circumstances by saying that he felt 'set up'. The crowd murmured in agreement.
All seven mayoral candidates, including Jim Pivnichny, the only Republican candidate were present, seated in semi-alphabetical order: Carol Ann Brokaw-Boles, Sharon Robinson-Briggs, Martin Cox, Bob Ferraro, Adrian Mapp, Pivnichny, and Tom Turner. (By rights, Robinson-Briggs should have been filed under 'R'.)
The questions were more or less of a general sort and candidates pretty much stuck to their guns, with talking points they have previously put out in their literature or on their blogs (see links here).
There were some fireworks, however.
A question on the PMUA was perhaps the liveliest of the evening, and the moderator threw the ball first to Brokaw-Boles.
Let it be said that while she is a highly-educated and evidently capable person, she is no public speaker and could hardly be heard past the first few rows (failing to use the orator's standby of rising to be able to project and be better heard -- which Smiley did quite effectively).
Her speaking manner aside, Brokaw-Boles came across in an us-vs-them manner ('Some of you are even putting dead animals in your garbage.') and caused another jaw-drop moment when she closed her remarks in defense of the PMUA by saying 'JUST WAIT 'TIL NEXT YEAR...THERE'S A DOUBLE-WHAMMY COMING'. Not exactly a phrase to warm voters' hearts.
(Aside: Brokaw-Boles said that part of the problem with the PMUA's rates arises from the fees it must pay to the Union County Utilities Authority for dumping Plainfield's solid waste. This would be a VERY SORE POINT with Plainfielders if they understood the POLITICS of the matter -- the PMUA could haul its trash to other outlets that are CONSIDERABLY CHEAPER, but Union County politics demands that Plainfielders get scalped by the Union County Utilities Authority. This is a point that Brokaw-Boles failed to bring out.)
Cox suggested cost-cutting alternatives such as fewer pickups. Pivnichny thought ratepayers would benefit from use-based fees: Use it heavier, pay more; use it less, pay less. Ferraro probably should not have spoken on the question, since he cost the City a quarter million dollars defending against his frivolous lawsuit when the agency was set up -- and failed to mention that he has been on the PMUA payroll the past few years thanks to Jerry Green's intervention.
Robinson-Briggs and Tom Turner took aim at management issues and the lavish trips top executives and Commissioners are accustomed to taking on the public dime to questionable conferences.
Mapp graciously acknowledged the points made by the others about the PMUA, but pointed out that it was he -- in March -- who not only pointed out issues with the agency, but proposed that Plainfield taxpayers could save doubly by folding the agency back into the city: First by reducing the fat in the executive salaries and perks, and secondly, by putting the fees back onto property owners' tax bills, opening the possibility for deducting on income taxes.
He also got off a good line on the PMUA's lavish lifestyle by noting that last year the PMUA submitted a $6,000 bill to the Council, asking to be reimbursed for the wining and dining by a former Council member while on PMUA junkets.
The applause that erupted during the various comments on the PMUA signaled that this is a BIG issue with voters, without regard to the camp they are in (with the possible exception of Brokaw's supporters).
In discussing roads, Robinson-Briggs had an uphill battle convincing anyone she had done much of anything about the issue -- despite reading through a long printed list -- since the real thrust of Mapp's argument is that she basically dropped the ball for three whole years and is now trying to play catch-up while voters have their fillings shaken loose driving across town every day. Good luck!
With time growing short, the moderator asked the audience to vote by a show of hands on three remaining questions: Muhlenberg, business development and police and security. With only one hand raised for police, the audience was pretty much evenly split between Muhlenberg and business development.
The moderator chose to go forward with business development.
And that is where I have questions about the structure of the whole evening.
The freshly minted Women for Progress in Plainfield, which put together the forum, turned out dressed in red -- the mayor's signature campaign color -- and this show of partiality could not be eclipsed by the 'faux League of Women Voters' procedures: pencils and cards, timekeepers, and a literature table.
In the first place, campaign literature was allowed -- which the LWV would NEVER do, and which the Library forbids.
Secondly, the moderator was the first person to applaud, after Mayor Robinson-Briggs' remarks, setting the stage for further applause throughout the evening. The LWV moderators are always very strict about this, warning audiences that applause cuts into candidate time -- and what, after all, are we really there for?
Third, several people called my attention to the fact that the moderator already had pre-prepared question cards when things began, and that Mayor Robinson-Briggs had prepared sheets from which she read, giving the impression the questions (and her responses) were scripted.
I will give the moderator points for adhering to the time limits and not allowing ANY candidate to digress in their answers.
Why wasn't the Muhlenberg question taken up instead?
Several attendees commented in the parking lot that they thought it was purposely avoided because this is an issue on which both Robinson-Briggs and Jerry Green are vulnerable.
In fact, when Robinson-Briggs was detailing (at excruciating length) her organizational activities and memberships, she OMITTED ANY REFERENCE to the fact that she is a member of the Muhlenberg Hospital Board and that she has NEVER ATTENDED SO MUCH AS ONE BUSINESS MEETING of same. (She did, however, say she 'teaches' at Essex County College, which a faculty member in attendance last evening disputes as false on its face. Turns out she gave a guest lecture. Hardly counts as 'teaching'.)
But the final jaw-dropper of the evening was the MAYORAL MELTDOWN.
Closing remarks were somewhat rushed because of time constraints, and when the Mayor's turn came (she was second, after Brokaw-Boles), Her Honor jumped up and began to make PERSONAL ATTACKS on each of the other candidates, beginning with Brokaw-Boles and continuing -- alphabetically -- down the table. Except for Assemblyman Green.
Her voice rising almost to a scream, the audience was so taken aback that a hubbub broke out and people began to challenge what was being said.
The moderator saved the meeting from turning into a melée by shutting the Mayor down and moving on. Robinson-Briggs sat trembling and visibly agitated throughout the rest of the forum.
I have to say, it reminded me of the old days -- tons of folks, supporters of all sides and plenty of uncommitted folks, and lively interaction.
A good time, had by all -- or almost all.
-- Dan Damon
View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.
Posts
