How Zimmer would keep corruption out
8 months ago | 793 views | 12 12 comments | 16 16 recommendations | email to a friend | print

We obtained this internal draft of a memo circulating in Dawn Zimmer’s camp, regarding how they would conduct themselves once in City Hall. It’s not too juicy, but definitely has some corruption-fighting practices that are worth debating in Hoboken.

It mentions that “City employees living in ‘affordable housing’ must meet standard financial screening qualifications or pay a variable surcharge based on family income, and not own other housing.” Not sure why a city would have the power to demand that if the affordable housing they live in is not run by the city.

Here’s an interesting one: “Senior Staff and Directors will sign an agreement not to work for a developer with whom their office has had a business relationship for one year after leaving City employment.”

Is it about time? What are your thoughts?

From: DZ

To: Campaign Leadership

Internal Draft – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY – please send me your comments ASAP


This draft reflects our overall approach to governance but is subject to additions, deletions, editing etc.

ZIMMER CAMPAIGN RUNOFF

PRINCIPLES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT, INCLUSIVITY AND TRANSPARENCY

Introduction

The Zimmer Campaign is committed to the highest standards of professional conduct in City Hall and all city-related agencies (e.g., HHA, Parking Authority, HUMC, B.O.E.).

During the RUNOFF we will be asked about governance. Therefore it is appropriate to start developing the Standards, based on national “Best Practices” in Municipal Government, which would guide a Zimmer Administration, if elected. .

Working Principles (for Day1)

1. A Conflict of Interest Policy will be developed and fully enforced.

2. There will be an open recruitment and selection process for all senior staff and Directorship positions (some “Acting” appointments will be made, as necessary and appropriate, to be able to govern on July 1).

3. Before appointment to a senior staff or Directorship position, selected candidates will be required to complete the Conflict-of-Interest questionnaire and where appropriate, take actions to remove any “appearances of conflict.”

4. Senior Staff and Directors must disclose all family members currently employed by the City. Prospectively, Mayor’s Office approval is required before any family members can become employed by the City.

5. There will be an RFQ/ RFP process for all Professional Services contracts (except where a stipulated process is required by law).

6. Every Director and Agency head will be required to complete and submit an audit within 30 days identifying and correcting: embedded inappropriate behavior; inefficient business practices unexplained no-bid contracts; failures to monitor payments owed the city; current job descriptions; and incumbents who do not have required credentials.

7. The CFO and General Counsel will: conduct program and contract audits; investigate allegations of fraud, waste, and abuse; confirm adequacy of internal controls; assure compliance with City policies and procedures, Federal and State laws, regulations and grants.

8. All initial contacts from developers will be reported immediately to the Mayor’s Chief of Staff. Senior Staff and Directors will sign an agreement not to work for a developer with whom their office has had a business relationship for one year after leaving City employment.

9. City employees living in “affordable housing” must meet standard financial screening qualifications or pay a variable surcharge based on family income, and not own other housing.

10. Any City program or agency with a “waiting list” such as Affordable Housing is required to have a fully transparent process.

11. A "hot-line" will be established so Hoboken residents can anonymously report inappropriate and unacceptable public sector behavior.

12. There will once a month "Mayor's Open Door" where residents, community groups and business owners can explain their ideas and concerns directly to the Mayor.

13. The Mayor will hold a quarterly Community Forum rotating through each of the six wards.



comments (12)
« ThirdLong07030 wrote on Sunday, May 24 at 04:36 PM »
I agree, what took so long? I have concerns about Zimmers relative inexperience but I think that if she and the people around her put together this draft, I can feel good about voting for her. I did not feel that way about her main competition (both of them) last time around and still do not.
« HobokenReformer wrote on Sunday, May 24 at 01:49 PM »
What a great start for an agenda for our new mayor. To me it is just plain amazing that these simple principles were not put in place long ago! But then again, this town has been run by a few connected for those few connected for a long time. It's high time for change, and I feel the wind of change blowing just around the corner.

Also, I am looking forward to the upcoming debates where I expect that it will become very obvious to everyone that Zimmer has clear and specific plans for straightening out the city's business while Cammarano will repeat his generalities about aiming to reduce taxes without having anything to back up his claims.
« HudsonDispatcher wrote on Saturday, May 23 at 10:35 AM »
It's hard to make head or tail of TiltedHeadDave's rantings, but when he says...



"If B&R were working w/yup, Mason would've been elected on 5/12 & there would be no need 4 all this."

...it MAY mean he thinks a sizeable majority of Mason votes wanted real change in the way Hoboken is run.

If that is what he is saying, I agree, and it is good news for Zimmer.

Zimmer is the remaining change candidate. Peter stands for more of the same. Zimmer with Mason's support wins, and Peter with help from Dave Roberts winds up second best.

« TiltedHeadDave wrote on Friday, May 22 at 05:10 PM »
Andy,

Keep telling yourself that. I have a bridge 4 sale, you want 2 buy it?

If B&R were working w/yup, Mason would've been elected on 5/12 & there would be no need 4 all this.

That was the ultimate yup B&R ticket. How did that go, again? Right, not 2 well. LOL.

If Dawn wasn't being selfish & opportunistic, now there's a surprise, she would've made her own deal w/Beth, like Mikey did, & gotten herself, Carol, Ravi or Dave in 1 of the at large spots & presented a 100% unified "reform" movement.

Instead, they both went 4 themselves & Beth got her a$$ beat sooo bad that she's going 2 need an extra stuffed purple pillow 4 the rest of her life.

Dawn benefitted from the major mistake Beth made by getting between the sheets w/the Russolini's, sabotaging her own campaign & snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

CAMMARANO 3A

ALICEA 5B

ADDEO 6B

MORALES II 7B
« HOBOKEN_REPORTER wrote on Friday, May 22 at 02:10 PM »
Go back to the homepage for an update on this story: www.hudsonreporter.com

« Andynboken wrote on Friday, May 22 at 09:48 AM »
If BNRs are so affraid of being forced out of town which btw can't happen unless they sell their place, then why didn't they do something about the corruption for the past 20 odd years. Most benefited from the social clubs that had won elections and reaped beneftis for those who were politically connected. I'm sure there were others in this town who lived here just as long as those who use the BNR title that didn't get those benefits and got squeezed out long ago. If everyone agrees that we need to cut the budget so hoboken remains a great place to live that has affordable taxes then the BNRs won't have anything to complain about. The "yuppies" as you like to call us have been living in this town for a long time now. They helped Hoboken have its renaissance in the early 90's from the dump that it was. None of the BNRs would be sitting on 500k (or much more) profits in their homes if the yuppies didn't move into town and make it a desirable place to live again. So to agree with Belwether, many of the BNRs in this town agree with the "yups" and finally are working to rid this town of corruption.
« davidd wrote on Friday, May 22 at 09:26 AM »
This will definitely be progress.

Shame on you TiltHeadedDave for deliberately misinterpreting the draft ethics rules. From one Dave to another.
« HobokenReformer wrote on Friday, May 22 at 08:35 AM »
This sounds like a good start. It's amazing that policies like that have not been in place all along!
« Belwether wrote on Friday, May 22 at 06:20 AM »
This BnR term needs some defining.... I know a lot of Born and Raised. Many are just as pissed as the so - called yuppies. I don't think it's the Yuppies v the Born and Raised. I think it's the small, enabled, politically connected/corrupt against the rest of us. There is no mission to push people out who were born here. We just want the small corrupt group to stop fleecing this town.
« Belwether wrote on Friday, May 22 at 05:45 AM »
These are terrific ideas. They are controls and measures. Nice. Most affordable housing programs have rules where you can only have one residence ie the affordable housing unit. It's not meant to be a cheap pied a terr. It's suppose to be a break for those that need it. Often times, the program managers do not properly enforce it. I can't see how working with the state and federal (CT's expired program was a state program) to enforce their own rules is a bad thing. It's obvious that Church Towers did not follow it's own rules when it came to waiting lists....Michael Russo someone how jumped the list based on a 'relative rule'. That's what the manager of the property said, when asked how he got in given he was a child when the list closed. As someone who has done affordable housing lending on a national basis, I can assure their is no such rule. The program also had a provision for periodically re-qualifying everyone in the building and asking those that make too much money to leave so that the people can meet its purpose of providing housing breaks for those who need them. Because it was not managed correctly 40% of the building is over the income amount where they could get in. What does the taxpayer get for subsidizing people who drive around in their BMWs and fur coats? Those that meet the income requirements are perfectly welcomed to stay. Who is the elitist? Or should I ask who are the cheats?

I can't imagine if someone has a second home that they can't afford to pay market rent (and via a landlord - a fair share of taxes).
« TiltedHeadDave wrote on Friday, May 22 at 04:49 AM »
Here's something high on the agenda 4 Zimmer ... ...

9. "City employees living in “affordable housing” must meet standard financial screening qualifications or pay a variable surcharge based on family income, and not own other housing."

The variable surcharge thing already happens, it just sounds like a good idea & appeals 2 the clueless flock of elitist, yup sheep...most of whom bought condominiums that were overpriced

How can she try 2 impose a municipal ordinance on an issue that's governed by state & federal agencies & probably can't possibly be superceded by something a mayor of a 1 square mile city wants 2 do????

(See previous explanation 4 the answer.)

She's even more dangerous than I realized before & I want her 2 get politically crushed on 6/9 that much worse now. I mean, before I would've been happy 2 see a Cammarano, Alicea, Addeo & Morales II sweep by 1 vote...now...I hope they beat them all by 1,000 votes.
« TiltedHeadDave wrote on Friday, May 22 at 03:40 AM »
WOW...She really does want 2 try 2 force all B&R's out of their birthplace & lifelong hometown.

What a typical elitist, yup, *ee* snob.

The more I learn about DZ, the more I'm supporting, contributing 2 & working 4 PC.