Mayor Schroeder Assesses Our Financial Wreckage

Editor, The Ocean Star:

We, your new mayor and council, are discovering problem after problem left from the previous administration — problems that are costing the taxpayers.

Many are already aware of our latest discovery — the borough’s bookkeeping for at least the last four months of 2010, and possibly longer, was essentially non-existent. The general ledger of our previous chief financial officer [CFO] is a rat’s nest of cross-outs, white-outs, entries in pencil — unacceptable for a Little League fundraiser, much less for a multi-million-dollar municipality.

Handling taxpayers’ money is a public trust, which requires both careful spending and responsible record-keeping. It is hard to determine our current position, because the record keeping is so sloppy it’s hard to believe it’s not deliberate. We have been handed a situation in which it is impossible to know our exact financial position — fixing the damage has already cost the taxpayers $45,000, and we are not yet done.

As part of the newly elected majority, we are fixing the problem. We are implementing a system of checks and balances to insure that all financial transactions are documented, approved and accounted for.

An accounting firm is carefully reconstructing the financial records from previous years, and our new auditor will carefully examine their work. We will bring in independent reviewers, including state agencies, if, when and where appropriate. Finally, we will hire a new, qualified CFO to replace the CFO from the previous administration.

It’s hard to believe the previous administration would let this happen. But, we are getting this under control. You have my word that as long as I am mayor, and as long as I have leaders like Jack McHugh, Chris Leitner and Chris Goss working with me, it will not happen again.

WILLIAM SCHROEDER, MAYOR OF POINT PLEASANT

Letter To The Editor: Cultural Events, Arts, And Recreation Advisory Board

Proper planning and foresight will enrich our community and bring critical, long-term tax relief. The Cultural Arts, Events, and Recreation Advisory Board being proposed for Point Pleasant is a significant step in the right direction.

Our borough’s parks and facilities are a testament to the value we place on our open spaces, and provide the ideal setting for every variety of event and occasion, offering limitless opportunity.

We find ourselves as a community at a daunting but fortuitous crossroads. Tough economic times are not only a chance to make our town simpler and more efficient; they demand innovation and creative, long-term investment. You cannot just take shears to a rose bush; you have to carefully prune and deadhead in anticipation of next year’s growth to produce the brightest blooms.

This is exactly the task we have before us. We have the means and the opportunity to encourage commercial growth and cultivate our town’s identity as a destination spot. What we need is the willingness to look beyond what’s satisfactory and strive for what is extraordinary.

Events like a bigger and bolder Summerfest, a Relay For Life that is a point of pride and held in the heart of town, car shows, summer theater, and concert events can help transform Point Pleasant from the town you drive through on the way to the beach, to the town where you spend an afternoon with your family.

Parks, eateries, boutique storefronts and a vibrant calendar of events will make us the envy of towns like Brick, Howell, Jackson, and even Toms River or Lakewood — towns that either lack the cohesion or small-town feel that we all enjoy here.

The expanded scope of the Advisory Board will give its members the ability to advocate for and cultivate a climate that will attract visitors and new businesses to our town, bringing with them the economic growth and relief we need.

Now is the time to strive for our potential and share what makes Point Pleasant so special.

To Promote, Or Not To Promote: That Was Never The Question

The question was brought recently to the PD if there was a way to cut down “Officer In Charge” pay. This is essentially additional pay incurred by gaps in the command structure that have been left by downsizing or other circumstances. The recommendation came back that since the PD is down three sergeants, according to their current organizational structure, one promotion to sergeant would satisfy most of the demand and that two would be better still.

Adding frustration to this situation was the Sergeant’s List which was set to expire with no clear indication of when the next test and list will be. Unfortunately the public conversation about this matter became about the promotion(s) and who may or may not be considered. The command structure of the PD and the efficiency of their operations in a difficult climate were not the issue. The issue was whether or not there was a way to save money. After much examination and debate over cost, and not personnel, a consensus could not be reached, and the decision was made that no action should be taken, at least until there is a clearer picture of this year’s budget.

Perhaps by the time the next list is available our financial situation will have improved and we will have found an innovative way to address our difficulties and demands. It is unfortunate that this matter was perceived as a personnel issue. That is exactly what Civil Service is designed to avoid, to establish a ranking based on performance and not personality. It’s not perfect, but it is certainly better than making it purely a matter of discretion or politics.

I would like to apologize to the officers and family in attendance. Even if a decision had been made to promote, there would still have been approvals with Civil Service and the PBA needed before the promotion and oath be taken.

One Door Closes, And Another Door Opens

It’s been two months since the election and the new administration has been officially sworn in. It has not been easy changing gears from campaign mode to council mode. I didn’t realize how tense things had become until it was over. When it began I figured I would be frank about my thoughts and feelings, talk to as many folks as possible, avoid controversy, and stay the course hoping for the best. I wanted to feel as good about myself on November 3^rd as I did before the primary, but it was naive to think it wouldn’t be an emotional tightrope. Every time I caught wind of the whisper campaigns or had to read another ridiculous letter to the editor I was ready to fly off the handle. Fortunately I was surrounded by good people quick to remind me that it would be better to lose. The only thing I would change is the Facebook incident. I wish I had seen the comments before my opponents. If they don’t believe I would have removed them for reasons of compassion they should at least believe I never would have handed them such a plum cherry. I didn’t take personal jabs from people I’ve never even met too seriously, but I don’t appreciate the way my wife was treated and I wouldn’t have played a part in the same of anyone else. Now it’s time to get down to the real work, but how do you work with people who have either been directly adversarial or at least complicit by their silence in what you consider to be dishonest and personal attacks? I don’t know how to do that, but it’s a requirement of the job. We are in the service of our community and not our personal interests. It is time now to put aside the things that might divide us and find the common ground on which to build. We do not have the luxury of anything less.

The first meeting wasn’t so bad, and I hardly think it was as “controversial” as some would like it to appear. I do wish there had been more discussion among council prior to the appointments. I don’t feel that any minds would have been changed, but at least we could have had a better start to the inclusive tone I look forward to in this year’s council. It wasn’t a perfect process but it wasn’t inadequate either and I believe this council has the desire and the willingness to establish better revue procedures for the future. That being said, I don’t understand the confusion over the criteria for reviewing RFP’s? First of all they were the same RFPs as last year. Secondly, a number of them did not even include fee schedules. I wasn’t surprised, I’ve seen plenty of vendors bid this way. They want to sell you on their resume and presentation knowing that price will be debated later based on the lowest bidder. My revue process was simple; rate the applicants based on what I perceive as their ability to meet the needs of the town, research their background on-line, inquire about them with friends I have in their field, and ask the front runners to meet the lowest bid. This worked best in the case of the various engineers who I really expect to be critical in establishing a plan for the commercial revitalization of Point Pleasant. We don’t need to be the next Red Bank or Princeton, but we can be more than a spotty patchwork of stores people stop into on the way to the beach. I know our town has the potential to become a robust destination spot where local merchants flourish.

The most important factor in making these decisions was not mentioned from the dais. Particularly in the matter of Borough Attorney, the most important criteria is trust. The attorney is not a judge. No matter how you slice it they are in a partisan position and the more exacerbated and litigious the work of Legislation and Administration becomes, the more important the attorney becomes as he or she is the constant counsel and guide, particularly in small town with “part-time” governance. Because the Mayor and Council are not full time the two most important and most powerful people in the Borough are the Clerk and the Attorney. It is the Attorney’s job to know the intimate details of the goals and directions of mayor and council. It is the Clerk’s job carry out their direction day to day and interpret their work when establishing the policy and procedures that have the greatest impact on our residents. The Clerk and Attorney are so heavily relied upon it would be impossible to reach our potential without complete trust in them, and as was said, it’s very difficult to trust someone who helped try and defeat you.

This is an important part of the design of our government. A ship cannot sail in a straight line. To tell the truth I am a little envious of the Republicans. There is righteousness in being the opposition party if you choose to be so. Some may just sit back and hurl stones trying to cause controversy and obstruct the majority hoping to make them appear ineffective. Others may truly assume the mantle of advocacy as Councilmember DePaolo stated, but to do so you have to work twice as hard, you have to be diligent and persuasive, and most importantly you have to be right. But this is the way it should be. This is the way democracy works. It may not be perfect, but it’s effective and it is no accident. This is a system crafted by experience and trial and error by people who understood the danger of imbalance. I’ve always thought of democracy like the parachute game kids play at camp or at parties where you all spread out along the edge and you put a ball in the middle. Everyone jerks and pulls and the ball jumps and shoots back and forth but if you watch closely the ball stays mostly in the middle. Start taking kids off of either side and eventually you will lose the ball. I feel like our parachute is fairly well balanced right now and none of us are the type to try and jerk the chute out of anyone else’s hands.

We are all very fortunate to live in Point Pleasant. I have a very hard time trying to think of negatives about our town. It is my sincerest hope for the next year, and beyond, that our governing body becomes a more accurate reflection of our community that in my experience has been a lot quicker to come together than to tear each other down.

Thank You

Thank you to everyone that supported us and took the fate of our community into their own hands. Our success wasn’t about what Bill, or Bob, or I did, it is entirely about what you did. We didn’t win because of our signs, our ads, or how many doors we knocked on. We won because you advocated to your friends and families; because you wrote letters, sent e-mails, made phone calls, and weren't content to be spectators. I am proud and humbled by this experience, and I take the responsibility very seriously.

We were intent from the beginning to not make this about parties, but about people, the people that Bill, Bob, and I try to be in our private and public lives, and the people of Point Pleasant who live here because it is the best place to be. There is a lot of hard work ahead. Maintaining the quality of life we all enjoy in a way we can all afford is going to be beyond difficult. I know we won’t be able to please everyone, but my primary goal is that when the time comes for us to return to our private lives, most will feel if they didn't always agree with us, they never doubted our intentions.

I hope all the people who worked and pushed and pulled on both sides will continue to fight just as hard in good times as in bad. Democracy exists in our compromises, not our opinions, and our town thrives when we are all connected and engaged. May patience, good will, and a shared goal of prosperity for our community continue to bring out the best each and all of us have to offer. Thank you,

COUNCILMAN-ELECT CHRISTOPHER GOSS

My Last Campaign Letter To The Ocean Star

Editor, The Ocean Star:

When this election began and I submitted my first statement to The Ocean Star. I wrote that there is one factor above all that should matter most for our community in these difficult times when they choose who they want to make the decisions that will affect their families-Values.

Whenever we prepare to vote, for any election, but especially this one that affects us so directly, we must consider the criteria each of the candidates will use to make those decisions. There is no debate over controlling taxes, making difficult cuts, and finding the most effective ways to share services and responsibilities; these things must be done, but when representatives are weighing the pros and cons of the toughest choices, one wants to know that the person making those decisions values the same things they value.

If the budget demands a choice between closing the borough offices and eliminating services, or cutting attorneys and consultants fees, which would you choose? If the choice was between officers and detectives or security cameras in some neighborhoods, which would you rather have after your car or home is broken into? If it was the residents’ decision, would they freeze capital expenditures or continue to bond the town further into debt? Well, it is their decision. Residents should take the next few days to consider the issue that’s most important to them and call or e-mail the candidates, ask them what they would do and tell them what they themselves would do. That’s the difference between private and public administration, in business you work for the boss, but in public service we work for the people.

I ask the residents to go to the polls Nov. 2 and vote for Bill Schroeder, Bob Rusk, and myself and help elect a team that will put all Point Pleasant residents first, a team that shares their family’s concerns, aspirations, and values.

Thank you very much to everyone who has offered their support, their thoughts and suggestions, everyone who’s stopped us on the street or invited us into their homes, and everyone who’s taken the time to talk to their neighbors, make a phone call, or put up a sign. I look forward to giving back to this wonderful community.

CHRISTOPHER GOSS, DEMOCRATIC COUNCIL CANDIDATE
Kilkare Parkway, Point Pleasant

Barbara Marino's Letter To The Ocean Star

Editor, The Ocean Star:

Oh my gosh! On the morning of Oct. 21, the top headline on page one of a large, local daily newspaper was absurd and conspicuously wrong in its placement.

The very headline is inaccurate, perpetrating a falsehood spread by Susan Rogers, a candidate running for mayor. While the headline reads “Point Pleasant, NJ, candidate charges board member attacked her son, 12, on Facebook,” the reporter states that the board member said she did not condone what was said! The board member, according to article, did not attack, cyber-bully or anything even remotely similar. Yet, the article continues its obvious mistakes with the first sentence, stating “politics in this town have become so nasty…” There is much wrong with that sentence, but two things for starters: one, it is Rogers who has engaged in salt-the-earth character assassination politics since the day she first appeared on the scene, but also it makes it seem that her adversaries are doing the same thing, when all that has come out from the campaign of Schroeder, Goss and Rusk has been on the issues.

I cannot believe that there were no other newsworthy stories for the front page. Let’s see if I can help. Page Ten, “Garden State lost 20,200 jobs in September”. That story relates to the whole state, not just a town and a town of people who know the truth about how dirty Ms. Rogers runs her campaigns. If the newspaper wanted to stay with the “harassing” issue, the article at the bottom of B1, “Brick man pleads guilty to threatening Latino groups” was much more newsworthy and definitely a true case of cyber-bullying. Why was it relegated to the bottom of B1? Was it because it did not involve Ms. Rogers and her attempt to arouse sensationalism making her a victim just before the election?

If Ms. Rogers was truly concerned with her son’s well-being, she would have quietly had the post removed and quietly addressed the issue with the person involved — who was neither the board member or Mr. Goss. Instead, she e-mailed the press — publicizing the issue for her own personal political ambition rather than considering the well-being of her son, and how so much press on this issue would affect the poor boy.

Mr. Goss’s comments are right on target — too bad his comments were tucked at the end of the article. Ms. Rogers’ using police power to harass her political opponent is unethical and an abuse of power. That is the real story here. Too bad we don’t have a newspaper to report it.

The above letter is my opinion and does not reflect any other’s views or the views of any other newspaper.

BARBARA MARINO
Howe Street, Point Pleasant