wu-su

Santos isn't running in this elections cycle, and even if he were, there are no sour grapes. I prefer the fiddle rather than the violin, and frankly, isn't Santos playing the lyre as Kearny continues to burn? And my relationship with the Town is non-existent, so your point is? A write-in campaign, indeed, if nothing else it demostrates the strength of democracy, not the autocracy we see with Santos and the his puppets. It may not win an election, but it is a way for the people of Kearny to express their opposition to the status quo, the ingrained Democratic politics that is Kearny, and the misrepresentation that is reflective of the Town. Actually, one-party politics in Kearny needs to come to an end, and if a write-in campaign or another vehicle can be a first step in that direction, I believe it is you who should cease whinning and revisit the hollow "words" of the Mayor.

Why slanted; the questions are valid and you avoid attempting to answer them. Your rather contrived effort to divert attention from the questions using rather trite allustions to heat, kitchen and burns, was rather gallant, yet ineffective. Do you have answeres to the questions, if not, then admit it or avoid the need to make unsubstantiated comments.

Put the racial statements aside; the question is why, for what reason; the other question is who gave the order and what was the justification? If a foreign flag is to fly next to the US flag, there should be a valid reason rather than an arbitrary decision that sleights or favors one foreign flag over another.

It will be interesting to see how the dynamics of the Town actually begins to change. Who is going to do the dirty work for the Mayor, and to a lesser degree, his Council? Who is going to cover the Finance Chair's back? Who is going to take the heat at Council meetings? Who is going to replace the Business Administrator's friends and chosen vendors? When is a retirement not a retirement yet it's considered a retirement and comes with full compensation – when you work for local government in the State of New Jersey.

The idea of a tax revolt is great because there is a need to counter the serious political imbalance that exists in Kearny; regretfully, with the Santos Democrats in full control any opposition is tolerated on the surface (in public – in private the Mayor can be rather disdainful), the opposition is given a superficial hearing (in public) and an even shallower response, and then, when all is said and done, the Council does what Santos wants. Problem is, with no opposition on the Town Council, the Mayor's puppets will continue to adopt any Resolution he cares to introduce. The people of Kearny need to remove the incumbents from office, which is difficult because year after year they run seemingly unopposed. Well, despite the perennial situation, we can make a difference this year; if there is no opposition to a Council seat in your Ward, you have the option to cast a “write-in” vote. The key here to make it effective and to do that everyone within a given Ward has to write-in the same name. The other option is to support, form or resurrect another political party in Kearny, the core of which can be formed from the participants of the tax revolt. Whether supporting and rebuilding a Republican Party in Kearny or creating a new, local, grass roots organization, the time has come to wrestle control of the Town Council from Santos and his minions.

Yes, Town residents have been getting it from this Mayor and his Council for the past 10 Years.... tax increase after tax increase! Say "No" to Santos' shell games, word play and sleight of hand!

I believe Mayor Santos stated in The Observer that the municipal portion of the budget was 36%, not 20%, which means your calculation is incorrect and misleading and it is off by 16%, which further means that 64% not 80% goes to the county and schools; by the way, when Santos came into office, the municipal portion of the budget was 25%, which means he increased (grew) muncipal government by 11%. Quite frankly, the last thing we need is this Mayor for another four years, the Town can't afford Santos for another four years. The last thing we need is four more years of indecisiveness, mismanagement and tax increases.

It's taken 10 years to get this far on the bat factory; and nothing is formally finalized? And why couldn't Santos decide on other development opportunities on Passaic Avenue other than the bat factory in 10 years? A $5 million suplus in a competive election year makes me wonder how he's been juggling the budget. Increase in his previous 9 years and wow, what a miracle, Kearny has a surplus. By doing nothing Leadbeater can accomplish more than Santos. Sorry, my votes with Leadbeater.

A 72% increase in taxes and an 11% growth in municipal government goes far beyond an ever-weakening dollar. Perhaps it is more indecisiveness and mismanagment; 10 years of indecision and wavering. He maintains an army of attorneys and accountants; his Department Heads are very well paid; his B.A. is extremely well compensated; and he is elected Mayor, so over 10 years, why would valid ideas have to be delivered to his door, what has his costly braintrust been bringing to the table? He should have devivered the goods to the people of Kearny in the form of lower taxes!

We are not talking about other towns, we're discussing Kearny. And wasn't lowering taxes part of his previous campaign promises? In 10 years he has raised taxes, what 72% and municipal government grew from 25% of your tax rate to 36% of your tax rate; 11%. Let's not divert attention from Kearny by bringing in other towns.

Although it may not be something I want to admit, I am somewhat aware of the workings of government; at least enough to know a little about the roles of professionals. My point is that Kearny doesn’t need the army of attorneys that the town seems to have paid during the course of the past year, particularly since they have three or four appointed attorneys. I have been told that spending on legal fees is excessive. In fact, I recently heard, and have yet to verify the information, that one firm, handling one case was paid over $600,000 last year and has received more money this year? Or why pay over $100,000 to an accounting firm when the town has a finance department? Or why exorbitant payments to the town engineer on a project by project basis when the engineer already receives a more than reasonable amount of money through the firm’s contract; what’s the contract for anyway and what it covers? Or why a security firm is hired to patrol the Gunnell Oval when the town has a police department, and if there is trouble, the security firm calls the police anyway? Excesses and waste, that’s the point I’m trying to make; not the fact that professionals have to be hired and paid to run government efficiently. How many of these professionals have ties to Hudson County or are cronies of Hudson County political leaders? Where is the oversight when the Council is seemingly controlled by the Mayor, where is the oversight when the Business Administrator is seemingly controlled by the Mayor, where is the oversight, the checks and balances? I would think that without a system of checks and balances, without more oversight of spending practices to control excesses and waste, taxes will continue rise. A plan? Great idea, let’s use this forum to collectively formulate a plan.

I understand there were several opportunities for Santos to guide or take the lead towards development of the bat factory, but he let these opportunities slip by him. Why couldn't he make a decision; wasn't any proposal good enough for him? What was he looking for a Short Hills retail and condo development? Because of his indecisino we now have this situation with trustees, a situation that could have been avoided had the Mayor been a leader.

More often than not the Democrats do not have Republican opposition, so yes, the Republicans do need to put up candidates who offer viable alternatives. Perhaps this run by John Leadbeater will provide the impetus that leads to a resurgence of Kearny's Republican Party.

With all of these lawyers around him, and with access to legal advice through his Council, why does he have to pay an army of lawyers to make decisions for him? Does the Town need a new, "special" attorney for every action it takes? What has this enlightened group of done in 8 years? Where is development from the Town's development plans; the proposals of developers still be weighed by the Town's Planner and Attorney? Will a decision ever be made? How many development plans were passed over when the market was at a high? How many missed opportunities did the Mayor and Council let slip away? Besides the lawyers, how much money is being spent on professionals? The Planner, the Auditor, the Accountants, etc.?

I would like to hand power over to people who will actually get things done; who will follow through on development plans, who will be more creative and innovative, who will take actions and make decisions rather than rely on an army of attorneys for guidance and opinions; I prefer to hand power over to others who will lead rather than float aimlessly in the muddle of indecision. Instead of repetitive nothingness I would like to see progress.

Same old Santos drivel from the same old Santos supporters. Santos has had 8 years to be meaningful, but instead what we in Kearny find is absolutely meaningless. The problem is those who are not Santos supporters have been hurt in many ways because of his meaninglessness.

The time for change was actually more than four years ago - Vote Against Santos VAS

No need for a recall; rally the people together and collectively Vote Against Santos (VAS) in the November election. If enough is enough, then take no more - VAS!

Vote against him in November; that is probably the ultimate recall. Vote him out of office.

What's been meaningless is one-party, democratic rule for the past eight years. What's been meaningless is an ineffective Mayor and Council.

The person currently running Kearny may use "acceptable", but is he, really? I would prefer the one who may misuse words and has substance and character rather than one who uses words that are as shallow as him and his alledged accomplishments. So the answer to the question (as rhetorical as it may be) is, "yes"; a refreshing alternative.

Anonymous?

You are wrong, but of course, I would expect such a response. What's this Civic 101? Council meetings - no - I watch them on TV; I've been to a few, and they all appeared almost staged and very animated. I walked into a void and I left from a void. When there is no or rare opposition to the lord of the realm, one is not obtaining a well-rounded perspective of a problem or situation. Frankly, the meetings are rather boring, they are far from balanced, each Council member gets to blow their horn a bit and look impressive for the cameras, and then everyone marches in lock-step. Let's hold hands, sway back and forth and sing Kumbaya. No spice, all vanilla. Meetings on TV - yes - with comments noted immediately above. Write letters - yes - forward ideas - yes; write to newspapers - yes; local as well as the Ledger, the NY Times, the Wall Street Journal, etc. Approach Mayor and Council at hundreds of public events? What hundreds? At a parade or two or the tree lighting, where they are herded together? When they are in public I notice that they are somewhat distracted, prefer to mingle and not be burdened with one individual. Hundreds? Must be a special circle. OK - your turn.

Challenge the incumbents; whether in the primaries (where there is a greater chance of defeating an incumbent Democrat) or in November. Be a bit more responsive to the residents of Kearny; be a bit more sensitive to the needs of my constituents. Listen to the public and not ignore there questions or problems. Serve with less arrogance and without this aura of elitism or superiority. Make decisions rather than defer to an army of consultants or bevy of attorneys. Realizing that the public elected me and I am accountable to them; not to a Mayor or other contributors or benefactors. That would be a start...

The Council's united and will do whatever the Mayor insists upon. But that's been the way for over four years now. It's the number of lawsuits that is most intriguing as well as the nature or cause for the lawsuits. I would like to hear more about these cases and how much they not only cost to settle but also to have the town represented in court? Weren't there also one or two suits involving DPW or grounds personnel? Insurance rates may have decreased, but what suits were settled, what suits were won by the town, and why do there appear to be so many of them? I direct these thoughts to lawsuits; I am not refering to grievences, which appear to be significantly high in number as well and do cost the town and the taxpayer money.