 |
Taking a closer look at the PDCC election. |
CORRECTION: A reader has
informed me that TIES in the election of city committee candidates are
resolved by a vote of the duly elected members:
"Dan, ties are resolved via vote of the elected Committee Members at the Reorg meeting, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 19:13-20 a. (4)."
At one such PDCC meeting, such an issue was resolved BEFORE the new chair was elected.
From the look of things Tuesday night, Chairman Mapp did well except in
the Second Ward, and maintained a healthy majority of the Plainfield
Democratic City Committee.
The anti-Mapp forces only gained 13 seats (9 in Ward 2 and 4 in Ward 3).
There was one tie in 3-6 and is to be expected the Chair will resolve
it by picking his candidate as the winner.
But the fact that anti-Mapp forces recruited a nearly full slate
to begin with indicates that this was far more than simply a contest over a few PDCC
seats. This was meant to be an attempt to take control of the PDCC and
unseat Mapp as chairman.
[The PDCC will meet to reorganize on Monday, June 10, at 7:00 PM. Guests are always welcome, though only members may participate in the meeting.
PDCC Headquarters is at 31
Watchung Avenue (next to Antojito's Restaurant). Parking behind
headquarters and in the public lot adjacent or on the street.]
WHAT IS THE CITY COMMITTEE AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?
First of all, the term
"City Committee" is somewhat of a misnomer. The male and female
representatives elected on Tuesday are elected as members of the Union
County Democratic Committee.
There are one male and one female representative for each of the city's
34 voting districts. (That tradition is coming under assault with court
challenges, and several counties now elect two representatives per
district without regard to gender.)
The "City Committee" exists as a subset of the UCDC. It has its own
bylaws and tends to Democratic affairs in the City of Plainfield.
However, it is not "democratic" in the small-d sense. Nothing in the
bylaws indicates how candidates for public office (Council and Mayor)
are to be chosen.
Which means it is perfectly within the chair's prerogatives to
personally choose each and every candidate. As was done this year with
candidates Cory Storch and Barry Goode.
On the other hand, the chair could let the City Committee do it in a
truly small-d democratic fashion, as was done last year with the
nomination of Ashley Davis for the Ward 1 Council seat.
As long as things are fine with the County party, Plainfield is left pretty much alone to run its own show.
When they are not fine, the County chairs can exercise their role as
trustees and nominate without regard to the chair or the local
committee. This is what happened when Mayor (and chairman) Al McWilliams
ran afoul of the County leadership when he wanted to run for a third
term. The county chairs voted 20-1 against him and the line went to
Sharon Robinson-Briggs. (The only 'yes' vote was his own.)
WHAT DOES THE CITY COMMITTEE DO?
All city committees are responsible for the groundwork necessary to win
primaries and general elections in their communities. Plainfield is no
exception.
Some committees engage in other activities throughout the year,
including voter registration and educational programs or discussions on
topics of interest.
Plainfield has had some engagement with voter registration, especially when Rebecca Williams was on City Council and the PDCC.
The PDCC has also made attempts to socialize periodically, but this seems to have fallen by the wayside.
The PDCC has an Executive Committee composed of several vice chairs,
plus a treasurer, a recording secretary, a corresponding secretary, and a
Sergeant-at-arms.
Though the bylaws call for several meetings of the PDCC as a whole and
the Executive Committee (with five days written notice), the pattern is
not followed rigidly.
In fact, Chairman Mapp has not made use of the Executive Committee, and
has delegated other duties without regard to who was elected to the
post.
ABOUT THE 2019 COMMITTEE ELECTION
When Mayor Mapp was sworn in to his second term in January 2018, he was riding the crest of a huge wave.
Not only had he won re-election handily. He was control of the City Committee without a whisper of dissent.
Then came the fateful struggle to replace the ailing Assemblyman Jerry Green as chair of the Union County Democratic Committee.
Thinking the PDCC votes were his to dispose of, Chairman Mapp expected
the committee to support Sen. Nick Scutari's candidacy unquestioningly.
That was not in the cards. And the PDCC was rent asunder on the contest between Scutari and Fanwood Mayor Colleen Mahr.
In October, word began to circulate among PDCC members that the chairman
was planning to sack everyone who voted for Mahr when the time came
round for the next PDCC slate. (As it turns out, he also sacked one who
wasn't even involved in the Scutari-Mahr vote).
In the event, Chairman Mapp nominated 36 new PDCC members (18 males and 18 females, though not all are paired).
THE PETITION CONTEST
The anti-Mapp forces worked to mount two complementary slates -- People
First Democrats [allied with Mahr], and Democrats United for Progress
[said to be allied with John Campbell].
These two combined to make a nearly full slate (see my post on the complete slates here).
Once all petitions were filed, both Chairman Mapp and People First
Democrats filed challenges. You can see Municipal Clerk "Ajay" Jalloh's
ruling (which was upheld) here.
Jim Spear of People First Dems challenged the RDO candidacy of the 2-8
RDO candidates. In the event, the male withdrew immediately over
questions of who circulated the petition, and the female withdrew the
petition altogether after several signatures were challenged. In the
event, this left RDO with no candidates in 2-8.
In 2-9, the RDO never mounted a male candidate, leaving People First Dem Sean McKenna unopposed for the male seat.
Chairman Mapp submitted 17 challenges. 16 candidates were removed as a
result, putting a serious dent in the competing Democrats United slate.
As it turns out, the anti-Mapp slates had been given outdated and
incorrect materials indicating the number of valid signatures needed on
petitions. Rumors still circulate that this was done purposely as a way
of the Mapp administration putting its thumb on the scale in the
contest.
While no one knows why the wrong petition requirements were given, it
was obvious they were from 2015 and on one asked about that fact.
Also, as folks seasoned in the petition process know, a circulator
better get double the needed number of signatures because all sorts of
people will sign a petition without knowing whether they in fact are
even registered to vote because "in their head" they think of themselves
as a Democrat.
ARE THERE ANY SURPRISES IN THE OUTCOMES?
There are surprises aplenty.
First, consider that if the PDCC election had been held in January of
2018, I think everyone would agree that Chairman Mapp would have won
100% of both PDCC and Council races hands-down.
So, what surprises are there with regard to the PDCC in 2019?
In Ward 1, challenges materialized in only 3 districts (3, 5, and 7). None of the challengers took more than 31% of the vote.
Ward 2 was a disaster for Mapp. Anti-Mapp forces took 3,
6, 8, 9, and split 10 (with Cory Storch winning for Mapp, and Lois
Mattson losing to Jennifer Popper). In two districts Mapp won with less
than 55% of the vote (2, and 7). Only in 1, 4, 5, and 11 did he win
undisputedly.
In 2-8, Jim Spear and Farah Pidgeon were unopposed (due to the foul-up of the RDO petition).
In 2-10, Mary Burgwinkle won handily with Sean McKenna (who was
unopposed). Burgwinkle had been with Mapp since the earliest days and is
treasurer of the PDCC until Monday.
In 2-3, Shep Brown and his running mate were defeated. He has been on
the PDCC since the New Dems first took control in 2005, I believe. His
running mate was hand-picked by Mapp to replace Joanne Macaluso, who was
booted.
Another surprise was the failure of Canon Leroy Lyons and his wife
Michelle Graham Lyons in 3-6. They were handpicked by Mapp to replace
two he had booted: Peter Price and Jeanette Criscione, who won as People
First Dems.
In Ward 3, the anti-Mapp forces took districts 1 and 5. While on
paper it looks like Mapp took all the others, he was contested in five
of the eight and won with less than 55% in two of those. In three
districts (including 3-9, his own), Mapp had no challenges.
It would have been interesting to see how the contest for Mapp's
district would have played out had former Fire Chief Frankie Tidwell
been on the ballot. Tidwell was enormously popular as chief and many
feel his suspension before retirement was unwarranted.
In Ward 4, only three districts ended up being in play. The highest anti-Mapp percentage was in 4-2 at 42%.
If Mapp hadn't been so successful at challenges and if the anti-Mapp
opposition had been more astute the outcome might have been less
favorable for Mapp.
As it is, there are worrisome signs behind the facade of victory.
View today's CLIPS
W here.
Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to
subscribe.
About Cookies: This blog
is operated by Google, which uses cookies to improve the
user's experience. By continuing to read this blog you agree to
their use.
Posts
