Bergen County Democratic Organization’s former power broker, Joseph Ferriero, was found guilty this past week. His lack of disclosure in owning a company doing business with government officials was a contributing factor to that guilt.
Evidently, Mr. Ferriero as an attorney should have known that his partner, Dennis Oury, also an attorney, would have to conceal a conflict of interest from a client if their company was to make money. That knowledge formed the basis of an agreement to “conspire” to defraud Mr. Oury’s client of “honest services.”
That conspiracy conviction raises a few questions from a political perspective. Does a lack of disclosure come in shades of gray? When does it become black and white guilt? Is conspiracy based on a level of knowledge, action, lack of action, and/or personal gain?
When politicians accept campaign contributions from a contributor, whereby the politician has some authority that may be of useful value, is there a disclosure requirement? Would a lack of disclosure imply conspiracy to defraud voters of “honest services?”
A current Westwood Council member running for reelection spoke of his pride in championing the expansion of an outdoor dining ordinance. Did that councilman conspire against the interests of his constituency by not disclosing $1500 campaign contributions from a local developer/banker, whose rental property benefited? At what point does a lack of disclosure become a transgression?
Governor Corzine promised in his 2005 campaign to reduce New Jersey’s high property taxes and disinfect a political system notorious for patronage and corruption. Yet property taxes are up and it took his current republican challenger, Chris Christie, to begin the disinfection process. Were there influences that conflicted with Corzine’s ability to fulfill promises? Would disclosures have affected his decisions?
Politicians act within their capacity, making choices. No wrongdoing is suggested above. Yet who’s to say what influences affect decisions. The hospital reopening has been reported as awaiting a political blessing. If true, how many DOH statuary defined objectives are determined by politics rather than need?
The map below shows the northeast corner outside an unrealistic, unfettered, as a crow flies, 15-minute drive time from Valley and Englewood hospital. Considering a deficient public transit system, how many taxpaying residents are at risk?
The 2009 population in the yellow area is calculated to be 39,610 residents. Which State politicians represent their interests? Which State politicians offer substance over words? Which State politicians have other interests to consider? Which State politicians accept hospital Political Action Committee contributions?
The election in the Pascack and Northern Valley municipalities may have a profound affect on the future of health care accessibility to many of those 39,000+ residents. Maybe even more so to the 100,000+ residents that the State Report had defined as part of Pascack Valley Hospital’s market service area. Swine flu anyone?
After reading the Pascack Press I was wondering why the Record hasn’t had any recent follow up articles. Maybe they could check who are all the players and give the Council a program to help them get up to speed.
Comment by Reg — October 26, 2009 @ 2:45 PM
This paints a depressing picture.
Comment by Pundit — October 26, 2009 @ 3:26 PM
I was blind and now I see. No wonder no one says what grefrath and phayre have done. Are they democrats?
Comment by Samim — October 26, 2009 @ 4:06 PM
This blog makes the trip home from work interesting. I love the season of politics. There are so many surprises that aren’t really surprises. Now we can guess why they were against Wachovia.
Comment by Dirk — October 26, 2009 @ 4:26 PM
The mayor is talking to the governor’s office, according to the latest Pascack Press. What’s the matter, the governor didn’t hear him the last time he said he spoke with him? What’s going on with HUMC’s application? The article says there is no application pending so no need for extension. Who’s BSing who?
Comment by Tron — October 26, 2009 @ 5:53 PM
The governing body was apparently quick to give Hackensack what it wanted when it won the property in bankruptcy. What happened after that? Was the Mayor & Council so enamored with Hackensack Ferguson’s presence they didn’t seek any assurances? Newspaper story says no application is pending so no license extension is needed. Was it deferred or withdrawn? Didn’t anybody ask questions about the certificate of need deadline when it was deferred? Where was our legal counsel? Is someone getting paid off to look the other way?
Comment by Midshipman — October 27, 2009 @ 4:13 PM
BCDO had Ferriero. Who does Westwood have? Trick question for Halloween.
Comment by Starring369 — October 26, 2009 @ 7:06 PM
Read the Sunday Pascack Press and it don’t seem well for a new hospital. What is the Mayor doing? He rambles about talking to the Governor. What’s the Mayor trying to do, impress us? Isn’t that the same guy who is trying to cut a “glut” of beds? I don’t appreciate being pandered to with empty words. If Corzine cared we would have heard something before now. Is everything hinging on this election? What will the Mayor and Council do if Corzine wins? You do not need to be a political scientist to figure out this is an issue without a leader.
We don’t hear anything from HUMC or this Legacy. Is the Mayor being stroked by them? Does anyone know anything real?
PS: Not surprised to read of possible conflicts between the Council and some town players.
Comment by Diesel — October 26, 2009 @ 8:12 PM
Is your council conspiring against us with ignorance?
Comment by Traveler — October 26, 2009 @ 8:49 PM
You give them too much credit. Not smart enough for that.
Comment by Fitness King — October 27, 2009 @ 6:05 PM
I commented as a way to show support for your blog last week. Now I write to say I’m concerned whether it takes contributions to get focus on our concerns. That councilman may have done nothing wrong but does a money donation affect emotions in decision thinking. You’d have to be callus not to be affected somehow if stuff comes before you supported by a donator. What other votes offered a perk to that donator or someone else?
Comment by Cris22 — October 26, 2009 @ 11:27 PM
Morning coffee in hand, sitting at my desk, finished reading the Record, your post and now that I’m up to speed felt a need to say we’re #######.
Comment by Gibbs — October 27, 2009 @ 8:27 AM
Can’t say I’m surprised about the contribution source but a little upfront honesty could go a long way. They’re worrying about outdoor dining while we worry about a hospital.
Read the Record this morning on the way into work and its annoying the way this hospital process has been handled. The Mayor is only now looking into extending the CN extension. Where is the wizardry of HUMC. Didn’t anybody that represents us think to confirm there was a viable plan?
If we don’t get a hospital back I blame everybody up on that council. If we somehow luck out, I credit Lady Luck.
Comment by Don — October 27, 2009 @ 9:38 AM
It’s amazing what you find as you cruise the net. Didn’t expect to find a local concern so elaborately engaged. What’s more remarkable is that anybody expected the hospital to return without an equally engaged public. How can you rely on part time politicians to appreciate something even some seasoned business people wouldn’t understand? These types of issues require strategies with individuals who recognize, as noted above by Reg, the various players.
The local elected officials have shown by their delayed reactionary approach to each passing month, a yokel approach. Most likely none of them have any real business experience. Our loss and the developer’s gain.
Comment by Apollo — October 27, 2009 @ 12:38 PM
If? HUMC had no comment in that article. What does that tell you?
Comment by Larry — October 27, 2009 @ 12:53 PM
Never should have given away development rights without requiring a hospital. You will lose the hospital and control of what goes in there. Inexcusable.
Comment by Larry — October 27, 2009 @ 12:02 PM
Politics in Westwood are beginning to reflect the trash of traditional political games. Looks like the republican machine is afraid of a little competition. Driving down the street I saw a DPW staffer removing a red Conkling and Frasco political sign this afternoon. I asked my neighbor why they would do that. He thought it probably had something to do with a 10 foot town right of way. Funny they didn’t take one across the street belonging to the republicans. We maintain the strip in front of our homes but it appears incumbent politics dictate the party that can be represented there. These guys are more concerned about the politics of their contributors then our hospital. Thank you.
Comment by Sandra — October 27, 2009 @ 2:49 PM
I wondered what happened to my signs.
Comment by Tony — October 27, 2009 @ 5:59 PM
And I bet your local republicans are outraged at Obama’s going after FOX. This is no different.
Comment by lite bulb — October 28, 2009 @ 9:16 AM
Do your DPW workers work for the republicans or taxpayers?
Comment by Marymarie — October 28, 2009 @ 12:59 PM
Most of them are great and a couple are ##### but the manager probably answers to the republicans. They gave him tenured job security a few years back so he owes them. I think they even pay him over 6 figures so like state union workers with Corzine, they support their bread butterer.
It’s nice to have an anonymous outlet to speak my mind. I’m not happy that signs on private property are being subject to games. When was the last election anyone remembers the DPW being paid to drive around town to remove political signs from our right of way? They only last a few weeks. It leads me to believe the latest post cards from Grefrath and Phaye are built on deception. How can they say they “put aside partisan politics” and start these tactics? What did it cost in DPW pay?
I read Conkling and Frasco’s website and they ask a legitimate question. If we got a half million dollars in new tax revenue from the hospital property, why weren’t our taxes cut? Obviously the town is spending that extra money and they still needed a tax increase.
They say their holding our taxes stable and controlling spending. How much are these new playing surfaces, improved parking and link to the County going to cost us? Who has heard anything on cost? Will this be another firehouse fiasco with walls falling down and endless delays? Two years and nothing has changed down there.
The current action by the incumbents appear more focus on maintaining power then discussing issues. If it’s true they refused to debate, what can that say about their understanding of our issues? No one wants conflict but we can’t afford complacency either. That’s why I think the hospital is going no where.
Comment by anonymous — October 28, 2009 @ 7:47 PM
I was leaning towards the incumbents until I’d heard about this.
It turns my stomach. Makes me think this harmony thing is a load of bull. Are they afraid the other two might make them do their jobs?
Comment by tommy — November 1, 2009 @ 10:25 PM
What 10 foot? Thought it was a 15 foot right of way. A regulation that makes me responsible for fixing the sidewalk and mowing the grass but doesn’t allow me freedom of speech!
Comment by Tuck — October 27, 2009 @ 7:11 PM
The Pascack Press says the mayor’s “continuing his personal efforts to bring the hospital to fruition.” So, what effort is the Council exerting? They all say the hospital is important to them as they seem to wait on the mayor. This guy talks of his hope at the eleventh hour while the state department of health says it can’t do anything unless an application for a hospital is active. Like another commenter said, who’s shoveling the bull to who?
Comment by Jojo — October 27, 2009 @ 7:56 PM
The blog comments are off track but your post led it that way. It’s unfortunate that even this has become political. If we give up we lose. Even incompetent effort is better than no effort.
Comment by breaker — October 27, 2009 @ 8:43 PM
The moment HUMC withdrew its application it meant the issue was political. OR it means HUMC isn’t being honest with its intentions. Lets review. HUMC originally told the state’s AG it had no interest in opening a hospital. There’s a copy of a letter somewhere on this blog that says so. Did HUMC go through the charade of an application to accommodate a gullible town government?
Since we don’t know the answers, and a recent no comment from HUMC on their application status was cited in the paper we have to assume politics are in being play. The question is whether its at a state level or a local level?
Comment by Jack1001 — October 28, 2009 @ 12:26 PM
Incompetent effort? Would you hire an incompetent employee?
Comment by rick — October 28, 2009 @ 3:27 PM
Just read article in record ‘Upswing in Westwood’. No rocket science here. Can you guess why the zoning was change for the hospital? So much for trying to keep our town a community. Welcome to Westwood-City Hub of the Valley, without a hospital.
Comment by gragg — October 28, 2009 @ 7:38 AM
Is this story about the same developer who is the big political contributor? Did your councilman have a role in this project also? Busy fellow.
Comment by H.Parker — October 28, 2009 @ 3:01 PM
After reading this blog, my belief is reinforced that NJ politics is modeled after the world’s oldest profession. The politician is the pimp, the property tax payer gets screwed and government, lobbyists and the bureaucracy walk away with the smile.
Democracy is rule by the best marketing campaign. We listen to words and ignore or overlook reality. Unfortunately it’s how many of us guide our purchasing habits. Look at how we’re treated on this hospital. The Plainfield politicians probably still tell their residents they’re working on getting Muhlenberg Hospital back. It makes everyone feel good. Except its unlikely any of the rhetoric ridden local politicians knows how to do it. In the meantime, like those folks, we hope and time passes and our options diminish.
When something doesn’t work the wisest choice is to look for another solution. That’s why we have elections.
Comment by Hedgevestor — October 28, 2009 @ 9:22 PM
PVH is not coming back. No. Hearing scheduled before the CN expires. No comment from HUMC. The referendum wasn’t even publicized.
Comment by Paul — October 29, 2009 @ 8:37 PM
Diesel above was right, there is no leadership anywhere on a hospital reopening. Mr. Ferguson of HUMC seemed to be the driving force when he was around. I came to this site after reading an ad in the local CL thinking I’d see an organized effort. One person from Westwood? Where is Westwood’s leadership as the host town?
Paul is correct. Why hasn’t HUMC been more active since they asked for the deferral? Before the first hearing in Westwood there was signs all over, ads in every issue of the local papers, both pro and con, even the town had its bulletin board pushing awareness of pending actions. Now with the referendum, ho, hum and yawn? Why are we having the referendum? Whose idea? Where’s the direction to getting this hospital back. I’ll be voting yes in Hillsdale and can only hope others will too!
Comment by Ronnie — October 30, 2009 @ 7:48 PM
Great ad in the Community Life. Thank you.
Comment by ALICIA — October 31, 2009 @ 1:23 PM
The referendum gives politicians cover when the hospital along with the ER disappears. They tried. Right? How? By letting others take the lead? HUMC first said it wanted no hospital. Never should have let them call the shots.
Comment by Paul — November 1, 2009 @ 1:28 PM
It’s been about 6 months since my last visit but saw your ad. I thought the battle was winding down with not to many following the hospital’s return. I see it is here and that’s why I think we will get our hospital back. People will show their support Tuesday.
Comment by Annamarie — November 1, 2009 @ 4:03 PM
How come there are no ads from HUMC reminding us to vote for the referendum? Do they still want to open a hospital there in Westwood?
Comment by Jeffery891 — November 1, 2009 @ 9:09 PM
Interesting story in the Record this morning on ethics and elected officials. Timely with your post. Saw a local restaurant with a posted sign complaining about that developer banker in Westwood saturday. Does that mean that councilman is part of that restaurant’s problem too? How’s that guy feel about the hospital?
Comment by Biddle — November 2, 2009 @ 9:47 AM
It’s annoying to see that a long time Italian restaurant has to jump hurdles because some business banker wants our town in his image. It’s more grating to think that some of our officials might be beholden to him. I was looking at that documentation and see they have real estate PAC money too. How do all their interests coincide with Westwood’s? Its no wonder the Mayor and Council can’t put our hospital together, they don’t have a contributor giving them direction.
Comment by Angelo — November 2, 2009 @ 9:26 PM
I was speaking with a friend of mine who lives in Westwood. We discussed politics and the possibility of a new hospital. We were a little surprised that there were no advertisements from Hackensack Hospital or even the towns supporting a hospital’s return, reminding us of the referendums. One ad from a private citizen?
My son plays sports and has a peanut allergy. I’d be stressed if he had an injury and Pascack Valley Hospital wasn’t reopen. So then I’m concerned that there doesn’t seem to be any central direction in a hospital’s return. Hopefully Westwood will shake up their leadership this election with somebody who will guide the Valley’s communities in getting a hospital back. Thank you.
Comment by Sarra — November 2, 2009 @ 4:39 PM
Yes. With no hospital we lose the emergency room too. The travel time amd waiting times between injury and treatment are unacceptable. I can’t believe how our hospital is just slipping away and there seems to be no organized plan.
Comment by Mary S — November 3, 2009 @ 8:45 AM
There was a great letter in the pascack press this week. I recognized the name of the writer and was surprised of his candor and observation. The title of the letter alone drew my attention knowing it had to have some connection to politics. He was very correct in his conclusion, innovation and results needs stimulated dialogue. I commend him on speaking up.
Westwood should have an interesting election, current incumbents vs. pass incumbents. I went to the pass incumbents blog referenced on today’s post and I can see why they’re endorsed. Good Luck to them and hopefully to us for a new hospital.
Comment by THarding — November 2, 2009 @ 8:06 PM
You should have open today’s post to comments. It looks like they’d have been interesting.
Comment by Jedd — November 2, 2009 @ 10:52 PM
Voted before work. Talking with posse into work, we’re all rooting for Conkling, Frasco. Should have opened latest post to comments Might of been good discussion.
Comment by Dirk — November 3, 2009 @ 8:19 AM
Hopefully this election will be a turning point for Westwood and New Jersey. We need a hospital in the Pascack Valley. It’s why it was started in the first place decades ago. It shouldn’t be mixed with politics. It’s a subject that needs attention by whoever wins these elections.
Comment by DayNa — November 3, 2009 @ 10:54 AM
The Independents will lose in Westwood because people don’t understand the voting process. The people will associate Conkling and Frasco to Daggert cause they’re in his line and they’ll go down with him. Christi will carry Bergen County and win the Governors seat. It would have been nice to have change but the hospital needs to be the only focus.
Comment by LL — November 3, 2009 @ 7:20 PM
Christi LOST Bergen!
Comment by Starring369 — November 4, 2009 @ 4:13 PM
Take note public option Christi won.
Comment by kSteve — November 3, 2009 @ 10:40 PM
Christi, Vandervalk & Schroder won. Ferriero’s gone and the Republican wave washes up on the shore again. Now we should get our hospital back
Comment by Tilly — November 3, 2009 @ 11:13 PM
Was disappointed local independents lost but if the media is right, the herd just went republican to send a message to the Corzine clan. We want lower taxes and bring back our hospital. Our mayor had no influence with HIS governor but now we don’t need it. Christie made a commitment to us when he visited Westwood and hopefully, if Hackensack hasn’t changed their mind, a hospital will be returning soon. Amen.
Comment by Manny — November 4, 2009 @ 12:17 PM
If HUMC changes its mind then what ?
Comment by tommy — November 4, 2009 @ 11:18 PM
We got new player moving into Drumthwacket, an (almost) new CEO at HUMC today and an empty hospital building. How long do we have to wait now.
Comment by Reg — November 4, 2009 @ 3:43 PM
Supri indes got whooped. $500K? new rev & 1% PT incre. How rept next yr?
Aftr 20 yr /movin so dn’t care. *Unbelievable!* U rite. Govt desrved.
Comment by 2gether — November 4, 2009 @ 8:36 PM