Mangin's Ethics Questions

[A. Realist]

Yes bonding is legal and conflicts do exist. But how much interest will we pay out for this bonding, not to mention the legal fees that are involved with the bonding process. Also the conflict in the mayors office is far from common, it includes large amounts of tax payer dollars every April. This is not a simple matter of ones imagination, it's a very real issue. An issue that will be realized every quater.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The bonding charges are a pittance compared to the cost of letting necessary projects fall by the wayside. For instance, the town is under a court order to proceed with sewer separations, which is one of the larger bonded projects. Non-compliance would cost the town thousands of dollars per day in fines; to say nothing of the fact that the conditions caused by a combined system just keep on compounding if not addressed. Roads in disrepair do not improve on their own. It takes millions of dollars to repave. Bonding is the only sensible way to get it done.

I fail to see how the perceived "conflict" in the Mayor's office effects the tax rate. You're not seriously insinuating that Mrs. Torres intimidates the Mayor, are you? And then, I guess, he in turn intimidates everybody else on the Council? Yeah, I'm sure they all sit around trying to figure out new ways to raise our taxes (and their own) just to get people angry at them! Really, now!!

[Guest TAXPAPER]

Yes bonding is legal and conflicts do exist. But how much interest will we pay out for this bonding, not to mention the legal fees that are involved with the bonding process. Also the conflict in the mayors office is far from common, it includes large amounts of tax payer dollars every April. This is not a simple matter of ones imagination, it's a very real issue. An issue that will be realized every quater.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe we need for the Attorney General to be involved.Something is not right.

[Jim Mangin]

Still no reply from Mangin to the earlier post.  What does that mean from the usual talkative Jim?  (The Mangin statements are italicized)

                      *        *              *

What was your question?

Jim Mangin

ps - I'll bet the answer is going to be jimmangin@aol.com.

[Guest Just do it]

Maybe we need for the Attorney General to be involved.Something is not right.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you feel that way call . But be sure to ask for Cristy

[Guest Q&A]

The bonding charges are a pittance compared to the cost of letting necessary projects fall by the wayside. For instance, the town is under a court order to proceed with sewer separations, which is one of the larger bonded projects. Non-compliance would cost the town thousands of dollars per day in fines; to say nothing of the fact that the conditions caused by a combined system just keep on compounding if not addressed. Roads in disrepair do not improve on their own. It takes millions of dollars to repave. Bonding is the only sensible way to get it done.

I fail to see how the perceived "conflict" in the Mayor's office effects the tax rate. You're not seriously insinuating that Mrs. Torres intimidates the Mayor, are you? And then, I guess, he in turn intimidates everybody else on the Council? Yeah, I'm sure they all sit around trying to figure out new ways to raise our taxes (and their own) just to get people angry at them! Really, now!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is that the only bonding we've done?sewer separations and street repairs. Now just answer yes or no. Now, is the conflict a perception or in fact a real matter that truely effects our tax rate? Look a little closer be objective. I'm sure you'll see it. Cute, but no one insinuated intimidation, those are your words.

[Jim Mangin]

The bonding charges are a pittance compared to the cost of letting necessary projects fall by the wayside. For instance, the town is under a court order to proceed with sewer separations, which is one of the larger bonded projects. Non-compliance would cost the town thousands of dollars per day in fines; to say nothing of the fact that the conditions caused by a combined system just keep on compounding if not addressed. Roads in disrepair do not improve on their own. It takes millions of dollars to repave. Bonding is the only sensible way to get it done.

I fail to see how the perceived "conflict" in the Mayor's office effects the tax rate. You're not seriously insinuating that Mrs. Torres intimidates the Mayor, are you? And then, I guess, he in turn intimidates everybody else on the Council? Yeah, I'm sure they all sit around trying to figure out new ways to raise our taxes (and their own) just to get people angry at them! Really, now!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What about the bond for the deficit in the Water Dept? How long does that "improvement" last? How about the bond for the shirts and pants in the Fire Dept.?

Here's a good one. How about the bond for the computer software? Does that last 15 years? If the Town bonded for computer software 10 years ago we'd still have 5 years of payments to make for our Windows 3.1 software. We'd be paying for the Windows 3.1 bond and then we'd have to take another bond to upgrade to Windows 95. While paying the bonds for Windows 3.1 and Windows 95, we'd take out another bond to pay for Windows 2000. While paying the bonds for Windows 3.1, Windows 95 and Windows 2000, we'd take out another bond to upgrade to Windows XP. You see how it works? Computer software is just another bad bonding decision.

I've said all along, bonding is a legitmate financing vehicle for the right projects. The problem is we use it a fix for everything - eg. "The Pine Sol Bond."

Jim Mangin

[A. Realist]

Is that the only bonding we've done?sewer separations and street repairs. Now just answer yes or no. Now, is the conflict a perception or in fact a real matter that truely effects our tax rate? Look a little closer be objective. I'm sure you'll see it. Cute, but no one insinuated intimidation, those are your words.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you not know what the term "for instance" means? Sewer separation and road improvements were used as examples of items possessing a minimum 5 year shelf-life, that are legitimate projects for bonding. Yes, there are other items/projects that qualify as bondable and they all have to meet the specific criteria set forth by the State.

As far as the "conflict" is concerned, I guess its validity lies in the eye of the beholder. I see it as "perceived"; you see it as "real". If you are so convinced of the presence of conflict, why haven't you filed an ethics complaint instead of wasting all this time fostering baseless innuendo? (Maybe you have and you just didn't like the outcome.)

If you aren't insinuating intimidation, what exactly is your point? Be specific as to Mrs. Torres' conflict and how her deletion from the Mayor's Office would reduce our taxes. Inquiring minds want to know!

[Jim Mangin]

Yes bonding is legal and conflicts do exist. But how much interest will we pay out for this bonding, not to mention the legal fees that are involved with the bonding process. Also the conflict in the mayors office is far from common, it includes large amounts of tax payer dollars every April. This is not a simple matter of ones imagination, it's a very real issue. An issue that will be realized every quater.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Our annual debt service payments are now about $1.5 million higher than they were in 2000 ($1,517,853 to be exact). The legal fees are harder to figure because they are appropriated in several different accounts. It is a good point though. If we adopted a "pay as you go" policy we could budget $1.5 million of improvements every year. Instead we'll be paying $1.5 million more per year long after the improvement projects stop. That's the difference.

Jim Mangin

[Guest Obsrver]

What was your question?

Jim Mangin

Dear Jim,

Sure. I guess you missed it. The poster above wanted answers to statements you made that, according to the poster, were wrong or untruthful. For clarity, I've copied the posting below so you don't miss it again; your statements are the ones italicized.

***

The posting below by Councilman Mangin is full of classic Jimmy-spins. He avoids the issue at hand, responds with with untruths and glaring omissions, and attacks others all in the process of not answering. Here's just a few of the more egregious statements from his posting below. Let's call them Jimmy-spinisms (it sounds nicer than lies).

I didn't say they would "exonerate" me. I said they would offer an opinion, which they did.

You said you did not have a conflict of interest, that it was an entirely political attack by the mayor and town attorney. You sought the opinion to prove your point. You failed miserably.

I missed the Council meeting of May 25 (my son's birthday). That was the 1st Council meeting I missed in 2004. For the record, Mike Landy and Jose Torres missed three Council meeting before the June primary.

Untrue. In January 2004 alone you missed 3 meetings. One of them you missed to attend a Nick Sacco political fund-raiser. Remember now? Classic Jimmyisms: attack others in defending yourself (Landy and Torres) and try shamelessly for the sympathy points.

I never refused to make the decision public. I stated that the Advisory Opinion was that yes, there was a conflict of interest.

After Jimmy accused the town attorney (a former judge) of being political, the town attorney put his full legal opinion in the record and in the minutes of the meeting. Jimmy refused (and still refuses) to place the decision he received in the town record. Jimmy refused to apologize to the town attorney. Jimmy also spurned the town attorney's requests for the decision. Classic Jimmyism: Make it up as you go along if circumstances change against you.

I received the letter on May 12, 2004.

There's a classic glaring omission. Then why didn't Jimmy disclose that before his election? He had over 3 weeks.

I never sought to find out how much money the developer had. Everyone knows Bruce Ratner is a bazillionaire.

Untrue. To the point of Jimmy telephoning the developer directly. It's not how much Ratner has but how much he would spend in Kearny. Jimmy knew that all too well. (The use of "bazillionaire" combines a weak attempt at humor with the classic avoiding the question tactic.)

I can't post it here. It's too long.

Too long for Jimmy?? So spin, spin, spin. You are a complete phony.

[Guest Q&A]

Do you not know what the term "for instance" means? Sewer separation and road improvements were used as examples of items possessing a minimum 5 year shelf-life, that are legitimate projects for bonding. Yes, there are other items/projects that qualify as bondable and they all have to meet the specific criteria set forth by the State.

As far as the "conflict" is concerned, I guess its validity lies in the eye of the beholder. I see it as "perceived"; you see it as "real". If you are so convinced of the presence of conflict, why haven't you filed an ethics complaint instead of wasting all this time fostering baseless innuendo? (Maybe you have and you just didn't like the outcome.)

If you aren't insinuating intimidation, what exactly is your point? Be specific as to Mrs. Torres' conflict and how her deletion from the Mayor's Office would reduce our taxes. Inquiring minds want to know!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK, for instance means more then one. Then how many are there?(Bond issues that is) Please stop with the intimidation, your the one that brought it up. It's spin. We are well aware that Ms Torres is not in the Mayors office with a bat. But she is busy coducting board business during her scheduled work day. And if I had made an ethics complaint you would have known the outcome as well. Your so transparent.

[Guest guest]

What was your question?

Jim Mangin

Dear Jim,

Sure. I guess you missed it.  The poster above wanted answers to statements you made that, according to the poster, were wrong or untruthful.  For clarity, I've copied the posting below so you don't miss it again; your statements are the ones italicized. 

                                ***

The posting below by Councilman Mangin is full of classic Jimmy-spins. He avoids the issue at hand, responds with with untruths and glaring omissions, and attacks others all in the process of not answering. Here's just a few of the more egregious statements from his posting below. Let's call them Jimmy-spinisms (it sounds nicer than lies).

I didn't say they would "exonerate" me. I said they would offer an opinion, which they did.

You said you did not have a conflict of interest, that it was an entirely political attack by the mayor and town attorney. You sought the opinion to prove your point. You failed miserably.

I missed the Council meeting of May 25 (my son's birthday). That was the 1st Council meeting I missed in 2004. For the record, Mike Landy and Jose Torres missed three Council meeting before the June primary.

Untrue. In January 2004 alone you missed 3 meetings. One of them you missed to attend a Nick Sacco political fund-raiser. Remember now? Classic Jimmyisms: attack others in defending yourself (Landy and Torres) and try shamelessly for the sympathy points.

I never refused to make the decision public. I stated that the Advisory Opinion was that yes, there was a conflict of interest.

After Jimmy accused the town attorney (a former judge) of being political, the town attorney put his full legal opinion in the record and in the minutes of the meeting. Jimmy refused (and still refuses) to place the decision he received in the town record. Jimmy refused to apologize to the town attorney. Jimmy also spurned the town attorney's requests for the decision. Classic Jimmyism: Make it up as you go along if circumstances change against you.

I received the letter on May 12, 2004.

There's a classic glaring omission. Then why didn't Jimmy disclose that before his election? He had over 3 weeks.

I never sought to find out how much money the developer had. Everyone knows Bruce Ratner is a bazillionaire.

Untrue. To the point of Jimmy telephoning the developer directly. It's not how much Ratner has but how much he would spend in Kearny. Jimmy knew that all too well. (The use of "bazillionaire" combines a weak attempt at humor with the classic avoiding the question tactic.)

I can't post it here. It's too long.

Too long for Jimmy?? So spin, spin, spin. You are a complete phony.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Talk about long winded. Save space and just call him names. But he does have your attention.

[Jim Mangin]

Ok, let's go through this one more time. But this time, pay attention. My comments are in bold.

What was your question?

Jim Mangin

Dear Jim,

Sure. I guess you missed it.  The poster above wanted answers to statements you made that, according to the poster, were wrong or untruthful.  For clarity, I've copied the posting below so you don't miss it again; your statements are the ones italicized. 

                                 ***

The posting below by Councilman Mangin is full of classic Jimmy-spins. He avoids the issue at hand, responds with with untruths and glaring omissions, and attacks others all in the process of not answering. Here's just a few of the more egregious statements from his posting below. Let's call them Jimmy-spinisms (it sounds nicer than lies).

I didn't say they would "exonerate" me. I said they would offer an opinion, which they did.

You said you did not have a conflict of interest, that it was an entirely political attack by the mayor and town attorney. You sought the opinion to prove your point. You failed miserably.

Yes it was an entirely political attack by the Mayor and Town Attorney. I contacted the State for an opinion because the Mayor and Town Attorney wouldn't **** and get off the pot. They wouldn't contact the State, so I did.

I missed the Council meeting of May 25 (my son's birthday). That was the 1st Council meeting I missed in 2004. For the record, Mike Landy and Jose Torres missed three Council meeting before the June primary.

Untrue. In January 2004 alone you missed 3 meetings. One of them you missed to attend a Nick Sacco political fund-raiser. Remember now? Classic Jimmyisms: attack others in defending yourself (Landy and Torres) and try shamelessly for the sympathy points.

You're saying I missed three meetings In January? The Town Council only meets twice a month. I did miss one meeting, but it wasn't a Sacco fundraiser. I was invited to attend his swearing in to a new Senate term. Your original post said I missed the 3 meetings before the June Primary. I didn't. Jose and Mike did. You're probably just confused.

 

I never refused to make the decision public. I stated that the Advisory Opinion was that yes, there was a conflict of interest.

After Jimmy accused the town attorney (a former judge) of being political, the town attorney put his full legal opinion in the record and in the minutes of the meeting. Jimmy refused (and still refuses) to place the decision he received in the town record. Jimmy refused to apologize to the town attorney. Jimmy also spurned the town attorney's requests for the decision. Classic Jimmyism: Make it up as you go along if circumstances change against you.

I never refused (and still don't refuse) to make the decision public. I never spurned (Is that a word?) the Town Attorney's request for the decision. He's welcome to it. You're welcome to it. The Mayor's welcome to it. For the seventh time, e-mail me at jimmangin@aol.com and I'll send it to you.

Did I refuse to apologize to the Town Attorney? Absolutely. His was a political agenda. Pure and simple. What was the Mayor's response when I asked why Councilwoman Doyle didn't have the same conflict of interest? Oh yea, he said, "That one fell through the cracks." Political? Yea, I think so.

I received the letter on May 12, 2004.

There's a classic glaring omission. Then why didn't Jimmy disclose that before his election? He had over 3 weeks.

Simple. No one asked. Next question.

I never sought to find out how much money the developer had. Everyone knows Bruce Ratner is a bazillionaire.

Untrue. To the point of Jimmy telephoning the developer directly. It's not how much Ratner has but how much he would spend in Kearny. Jimmy knew that all too well. (The use of "bazillionaire" combines a weak attempt at humor with the classic avoiding the question tactic.)

Again, I never tried to find out how much money the developer had. Who cares? My concern was that this project was going nowhere. To be honest, it still is.

I can't post it here. It's too long.

Too long for Jimmy?? So spin, spin, spin. You are a complete phony.

jimmangin@aol.com - That makes eight times.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Keep 'em comin'

Jim Mangin

[Guest Guest]

Ok, let's go through this one more time. But this time, pay attention. My comments are in bold.

Keep 'em comin'

Jim Mangin

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I love this guy!

[A. Realist]

I love this guy!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not as much as he does!

[Guest Majors]

Not as much as he does!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess you never took my advice about a 60 mins. training series on HOW TO SPEAK UP without PUTTING OTHERS DOWN written by Mel Silverman.This is a serious problem and should be addressed ASAP.

[A. Realist]

I guess you never took my advice about a 60 mins. training series on HOW TO SPEAK UP without PUTTING OTHERS DOWN written by Mel Silverman.This is a serious problem and should be addressed ASAP.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Were you attempting to put down my put-down with a put-down of you own? Sorry, not even close!

What you fail to understand is: 1) I do not care what you think of my responses and 2) I am a reactionary whose duty and delight it is to comment on the inane opining of certain offerings on this site.

I am well acquainted with Mel Silberman's treatise on elocution and self-expression and I find his premise both pandering and condescending. His course goal is to present one's image, not one's ideas. Obviously not my style. I'd rather shoot from the lip!

[Guest Majors]

Were you attempting to put down my put-down with a put-down of you own? Sorry, not even close!

What you fail to understand is: 1) I do not care what you think of my responses and 2) I am a reactionary whose duty and delight it is to comment on the inane opining of certain offerings on this site.

I am well acquainted with Mel Silberman's treatise on elocution and self-expression and I find his premise both pandering and condescending. His course goal is to present one's image, not one's ideas. Obviously not my style. I'd rather shoot from the lip!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No I was not trying to put you down . I was trying to advise you that help is out there. Sometimes people do not have a avenue to let out their frustrations so they try to say things that makes others unhappy.Try taking a break go on vacation and relax. Keep your mind open not closed.

[A. Realist]

No I was not trying to put you down . I was trying to advise you that help is out there. Sometimes people do not have a avenue to let out their frustrations so they try to say things that makes others unhappy.Try taking a break go on vacation and relax. Keep your mind open not closed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I hope you had your tongue-in-cheek, sheepish grin on when you typed that little patronization!

[Guest guest]

I guess you never took my advice about a 60 mins. training series on HOW TO SPEAK UP without PUTTING OTHERS DOWN written by Mel Silverman.This is a serious problem and should be addressed ASAP.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Majors you fried Al. Realist. I love it you are so right about how serious his problem is . I hope he takes your advise.

[Guest Guest]

I love this guy!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Always knew Doyle was cracked. Good response.

[A. Realist]

Majors you fried Al. Realist. I love it you are so right about how serious his problem is . I hope he takes your advise.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Majors,

You really shouldn't answer your own posts. It's a sign of insecurity.

PS: The space BEFORE the period was a dead give-away!

[Guest MangWarp7]

The spin, warp and lies continue. Jimmyisms are in italics.

Yes it was an entirely political attack by the Mayor and Town Attorney. I contacted the State for an opinion because the Mayor and Town Attorney wouldn't **** and get off the pot. They wouldn't contact the State, so I did.

You in fact said you would make it public and you didn't. You're hiding it. Stop playing with your e-mail address game. If it's no big deal you should post and discuss the decision here.

You're saying I missed three meetings In January? The Town Council only meets twice a month. I did miss one meeting, but it wasn't a Sacco fundraiser. I was invited to attend his swearing in to a new Senate term.

No, I'm not confused. And you're still telling lies. Yes, you missed THREE meetings in ONE month, January. Call the clerk's office at Town Hall. There were two regular meetings, the reorg meeting and a special meeting ALL in January.

And if it's a Sacco swearing-in, why did non-politicians have to pay to get in? Again you lie.

You're welcome to it. The Mayor's welcome to it. For the seventh time, e-mail me at jimmangin@aol.com and I'll send it to you.

But what's wrong with this board, Jim? That's a game you're playing. I think it's only a matter of time before it gets posted here so I'd go first if I were you.

Simple. No one asked. Next question.

No one asked? That's farcical and nonsensical. (Check those words in the dictionary while you're checking for spurned, by the way.) You are so full of yourself and you know what. You hid it.

Again, I never tried to find out how much money the developer had. Who cares?

You lie. You did. The State of NJ nabbed you. Obviously, whoever keeps asking you cares enough to try to keep you honest. It's not working since you refuse to accept the truth. I guess we'll wait until Fitzgerald posts it?

[Jim Mangin]

The spin, warp and lies continue.  Jimmyisms are in italics.

Yes it was an entirely political attack by the Mayor and Town Attorney. I contacted the State for an opinion because the Mayor and Town Attorney wouldn't **** and get off the pot. They wouldn't contact the State, so I did.

You in fact said you would make it public and you didn't.  You're hiding it.  Stop playing with your e-mail address game.  If it's no big deal you should post and discuss the decision here. 

You're saying I missed three meetings In January? The Town Council only meets twice a month. I did miss one meeting, but it wasn't a Sacco fundraiser. I was invited to attend his swearing in to a new Senate term.

No, I'm not confused.  And you're still telling lies.  Yes, you missed THREE meetings in ONE month, January.  Call the clerk's office at Town Hall.  There were two regular meetings, the reorg meeting and a special meeting ALL in January. 

And if it's a Sacco swearing-in, why did non-politicians have to pay to get in?  Again you lie.

 

You're welcome to it. The Mayor's welcome to it. For the seventh time, e-mail me at jimmangin@aol.com and I'll send it to you.

But what's wrong with this board, Jim?  That's a game you're playing.  I think it's only a matter of time before it gets posted here so I'd go first if I were you.

Simple. No one asked. Next question.

No one asked?  That's farcical and nonsensical.  (Check those words in the dictionary while you're checking for spurned, by the way.)  You are so full of yourself and you know what.  You hid it.

Again, I never tried to find out how much money the developer had. Who cares?

You lie.  You did.  The State of NJ nabbed you.  Obviously, whoever keeps asking you cares enough to try to keep you honest.  It's not working since you refuse to accept the truth.  I guess we'll wait until Fitzgerald posts it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

jimmangin@aol.com

Jim Mangin

[JoeW]

jimmangin@aol.com

Jim Mangin

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jim,

Do you have it in a scanned version?

JW

[Guest Guest]

Who cares about this?